Skip to main content

Full text of "The life and times of Jesus the Messiah"

See other formats


3 1822 02362 4869 







^ jy 


3 1822 02362 4869 


■in 00 
v/. / 


Vol. I. 








Author of '' Prophecy and History in Relation to the Messiah." 

BXeTCoftev yap d'pri Si tadnzfjov tv aiviyjtiari 

Volume L 




70 Fifth Avknue 













In issuing a new edition of this book I wish, in the first place, again 
to record, as tlie expression of permanent convictions and feelings, 
some remarks with which I had prefaced the Second Edition, 
althougli happily they are not at present so urgently called for. 

With the feelings of sincere thankfulness for the kindness with 
which this book was received l)y all branches of the Church, only 
one element of pain mingled. Although I am well convinced that 
a careful or impartial reader could not arrive at any such conclu- 
sion, yet it was suggested that a perverse ingenuity might abuse 
certain statements and quotations for what in modern parlance are 
termed ' Anti-Semitic ' purposes. That any such thoughts could 
possibly attach to a book concerning Him, A^'ho was Himself a Jew; 
Who in the love of His compassion wept tears of bitter anguish o\ er 
the Jerusalem that was about to crucify Him, and Whose first utter- 
ance and prayer when nailed to the Cross was: ' Father, forgive them, 
for they know not what they do ' — would seem terribly incongruous 
and painful. Nor can it surely be necessary to point out that tlie 
love of Christ, or the understanding of His Work and Mission, must 
call forth feelings far different from those to which reference has been 
made. To me, indeed, it is diflicult to associate the so-called Anti- 
Semitic movement witli any but the lowest causes: envy, jealousy, 
and cupidity on the one liand; or, on the other, ignorance, prejudice, 
bigotry, and hatred ol' I'ace. But as these are times when it is neces- 
sary to speak unmistakably, I avail myself of the present opportunity 
to point out the reasons why any Talmudic ipiotations, even it' fair, 
can have no application for 'Anti-Semitic' ]Mir]>oses. 


First: It i.s a mistake to regard everything in Taliniulie writiugs 
al)Out 'the Gentiles" as presently applying to Christians. Those 
spoken of' are characterised as 'the worshippers of idols," 'of stars 
and i)lanets.' and by similar designations. That 'the heathens' of 
those days and lands should have been suspected of almost any 
abomination, deemed capable of any treachery or cruelty towards 
Israel — no student of history can deem strange, especially when the 
experience of so many terrible wrongs (would they had ])een con- 
tined to the heathen and to those times!) would naturally lead to 
morbidly excited ^suspicions and apprehensions. 

Secondly: We must remember the times, the education, and the 
general standpoint of that period as compared with our own. No 
one would measure the belief of Christians by certain statements in 
the Fathers, nor judge tlie moral principles of Roman Catholics by 
prurient quotations from the Casuists; nor yet estimate the Lutherans 
by the utterances and deeds of the early successors of Luther, nor 
Calvinists by the burning of Servetus. In all such cases the general 
standpoint of the times has to be first taken into account. And no 
educated Jew would share the follies and superstitions, nor yet sym- 
pathise with the suspicions or feelings towards even the most hostile 
and dei^raved heathens, that may be quoted from tlie Talmud. 

Thirdly: Absolutely the contrary of all this has been again and 
again set forth by modern Jewish writers. Even their attenqjts t(j 
explain away certain quotations from the Talmud — unsuccessful 
thougli. in my view, some of them are — afibrd evidence of their 
present repudiation of all such sentiments. I would here specially 
refer to such Avork as Dr. Grunehauni's 'Ethics of Judaism' (' Sitten- 
lehre d. Judenthums') — a ])ook deeply interesting also as setting 
forth the modern Jewish view of Christ and His Teaching, and 
accordant (though on ditferent grounds) with some of the conclusions 
expressed in this book, as regards certain incidents in the History 
of Christ. The principles expressed by Di-. (rrlinebaion, and other 
writers, are such as for ever to give the lie to Anti-Semitic charges. 
And although he and others, with quite proper loyalty, labour to 
explain certain Talnnidic citations, yet it ultimately c-omes to the 
admission that Talniudic sayings are not the criterion and rule of 
])res('nt duty, even as regards the heathen — still less Christians, to 
whom they do not apply. 

AVhat has just been stated, while it fully disposes of all 'Anti- 
Semitism,' only the more clearly sets forth the argument whicli forms 
the main ]))-opositiou of this book. Here also we have the highest 


exaiiii)le. None loNcd Israel so intensely, even unto death, as Jesus of 
Nazareth; none made such withering' denunciations as He of Jewish 
Traditionalism, in all its l)ranches, and of its llepresentatives. It is 
with Traditionalism, not the Jews, that our controversy lies. And 
here we cannot speak too i)lainly nor decidedly. It mig-ht, indeed, l)e 
argued, apart from any proposed ditlcrent api)lications, that on one or 
another point opinions of a ditferent kind may also be adduced from 
other Rabbis. Nor is it intended to convey unanimity of opinion on 
every subject. For, indeed, such scarcely existed on any one point — 
not on matters of fact, nor even often on Halakhic questions. And 
this also is characteristic of Rabbinism. Rut it must be remem- 
bered that Ave are here dealing with tlie very text-book of that 
sacred and Divine Traditionalism, the l)asis and substance of Rab- 
])inism, for which such unlimited authority and al)solute su])mission are 
claimed; and hence, that any statement admitted into its pages, even 
though a different view were also to be adduced, possesses an authori- 
tative and a representative character. And this further appears from 
the fact that the same statements are often i-epeated in other docu- 
ments, besides that in which they were originally made, and that they 
are also supported by other statements, kindred and parallel in spirit. 
In truth, it has throughout been my aim to present, not one nor 
another isolated statement or aspect of Rabbinism, but its general 
teaching and tendency. In so doing I have, however, purposely left 
aside certain passages which, while they might have most fully brought 
out the sad and strange extravagances to which Rabbinism could go, 
would have involved the unnecessary quotation of what is not only 
very painful in itself, but might have furnished an occasion to 
enemies of Israel. Alike the one and the other it was my most 
earnest desire to avoid. And by the side of these extravagances 
there is so much in Jewish writings and life — the outcome of Old 
Testament training — that is noblest and most touching, especially as 
regards the social virtues, such as purity, kindness, and charity, and 
the acknowledgment of God in sutferings, as well as their patient 
endurance. On the other hand, it is difficult to believe that even the 
vehement assertions of partisans on the other side, supported liy 
isolated sayings, sometimes torn from their context, or by such co- 
incidences as are historically to be expected, will persuade those who 
keep in view either the words of Christ or His history and that of 
the Apostles, that the relation between Christianity in its origin, as 
the fullilment of the Old Testament, and Traditionalism, as the exter- 
nalised development of its letter, is other than that of which these 


\(»luiii(>s furnish hoth the explanation and the evidence. In point of 
fact, the attentive student of history Avill observe that a simiUir protest 
against the bare letter underlies Alexandrianism and Philo — although 
there from the side of reason and apologetically, in the New Testa- 
ment from the aspect of spiritual life and for its full presentation. 

Tlius much — somewhat reluctantly written, because approaching 
controversy — seemed necessary by way of explanation. The brief 
interval between the First and Second Editions rendered only a 
superficial revision possible, as then indicated. For the present 
edition the whole work has once more been revised, chiefly with the 
view of removing from the numerous marginal Talmudic references 
such misprints as were observed. In the text and notes, also, a few 
errata have been corrected, or else the meaning rendered more clear. 
In one or two places fresh notes have been made; some references 
have been struck out, and others added. These notes will furnish evi- 
dence that the literature of the subject, since the first appearance of 
these volumes, has not been neglected, although it seemed unnecessary 
to swell the ' List of Authorities ' by the names of all the books since 
published or perused. Life is too busy and too short to be always 
going back on one's traces. Nor, indeed, would this be profitable. 
The further results of reading and study will best be embodied in 
further labours, please God, in continuation of those now completed. 
Opportunity may then also occur for the discussion of some questions 
which had certainly not been overlooked, although this seemed not 
the proper place for them: such as that of the composition of the 
Apostolic writings. 

And so, with great thankfulness for what service this book has 
))een already allowed to perform, I would now send it forth on its 
new journey, with this as my most earnest hope and desire: that, in 
however humble a manner, it may be helpful for the fuller and clearer 
setting forth of the Life of Him Who is the Life of all our life. 

A. E. 

Oxford: March 1886. 




In presenting tliese volumes to the reader, I must offer an explana- 
tion, — though I would fain hope that such may not be absolutely 
necessary. The title of this book must not be understood as implying 
any pretence on my part to write a ' Life of Christ ' in the strict sense. 
To take the lowest view, the materials for it do not exist. Evidently 
the Evangelists did not intend to give a full record of even the 
outward events in that History; far less could they have thought of 
compassing the sphere or sounding the depths of the Life of Him, 
Whom they present to us as the God-Man and the Eternal Son of 
the Eternal Father. Rather must the Gospels l^e regarded as four 
different aspects in which the Evangelists viewed the historical Jesus 
of Nazareth as the fulfilment of the Divine promise of old, the Mes- 
siah of Israel and the Saviour of man, and presented Him to the 
Jewish and Gentile world for their acknowledgment as the Sent of 
God, Who revealed the Father, and Avas Himself the Way to Him, 
the Truth, and the Life. And this view of the Gospel-narratives 
underlies the figurative representation of the Evangelist in Christian 

In thus guarding my meaning in the choice of the title. I have 
already indicated my own standpoint in this l^ook. But in an- 
other respect I wish to disclaim having taken any predetermined 
dogmatic standpoint at the outset of my investigations. I wished 

^ Comp. tbe historical account of tliese sj'iiibols in Zahn. Forsch. z. Gescb. il. 
Neu-Test. Kanons, ii. pp. 257-275. 


to write, not lur a (U'tiiiile pur])()se, be it even that of the defence 
of the faith — but i-athcr to h't that purpose grow out of the book, 
us woukl be pointed out by the course of independent study, in which 
ar<>:uinents on both sides should l)e impartially weighed and facts 
ascertained. In this manner I hoped best to attain what must be the 
first object in all research, l)ut especially in such as the present: to 
ascertain, as far as we can, the truth, irrespective of consequences. 
And thus also I hoped to help others, by going, as it were, before 
them, in the path which their enquiries must take, and removing 
the difficulties and entanglements which beset it. So might I 
honestly, confidently, and, in such a matter, earnestly, ask them to 
follow me, i)ointing to the height to which such enquiries must lead 
uj). I know, indeed, that there is something beyond and apart from 
this; even the restful sense on that height, and the happy outlook 
from it. But this is not within the province of one man to give 
to another, nor yet does it come in the way of study, however 
earnest and careful; it depends upon, and implies the existence of 
a subjective state which comes only by the direction given to our 
enquiries by the true odj/yog (St. John xvi. 13). 

This statement of the general object in view will explain the 
course pursued in these enquiries. First and foremost, this book was 
to be a study of the Life of Jesus the Messiah, retaining the 
general designation, as best conveying to others the subject to be 

But, secondly, since Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew, spoke to, and 
moved among Jews, in Palestine, and at a definite period of its 
history, it was absolutely necessary to view that Life and Teaching 
in all its surroundings of place, society, popular life, and intellectual 
or religious development. This would form not only the frame in 
which to set the picture of the Christ, but the very background of 
tlie picture itself. It is, indeed, most true that Christ spoke not only 
to the Jews, to Palestine, and to that time, but — of which history 
has given the evidence — to all men and to all times. Still He spoke 
first and directly to the Jews, and Tlis words must have been in- 
telligible to them. His teaching have reached upwards from their 
intellectual and religious stand])oint, even although it infinitely 
extended the horizon so as, in its full application, to make it wide as- 
the bounds of earth and time. Nay, to explain the bearing of the 
religious leaders of Israel, from the first, towards Jesus, it seemed 
also necessary to trace the historical development of thought and 
religious belief, till it issued in that svstem of Traditionalism, which. 


by an internal necessity, was irreconcilably antagonistic to the Christ 
of the Gospels. 

On other grounds also, sueh a full portraiture of Jewish life, 
society, and thinking seemed requisite. It furnishes alike a vin- 
dication and an illustration of the Gospel-narratives. A vindication 
— because in measure as we transport ourselves into that time, we 
feel that the Gospels present to us a real, historical scene; that the 
men and the circumstances to which we are introduced are real — 
not a fancy i)icture, l)ut just such as we know and now recognize 
them, and would expect them to have spoken, or to have been. 
Again, we shall thus vividly realise another and most important 
aspect of the w(u-ds of Christ. We shall perceive that their form is 
wholly of the times, their cast Jewish — while by the side of this 
similarity of form there is not only essential ditierence but absolute 
contrariety of substance and spirit. Jesus spoke as truly a Jew to 
the Jews, but He spoke not as they — no, not as their highest and 
best Teachers would have spoken. And this contrariety of spirit 
with manifest similarity of form is, to my mind, one of the strongest 
evidences of the claims of Christ, since it raises the all-important 
question, whence the Teacher of Nazareth — or, shall we say, the 
lunnble Child of the Carpenter-home in a far-off little place of Galilee 
— had drawn His inspiration? And clearly to set this forth has been 
tlie first ol)ject of the detailed Rabbinic quotations in this book. 

But their further object, besides this vindication, has been the 
illustration of the Gospel-narratives. Even the general reader must 
be aware that some knowledge of Jewish life and society at the time 
is requisite for the understanding of the Gospel-history. Those who 
have consulted the works of Lighffoot, Schottgen, Meuschen, Wetstein 
and WfinscJie, or even the extracts from them presented in Com- 
ujcntaries, know that the help derived from their Jewish references 
is veiT great. And yet, despite the immense learning and industry 
of these writers, there are serious drawbacks to their use. Some- 
times the references are critically not quite accui'ate; sometimes 
they ai-e derived from works that should not have been adduced in 
evidence: occasionally, eithei' the i-endering, or the application of 
what is separated from its context, is not reliable. A still more 
s<'rious objection is, that these ({notations are not unfrequently one- 
sided: but chiefly this — perhaps, as the necessary consequence of being 
merely illustrative notes to certain verses in the Gospels — that they 
do not i)i-esent a full and connecte<l picture. And yet it is this 
which so often gives the most varied and welcome illustration of the 


(iuspcl-iiari'atives. \u truth, we know nut only the leadinji' per- 
sonages in Cliurcli and State in Palestine at that time, their views, 
teaching, pursuits, and aims; the state of parties; the character of 
poi)ular opinion; the proverbs, the customs, the daily life of the 
country — but ^ve can, in imagination, enter their dwellings, associate 
with them in familiar intercourse, or follow them to the Temple, the 
Synagogue, the Academy, or to the market-place and the worksho}). 
Wv know what clothes they wore, what dishes they ate, what wines 
they drank, what they produced and what they imported: nay, the 
cost of every article of their dress or food, the price of houses and 
of living: in short, every detail that can give vividness to a picture 
of life. 

All this is so im[)ortant for the understanding of the Gospel- 
history as, I hope, to justify the fulness of archteological detail in 
this book. And yet I have used only a portion of the materials which 
I had collected for the purpose. And here I must frankly own, as 
another reason for this fulness of detail, that nmny erroneous and 
misleading statements on this subject, and these even on elementary 
points, have of late been made. Supported by references to the 
labours of truly learned Gernum writers, they have been sometimes 
set forth with such confidence as to impose the laborious and un- 
welcome duty of carefully examining and testing them. But to 
tills oidy the briefest possible reference has I)een made, and chiefly 
in the l)eginning of these volumes. 

Another explanation seems more necessary in this connection. In 
describing the Traditionalism of the time of Christ, 1 must have said 
what, I fear, may, most unwillingly on nn' part, wound the feelings of 
some who still cling, if not to the faith of^ yet to what now rei)resents 
the ancient Synagogue. But let me appeal to their fairness. I 
must needs state what I believe to be the facts; and I could neither 
keei) them back nor soften them, since it was of the very essence of 
my argument to present Christ as both in contact and in contrast Avith 
Jewish Traditionalism. No educated Western Jew would, in these 
•daA's, confess himself as occupying the exact standpoint of Rabbinic 
Traditionalism. Some will select i)arts of the system; others will 
allegorise, exi)lain. or modify it: very many will, in heart — often 
also openly — repudiate the whole. And here it is surely not neces- 
sary for me to rebut or disown those vile falsehoods about the Jcavs 
which ignorance, cupidity, and bigoted hatred have of late again so 
strangely raised. But I would go further, and assei't that, in re- 
fci-ence to Jesus of Xazareth. no educated Israelite of to-day would 


identify himself with the religious leaders of the people eighteen 
centuries ago. Yet is not this diselainier of that Traditionalism 
which not only explains the rejection of Jesus, l)ut is the sole logical 
raison cVetre of the Synagogue, also its condemnation? 

I know, indeed, that from this negative there is a vast step in 
advance to the positive in the reception of the Gospel, and that 
many continue in the Synagogue, because they are not so convinced 
of tlie other as truthfully to profess it. And perhaps the means we 
have taken to present it have not always been the wisest. The mere 
appeal to the literal fultilmeni, of certain prophetic jiassages in the 
Old Testament not only leads chiefly to critical discussions, but rests 
the case on what is, after all, a secondary line of argumentation. 
In the New Testament prophecies are not made to point to facts, 
but facts to point back to prophecies. The New Testament presents 
the fultilment ofallprophccy rather than of prophecies, and individual 
predictions serve as fingerposts to great outstanding tacts, which 
mark where the roads meet and part. And here, as it seems to me, 
we are at one with the ancient Synagogue. In proof, I would call 
special attention to Appendix IX., which gives a list of all the Old 
Testament passages Messianically applied in Jewish writings. We, 
as well as they, appeal to all Scripture, to all prophecy, as that of 
which the reality is in the Messiah. But we also appeal to the 
whole tendency and new direction which the Gospel presents in 
opposition to that of Traditionalism; to the new revelation of the 
Father, to the new brotherhood of man, and to the satisfaction of the 
deei)est wants of the heart, which Christ has brought — in short, to 
the Scriptural, the moral, and the spiritual elements; and wc would 
ask whether all this could have been only the outcome of a Car- 
penter's Son at Nazareth at the time, and amidst the siu'i-oundings 
which we so well know. 

In seeking to reproduce in detail the life, opinions, and teaching 
of the contemporaries of Christ, we have also in great measure 
addressed ourselves to what was the third siieckd object in view in 
this History. This was to clear the path of difficulties — in other 
words, to meet such objections as might be raised to the Gospel- 
narratives. And this, as regards principle — not details and minor 
questions, which will cause little uneasiness to the thoughtful and 
calm reader; quite irrespective also of any theory of insj^iration 
which may l)e proposed, antl hence of any harmonistic or kindred 
attempts which may be made. Broadly speaking, the attacks on the 
Gospel-narratives may be grouped under tliese three particulars: 


they may l)o represented as inteiiti(^nal fraud hj the writers, and 
imposition on the readers; or, secondly, a rationalistic explanation 
may V)e sought of them, showing how what originally had been quite 
simple and natural was misunderstood by ignorance, or perverted by 
superstition; or, thirdly, they ma}^ be represented as the outcome of 
ideas and expectations at the time, which gathered around the 
beloved Teacher of Nazareth, and, so to speak, found body in legends 
that clustered around the Person and Life of Him Who was regarded 
as the Messiah. . . . And this is supposed to account for the 
preaching of the Apostles, for their life- witness, for their martyr- 
death, for the Church, for the course which history has taken, as 
well as for the dearest hopes and experiences of Christian life! 

Of the three modes of criticism just indicated, importance at- 
taches only to the third, which has been liroadly designated as the 
mythical theory. The fraud-theory seems — as even Strauss admits 
— psychologically so incompatible with admitted facts as regards the 
early Disciples and the Church, and it does such violence to the first 
requirements of historical enquiry, as to make it — at least to me — 
dilRcult to understand how any thoughtful student could In' swayed 
l)y objections which too often are merely an appeal to the vulgar, 
intellectually and morally, in us. For — to take the historical view 
of the question — even if every concession were made to negative 
criticism, sufficient would still be left in the Christian documents to 
establish a consensus of the earliest belief as to all the great facts of 
the Gospel-History, on which both the preaching of the Apostles 
and the primitive Church have been historically based. And with 
this consensus at least, and its practical outcome, historical enquiry 
has to reckon. And here I may take leave to point out the infinite 
importance, as regards the very foundation of our faith, attaching to 
the historical Church — truly in this also the eKKXrjcria Geov ^(^vro?:, 
(TTvXog Ktx\ iSpaiijDj-ia [coluinna et fulcrum^ rr/g aXt/delag; fthe 
Church of the Living God, the pillar and stay [support] of the truth). 

As regards the second class of interpretation — the rationalistic — 
it is altogether so superficial, shadow}' and unreal tliat it can at 
most be only regarded as a passing phase of light-niindcil attempts 
to set aside felt difficulties. 

IJut the third mode of explanation, commonW, tlioiigh ]»('rhai)s 
not always ([uite fairly, designated as the mythical. dcsciNcs and 
demands, at least in its sober presentation, the serious lonsidcration 
of the historical student. Hai)])ily it is also tliat which, in the nature 
of it, is most capable of being subjected to the test ot liistoricai ex- 


amination. For, as previously stated, we possess ample materials for 
ascertaining the state ol' thought, belief, and expectancy in the time 
of Christ, and of His Apostles. And to this aspect of olyections to 
the Gospels the main line of argumentation in this book has been 
addressed. For, if the historical analysis here attempted has any 
logical force, it leads up to this conclusion, that Jesus Christ was, 
alike in the fundamental direction of His teaching and Avork, and in 
its details, antithetic to the Synagogue in its doctrine, })ractice, and 

But even so, one difficulty — we all feel it — remaineth. It is that 
connected with miracles, or rather with the miraculous, since the 
designation, and the difficulty to which it points, must not be limited 
to outward and tangible phenomena. But herein, I venture to say, 
lies also its solution, at least so far as such is possible — since the 
difficulty itself, the miraculous, is of the very essence of our thinking 
about the Divine, and, therefore one of the conditions of it: at least, 
in all religions of which the origin is not from within us, subjective, 
but from without us, objective, or, if I may so say, in all that claim 
to be universal religions (catholic thinking). But, to my mind, the 
evidential value of miracles (as frequently set forth in these volumes) 
lies not in what, without intending ofience, I may call their barely 
super-naturalistic aspect, but in this, that they are the manifestations 
of the miraculous, in the widest sense, as the essential element in 
revealed religion. Miracles are of chief evidential value, not in 
themselves, but as instances and proof of the direct communication 
between Heaven and earth. And such direct communication is, at 
least, the postulate and first position in all religions. They all present 
to the worshipper some medium of personal communication from 
Heaven to earth — some prophet or other channel of the Divine — and 
some medium for our communication with Heaven. And this is the 
fundamental principle of the miraculous as the essential postulate 
in all religion that purposes again to bind num to God. It j)roceeds 
on the twofold principle that communication must tirst come to man 
fro)ii Heaven, and tlien that it does so come. Rather, perhaps, let 
us say, that all religion turns on these two great factors of our inner 
experience: man's felt need and (as implied in it, if we are God's 
creatures) his felt expectancy. And in the Christian Church this is 
not merely matter of the past — it has attained its fullest reality, and 
is a constant present in the indwelling of the Paraclete. 

Yet another part of the task in writing this book remains to be 
mentioned. In the nature of it, such a ])ook must necessarily have 


Ijucii more or Ie.-;ri of a Coininentary on the Gof^pels. But I have 
souglit to follow the text of the Gospels throughout, and separately 
to eonsider every passage in them, so that, 1 hope, I may truthfully 
tlesignate it also a Commentary on the Four Gospels — though an 
informal one. And here I nmy be allowed to state that throughout 
I have had the general reader in view, reserving for the foot-notes 
and Appendices wiiat may be of special interest to students. While 
thankfully availing myself of all critical help within my reach — 
and here I may perhaps take the liberty of specially singling out 
I'rofessor Westcott's Commentary on St. John — I have thought it 
right to make the sacred text the subject of fresh and independent 
study. The conclusions at which I arrived I would present with 
the more deference, that, from my isolated position, I had not, in 
writing these volumes, the inestimable advantage of personal contact, 
on these subjects, with other students of the sacred text. 

It only remains to add a few sentences in regard to other matters 
— jierhaps of more interest to myself than to the reader. For many 
years I had wished and planned writing such a book, and all my 
pi'cvious studies were really in preparation for this. But the task 
was actually undertaken at the request of the Publishers, of whose 
kindness and patience I must here make public acknowledgment. 
For, the original term fixed for writing it was two or three years. 
It has taken me seven years of continual and earnest labour — and, 
even so, I feel as if I would fain, and ought to, spend other seven 
years upon what could, at most, be touching the fringe of this great 
subject. What these seven years have been to me I could not at- 
tempt to tell. In a remote country parish, entirely isolated from all 
social intercourse, and amidst not a few trials, parochial duty has 
been diversified and relieved by many hours of daily work and of 
study — delightful in and for itself. If any point seemed not clear 
to my own mind, or required protracted investigation, I could give 
days of undisturbed work to what to others might perhaps seem 
secondary, but was all-important to me. And so these seven years 
l)assed — with no other companion in study than my daughter, to 
whom I am indebted, not only for the Index Berum, but for much 
else, especially for a renewed revision, in the proof-sheets, of the 
references made throughout these volumes. What labour and pa- 
tience this required every reader will perceive — although even so I 
cannot hope that no misprint or slip of the pen has escaped our 

And now I part from this book with thankfulness to Almighty 


<j(()(l for sparing- iiie to complete it, witli lingering regret that the 
task is ended, but also with unfeigned diffidence. I have, indeed, 
sought to give my best and most earnest labour to it, and to v.rite 
what I believed to be true, irrespective of party or received opinions. 
This, in such a book, was only sacred duty. But where study 
necessarily extended to so many, and sometimes new, departments, 
I cannot hope always to carry the reader with me, or — Avhich is far 
more serious — to have escaped all error. My deepest and most 
earnest prayer is that He, in Whose Service I have desired to write 
this book, would graciously accept the humble service — forgive what 
is mistaken and bless what is true. And if anything pers(Muil may 
intrude into these concluding lines, I would fain also designate what 
I have written as Apologia jy^'O vita itied (alike in its fundamental 
direction and even ecclesiastically) — if, indeed, that may be called 
an Apologia which is the confession of this inmost conviction of 
mind and heart: ' Lord, to Whom shall we go ? The words of 
eternal life hast Thou! And we have believed and know that Thou 
art the Holy One of God.' 


S Bradmore Road, Oxford: 
September 1883. 



Alford: Greek Testament. 

Vonder Aim: Heidn. u. ji'id. Urtheile 

iiber Jesii u. die alteii Christen. 
Altingius: Dissertationes et Orationes. 
Apocrypha: S. P. C. K. Commentary on. 

Tlie Apocryplial Gospels. 
Auerbach : Beritli Abraham. 

Bachev: Die Agada der Babylon. Anio- 

Back: Geschichte des Jiid. Yolkes u. 

seiner Literatur. 
Baedeker: Syrien u. Palastina. 
Bdhr: Gesetz iiber Falsche Zeugen nach 

Bible u. Talmud. 
Barclay: City of the Great King. 
Beer: Leben Abraham's. 
Beer: Leben Alosis. 
Beer, P. : Geschichte d. relig. Sekten d. 

Ben/jel: Gnomon Novi Testamenti. 
Bengel: Alter der jiidischen Proselyten- 

Bergel: Naturwissenschaftliche Kenut- 

nisse d. Talmudisten. 
Bergel: Der Himmel u. seine AVunder. 
Bergel: Die Eheverhaltnisse der alteu 

Berliner, Br. A . : Targum Onkelos. 
Bertholdt: Christologia Judfeorum. 
Beyschlag: Die Christologie des Neuen 

Beyschlag: Zur Johanneischen Frage. 
Bickell : Die Entstehung der Liturgie aus 

der Einsetzungsfeier. 
Bleek: Einleitung in das Neue Testa- 
ment, ed. Mangold. 
Bleek: Synoptische Erklarung d. drei 

Bloch : Studien z. Gesch. der Sammlung 

d althebr. Literatur. 
Blocli : Das Mosaisch-talmud. Polizei- 

Bloch : Civilprocess-Ordnung nach Mos. 

rabb. Rechte. 
Bochartns: Hierozoicon. 
Bodek: Marcus Aurelius u. R. Jehudah. 
Bodenschatz: Kircbliche Verfassung der 

heutiizren .Juden. 

Bbhl: Forschuugen nach einer Volks- 

bibel zur Zeit Jesu. 
Bbhl: Alttestamentliche Citate im N. T. 
Bonar: The Land of Promise. 
Braun: DieSohne des Herodes. 
Brauri/us: De Vestitu Ilebrajorum. 
Brecher : DasTranscendentale iniTalmud. 
Bredow: Rabbinische Mytheu, <tc. 
Brilckner: Die Versuchuugsgeschichte 

unseres Herrn Jesu Christi. 
Br tick: Rabbinische Ceremonialgebrau- 

Br nil: Fremdsprachliche Redensarten ira 

Br nil: Trachten der Juden. 
Buber: Pesikta. 
Backer: Des Apostels Johannes Lehre 

vom Logos. 
Burgon : The Last Twelve Verses of St. 

Buxforf: Exercitationes. 
Buxtorf: Synagoga Judaica. 
Buxtorf; Lexicon Talmud. 

Calvin: Comment, (passim). 
Cahen : Repertorium Talmudicum. 
Carpzov: Chuppa Hebneorium. 
Caspar i: Einleitung in das Leben Jesu 

Cassel: Das Buch Kusari. 
Cassel: Lehrbuch der Jiid. Gesch. u. 

Castelli: Commento di Sabbatai Donnolo 

sul libro della Creazione. 
Castelli: II Messia secondo gli Ebrei. 
Cavedoni: Biblische Numismatik. 
Charter is : Canonicity. 

Chasronoth Hashas. 
Cheyne: Prophecies of Isaiah. 
Chijs: De Herode Magno. 
Cohen: Les Deicides. 

Commentaries, Speaker's, on the 
Gospels; Camb. Bible on the 
Conder: Tent AVork in Palestine. 
Couder: Handbook to the Bible. 
Conforte: Liber Kore ha-Dorot. 
Cook: The Rev. Version of the Gospels. 
Creizetuich : Shulcan Ariich. 



Cremer: New Testament Dictionary. 
Cureton : Syriac Gospels. 

Ddhiie: Ji'ulisch-Alex. Religionsphilos. 
Daridson : Introduction to the Study of 

tlie New Testament. 
DdTiiJson: The Last Things. 
Dachx: Codex SuccaTalmudisBabylonici. 
I)(tJikn: IIistoriaRevelatlonisDivina?N.T. 
Bniiko: De Sacra Scriptura ejusque in- 

terpretatione Conuneutarius. 
Dehiuiiaji: Moines et Siljylles dans Tau- 

tiquite Judeo-Grecque. 
Delifzsch : Handwerkerleben zur Zeit 

Dditzsch : Geschiciite der jiid. Poesie. 
Delitzsrh : Durcli Kraidvheit zur Gene- 
Beb'tzsch : Bin Tag in Capernaum. 
Delitzsch: Untersu.chungen iib. die Ent- 

steh. u. Aidage d. .Mattii.-Evang. 
Delifzsclr, Talniu<1isrhe Studieu. 
Delitzsch : Jesus und llillei. 
DerenboKi-ij: Essai sur I'Histoire et la 

Geograpiiie de la Palestine. 
Deiitsch: Literary Remains. 
Dp>/liii{/ius : Observationes Sacra?. 
DiUmnnn: Das Bucli Henoch. 
DoUiiu/er: Heidenthum und Judentluim. 
Drummonil: Tlie .Jewisli Messiah. 
Diikfs: Zni' Rabbinischen Sprachkunde. 
Dukes: Rabbiiiisohe Blumenlese. 
Dusch((k: Zur Rotanik des Talmud. 
Diischak: Die Moral der Evangelien und 

des Talmud. 
Duschak: Jiidischer Cultus. 
Dnsc/itik : Schulgesetzgebung. 

Ebrard: Wissenschaftliehe Kritik der 

evangel, (icschichte. 
Eders]tfim : History of the .Jewish Nation. 
Edersheim: TheTenq)le, its Ministry and 

its Services. 
EdPTsheim: Sketclies of .Jewish Social 

Ehrmann: Geschichteder Schulen u. der 

Cultur unter den .Juden. 
EisemnriKicr: Entdecktes Judenthum. 
Eislcr: Reitriige zur Rabb. Sprach- u. 

EUicutt: New Testament Commentary: 

EUicoft: I^ectures on the I^ife of oui' 


Encyclopitdia Britannica { passim). 
Ether idye: Tlie Targums on the Penta- 
Euselniis: Ecclesiastical History. 
Ewald: Abodah Sai'ah. 
Eicald: Geschichte des Volkes Israel. 
Ewald: Bibl. Jahrb. ( passim). 

Fabric ill s: Codex PseudepigraphusV.T. 

Farrar: Life of Christ. 

Farrar: Eternal Hope. 

Fassi'l: Das Mos. rabb. Civilrecht. 

Fassel : Gerichts-Verf. 

Field: Otium Norvicense. 

Fdipoirski: Lil)er Juchassin. 

Fisher: Beginnings of Christianity. 

Fraiikel: Targum der Proi)h. 

Frankel: Ueb.d. Einfl.d. paliist. Exegese 

auf die Alexandr. Hermeneutik. 
Frankel: Mouatschrift fiir das Juden- 
thum (passim). 
Frankel: Vorstudien zu der Septua- 

Frankel: Einleitung in d. Jerusalem 

Era nek: d. Kabbala. 
Freudenthal: Hellenistische Studien. 
Friedenthal: Jessode haddat weikere 

Friedlaender: Sittengeschichte Roms. 
Friedlaender: Ben Dosa u. seine Zeit. 
Friedlaender: Patristische u. Talmud- 

ische Studien. 
Friedlieb: Oracula Sibyllina. 
Friedlieb: Archaologie der Leidensge- 

Fried/i/an)i: Siphre debe Rab. 
Fritzsche ii. Grimm: Handbuch zu den 

Fritzsche n. drimm : Libri V. T. Pseud- 

epigraphi Selecti. 
Fuller: Harmony of the Four Gospels. 
FUrst: Der Kanon des A. T. 
Filrst: Ivulturu. Literaturgeschichte der 

Juden in x\sien. 
Fi(j-st: Biblioth. Jiid. (passim). 
Filrstenthal: Menorath Hammaor. 
Fiirstetithal: Jessode haddat. 

Geier: De Ebra^orum Luctu Lugen- 
tiumque Ritibus. 

Geiyer: Das Judenthum u. seine Ge- 

Gei<jer: Beitriige z. Jiid. Literatur-Gesch. 

Geir/er: Zeitschrift fur Jud. Theol. (p)as- 

Geii/er: Urschrift n. Uebersetzungen del 

Geikie: Life and Words of Christ. 

Gelpke: Die Jugendgesch. des Herrn. 

Gerlach: Die R:dni. Statthiilter in Syrien 
u JudJia. 

Gf rarer: T'hilo. 

Gfr<')rer: .lahrli. d. Ileils. 

(rinsburi/: Ben Chajim's Introd. 

Ginslmrfj: Massoreth Ha-Massoreth. 

Ginsl)ur<j: Tlie Essenes. 

Gi)t.slnirij: The Kabbalah. 

Godet: Commentar. 


XXI 11 

Godef: BiljI. Studies. 
Goehel: Die Paraijelu Jesu. 
Goldherij: The Language of Clirist. 
Gruetz: Clescliichte der Juden. 
Green: Tlandbiv. to tlie Gnunniar of tlie 

Grk. Te8t. 
Grhr/m: Die Samariter. 
Grimm : Claris N. T. 
Grunemann: Die Jonatliaasclie I'enta- 

Griinehaum : Sittenlebre des.Iudeiithuins. 
Gnerut : Description do la Palestine et 

Guillemdrd: Hebraisms in the Greelv 

GiinzbKr'j: Beleuchtuug des alten Ju- 


II'i infill rijer: Real Encyklopiidie f. Bibel 

u. Talmud. 
Ilainelsreld: Dissertatio de itdibus vet. 

Haneberg: Die relig. Alterth. der Bibel. 
Harnoch: De Philouis Judivi Log. In- 

Hart nut un : Die Hebraerin am Putztische 

u. als Braut. 
Harfmrtiu) : Die enge Verbiudung des 

A. T. mit dem Neuen. 
Hase: Lebeu Jesu. 
Hrinpf: Die A. T. Citate in den i Evan- 

Hans rath: Neutestamentliche Zeitge- 

Her zf eld: Gescbichte Israels. 
Herzfehl: Handelsgescbichte der .Judeu 

des Alterthums. 
Herzog: Real-Encyklopadie (passim). 
UHdesheimer: Der Herod. Tempel n. d. 

Talmud u. Josephus. 
Uilgenfeld: Jiidische Apokalyptik. 
Hirsc/ifeld: Halach. u. Hagad. Exegese. 
Hirschfeld: Tractatus Macot. 
Hitzig : Geschichte des Volkes Israel. 
Hoffmann: Leben Jesu. 
Hofmann: Schriftbeweis. 
Hofmann: Weissagung u. Erfiillung. 
Hoffmann: Abhandluugeu iib. die Pen- 
tat. Gesetze. 
Holdheim: d. Cerem. Ges. 
Hottinger: Juris Hebr. Leges. 
Huschke: Ueb. d. Census u. die Steuer- 

verf. d. friih. Rom. Kaiserzeit. 
Huschke: Ueb. d. z. Zeil d. Geb. Jesu 

Christi gehaltenen Census. 
Hnvercamp : Flavins Josephus. 

Ideler: Chronologie. 
Ikenitis: Antiquitates Hebraicse. 
Ikenius: Dissertationes Philologieo-theo- 

Jellinek: Beth ha-Midrasli. 

Joel: Blick in <1. Religionsgescii. d. 2teu 

Christiiehen Jahrh. 
Joel: Kdigiiinsphilos. des iSohar. 
Jost: Gesch. d. Judenth. u. seiner Sekten. 
Jon-eft: Epistles of St. Paul, Romans, 

Galatians, Thessalonians. 
Josephus Gorionides: ed. Breithaupt. 
JatjnljoU: Comment, in Hist. Gentis 


Keil: Einl. in. d. Kanon. u. Ai)okrvph. 

Scbriften des A. T. 
Keim : Geschichte Jesu von Nazara. 
Kennedy: Resurrection of Jesus Christ. 
Kirchheim : Septem Libri Talmudici 

parvi Hierosol. 
Kirchner: Jiid. Passahf. 
Kitto: Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature 

Kofiut: Jiidische Angelologie u. Daemo- 

Konig: Die Menschwerdung Gottes. 
Kosfer: Nachw. d. Spur, einer Trinitats- 

lehre vor Christo. 
Kraff't: Jiidische Sagen u. Dichtungen. 
Krauss: Die Grosse Syuode. 
A0-f6.s-: Decreta Athen in honor Hyrcani 

P. M. Judfeorum. 
Krebs: Decreta Roman, pro Juda^is. 
Krehs: Observationes in Nov. Test. 
Kuhn: Stadt. u. Inirgerl. Yerfass d. 

Rom. Reichs. 

Landau: Arukh. 

Lange: Bibehverk (on Gospels). 

Langen : Judenthum in Paliistina z. Zeit 

Lange: Leben Jesu. 

Langf elder: Symbolik des Judenthums. 
Laftes: Saggio di Giunte e Correzzioni al 

Lessico Talmudico. 
Lavadeur: Krit. Beleucht. d. jiid Kalen- 

Lenormant: Chaldean Magic. 
I^eti: Historia Religionis jfuda^orum. 
Levy: Neuhebr. u. Chaldaisch. AVorter- 

Lery: Chaldaisch. Wiirterb. iiber die 

ier^: Gesch. der Jiidiscb. Miinzen. 
Lei-yssohii: Disputatio de Jud. sub. Ca's. 

Leu-in : Fasti Sacri. 
Len-in: Siege of Jerusalem. 
Len-yssohn: Zoologie des Talmuds. 
Ligidfoof: Hora Hebraica et Talnind- 

ica in 4 Evangel. 
Ligidfoof: Comnieiitary on Galatians. 
Lighffoof: Commentary on Colossians. 
Lisco: Die Wnnder .lesu Christi. 



Loir: Beitriige z. jiid Altorthuniskiuule. 
Ao//': Lebeusalter in d. jiid. Literutiir. 
Loire: Schulchan Arucd. 
Loiry: Biggoreth liii Talniud. 
Lucius: Essenisimis in .sein Verhilltn z. 

Liicke: Johiinnerf (Gorfpel). 
Jjundius: Jiulisciio Hoiligtliiinicr. 
Lnthardt: Johaun. Evangelium. 
Ltiihnrdt: Die modern. Darslell. d. Le- 

bens Jesu. 
Lutterheck: Neutestamentliche Lelirbe- 


McLellan: New Testament itxospels). 
Madden: Coins of the .Jews. 
Maimonides: Yad liaCliazziikali. 
Marcus; Padagogiiv des Tahniid. 
Marqiiardt: Rom, Staatsverwaltuug. 
Martinus: Fidei Pugio. 
Maybaum: Die Anthropomoii)!!. u. An- 

tliropopatli. bei Onkelos. 
Megillath Taauitla. 
Meier: Judaica. 
MfKscltpu : Nov. Test e.\ Talnmde et 

Meyer: Seder 01am Rabba et Suta. 
Meyer: Buch Jezira. 
Meyer: Kommentar. (ou Gospels). 
Meyer: Arbeit u. Ilandwgrk. im Talmud. 
Midrash Rabboth. 

Midrashim. (See List in Rabb. 
Abb rev.) 
Mill: On the M\thical Interpretation of 

the Gospels. 
Molitor: Philosophic der Geschichte. 
Moscovitor: Het N. T. en de Talmud. 
Milller: Mess. Erwart. d. Jud. Philo. 
Milller: Zur Johann Frage. 
Miiller, J. : Massech. Sopher. 
Milnter: Stern der Weisen 

Naiiz: Die Besessenen im N. T. 

Neander: Life of Christ. 

Nehe: Leidensgesch. uuser. Herru Jesu 

Nebe: Auferstehungsgesch. unser. Herru 

Jesu Christi. 
Neiihnuer: La Geographie du Talmud. 
Neubauer and Driver: Jewish Interpre- 
ters of Isaiah, liii. 
Xeiniuniii: Messian. Erschein. Ijei d. 

Neumarni: Gesch. d. Mess. Weissag. im 
A. T. 

New Testament. Ed. Scrivener. 
Ed. Westcott and Hort. Ed. Geb- 
JSlcolai: De Sepulchris Hebra^oram. 

Nizzachon Vetus. et Toledotli Jeshu. 

Nicholson : Tlie Gospel accord, to the 

Morris: New Testament (Gospels). 
Nork: Rabbinische Quellen u. Parallelen. 
Nil ft: Samaritan History. 

OtJio: Lexicon RaljViin. Philolog. 
Outram: De Sacriticiis Judteor et 


Othijoth de R. Akiba. 
Oxlee: Doc. of Trinity on Princips. of 


Pag ni 11 us- Thesaurus Lingua^ Sauctte. 
Palestine E.xploration Fund Quar- 
terly Statements {passim). 
Perles: Liechenfeierlichk. im Nachbibl, 

Philii)2)soii : Ilaben wirklich die Jud. 

Jesuni gekreuzigt ''. 
Philippsoii: Israellt. Religionslehre. 
Philo Juduius: Opera. 

Pictorial Palestine (passim). 
Picturesque Palestine. 
Pinner: Berachoth. 
Pinner: Compend. des Hieros. u. Babyl. 


Pirke de R. Elieser. 
PI II in pt re: Comment, on the Gospels. 
Pliiinplre: Hihle Educator (y;f/s67'w). 
Pocock: Porta Mosis. 
Prayer-books, Jeirish : i. Arnheim. ii. 

Mannheimer. iii. Polak (Frankfort 

ed.). iv. Friedliinder. v. F. A. Euchel. 

vi. Jacobson. vii. Pesach Haggadah. 

viii. Rodelheim ed. 
Pressense: Jesus Christ: His Time, Life, 

and "Works. 
Prideaii.v: Connec. of 0. and N.T. 
Pusey: What is of Faith as to Everlasting 

Punishment ? 

Rabbinowicz: Einleit. in d. Gesetzgeb. 

u. Medicin d. Talm. 
Earn is: Dissertat. de. aedib. vet. Hebr. 
Bedslob: Die Kanonisch. Evangelien. 
Eeland: Anticpiit. Sacr. veter. Hebr. 
Belaud: Pakvstina. 
Remond: Ausbreit. d. Judenthuins. 
Renan : L'Antechrist. 
Renan : Vie de Jesus. 
Renan : Marc-Aurele. 
Rhenferdet Vitriiuja: De Decern Otiosis 

Riehni: Haudworterb. d. bibl. Alterth. 

Riehm: LehrbegritT d. Hebraerbriefs. 
Riess: Geburtsjahr Christi. 
Ritter: Philo u. die Ilalacha. 
Roberts: Discussion on the Gositcls. 



liohinsoir. Bil)rK-al l{i\st';irclu>s in J'aleci- 

Roeth : Epistola ad Hebrteos. 
Bohr: Paliistiiia z. Zeit Christi. 
Bdiisc//: Bucli Jubilaen. 
Rous: Lehreu. Lebeiisgescli. JesuCliri(<ti. 
Riisch: Jesus-Mythen d. Talinudist. 
Rospjimilller: Biblisch. GeoiiTaphie. 
Rossi, Azarjnh de: Meor Eiiajiiii. 
Rossi, Giambernnrdo de: Delia Liuji'ua 

Propria di Christo. 

Sdchs: Beitriigez. SpracU u. Altertlmms- 

JSaalsc/niiz: Musik bei d. Hebrileni. 
Saalschiitz: Mos. Recht. 
Halmidor: Ronierherrscluift in Judiea. 
Salvador: Gescb. d. Jiid. Volkes. 
Hammter: Baba Mezia. 
Schenkel: Bibel-Iiexicoii (jiassim). 
JSchleusner: Lexicon Gr. Lat. in N.T. 
Hchiner: De Chuppa Ilebraioruni. 
Schmilg: Der Siegeskaleuder Megill 

SchnecJierdncrger : Neutestanient. Zeitge- 

JSchoetfijf'n : Hora3 Hebraicse et Tal- 

Schreiber: Principien des Judentluims. 
Schroedenis: Comment, de Vestitu 

Mulier. Hebr. 
Schilrer: Neutestam. Zeitgescli. 
Sckiirer: Gemeindeverfass. d. Juden in 

Rom in d. Kaiserzeit. 
Schwab: Le Talmud de Jerusalem. 
Schwarz: I). Heilige Land. 
Schwarz: Tosifta Shabbath. 
Scrivener: Introduction to the Criticism 

of the New Testament. 
Seder Hadoroth. 
Selden : De Synedriis Ebr. 
Seidell : De Jure Naturali et Gent. Hebr. 
Selden: Uxor Ebraica. 
Sej)}}: Leben Jesu. 
Sevin : Chronologie des Lebens Jesu. 
Sheri/ighani : Jonia. 
Siegfried: Philo vou Alexandria. 
Singer: Onkelos u. seine Verhaltn. z. 


Sion Ledorosh. 
Smith : Dictionary of tlie Bible ( passim). 
Smith and W((ce: Dictionary of Christian 

Biography (passim). 

Tikkune haSohar. 
Salowetjczyk: Bibel, Talmud, u. Evan- 

Sommer : Mispar haSohar. 
Spencer: De Legib. Hebr. Ritual. 
Spiess: Das Jerusalem des Josephus. 
Spitzer: Das Mahl bei den Hebriiern. 

Staideij: Sinai and I'alesliiic. 

Stein rnei/er: Gebiu't des llerrn u. seiii- 

erste Schritte im Leben. 
Steinmeijer: Die Parabeln des llerrn. 
Stein : Schrift des Lebens. 
Stern : Die Fran im Talmud. 
Stern: Gesch. des Judenthums. 
Slier: Reden des Ilerrn Jesu. 
Sfrack: Pirke Aboth. 
Struck: Proleg. Crit. in V.T. Hebr. 
Strauss: Letien Jesu. 

Supernatural Religion. 
S/irenhiisins: Biblos Katallages. 
Surenhnsins: Mishnah. 

Talmud, Babylon and Jerusalem. 
Targum, the Targumlm in the Mik- 
raoth gedoloth. 
Taylor: Sayings of the Jewish Fathers 
(Pirqe Ab.. &c.). with critical and 
illustrative Notes. 
Taylor: Great Exemplar. 
Taitchuma: Midrash. 
Thein : Der Talmud. 

Theologische Studieu u. Kritikeu 
( passim). 
Tholuck: Bergpredigt Christi. 
Tholuck: Das' Alt. Test, im Neu. Test. 
Tischendorf: When were our Gospels 

written ? 
Toetterman : R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanu.s. 
Traill: Josephus. 
Trench : Notes on the Miracles 
Trench : Notes on the Parables. 
Tristram : Natural History of the Bible. 
Tristram: Land of Israel. 
Tristram : Land of Moab. 
Trusen: Sitten, Gebriiuche u. Krank- 
heiten. d. alt. Hebr. 

Ugolinus: Thesaurus Anticiuitatum Sac- 

rarum {passim). 
Unriih: Das alte Jerusalem u. seine 


Ver))es: Histoire des Idees Messianiques. 
Vitringa : De Synagoga Vetere. 
Volkmar: Einleitungin die Ai)okryphen. 
Volkmar: Marcus. 
Volkmar: Mose Prophetic u. Himmel- 

Vorstius: De Hebraisms Nov. Test. 

Wace: The Gosi)el and its Witnesses. 
Wagenseil: Sota. 

Wahl: Clavis Nov. Test. Pliilolu-ica. 
Warneck: Pontius Pilatus. 
Watkins: Gospel of St. John. 
Welier: Johannes der Ttiufer u. die 
Parteien seiner Zeit. 



W'ahcr: System der nltsyiiiiyot;-. paliist. ; 

B. Weiss: Lelirli. d. I.ilil. Tlieol. desN.T. 
ITe/w: Mecliilta. 
UV'/.s'.v: Sii)hrti. 

B. ]\'eiss: Mtittliiiiisevaiigeliuin. 
B. Weiss: Lel)('n Jesu. 
]IV/.s'.s-: Gescliichtc. derjiul. Tradition. 
Weizsilcker: Uiitersuch. lib. die evauj^el. 

Wdllinusen: Die Pharisaer u. die Sad- 

Wi'stroU: Introduction to the Study of 

tlie Gosi)eis. 
M'fstcott: On tbe Canon of the New 

Westrntf: Gospel of St. Jobn. 
Wefstfin : Novum Testamentum Gnecuni 

WicJicIhdvs: Kommentar zur Leidens- 

Wieseler: Beitriige zuden Evang. u. der 

Evangel. Gesch. 
Wieseler: Cbronol. Syno])se der 4 Evan- 

Wiesner: d. Bann in s. Gescb. Entwicke- 

Winer : Bibliscbes Realworterbuch ( pas- 

Winer: De Onkeloso. 

Wilson: Recovery of Jerusalem. 

Witticheu : Die Idee des Reicbes Gottes. 

Wittichen : Leljen Jesu. 

Woljiiis: Bibliotbeca Hebnta (pfissim). 

Wordswori/i: Commentary (Gospels). 

Wnnderbdv: Biljl. talmud. Aledecin. 

Wilnsche: Die Leiden des Alessias. 

Wilnsche: Neue Beitriige z. Erlilut. der 

Wilnsclie: Der .Jerusalemiscbe Talmud. 
Wilnsche: Biljliotbeca Rabbinica. 

Yalkut Sbimeoni. 
Yalkut Rubeni. 
Youny: Cbristology of tbe Targums. 

Zahn: Forscb. zur Gescb. d. N.T. Kanons. 
Zeller: Pbilosopbie der Griechen. 

Zemacb David. 
Ziminermann : Karten u. Pliine z. Topo- 
graphic des alten Jerusalems. 
ZocMer: Handb. d.Theol.Wissenscbaften. 
Znmjd: Geburtsjaln- Christi. 
Zunz: Zur Gescbichte u. Literatur. 
Z?/»z:DieGottesdienstl. Yortr. d. .Juden. 
Zimz: Synagogale Poesie. 
Z'o?2: Ritus d.Synagogalen-Gottesdienst. 
Znckermandel : Tosephta. 


The Mis/uHi/i iri always quoted according lo Tractate, (lia-ptfr (Pereq) and Para- 
ijraph (Mishnah), the Chapter l)ein.ii' marked in Eoman, the paragraph in ordinary 
Numerals. Thus Ber. ii. 4 means the .Misimic Tractate Berakhoth, second Chapter, 
fourth Paragi-aph. 

The Jerusalem TaJvuid is distinguished liy the ai)1)reviation Jer. ijefore the 
name of the Tractate. Thus, .Ter. Ber. is the .Jer. Gemara, or Talmud, of the Tractate 
Berah-hoth. The edition, from which quotations are made, is that commonly used, 
Krotoschin, 1866, 1 vol. fol. The quotations are made either by Chapter and Para- 
grapli (.Jer. Ber. ii. 4), or, in these volumes mostly, l)y page and column. It ought 
to be noted that in Ilabbinic writings each page is really a double one. distinguished 
respectively as a and h: a being the page to the left hand of the readei-, and h the 
reverse one (on turning over the page) to the right hand of the reader. But in the 
Jerusalem Gemara (and in Yalkut [see below], as in all works where the page and 
column {col.) are mentioned) the (luotation is often — in these volumes, mostly — made 
by page and column (two columns being on each side of a page). Thus, while .Jer. 
Ber. ii. 4 would be Chapter 11. Par. 4, the corresi)onding (luotation by page and col- 
umn would in that instance be, .Jer. Ber. 4 d: marking that it is tiie fourth culnmii 
in h (or the ofl-side) of iiage 4. 

The Babyl. Talminl is. in all its editions, equally jiaged, so that a quotation made 
applies to all editions. It is double-paged, and ([uoted with the name of the Tractate, 
the number of the page, and a or b according as one or another side of the page is 
referred to. The quotations are distinguished from those of the Mishnah ])y this, 
that in the Mishnah Roman and ordinary numerals are employed (to mark Chapters 
and Paragraphs), while in the Babylon Talmud the name of the Tractate is followed 
by an ordinary numeral, indicating the page, together with a or 6, to mark wliich 
side of the page is referred to. Thus Ber. 4 a means: Tractate Berachoth. \). 4. first 
or left-hand side of the page. 

1 have used the Vienna edition, but this, as already explained, is not a point of 
any importance. To facilitate the verification of passages quoted I have in very 
many instances quoted also the line)^, either from top or bottom. 

The abbreviation Tos. {Tosephtn, additamentum) before the name of a Tractate 
refers to the additions made to the Mishnah after its redaction. This redaction dates 
from the third century of our era. The Tos. extends only over 52 of the Mishnic 
Tractates. They are inserted in the Talmud at the end of each Tractate, and are 
printed on the doulde pages in double columns (col. a and h on p. a. col. e and 
(I on p. h). They are generally quoted by Pereq and Mishnah : thus, Tos. Gitt. i. 1. 
or (more rarely) by page and column, Tos. Gitt. p. l.iO a. The ed. 7.uckcrmaiiiM 
is, when quoted, specially indicated. 

Besides, the Tractate Ahoth de Rabbi Nathan (Ab. de. R. Math.), and the smaller 
Tractates, Sopherim (Sopher.). Semarhoth (Seniarh.). Kalhih (Kail, or ChaU.% 

1 It is to be noted that in tJiP marginal ami notp-rPterfncPs the olrl mode of indicating a 
reference (as in the first ed. of this hook) and tlie. perliai)s, more correct mode of translitera- 
tion have been promiscuously employed. But the reader can have no difficulty in under- 
standing the reference. 


JJerekh Erets {Der Er.), Derekh Erets Ziita (commouly Der Er. S.), and Pereg 
Shalom {Per. Shal.) are inserted at the close of vol. ix. of the Talmud. They are 
printed in four columns (on double pages), and quoted by Pereq and Mishnah. 

The so-called Septem Libri Talmudici parvi Hierosolymitani are published 
separately (ed. Raphael Kirchheim, Frcf 1851). They are the Massecheth Sepher 
Torah {Mass. Se/ph. Tor.), Mass. Mezuzah {Mass. Mesus.), Mass. Tephillin {Mass. 
Tephill.), Mass. Tsitsith {Mass. Ziz.), Mass. Ahhadim {Mass. Abaci.), Mass. Kuthlm 
{Mass. Cuth.), and Mass. Gerim {Mass. Ger.). They are printed and quoted 
according to double pages {a and b). 

To these must be added the so-called Vhesronoth haShas, a collection of jjassages 
expurgated in the ordinary editions from the various Tractates of the Talmud. 
Here we must close, what might else assume undue proportions, by an alphabetical 
list of the abbreviations, although only of the principal books referred to: — 

Ab. Zar. ' . . The Talmudic Tractate Abhodah Zarah, on Idolatry. 

Ab. . . . •' '■ '• PZ/yyey .IfeZ/o^/?, Sayings of the Fathers. 

Ab. de P Nath. The Tractate Abhoth de Rabbi Nathan at the close of vol. ix. in 

the Bab. Talm. 
Arakh. . . The Talmudic Tractate Arakhiii, on the redemption of persons or 

things consecrated to the Sanctuary. 

Bab. K. . . " " " 5aM« Qaw7«a (' First Gate '), the first, 

Bab. Mets. [or Mez.^ " " Babha Metsia ('Middle Gate '), the second, 

Bab. B. . . " " " 5a6//rt 5«it/^?-« ('Last Gate'), the third of 

the great Tractates on Common Law. 

Bechor. . . " " '• i?t'A7;oro^/^ on the consecration to the Sanc- 

tuary of the First-born. 

Bemid R. . . The Midrash (or Commentary {Bemidbar Rabba. on Numbers. 

Ber. . . The Talmudic Tractate Berakhoth, on Prayers and Benedictions. 

Ber. R. . . The Midrash (or Commentary) Bereshith Rabba, on Genesis. 

Bets, [or Be^.^^ . The Talmudic Tractate Betsah. laws about an egg laid on Sabbath 

and Fast-days, and on similar points 
connected with the sanctifying of such 

Biccur. . . " " " Bikkurim, on First-fruits. 

Chag. . • " " '■ Ghaijiyali, on the festive ofl'erings at the 

three Great Feasts. 

Qhall. . . " " " ChaUah, on the tirst of the dough (Numb. 

XV. 17). 

Chull. . . •■ " " C'A?/////?. the rubric as to the mode of killing 

meat and kindred subjects. 

Bebar R. . . The Midrash Det/han'/n Rfd/tn/. on Deuteronomy. 
Bern. ■ . The Talmudic Tractate Demai. regarding Produce, the tithing of 

which is not certain. 

Ech. R. . . The Midrash EkJuih Rabbathi. on Lamentations (also (pioted as 

Mid. on Lament). 

Eduy. . . The Talmudic Tractate Edu//oth (Testimonies), the legal determina- 
tions enacted or confirmed on a certain 
occasion, decisive in Jewish History. 

Er^/b. . . The Talmudic Tractate Endihin. on the conjunction of Sal)bath- 

boundaries. (See Ajipendix XVII.) 

Midr. Esth. . The ^Ildrash on Estlier. 

' Mark the note on previous page. 




The Talimulio Tractate Qittin, on Divorce. 

. The Taldniudic Tractate llorai/oth ' Decisions ' on certain uninten- 
tional transgressions. 
Jnd. [or rad] " " " JTarfw^/m, on the Washing of Hands. 

Jebam. [or ) ,, ,, ,, 

Yebam.'[ \ 
Jam. [mostly | .. ,^ ^, 

Tom.] ' ( 

Yebhamoth, on the Levirate. 
Yoma, on the Day of Atonement. 

Kel. . 


Kil. . 


Midr. Kohel. 
Marts S/i. 


Mrtkk: [or 

Meg ill. 



Moed K. 

Naz. . 
Ned. . 
Neg. . 




A'e^i'm, on the purification of furniture and 

Kerithufh, on the inuiishment of 'cutting 

KethubJioth, on marriage-contracts. 
" " Qiddushin, on Betrothal. 

" " " Kilayhn. on the unlawful commixtures 

(Lev. xix. 19; Deut. xxii. 9-11). 
" " " Qinnim, on the offering of doves (Lev. v. 

1-10; xii. 8). 

The Midrash on Qoheleth or Eccles. 
The Talmudic Tractate Maaseroth, on Levitical Tithes. 
" " " Jihftse?* (S/«eM/, on second Tithes (Deut. xiv. 

22, &c.). 
" " " Makhshirin, on fluids that nuiy render 

products ' defiled,' or that leave them 
undefiled (Lev. xi. 34, 38). 
] " " " Makkoth, on the punishment of Stripes. 

" " ife^Virf^rt, a Commentary on part of Exo- 

dus, dating at the latest from the first 
half of the second century. 
" " MegUlah, referring to the reading of the 

('roll') Book of Esther and on the 
Feast of Esther. 
" " MeUah, on the defilement of tilings con- 

" " Menachoth, on Meat-offerings. 

" " Middoth, on the Temple-measurements 

and arrangements. 
" " MiqvaotJi, on ablutions and immersions. 

" " Moed Qatau, on Half-holidays. 

" " Nazir, on the Nasirate. 

" " Nedavim, on Vowing. 

" " Negaim, on Leprosy. 

" " Nicldah, on female levitical impurity 


" " Oholoth. on tlie delilement of tents and 

houses, si)ecially by death. 

" " Orlah, on the ordinances connected with 

Lev. xix. 23. 

" " Parnh. on the Red Heifer and purificatiou 

by its ashes. 
" " Peak, on the corner to be left for the poor 

in harvesting. 
" " Pesachiin, on the Paschal Feast. 



Pesiqta . . The Book I'esiqta. an exceediii.i;l.v interesting series of Meditations 

or brief discussions and Lectures on cer- 
tain portions of tiie Lectionary for the 
principal Sabbaths and Feast Days. 

Firqe de B. Eliez. The Haggadic Pirqe de EahhiEUezer, in 54 cliapters. a discursive 

Tractate on tlie History of Israel from 
the creation to the time of Moses, with 
the insertion of three chapters (xlix.-li. ) 
oil the history of Hainan and the future 
Messianic deliverance. 

Bosh haSh. . The Talnuidic Tractate Bosh luiShanah, on the Feast of New Year. 

Sab. . . " " " ZrtM(v«, on certain levitically defiling issues. 

Sank. . . " " " (S'«H/<ec?r/«, on the Sanhedrim and Criminal 


tSebdcIi. . . " " '• Zehhacliiiii. on Sacrifices. 

S/i(d)h. . . " " " Shabbath, on Sabbath-observance. 

S/iebh. . . " " " . (S7ie6//H7/<, on the Sabbatic Year. 

Shebii. . . " " '■ Shebliuoth, on Oaths, &c. 

S/ieqal. . . " '• " .S7/e(7«/^/«, on the Temple-Tribute, etc. 

>s/iem B. . . The Midrash Shemoth Babba on Exodus. 

Shir haSh B. . " " Shir haShirim B(djba. onXhQ iio\\g,o'i^o\omo\\. 

Sijihra . . The ancient Commentary on Leviticus, dating from the second 


Siphre . . The still somewhat older Commentary on Numb, and Deuter. 

Sot. . . The Talniudic Tractate Sotah, on the Woman accused of Adultery. 

Snkk. . . " " " 6'mA-A-«/<, on the Feast of Tabernacles. 

Taan. . . " " " Taanitlt, on Fasting and Fast-Days. 

Tarn- . • " " " Tamid, on the daily Service and Sacrifice 

in the Temple. 

Teb. Yam. . " " " TeMw/ 1'o/m (■ bathed of the day '), on im- 

purities, where there is immersion on 
the evening of the same da\'. 

Tern. . . " " " Tcmurah, on substitution for things con- 

secrated (Lev. xxvii. 10). 

Ter. . . " " " T(9r^^??^o//^ on the priestly dues in produce. 

Tohnr. . . " " " Tohnrofh, on minor kinds of defilement. 

Tnnch. . . The Midrashic Commentary Tanclnima (or Yelmndenv). on the 



. The Talmudic Tractate Uqtsiit, on the defilement of fruits through 

their envelopes, stalks. iSrc. 

Vdi/jiik. B. . The Midrash Vai/ijikra B(dib(t. on Leviticus. 

Yidk. . . The great codeciiDte ion: Ytdkiif Shimeoni, which is a cre/p^c/ on the 

whole Old Testament, containing also 
ipuitations from works lost to us.' 

1 It will, of course, be understood that we 
have only given the briefest, and. Indeed, im- 
[lerfect, indications of the contents of the 
various Talmudic Tractates. Besides giving 
the Laws connected with each of the sub- 

jects of which they treat, all kindred topics 
are taken up, nay, the discussion often passes 
to quite other than the subjects primarily 
treated of in a Tractate. 


THE F I R S 1^ A^ L U M E 





The Jewish World in the Days of Christ — Tlie Jewish Dispersion iu the East . 3 


The Jewish Dispersion in the West^ — The Hellenists — Origin of Hellenist Litera- 
ture in the Greek Translation of the Bible — Character of the Septuagint . 17 


The Ohl Faith preparing for the New — Development of Hellenist Theology: 

The Apocrypha, Aristeas, Aristobulus, and the Pseudepigraphic Writings 31 


Philo of Alexandria, the Rabl)is, and the Gospels — The Final Development of 
Hellenism in its Relation to Fxabbinism and the Gospel according to St. 
John 40 


Alexandria and Rome — The Jewisli Comminiities in the Cai)itals of Western 

Civilisation 58 


Political and Religious Life of the Jewish Dispersion in the West — Their rnit)n 

in tlie Great Hoi)e of the Coming Deliverer .73 




In Palestine — Jews and Gentiles in • the Land" — Their Mutual Relations and 

Feelings—- The Wall of Separation ' - . . 84 


Traditionalism, its Origin, Character, and Literature — The Mishnah and Tal- 
mud — The Gospel of Christ — The Dawn of a New Day . . . . 9S 



In Jerusalem when Herod reigned . . . . . . . .111 

The Personal History of Herod — The Two Worlds in Jerusalem . . . 121 

The Annunciation of St. John the Baptist , . 13S 

The Annunciation of Jesus the Messiah, and the Birch of His Forerunner . 144 

Wliat Messiah did the Jews expect ? 160 


The Nativity of Jesus the Messiah 180 

The Purification of the Virgin and the Presentation in the Temple . . 191 

The Visit and Homage of the Magi, and the Flight into Egypt . . . 202 

The Child-Life in Nazareth 217 


In the House of His Heavenly, and in the Home of His Earthly Father — The 

Temple of Jerusalem — The Retirement at Nazareth .... 235 




In the Fifteenth Year of Tiberius Caesar and under the Pontificate of Annas 

and Caiaphas — A Voice in the Wilderness 255 

The Baptism of Jesus: Its Higher Meaning 275 




The Temptation of Jesus 291 


The Deputation from Jerusalem — The Three Sects of the Pharisees, Sadducees, 

and Essenes — Examination of their distinctive Doctrines . . . 308 


The Twofold Testimony of John — The First Sabbath of Jesus's Ministry — 
The First Sunday -The First Disciples 336 


The Marriage-Feast in Cana of Galilee — The Miracle that is ' a Sign ' . . 351 

The Cleansing of the Temple — ' The Sign ' which is not a Sign . . . 364 


The Teacher come from God and the Teacher from Jerusalem — Jesus and 

Nlcodemus 377 


In Judaja and through Samaria — A Sketch of Samaritan History and Theology 
— Jews and Samaritans . 390 

Jesus at the Well of Sychar . . . . . . . . . .404 




The Second Visit to Cana — Cure of the ' Nobleman's ' Son at Capernaum . 422 


The Synagogue at Nazareth — Synagogue-Worship and Arrangements . . 430 

The First Galilean Ministry 451 


At the • Unknown ' Feast in Jerusalem, and by tlie Pool of Bethesda . . 460 


By the Sea of Galilee — The final Call of the First Disciples, and the Miraculous 

Draught of Fishes 472 

A Sabbath in Capernaum 478 


Second Journey through Galilee — The Healing of the Leper .... 489 


The Return to Capernaum — Concerning the Forgiveness of Sins^The Healing 
of the Paralysed 499 


The Call of Matthew — The Saviour's Welcome to Sinners — Rabbinic Theology 
as regards the Doctrine of Forgiveness in contrast to the Gospel of Christ 
—The call of the Twelve Apostles 507 


The Sermon on the Mount — The Kingdom of Christ and Rabbinic Teaching . 524 


The Return to Capernaum — Healing of the Centurion's Servant . . . 542 

The Raising of the Young Man of Nain — The Meeting of Life and Death . 552 

The Woman which was a Sinner 561 




The Ministry of Love, the Blasphemy of Hatred, and the Mistakes of Earthly 
Affection — The Return to Capernaum — Healing of the Demonised Dumb 
— Pharisaic Charge against Clu-ist — The Visit of Christ's Mother and 
Brethren 570 


New Teaching ' in Parables ' — The Parables to the People by the Lake of 

Galilee, and those to the Disciples in Capernaum . ' . . . . 578 


Christ Stills the Storm on the Lake of Galilee 599 

At Gerasa — The Healing of the Demonised 606 


The Healing of the Woman — Christ's Personal Appearance — The Raising of 

Jairus' Daughter 616 


Second Visit to Nazareth — The Mission of the Twelve 635 


The Story of John the Baptist, from his Last Testimony to Jesus to his 

Beheading in Prison , . . . 654 


The Miraculous Feeding of the Five Thousand 676 

The Night of Miracles on the Lake of Gennesaret. ...... 686 

BooJi I. 



All the prophets prophesied not but of the daj's of the Messiah.' — Sanh. 99 a. 
' The work! was not created but only for the Messiah.' — Sanh. 98 h. 



Among the outward means by which t he religio n of Israel was pre - 
served , one of the most important w^s the centralisation and localisa - 
tion of its worship in Jerusalem. If to some the ordinances of the 
Old Testament may in this respect seem narrow and exclusive, it is 
at least doubtful, whether without such a provision Monotheism itself 
could have continued as a creed or a worship. In view of the state 
of the ancient world, and of the tendencies of Israel during the 
earlier stages of their history, the strictest isolation was necessary in 
order to preserve tlie religion of the Old Testament from tliat mixture 
with foreign elements which would speedily have proved fatal to its 
existence. And if one source of that danger had ceased after the 
seventy years' exile in Babylonia, the dispersion of the greater part 
of the nation among those whose manners and civilisation would 
necessarily influence them, rendered the continuance of this separa- 
tion of as great importance as before. In this r('S})e('t, even tradi- 
tionalism had its mission and use, as a hedge around the Law to 
render its infringement or modification impossible. q 

Wherever a Roman, a Greek, or an Asiatic might wander, he ^ \ /--«^u 
could take his gods with him, or find rites kindred to his own. (^^^"^-^-iJ 
It was far otherwise with the Jew. He ^ had onl y one Tcm])lo , that ^ ^ ^^ 
in Jerusalem; only one God, Him Who had once throned there ^/ ^^-<^ 
between the Cherulnm, and Wlio was still King over Zion. 'I'liat 
Temp le was the only place where a God-appointed. ])ui-(' pricstliood 
could offer acceptable sacrifices, whether for forgiveness of sin, or.lbr 
fellowship with God. Here, in the impenetrable gloom of the inner- 
most sanctuary, whic^h the High-Priest alone might enter once a year 
for most solemn expiation, had stood the Ark, the leader of the people 
into the Land of Promise, and the footstool on which the Sliechinah 
had rested. From that golden altar rose the sweet cloud of incense, 
symbol of Israel's a<?cepted prayers; that seven-branched candlestick 


BOOK shed its perpetual light, indicative of the brightness of God's Covenant- 
I Presence; on that table, as it were before the face of Jehovah, was 

^■^v — ' laid, week by week, * the Bread of the Face,' ' a constant sacrificial 
meal which Israel oflercd unto God, and wherewith God in turn fed 
His chosen priesthood. On the great l)lood-sprinkled altar of sacrifice 
smoked the daily and festive ))urnt-offerings, brought by all Israel, 
and for all Israel, wherever scattered; while the vast courts of the 
Temple were thronged not only by native Palestinians, but literally 
by ' Jews out of every nation under heaven. ' Around this Temple 
gathered the sacred memories of the past; to it clung the yet 
brighter hopes of the future. The history of Israel and all their 
prospects were intertwined with their religion; so that it may be 
said that without their religion they had no history, and without their 
history no religion. Thus, history, patriotism, religion, and hope 
alike pointed to Jerusalem antl the Temple as the centre of Israel's 

N'or could the depressed state of the nation alter their views or 
shake their confidence. What mattered it, tliat the Idumasan, Herod, 
had usurped the throne of David, except so far as his own guilt and 
their present subjection were concerned? Israel had passed througli 
deeper waters, and stood triumphant on the other shore. For 
centuries seemingly hopeless bondsmen in Egypt, they had not only 
been delivered, but had raised the God-inspired morning-song of 
jubilee, as they looked back upon the sea cleft for them, and which 
had l)uried their oppressors in their might and pride. Again, for 
weary years had their captives hung Zion's harps by the rivers of 
that city and empire whose colossal grandeur, wherever they turned, 
must have carried to the scattered strangers the desolate feeling of 
utter hopelessness. And yet that empire had crumbled into dust, 
while Israel had again taken root and sprung up. And now little 
more than a century and a half had passed, since a danger greater 
even than any of these had threatened the faith and the very existence 
of Israel. In his daring madness, the Syrian king, Antiochus lY. 
(Epiphanes) had forbidden their religion, sought to destroy their 
sacred books, with unsparing ferocity forced on them conformity to 
heathen rites, desecrated the Temi)le by dedicating it to ZeusOlympios, 
and even reared a heathen altar upon that of burnt-oflfering. '^ Worst 
of all, his wicked scheme§ had lieen aided by two apostate High- 
Priests, wlio had outvied each other in buying and then prostituting 

1 Such is the literal meaiiiiia; of what is translated by 'shewbread.' 
^ 1 Mace. i. 54, 59 ; Jos. Ant. xii. 5. 4. 


the sacred oflBce of God's anointed,^ Yet far away in the mountains 
of Ephraim^ God had raised for them most unlooked-for and unlikely 
help. Only three years later, and, after a series of brilliant vietories 
by undisciplined men over the flower of the Syrian army, Judas the 
Maccabee — truly God's Hammer^ — had purified the Temple, and 
restored its altar on the very same day * on which the ' abomination 
of desolation ' ^ had been set up in its place. In all their history the 
darkest hour of their night had ever preceded the dawn of a morning 
])righter than any that had yet broken. It was thus that with one 
voice all their prophets had bidden them wait and hope. Their 
sayings had been more than fulfilled as regarded the past. Would 
they not equally become true in reference to that far more glorious 
future for Zion and for Israel, which was to be ushered in by the 
coming of the Messiah ? 

Nor were such the feelings of the Palestinian Jews only. These 
indeed were now a minority. The majoritv of the nation constituted 
what wa s known as the dispersion; a term which, however, no longer 
expressed its original meaning of banishment by the judgment of 
God,** since absence from Palestine was now entirely voluntary. But 
all the more that it referred not to outward sufiering,'' did its continued 
use indicate a deep feeling of religious sorrow, of social isolation, and of 
p( )lit i(';i I strangership •* in the midst of a heathen world. For although, 
as Josephus reminded his countrymen,'' there was 'no nation in the 
world which had not among them part of the Jewish people, ' since it 
was * widely dispersed over all the world among its inhabitants , ' '' yet 
they had nowhere found a real home. A century and a half befor 

.5- J 


" Jew. W 
ii. 16. 4 

b vii. 3. 3 

' After the deposition of Onias III. 
tlirouf^h tlie bribery of his own brother 
Jason, the latter and Menelaus outvied 
each otlier in bribery for, and prostitu- 
tion of, the holy office. 

'^ Modin, the birthplace of the Macca- 
bees, has been identified with the modern 
El-Medyeh, about sixteen miles north- 
west of Jerusalem, in the ancient terri- 
tory of Ephraim. Comp. Conder's Hand- 
liook of the Bible, p. 291; and for a full 
reference to the whole literature of the 
subject, see Schurer (Neutest. Zeitgescli. 
p. 78, note 1). 

^ On the meaning of the name Macca- 
bee, comp. Grimm's Kurzgef. E.xeget. 
Handb. z. d. Apokr. Lief, iii., i)p. ix. x. 
We adopt the derivation from Maqqabha, 
a hammer, like Charles MarteJ. 

* 1 Mace. iv. .52-54 ; Megill. Taan. 23. 

^ 1 Mace. 1. 54. 

® Alike the verb ;^'i">, in Hebrew, an 
dtaaTtsipco in Greek,* with their deriv- 
atives, are used in the Old Testament, 
and in the rendering of the LXX., with 
reference to punitive banishment. See, 
for example, Judg. xviii. 30; 1 Sam. iv. 
21; and in the LXX. Deut. xxx. 4; Ps. 
cxlvii. 2 ; Is. xlix. 6, and other i)assages. 

' There is some truth, although greatly 
exaggerated, in the bitter remarks of 
Hausrath (Neutest. Zeitgesch. ii. p. 93), 
as to the sensitiveness of the Jews ia 
the dtacTTCopd, and the loud outcry of 
all its members at any interference with 
them, however trivial. But events 
unfortunately too often ]iroved how 
real and near was their danger, and 
how necessary the caution ' Obsta prin- 
cipiis.' _, 

8 St. Peter seems to have used it in 
that sense, 1 Pet. i. 1. / 



our era comes to us from Egypt^ — where the Jews possessed exceptional 
privileges — professedly from the heathen, but really from the Jewish^ 
Sibyl, this lament of Israel: — 

Crowding with thy uuiubers every ocean and country — 
Yet an ofl'ense to all around thy presence and customs ! 






Sixty years later the Greek geographer and historian Strabo bears 
the like witness to their presence in every land, but in language that 
shows how true had been the complaint of the Sibyl.* The reasons 
for this state of feeling will by-and-by appear. Suffice it for the 
present that, all unconsciously, ^hilo tells its deepest ground, and 
that of Israel's loneliness in the heathen world, when speaking, like 
the others, of his countrymen as in ^ all the cities of Europe^ in t^he 
provinces of Asia and in the isliuid s.' he describes them as, wlicrever 
sojourning, having but one metropolis — not Alexandria, Antioch, or 

Rome — but 
High God . '^ 

the Holy City with its Temple, dedicated to the Most. 

A nation, the vast majority of which was dispersed over 
the whole inhabited earth, had ceased to be a special, and become a 
world-nation.** Yet its heart beat in Jerusalem, and thence the life- 
blood passed to its most distant members. And this, indeed, if we 
rightly understand it, was the grand object of the ' Jewish dispersion ' 
throughout the world. 

What has been said applies, perhaps, in a special manner, to the 
Western, rather than to the Eastern ' dispersion.' The connection of 
the latter with Palestine was so close as almost to seem one of con- 
tinuity. In the account of the truly representative gathering in 
Jerusalem on that ever-memorable Feast of Weeks, ^ the division of 
the ' dispersion " into two grand sections — the Eastern or Trans- 
Euphratic, and the Western or Hellenist — seems clearly marked.' In 
this arrangement the former would include ' the Parthians, Modes, 
Elamites, and dwellers in Mesopotamia, ' Judaea standing, so to speak, 
in the middle, while ' the Bretes and Arabians ' would typically re- 
present the farthest outrunners respectively of the Western and the 
Eastern Diaspora. The former, as we know from the New Testament, 

1 Comp. the remarks of Schneckenbur- 
ger (Vorles ii. Neutest. Zeitg. p. 95). 

'^ Coiiip. Friedlieb, D. Sibyll. Weissag. 
xxii. 39. 

» Orac Sibyll. iii. 271, 272, apud Fried- 

bo apud Jos. Ant. xiv. 7. 2 : 'If 
'is not easy to find a place in the world 
that has not admitted this race, and is , 
mastered by it.' . — .-^ 

^ Philo in Flaccum (ed. Francf.), p. 971. 

^ Comp. Jos. Ant. xii. 3; xiii. 10. 4; 
13. 1; xiv. 6. 2; 8. 1; 10. 8; Sueton. 
Cses. 85. 

' Grimm (Clavis N. T. p. 113) quotes 
two passages from Philo, in one of which 
he contradistinguishes ' us,' the Hellenist 
Jews, from ' the Hebrews,' and speaks of 
the Greek as 'our language.' 


commonly bore in Palestine the name of the ' dispersion of the chap. 
Greeks,' " and of ' Hellenists ' or ' Grecians.' " On the other han<l, the I 

Trans-Euphratic Jews, who ' inhal^ited Babylon and many of the othei- ^ — ^^^ — 
satrapies, ' " were included with the Palestinians and the Syrians under !^fj*-3g'^''^" 
the term ' Hebrews,' from the connnon language which tliey spoke. '^Actsvi. i; 

• • ix ^^9 * xi 20 

But the difference between the ' Grecians ' and the ' Hebrews ' was „".,' " 

" Philo ad 

far deeper than merely of language, and extended to the whole ^o^jj"™^/- 
direction of thought. There were mental influences at work in the Aut. xv. 3. i 
Greek world from which, in the nature of things, it was impossible • y 
even for Jews to withdraw themselves, and which, indeed, were as J/-*^^^^*^^-*^-^-^ 
necessary for the fulfilment of their mission as their isolation from IUXiZ^^iJL,t.,^ 
heathenism, and their connection with Jerusalem. At the same 
time it was only natural that the Hellenists, placed as they were ^'^*'*'^^*-'*'**-^ 
in the midst of such hostile elements, sh(nild intensely wish to be l^'X^ 
Jews, equal to their Eastern brethren. On the other hand, Pharisaism, <^-— «^<- 
in its pride of legal purity and of the possession of traditional lore, /^jj-Aji-co-) f 
with all that it involved, made no secret of its contempt for the do-^oU- 
Hellenists, and openly declared the Grecian far inferior to the Baby- 
lonian ' dispersion, ' ^ That such feelings, and the suspicions which 
they engendered, had struck deep into the popular mind, appears 
from the fact, that even in the Apostolic Church, and that in her 
earliest days, disputes could break out between the Hellenists and 
the Hebrews, arising from suspicion of unkind and unfair dealings 
grounded on these sectional prejudices.'^ 'lActsvi. i 

Far other was the estimate in which the Babylonians were held 
by the leaders of Judaism. Indeed, according to one view of it. 
Babylonia, as well as ' Syria ' as far north as Antioch, was regarded as 
forming part of the land of Israel.' Every other country was con- 
sidered outside 'the land,' as Palestine was called, with the excep- 
tion of Bal)ylonia, which was reckoned as part of it.' For S^^ria and "Emb. 21a 
Mesopotamia, eastwards to the banks of the Tigris, were supposed 
to have been in the territory whicli King David' had conquered, and 
tliis made them ideally for ever like the land of Israel. But it was 
just between the Euphrates and the Tigris that the largest and 
wealthiest settlements of the Jews were, to such extent that a 
later writer actually designated them < the land of Israel.' Here 
Nehardaa, on the Nahar MalJca, or royal canal, which passed from the 

1 Similarly we have (in Men. 110^/) ends of the earth '—these are the exiles 

this curious explanation of Is. xliii. 6: in other lauds, whose minds were not 

' My sons from afar '—these are the exiles settled, like women, 
in Babylon, whose minds were settled, - Ber. R. 17. 

like men, ' and my daughters from the 


BOOK Euphrates to the Tigris, was the oldest Jewish settlement. It l)oasted 
I of a Synag'ogue, said to have been built ])y King Jechoniah with 
— ~-r — -• stones that liad been brought from the Temple.' In this fortified city 
the vast contributions intended for the Temple were deposited by the 
Eastern Jews, and thence conveyed to their destination under escort 
of tliousands of armed men. Another of these Jewish treasure-cities 
was Nisibis, in northern Mesopotamia, Even the fact that wealth, 
which must have sorely tempted the cupidity of the heathen, could be 
safely stored in these cities and transported to Palestine, shows how 
large the Jewish population must have been, and how great their 
general influence. 

In general, it is of the greatest importa nce to remember i n regard 
to this Eastern dispersion, tliat only a minoritv of the Jcws^onsistinu- 
in all of aljout 50.000, originallv returned from Babylon, first und er 
Z orubbaJjel a nd afterwards under Ezra." Xor was their inferiority 
)iifin('d to numbers. The wealthiest and most influential of the Jews 
remained behind. According to Josephus,'' with whom Philo sub - 
stantiallv agree s, vast ^numbers, estimated at millions, inhabited the 
Trans-Eu])hratic i)rovinces . To judge even by the number of those 
slain in popular risings (50,000 in Seleucia alone '^), these figures do 
not seem greatly exaggerated. A later tradition had it, that so dense 
was the Jewish population in the Persian Empire, that Cyrus forbade 
the further return of the exiles, lest the country should be depopulated.^ 
So large and compact a body soon became a political power. Kindly 
treated under the Persian monarchy, they were, after the fall of that 
empire,'' favoured by the successors of Alexander, When in turn the 
Macedono-Syrian rule gave place to the Parthian Empire, '^ the Jews 
formed, from their national opposition to Rome, an important element 
in the East. Such was their influence that, as late as the year 40 a.d. , 
the Roman legate shrank from provoking their hostility.* At the 
same time it must not be thought that, even in these favoured regions, 
they were wholly witliout persecution. Here also history records 
more than one tale of bloody strife on the part of those among whom 
they dwelt. ^ 

To the Palestinians, their brethren of the East and of Syria — to 
which they had wandered under the fostering rule of the Macedono- 

1 Comp. Fiirsf, Kult. u. Literaturgesch. 
d. Jud. in Asien, vol. i. p. S. 

^ Jos. Ant. xviii. 9. 9. 

3 Midrash on Cant. v. 5, ed. Warsh. p. 
26 a. 

* P/H7oadCaj. 

^ The following are the chief passages 
in Josephus relating to that part of Jewish 
history: Ant. xi. 5. 2; xiv. 13. 5; xv. 2. 7; 
3. 1; xvii. 2. 1-3; xviii. 9. 1, &c. ; xx. 4. 
Jew. W. i. 13. 3. 

H^ i^ 


Syrian monarchs (the Scloiicidae) — were indeed pre-eminently the CHAP. 
Golah, or 'dispersion.' To them the Sanhech'in in Jerusalem in- I 

timated by tire-signals from mountain-top to mountain-top the com- ^^ — . — 
mencement of eacii month for the regulation of the festive calendar,' 
even as they afterwards despatched messengers into Syria for the 
same purpose.^ In some respects the Eastern dispersion was placed 
on the same footing; in others, on even a higher level than the mother- 
country. Tithes and Terumot/i, or firet-fruits in n prepared condition,* p -^^ 
were due from them, while the Blkkurim, or tirst-fruits in a fresh state, 
were to be brought from Syria to Jerusalem. Unlike the heathen CLoUZ^^ Q. 
countries, whose very dust defiled, the soil of Syria was declared clean, 
like that of Palestine itself'' So far as purity of descent was con- ''Oiioi.^ 
cerned, the Babylonians, indeed, considered themselves superior to 
tlieir Palestinian brethren. They had it, that when Ezra took with 
him those who went to Palestine, he had left the land behind him as 
l)ure as fine Hour.'' To express it in their own fashion: In regard to bKuui. 69 6 
the genealogical purity of their Jewish inhabitants, all other countries 
were, compared. to Palestine, like dough mixed with leaven; but 
Palestine itself was such by the side of Babylonia.* It was even 
maintained, that the exact boundaries could be traced in a district, 
within which the Jewish population had preserved itself unmixed. 
Great merit was in this respect also ascribed to Ezra. In the usual 
mode of exaggeration, it was asserted, that, if all the genealogical 
studies and researches^ had been put together, they would have 
amounted to many hundred camel-loads. There was for it, however, at 
least this foundation in truth, that great care and labour were bestowed 
on preserving full and accurate records so as to establish purity of 
descent. What importance attached to it, w^e know from the action ■ 
of Ezra*" in that respect, and from the stress which Josephus lays on -^chs. ix. x. 
this point.'' Official records of descent as regarded the priesthood were aLifoi. ; Ag. 
kept in the Temple. Besides, the Jewish authorities seem to have . 
possessed a general official register, which Herod afterwards ordered to 
be burnt, from reasons which it is not difficult to infer. But from 
that day, laments a Rabbi, the glory of the Jews decreased!" 

Nor was it merely purity of descent of which the Eastern dis- 
persion could boast. In truth, Palestine owed everything to Ezra, 

1 Rosh. haSh. ii. 4; comp. the Jer. ^ As comments upon tlie genealogies 

Gemara on it, and in the Bab. Talmud from ' Azol ' in 1 Cbr. viii. 37 to ' Azel' iu 

23 b. ix. 44. Pes. 62 b. 

■^ Rosh. haSh. i. 4. 6 pes. 62 ft; Sachs, Beitr. vol. ii. p. 

^ Shev. vi. jMSsim ; Gitt. 8 a. 157. 

* Cheth. in a. 



the Babylonian.' a man so di.stiuguislied that, according to tradition, 
the Law would have been given by him, if Moses had not previously 
obtained that honor. Putting aside the various traditional ordi- 
nances which the Talmud ascribes to him,^ we know from the Scrip- 
tures what his activity for good had been. Altered circumstances 
had brought many changes to the new Jewish State. Even the 
language, spoken and written, was other than formerly. Instead of 
the characters anciently employed, the exiles brought with them, on 
their return, those now common, the so-called square Hebrew letters, 
sauh. 216 which gradually came into general use.''! The language spoken by 
the Jews was no longer Hebrew, but Aramaean, both in Palestine and 
in Ba])ylonia ; * in the former the Western, in the latter the Eastern 
dialect. In fact, the common people were ignorant of pure Hebrew, 
which henceforth became the language of students and of the 
Syna'gogue. Even there a Methurgeman, or interpreter, had to be 
employed to translate into the vernacular the portions of Scripture 
read in the public services,^ and the addresses delivered by the Rabbis. 
This was the origin of the so-called Targumim, or paraphrases of 
Scripture. In earliest times, indeed, it was forbidden to the Me- 
thurgeman to read his translation or to write down a Targum, lest 

' According to tradition he returned to 
Babylon, and died tliere. Jo3ephu3 says 
that he died in Jerusalem (Ant. xi. 5. 5). 

2 Herzfeld has given a very clear his- 
torical arrangement of the order in which, 
and the persons by whom, the various 
legal determinations were supposed to 
have been given. See Gesch. d. V. Isr. 
vol. iii. pp. 240 &c. 

^ Although thus introduced under Ezra, 
the ancient Hebrew characters, which re- 
semble the Samaritan, only very gradu- 
ally gave way. They are found ou monu- 
ments and coins. 

* Herzfeld (u. s. vol. iii. i). 46) happily 
designates the Palestinian as the Hebrajo- 
Aramaic, from its Hebraistic tinge. The 
Hebrew, as well as the Aramaean, belongs 
to the Semitic group of languages, which 
has thus been arranged: 1. North Semi- 
tic: Punico-Phoenician. Hebrew, and 
Aramaic (Western and Eastern dialects). 
2. South Semitic: Arabic. Himyaritic. 
and Ethiopian. 3. East Semitic: The 
Assyro-Babylonian cuneiform. When we 
speak of the dialect used in Palestine, we 
do not, of course, forget the great in- 
fluence of Syria, exerted long before and 
after the Exile. Of these three branches 
the Aramaic is the most closelv connected 

with the Hebrew. Hebrew occupies an 
intermediate position between the Ara- 
maic and tlie x\rabic, and may be said to 
be the oldest, certainly from a literary 
point of view. Together with the intro- 
duction of the new dialect into Palestine, 
we mark that of the new, or square, 
characters of writing. The Mishnah and 
all tlie kindred literature up to the fourth 
century are in Hebrew, or rather in a 
modern development and adaptation of 
that language ; the Talmud is in Aramaean. 
Comp.on this subject : Be Wefte-^chrader, 
Lehrb.d. hist. kr. Einl. (8 ed.) i)p. 71-88; 
Herzof/'s Real-Encykl. vol. i. 4f,fi. 468 ; v. 
614&C., 710; Zi^//z,"Gottesd.yortr. d- Jud. 
pp. 7-9; llerzfehJ, u. s. pp. 44 kQ.. 38 &c. 
" Could St. pani have had this in mind 
when, in referring to the miraculous gift of 
speaking in other languaijes, he directs 
that one shall always interpret d Cor. xiv. 
27)? At any rate, the word fargtim in 
Ezra iv. 7 is rendered in tlie LXX. by 
apurtvEVGo. The followins from the 
Talmud fBer. 8 a and h) afforils a cu- 
rious illustration of 1 Cor. xiv. 27: 'Let 
a man always finish his Parashah (the 
daily lesson from the Law) with the 
congregation (at the same time) — twice 
the text, and once targum.' 


the paraphrase should be regarded as of equal authority with the CHAP. 
orig'iual. It was said that, when Jonathan brought out his Targuui I 

on the Prophets, a voice from heaveu was heard to utter: ' Who is ^- — ~r — ' 
this that has revealed My secrets to men? ' " Still, such Targii- " 
mim seem to have existed from a very early period, and, amid 
the varying and often incorrect renderings, their necessity must 
have made itself increasingly felt. Accordingly, their use was 
authoritatively sanctioned before the end of the second century after 
Christ. This is the origin of our two oldest extant Tarcjinnim: 
that of Onkelos (as it is called), on the Pentateuch; and that on 
the Proi)hets, attributed to Jonathan the son of Uzziel. These names 
do not, indeed, accurately represent the authorship of the oldest Tar- 
guniim, which may more correctly be regarded as later and authorita- 
tive recensions of what, in some form, had existed before. But 
although these works had tlieir origin in Palestine, it is noteworthy 
that, in the form in which at present we possess them, they are the 
outcome of the schools of Babylon. 

But Palestine owed, if possible, a still greater debt to Babylonia. 
The new circumstances in which the Jews were placed on their 
return seemed to render necessary an adaptation of the Mosaic Law, 
if not new legislation. Besides, piety and zeal now attached them- 
selves to the outward observance and study of the letter of the Law. 
This is the origin of the JlisJinah, or Second Law, which was intended 
to explain and supplement the first. This constituted the only 
Jewish dogmatics, in the real sense, in the study of which the sage, 
Rabbi, scholar, scribe, and Darshan,^ were engaged. The result of 
it was the llldrash, or investigation, a term which afterwards was 
popularly applied to commentaries on the Scriptures and preaching. 
From the outset, Jewish theology divided into two branches: the 
HalakJiah and the Haggadah. Tlrc former (from halakk, to go) was, 
so to speak, the Rule of the Spiritual Road, and, when tixed, had 
even greater authority than the Scriptures of the Old Testament, 
since it explained and applied them. On the other hand, the 
Haggadah^ (from nagad, to tell) was only the personal saying of 
the teacher, more or less valuable according to his learning and 
populnrity, or the authorities which he could quote in his support. 
Fnlike the EaJoMah, the Haggadal} had no absolute authority, 
either as to doctrine practice, or exegesis. But all the greater would 

' From clavasih. to searcli out, literally, = The TIalnkhali miijlit be described as 

to tread out. The preacher was after- the apoer>i)hal Pentateuch, the Hagga- 
wards called the Darshan. dab as the apocryphal Prophets. 


be its popular influence,' and all the more dangerous the doctrinal 
license which it allowed. In fact, strange as it may sound, almost 
all the doctrinal teaching of the Synagogue is to be derived from the 
Haggadah — and this also is characteristic of Jewish traditionalism. 
But, alike in Halakhah and Haggadah, Palestine was under the 
deepest obligation to Babylonia. For the father of Halakhic study 
was Hillel, the Babylonian, and among the popular Haggadists there 
is not a name better known than that of Eleazar the Mede, who 
flourished in the first century of our era. 

After this, it seems almost idle to inquire whether, during the 
first period after the return of the exiles from Babylon, there were 
regular theological academies in Babylon. Although it is, of course, 
impossible to furnish historical proof, we can scarcely doubt that a 
community so large and so intensely Hebrew would not have been 
indiftercnt to that study, which constituted the main thought and 
engagement of their brethren in Palestine. We can understand that, 
since the great Sanhedrin in Palestine exercised supreme spiritual 
authority, and in that capacity ultimately settled all religious 
questions — at least for a time^the study and discussion of these 
subjects should also have been chiefly carried on in the schools of 
Palestine; and that even the great Hillel himself, when still a poor 
and unknown student, should have wandered thither to acquire the 
learning and authority, which at that period he could not have found 
in his own country. But even this circumstance implies, that such 
studies were at least carried on and encouraged in Babylonia. How 
rapidly soon afterwards the authority of the Babylonian schools 
increased, till they not only overshadowed those of Palestine, but 
finally inherited their prerogatives, is well known. However, there- 
fore, the Palestinians in their pride or jealousy might sneer, ^ that the 
Babylonians were stupid, proud,- and poor ( ' they ate bread upon 
bread '),^ even they had to acknowledge that, ' when the Law had 
fallen into oblivion, it was restored by Ezra of Babylon; when it was 
a second time forgotten, Hillel the Babylonian came and recovered 
it; and when yet a third time it fell into oblivion, Rabbi Cliija came 
from Babylon and gave it back once more. ' * 

1 We may here remind ourselves of 1 is mentioned as a reason wliy the Shekhi- 

Tim. V. 17. St. Paul, as always, writes nah could not rest upon a certain Ral)lji. 

with the familiar Jewish phrases ever ■' Pes. 34 b; Men. 52 (t; Sanh. 24 n; 

recurring to his mind. The expression Bets. 16 n — apud Neiihauer, Geog. du 

SiSadKaXia seems to be equivalent to Talmud, ]). 32.3. In Keth. 75 a, they 

Halakhic teaching. Comp. (/?•»???», Cla- are styled the 'silly Babylonians.' See 

vis N. T. pp. 98, 99. also Jer. Pes. 32 a. " 

■^ In Moed Q. 25 (i. sojourn in Babylon * Sukk. 20 a. R. Chija, one of the 





Sucli tlii'ii was that Hebrew dispersion which, t'roiii tlie tirst, eoii- 
stitute(l really the chief part and the strength of the .Jewish nation, 
and with which its religious future was also to lie. For it is one of 
those strangely signiticant, almost symbolical, facts in history, that 
after the destruction of Jerusalem the spiritual sujjremacy of Palestine 
passed to Babylonia, and that Rabbinical Judaism, under the stress 
of political adversity, voluntarily transferred itself to the seats of 
Israel's ancient disi^ersion, as if to ratify by its o^^ai act what the 
judgment of God had formerly executed. But long before that time 
the Babylonian '■ dispersion ' had already stretched out its hands in 
every direction. Northwards, it had spread through Armenia, the 
Caucasus, and to the shores of the Black Sea, and through Media to 
those of the Caspian. Soutlnvards, it had extended to the Persian Gulf 
and through the vast extent of Arabia, although Arabia Felix and the 
land of the Ilomerites may have received their first Jewish colonies 
from the opposite shores of Ethiopia. Eastwards it had passed as far ^ . , . 
as India.' Ever3'where we have distinct notices of these wanderers, i^u^tA ^ 
and everywhere they appear as in closest connection with the Rabbi- O, 
nical hierarchy of Palestine. Thus the Mishnah, in an extremely 
curious section, how on Sabbaths the Jewesses of Arabia might 
wear their long veils, and those of India the kerchief round the head, 
customary in those countries, without incurring the guilt of desecrating 
the holy day by needlessly carrying what, in the eyes of the law, would be 
a burden;-' while in the rubric for the Day of Atonement we have it 
noted that the dress which the High-Priest wore '■ between the even- 
ings' of the great fast — that is, as afternoon darkened into evening — 
was of most costly 'Indian' stuflt'.'' 

That among such a vast community there should have been poverty, 
and that at one time, as the Palestinians sneered, learning may have 
been left to pine in want, we can readily believe. For, as one of the 
Rabbis had it in explanation of Dent. xxx. 1.3: 'Wisdom is not 
" beyond the sea " — that is, it will not be found among |;rader s or 
merchants,'" whose mind must be engrossed by gain. And it was 

•' Shabb. 
vi. 6 


teachers of the second century, is among 
llie most-celebrated Rabbinical authori- 
ties, around whose memorj' legend has 
thrown a special halo. 

' In this, as in so many respects. Dr. 
Nenharier has collated very interesting 
information, to which we refer. See his 
Geogr. du Talm., pp. 369-399. 

2 The whole section gives a most 
curious glimpse of the dress and orna- 

ments worn by the Jews at that time. 
The reader interested in the subject will 
find special information in the tlnee little 
volumes of Ihirtmann (Die Heliriierin 
am Putztische), in 3". G. Sc/ifbder'stiome- 
what heavy work: De Vestitu Mulier. 
Hel)r., and especially in that interesting 
tractate, Trachten d. Juden, ])y Dr. A. 
Briin, of whicli, unfortunately, only one 
part has appeared. 


BOOK trade and commerce which procured to the 13al)yl()iiiaiis their wealth 
I and influence, although agriculture was not neglected. Their cara- 

■ — ~. — ' vans — of whose camel drivers, l)y the way, no very flattering account 
''Kicui. iv. is given" — carried the rich carpets and woven stuff's of the East, as 
well as its precious spices, to the West: generally through Palestine 
to the Phoenician harbours, where a fleet of merchantmen belonging 
to Jewish bankers and shippers lay ready to convey them to every 
quarter of the world. These merchant i)rinces were keenly alive to 
all that passed, not only in the flnancial, but in the political world. 
We know that they were in possession of State secrets, and entrusted 
with the intricacies of diplomacy. Yet, whatever its condition, this 
Eastern Jewish community was intensely Hebi-ew. Only eight days' 
journey — though, according to Philo's western ideas of it, by a diffi- 
cult road' — separated them from Palestine; and every pulsation there 
vibrated in Babylonia. It was in the most outlying part of that 
colony, in the wide plains of Arabia, that Saul of Tarsus spent those 
three years of silent thought and unknown labour, which preceded his 
re-appearance in Jerusalem, when from the burning longing to labour 
among his brethren, kindled by long residence among these Hebrews 
of the Hebrews, he was directed to that strange work which was his 
KGai. i. 17; Ufe's missiou." And it was among the same community that Peter 
«ipet. V. 13 wrote and laboured,'^ amidst discouragements of which we can form 
some conception from the sad boast of Nehardaa, that up to the end 
of the third century it had nut numbered among its members any 
convert to Christianity. - 

In what has been said, no notice has been taken of those wan- 
derers of the ten tribes, whose trackless footsteps seem as mysterious 
as their after-fate. The Talmudists name four countries as their seats. 
But, even if we were to attach historic creilence to their vague state- 
ments, at least two of these localities cannot with any certainty be 
identified.^ Only thus far all agree as to point us northwards, through 
India, Armenia, the Kurdish mountains, and the Caucasus. And with 
this tallies a curious reference in what is known as IV. Esdras, 
which locates them in a land called Arzareth. a term which has, 
with some probability, l)een identified with the land of Ararat,* 

1 rhilo ad Cajuni, ed. Frcf. p. 1023. For the i-easons there stated. I prefer tliis 

- Pes. 56 a, apud Xeubauer, u. s., p. to the inii;eiiious interpretation proi)osed 

351. liy Dr. Scliilh'r-Szinessy (.lourn. of Philol. 

3 Comp. Neiihduer, jtp. 315, 372 ; Hum- for ls70, p)). 113. 114), who re,2;aTds it as 

bur'jp.r, Real-Enoykl. ]). 135. a contraction of Erez acheretJi, 'an- 

* Comp. Vri//,-i)i(ir, Handl). d. Einl. in other land.' referred to in Deut. xxix. 27 

d. Apol<r. ii"^^ Abth.. pp. 193, 194, notes. (28). 



Josc'phus' describes tlu'Ui as ;i 11 iiiiiimici'able miiltitiKlc, and \a,nii('ly 
locates them beyond the Eiipliiates. Tlie Mishiiali is sihuit as to 
their seats, but discusses their liiture restorati(Ju; ilablji Akiba deny- 
ing- and Ilabbi Eliezer auticii)atin,iA' it.'' Another Jewish tradition' 
locates tliem by the t'abk'd river Habbatyon, which was sui)})osed to 
cease its tiow on tlie weekly Sabbath. This, of course, is an implied 
admission of ignorance of their seats. Similarly, the Talmud ' sjjcaks 
of three localities whither they had been Ijanished : the district 
around the river Sat)batyon; I)ai)hne, near Antioch; while the tliird 
was overshadowed and hidden by a cloud. 

Later Jewish notices connect the tinal discovery and the return 
of the Most tribes" with their conversion under that second Messiah 
who, in contradistinction to ' the Son of David ' is styled ' the Son of 
Joseph,' to whom Jewish tradition ascribes what it cannot reconcile 
with the royal dignity of 'the Son of David,' and which, if applied 
to Ilim, would almost inevitably lead up to the most wide concessions 
in the Christian argument.*' As regards the ten tribes there is this 
truth underlying the strange hypothesis, that, as their persistent 
apostacy from the God of Israel and His worship had cut them otf 
from his people, so the fultihuent of the Divine promises to them in 
the latter days would imj^ly, as it were, a second birth to make them 
once more Israel. Beyond this wc are travelling chietly into the 
region of conjecture. Modern investigations have pointed to the 
Nestorians,^ and latterly with almost convincing evidence (so far as 
such is possible) to the Afghans, as descended from the lost tribes.* 
Such mixture with, and lapse into, Gentile nationalities seems to have 
been before the minds of those Rabbis who ordered that, if at present 
a non-Jew weds a Jewess, such a union was to be respected, since 
the stranger might be a descendant of the ten tribes.' Besides, 
there is reason to believe that part of them, at least, had coalesced 
with their brethren of the later exile; ^^ while we know that indi- 
viduals who had settled in Palestine and, presumably, elsewhere, Avere 



"Ant. xi.5. 'J 
■ Sanh. X. :i 
Ber. R. 7:{ 

e Yebam. 

16 6 

1 R. Eliezer seems to connect their 
return with the dawn of the new Mes- 
sianic day. 

'^ This is not the place to discuss the 
later Jewish fiction of a second or ' suf- 
ferins;' Messiah, 'the son of Joseph,' 
wliose special mission it would lie to 
lirine: back the ten tribes, and to subject 
them to Messiah, 'the son of David,' but 
who would perish in the war against 
Goa; and Maa;o£r. 

^ Comp. the work of Dr. Asahel Grant 
on the Nestorians. His ariiunients have 
been well summarised and exi)andt'(l iu 
an interesting note in Mr. Sii/t's Sketch 
of Samaritan History, pi). 2-4. 

* I would here call special attention 
to a; most interesting paper on the sub- 
ject ('A New Afghan Question '), by Mr. 
H. W. Bellexr, 'n\ the •Journal of the 
United Service Institutidii of India,' for 
1881. pp. 49-97. ■' Kidd. (59 b. 


able to trace descent from them.' Still the great mass of the teu 
tribes was in the days of Christ, as in our own, lost to the Hebrew 

1 So Anna' from the tribe of Aser, St. ments are not convincing, and iiis opin- 
Luke ii. 'M\. Lutterheck (Neutest. Lehr- ion was certainly not that of those who 
begr. pp. 102, 103) argues that the ten lived in the time of Christ, or who re- 
tribes had become wholly undistinguish- fleeted their ideas, 
able from the other two. But his argu- 





When wc turn from the Jewish ' dispersion ' in the East to that in CHAP. 

the West, we seem to breathe quite a ditiercnt atmosphere. Despite H 

tlic ir intense nationalism, all unconsciously to themselves, their menta l "^ — "y- — ^ 

characteristics and tendencies were in the opposite directio n from 

those of their brethren. With those of the East rested the future of 

Judaism; with them of the West, in a sense, that of the world. 

Th e one represented old Israel groping back into the darkness of the 

]mst; the other young Israel, stretching forth its hands to wher e 

the dawn of a new day was a])out to break . These Jews of the 

West are known by the term HeJ1c)il>its — from eK.Xtfvi8,8iv^ to conform 

t o the language and manners of the Greek s. ^ 

Whatever their religious and social isolation, it was, in the nature 

of t hings, impossibl e that the Jewish communities in the West should 

remain unati'ccted by Grecian cultuje and modes of thought : just as, 

on the other hand, t he Greek world. des})ite popular hatred and the 

contempt of the higher classes, \ould not wholly withdraw itself from 

Jewish intluences /.- Witness hei'e the many convei'ts to .Iinhn'suj 

among the (jjentiles ; - witness also t he evi dent i)reparedness of the lands 

of this ' dispersion ' for the new doctrine which was to conu* from 

Judaea. Many causes contributed to render the Jews of the West ^ 

accessible to Greek intluenccs. They had not a long local liistory to -^^^-'^^^-^ / 

look ]);i(',k ii])on. nor did thev form a eoinp;ict body, like tlieii- liivtluvr 'wTa2U 

in th e East. Thev were cr aftsmen, trad ers, m erchants, settled for a a 
-T^ ^^^ ' ^ (5Vl^ ^ 

1 Indeed, the word Ahiisti (or Aln- j Test.) on Acts vi. 1, agTeeiiig- with Dr. 
nistin) — 'Greek' — actually occurs, as in j Roberts, argue.s that the term 'Hellenist' 
.Ter. Sot. 21 I), line 14 from bottom. Bold \ indicated only principles, and not birth- 
place, and that there were Hebrews and 
Hellenists in and out of Palestine. But 
this view is untenable. 

^ An account of this proiiaganda of 
Judaism and of its results will be given 
in another connection. 

(Forsch. n. ein. Volksb. p. 7) quotes Philo j 
(l^eg. ad Caj. \). 102;?) in proof that he 
i-egarded the Eastern dispersion as a 
branch separate from the Palestinians. 
But the passage does not convey to me 
the inference whicli he draws from it. 
Di'. Guiliemard (Hebraisms in the (Jreek 






time hero or there — units which niigiit combine into communities , 
])ut could not I'oi'iii one ))e()))h- . Then tlieir V)Ositi(jn was not favour- 
able to tlie sway of traditionalisnw / Their occupatii ns, the verv 
reasons for their being in a ' strange land,' were purely secular. That 
jofty absorjition of thought and life in the study of the Law, writteB^ 
and oral, which characterised the East, was to them something in the 
dim distance, sacred, like the/soi^ and the institutions of Palestine, but 
unattainable. In Palestine or Babylonia numberless influences from 
his earliest years, all that he saw and heard, the very force of circum- 
stances, would tend to make an earnest Jew a disciple of the Rabbis; 
in the West it vrould lead him to Miellenise.' It was, so to speak, 
'in the air'; and he could no more shut his mind against Greek 
thought than he could withdraw his body from atmospheric influences. 
That restless, searching, sul^tle Greek intellect would penetrate ever}^- 
where, and flash its light into the innermost recesses of his home 
and Synagogue. 

To be sure, they were inten sely Jewish , these communities of 
strangers. Like our scattered colt)nists in distant lands, they would 
cling with double atFection to the customs of their home, and invest 
with the halo of tender memories the sacred traditions of their faith. 
The Grecian Jew might well look with contempt, not unmingled with 
pity, on the idolatrous rites practised around, from which long ago 
the pitiless irony of Isaiah had torn the veil of beauty, to show the 
hideousness and unreality beneath. The dissoluteness of public and 
])i-ivate life, the frivolity and aimlessness of their pursuits, political 
aspirations, popular assemblies, amusements — in short, the utter decay 
of society, in all its phases, would lie open to his gaze. It is in 
terms of lofty scorn, not unmingled with indignation, which only 
occasionally gives way to the softer mood of warning, or even invita- 
tion, that Jewish Hellenistic literature, whether in the Apocrypha or 
in its Apocalyptic utterances, addresses heathenism. 

From that spectacle the Grecian Jew would turn Avith infinite 
satisfaction — not to say, pride — to his own community, to think of 
its spiritual enlightenment, and to pass in revicAv its exclusive 
]mvileges\ It was with no uncertain steps that he would go past 
those si)lendid temples to his own humbler Synagogue, pleased to find 
himself there surrounded by those who shared his descent, his faith, 
his liopes; and gratified to see their number swelled by many who, 
heathens l)y birth, had learned the error of their ways, and now, so to 
speak, humlily stood as suppliant 'strangers of the gate,' to seek 
' St. Paul fully describes tliese feelings in tlie Epistle to the Romans. 



a De Vita 
p. 68") ; Leg. 
ad Oaj. 
I). 1014 

'■ Leg. ad 
Caj. p. 1035 

« Ag. Aplon 
li. 17 


uduiit^sit)!! into hi.s sauctuni'j.' Hoav ditl'erent were the rites which he 
l)ractisc(l, hallowed in their Divine origin, rational in themselves, and 
at the same time deei)ly sigiiilicant,,'tn)ni the absurd superstitions 
around. Who could have c()nii)ared with the voiceless, meaningless, 
blasphemous heathen worshi}), if it deserved the name, that of the 
Synagogue, with its i)athetic hymns, its sublime liturgy, its Divine 
Scriptures, and tliose ' stated sermons ' which ' instructed in virtue and 
l)iety,' of which not only I'hilo," Agri])pa,'' and Josephns," speak as a 
regular institution, but whose antiquity and general prevalence is 
attested in Jewish writings,^ and nowiiere more strongly tlian in the 
book of the Acts of the Apostles? 

And in these Synagogues, how" would ' l)rotherly love ' be called 
out, since, if one member suffere<l, all might soon be affected, and the 
danger whicli threatened one community would, unless averted, ere 
long overwiielin the rest. There was little need for the admonition 
not to 'forget the love of strangers.'* To entertain them was not 
merely a virtue; in the Hellenist dispersion it w^as a religious 
necessity. And by such means not a few whom they would regard 
as ' heavenly messengers ' might be welcomed. Fro m the Acts of the 
Apostles we knew with what eagerness they would receive, and with 
what readiness they would invite, the passing Rabbi or teacher, Avho 
came_from the home of tlieir faith^ to spea k, if there were in them a 
word of comforting exhortation for the people.'* We ~caiT scarcely 
douV)t, considering the state of things, that this often bore on 'the 
consolation of Israel.' But, indeed, all that came from Jerusalem, all Acts.xm. iPj 
that helped them to realise their living connection with it, or bound 
it more closely, was precious. 'Letters out of Judaea,' the tidings 
which someone might bring on liis return from festive pilgrimage or 
business journey, especially about anything connected with that grand 
expectaticni — the star which w^as to rise on the Eastern sky — would 
soon spread, till the Jewish i)edlar in his wanderings had carried the 
news to the most distant and isolated Jewish home, wdicre he might 
tind a Sabbath-welcome and Sabbath-rest. 

'* A6y09 TTa- 

TTpb? TOf 

1 The ' Gerey haShaar,^ proselytes of 
the gate, a designation whicli some have 
derived from the circumstance that Gen- 
tiles were not allowed to advance be- 
yond the Tenii)le Court, but more likely 
to be traced to such passages as Ex. xx. 
10; Deut. xiv. 21; xxiv. 14. 

^ Comp. here Targ. Jon. on Judg. v. 
2, 9. I feel more hesitation in appeal- 
ing to such passages as Ber. 19 a, where 

we read of a Rabbi in Rome, Thodos 
(Theudos?), who llourislied several gen- 
erations before Hillel. for reasons which 
the passage itself will suggest to the 
student. At the time of Philo. however, 
such instructions in th(> Synagogues at 
Rome were a long-established institution 
(Ad Caj. p. lOU). 
^ (piXo^Evia, Hebr. .\iii. 2. 




BOOK Such undoubtedly was t\ui case. And yet, when the Jew stej 2l3e<l 

I out of tlie naiT()wc ircle wliich he had draw uua round liini, he was 

^~'^fSi'^^ C (ml'routed on eveFy side by Greciaujsni . Jt was in the Ibi-uni, in the 
n-ket, in tlie counting-house, in the street; in all that he saw, and 
in all to whom he spoke. It was retined; it was elegant; it was 
profound; it was supremely attractive. He might resist, but he could 
not i)ush it aside. Even in resisting, he had already yielded to it. 
For, once o\)Qn the door to the questions which it brought, if it were 
only to expel, or repel them, he must give n\) that principle of simple 
authority on whicli traditionalism as a system rested. Hellenic 
criticism could not so he silenced, nor its searching light be extin- 
guished by the breath of a Rabbi. U he attempt(,Ml this, the truth 
would not only ])e worsted before its enemies, but suffer detriment in 
his own eyes. He must meet argument with argument, and that not 
only for those who were without, but in order to be liimself quite sure 
of what he believed. He must be able to hold it, not only in con- 
troversy with others, where pride might l)id him stand fast, but in 
that much more s erious contes t Avithin. wlnire a man meets the old 

la of hi s own niiud. and has to 
lit, in which hcJjiunchcered by 


adve rsary al one in the secre t ai'cn 
sustaTiTthat terrible hand-to-hand tii 

outwar*! hel)) . ]>ut A\hy slioiihl he shrink from the contest, wlien he 
was sure that his was Divine truth, and that therefore victory must 
be on his side? As in our nujdern conHicts against the onesided in- 
ferences from i^hysical investigations we are wont to say that the 
truths of nature cannot contradict those of revelation — both l)eing of 
God — and as we are apt to regard as truths of nature what sometimes 
are only deductions from paitially ascertained facts, and as truths of 
revelation what, after all, may ))e only our own inferences, sometimes 
from imperfectly apprehended premises, so the Hellenist would seek 
to conciliate the truths of Divine revelation with those others which, 
Tic~thought, he recognise d m llelieiTism. hut what A\ere the truths 
of Divine revelatu)n? Was it only the substance of Scripture, or 
also its form — the truth itself which was conveyed, or the manner in 
which it was presented to the Jews; oi-, if both, then did the two 
stand on exactly the same footing? On the answer to these questions 
Avould depend how little or how much he would 'hellenise.' 

One thing at any rate was quite certain. The Old Testament, 
leastwise, the La\v of Moses, was directly and wholly from God; and 
if so, then its form also — its letter — must be authentic and authorita- 
tive. Thus much on the surface, and Ibr all. \\\\\ the student must 
search deeper into it, his senses, as it were, quickened by Greek 


criticism; he must 'meditate' and penetrate into the Divine mys- CHAP, 
teries. The Palestinian also searched into them, and the I'csult was the H 

Midrash. But, whichever of his methods he had ai)plicd — the Peshat^ ' 1 — 

or simple criticism of the words, the DerusJi, or search into the i)Os- 
sibie api)lications of the text, what might be 'trodden out' of it; or 
the Sod, the hidden, m3Stical, sui)ranatural bearinii- of the words — it 
was still only the letter of the text that had been studied. There was, 
indeed, yet another understanding' of the Scriptures, to Avhicli St.l'aul 
directed his disci})les: the spiritual bearing of its spiritual truths. 
Hut that needed another qualitication, and tended in another direction 
from those of which the Jewish student knew. On the other hand, 
there was the intellectual view of the Scriptures — their philosophical 
understanding, the application to them of the results of Grecian 
thought and criticism. It was this which was peculiarly Hellenistic. 
Apply that method, and the deei)er the explorer proceeded in his 
search, the more would he feel himself alone, far from the outside 
crowd; but the brighter also would that light of criticism, which he 
carried, shine in the growing darkness, or, as he held it u]), would 
the precious ore, Avliich he laid bare, glitter and sparkle with a 
thousand varying hues of brilliancy. What was Jewish, Palestinian, 
individual, concrete in the Scriptures, was only the outside — true in 
itself, but not the truth. There were depths beneath. Strip these 
stories of their nationalism; idealise the individual of the })ersons 
introduced, and you came upon abstract ideas and realities, true to all 
tiine and to all nations. But this deep syml)olism was Pythagorean; 
this pre-existence of ideas which were the types of all outward 
actuality, was Platonism! Broken rays in them, but the focus of 
truth in the Scriptures. Yet these were rays, and could only have 
come from the Sun. All truth was of God; hence theirs nnist have 
been of that origin. Then were the sages of the heathen also in a 
sense God-taught — and God-teaching, or inspiration, was rather a 
question of degree than of kind ! 

One step only remained; and that, as we imagine, if not the 
easiest, yet, as we reflect upon it, that which in practice would be 
most readily taken. It was simply to advance towards Grccianism: 
frankly to recognise truth in the resvdts of Greek jt bought. There is 
that within us, name it mental consciousness, or as you will, which, 
all unbidden, rises to answer to the voice of intellectual truth, come 
whence it may, just as conscience answers to the cause of moral truth 
or duty. But in this case there was more. There was jthe mighty 
six'll which Greek i)hilosophy exercised on all kindred minds, and the 


- 6n^ 



BOOK jripecial adaptation of the Jewisli intellect to such subtle, if not deep, 

1 thinking. And, in general, and more powerful than the rest, because 

^^ ,- — penetrating everywhere, \v^j_llie. charm of (Jreek literatuxe, with its 

brilliancy; of Greek civilisation and culture^jvith. their pQlisbjamL 

attractiveness^^ and of what, in one word, we may call the '■ time- 

spirit,' t hat ty rannos, who rules all in their thinking, speaking, doing, 

/r\ whether they list or not. 

'--' — ' Why, his sway extended even to Talestine itself, and was felt in 
the innermost circle of the most exclusive Rabbinisni. We are not 
li(;re referring to the fact that the very language spoken in Palestine 
caine to be very largely charged with Greek, and even Latin, words 
Ilebraised, since this is easily accounted for by the new circumstances, 
and the necessities of intercourse with the dominant or resident 
foreigners. Nor is it requisite to point out how impossible it would 
have been, in presence of so many from the Greek and Roman world, 
and after the long and persistent struggle of their rulers to Grecianise 
Palestine, nay, even in view of so many magnificent heathen temples 
on the very soil of Palestine, to exclude all knowledge of, or contact 
with Grecianism. But not to be able to exclude was to have in sight 
the dazzle of that unknown, which as such, and in itself, must have 
luul peculiar attractions to the Jewish mind. It needed stern 
principle to repress the curiosity thus awakened. When a young 
Ral)l)i, BeriDama, asked his uncle whether he might not study Greek 
philosophy, since he had mastered the 'Law' in every aspect of it, 
the older Rabbi replied by a reference to Josh. i. 8: 'Go and search 
what is the hour which is neither of the day nor of the night, and in 
"Men. 99;., it thou maycst study Greek philosophy.'" Yet even the Jewish 
end })atriarch, Gamaliel IL, who may have sat with Saul 01 Tarsus at the 

feet of his grandfather, was said to have busied himself with Greek, 
as he certainly held liberal views on many points connected with 
Grecianism. To be sure, tradition justified him on the ground that 
his position brought hiin into contact with the ruling powers, and, 
perhaps, to further vindicate him, ascribed similar pursuits to the 
elder Gamaliel, although groundlessly, to judge from the circumstance 
that he was so impressed even with the wrong of possessing a Targum 
on .lob in Aramaean, that he had it buried deep in the ground. 

But all these are indications of a tendency existing. How wide 
it must have spread, appears from the fact that the ban had to be 
pronounced on all who studied 'Greek wisdom.' One of the greatest 
Rabbis, Elisha ben Abujah, seems to have been actually led to 
apostacy by such studies. True, he appears as the ^Acher'' — the 
'other' — in Talmudic writings, Avhom it was not proper even to 


naiuo. But he was not yet an apostate tVoni the Synagogue when CHAP. 
tlu).se ' Greek songs ' ever tlowed from his lips; and it was in the veiy H 

Beth-lia-Midrash. ov theologieal aeadeniy, tliat a multitude of SipJireij '^ — .' — 
3IiiiiiH (heretical l)ooks) Hew Irom his breast, where they had lain 

concealed/' It nmy be so, tluit the expression ^ Hiplirty Homeros^ -jcr. chag. 

(Homeric writings), which occur not only in the Talmud ''but even ciiag.^i™^' 

in the Mishnah' reterred pre-eminently, it not exclusively, to the ''Jer. sanh. 

' _ • ' -^ ' X. 28 a 

religious (u- semi-religious Jewish Hellenistic literat.ure, outside even <•• vad. iv. g 
the Apocrypha.' But its occurrence proves, at any rate, that the 
Hellenists were credited with the study of Greek literature, and tliat 
through tliem, il' not moi-e directly, the Palestinia.ns had become 
acciuainted with it. 

This sketch will pre})are us for a rapid survey of that Hellenistic 
literature which Judasa so mucli drea<}ed. Its importance, not only to 
the Hellenists but to the world at large, can scarcely be over-estimated. 
First and foremost, we have here the Greek translation of the Old 
Testament, veneral)le not only as the oldest, but as that which at the 
time of Jesus held the place of our * Authorized Aversion,' and as 
such is so often, although freely, quoted, in the New Testament. Nor 
need we wonder that it slioidd have been the people's Bible, not 
merely among the Hellenists, but in Galilee, and even in Judaea. It 
was not only, as already exjilained, that Hebrew was no longer tlie 
' vulgar tongue ' in Palestine, and that written Targuinim were pro- 
liibited. But most, if not all — at least in towns — would understand 
the Greek version; it might be quoted in intercourse with Hellenist 
In-ethren or with the Gentiles; and, what was perhaps equally, if not 
more important, it was the most readily procurable. From the extreme 
labour and care bestowed on them, Hebrew manuscrii)ts of the Bible 
were enormously dear, as we infer from a curious Talmudical notice,'' 'iGut.a^x. 

1 11 1 • 1 r 1 last line, 

where a connnon woollen wra}), which ot course yvas very cheap, a coj)y ana u 
of the Psalms, of Job, and torn pieces from Proverbs, are together 
valued at tive nianeh — say, about 19?. Although this notice dates from 
the third or fourth century, it is not likely that the cost of Hebrew 
BiVdical MSS. was much lower at the lime of Jesus. This would, of 
course, put their possession well nigh out of common reach. On the 

' Throu<2;h tliis literature, whicli as Bibel u. Talmud, vol. ii. pp. 68, 69), the 

bein<!; .Jewisli might have i)assed unsus- expre.-^rfion Siphroy Ilomeros applies 

peeted, a dangerous acquaintance might exchisively to the Juda^o-AIexandvian 

have been introduced with Greek writ- heretical writings; according to Fur>it 

ings — the more readily, that for example (Kanon d. A. Test. p. 98), simjjly to 

Aristobulus described Homer and Ilesiod Homeric literature. But see the discus- 

as having 'drawn from our liooks' (ap. sion in Xer//, Neuhebr. u. Chald.Worterb., 

Euseh. Pra^par. Evang. xiii. 12). Ac- vol. i. p. 176 ii and l>. 
cording to Ilamhin-r/er (Real-Encykl. fiir 


BOOK other hand, we are able to Un-\n an idea of the cheainics.s of Greek 
I manuscripts from what we know of the price of l)ooks in Rome at the 

"*— ^v — he.iiinning- of our era. Hunch-eds of slaves were there engaged copying 
what one dictated. The result was not only the publication of as 
large editions as in our days, but their production at only about double 
the cost of what are now known as 'cheap' or ' })eople's editions.' 
Probably it would be safe to compute, that as much matter as would 
cover sixteen pages of small print might, in such cases, be sold at the 
rate of about sixpence, and in that ratio.' Accordingly, manuscripts 
in Greek or Latin, although often incorrect, must have been easily 
attainable, and this would have considerable influence on nuiking the 
Greek version of the Old Testament the 'people's Bible. - 

The Greek version, like the Targum of the Palestinians, originated, 
no doubt, in the first place, in a felt national want on the part of the 
Hellenists, who as a body were ignorant of- Hebrew. Hence we find 
notices of very early Greek versions of at least parts of the Penta- 
teuch.^ But this, of course, could not suffice. On the other hand, 
there existed, as Ave may suppose, a natural curiosity on the part of 
students, especially in Alexandria, which had so large a Jewish popu- 
lation, to know the sacred liooks on which the religion and history of 
Israel were founded. Even more than this, we must take into 
account the literary tastes of the first three Ptolemies (successors in 
Egypt of Alexander the Great), and the exceptional favour which 
the Jews for a time enjoyed. Ptolemy I. (Lagi) was a great patron 
of learning. He projected the Museum in Alexandria, which was a 
liome for literature and study, and founded the great library.' In 
these undertakings Demetrius Phalereus was his chief adviser. The 
tastes of the first Ptolemy were inherited by his son, Ptolemy II. 

^286-284B.c. (Philadelphus), who had for two years been co-regent.^ In fact, 
ultimately that monarch became literally book-mad, and the sums 
spent on rare MSS., which too often proved spurious, almost pass 
belief. The same may be said of the third of these monarchs, 
Ptolemy III. (Euergetes). It would have been strange, indeed, if 
these monarchs had not sought to enrich their library with an 
authentic rendering of the Jewish sacred books, or not encouraged 
such a translation. 

' Comp. Frif^dUiridar, gitteiii;-. Roins, ^ i^.,-,>,./,^/,„//,.,. in -p^gp), Pi-ajpjii-.Evanfr. 

vol. iii. p. 31.'). ix. f>; xiii. 12. Tlie douhts raised by 

2 To these calL^es there should perhaps //^qc/?/ aijaiust this testimony have been 

be added the attempt to iiiti'odiice Gre- li-enerally repudiated by critics since the 

danism by force inlo Palestine, the con- treatise ijy Fa?fe??aer (Diatr. de Aristob. 

sequences which it may have left, and the .Tud. appended to Gai'sford's eA. of the 

existence of a Grecian i)arty in the land. Pnepar. Evang.). 


These circuiiistauces will account for the ditt'erent elements which CHAP, 
we can trace in the Greek version of the Old Testament, and explain il 
the historical, or rather legendary, notices which we have of its - — .' — ' 
composition. To Ix'gin with the latter. Josephiis has preserved 
what, no doubt in its present form, is a spurious letter from one 
Aristeas to his brother Philocrates,' in which we are told how, by the 
advice of his librarian (?), Demetrius Phalereus, Ptolemy II. had 
sent by him (Aristeas) and another officer, a letter, with rich presents, 
to Eleazar, the High-Priest at Jerusalem; who in turn had selected 
seventy-two translators (six out of each tribe), and furnished them 
with a most valuable manuscript of the Old Testament. The letter 
then gives further details of their splendid reception at the E]gyptian 
court, and of their sojourn in the island of Pharos, where they ac- 
complished their work in seventy-two days, when they returned to 
.lerusalom laden with rich presents, their translation having received 
the formal approval of the Jewish Sanhedrin at Alexandria. From 
this account we may at least derive as historical these facts: that 
the Pentateuch — for to it only the testimony refers — was translated 
into Greek, at the suggestion of Demetrius Phalereus, in the reign 
and under the patronage — if not by direction — of Ptolemy II, 
(Philadelphus).' With this the Jewish accounts agree, which describe 
the translation of the Pentateuch under Ptolemy — the Jerusalem Tal- 
mud ''in a simpler narrative, the Babylonian" w^tli additions apparently '' ^^^s- *• 
derived from the Alexandrian legends; the former expressly noting 
thirteen, the latter marking fifteen, variations from the original text. '^ 

The Pentateuch once translated, whether by one, or more likely 
by several persons/ the other books of the Old Testament would 

1 Comp. Joseplii Opera, ed. Haver- KeiJ, Lelirb. d. hist. kr. Eiul. d. A. T., 

camp, vol. ii. App. pp. 103-132. The p.. 551, note 5. 

best and most critical edition of this ^ It is scarcely worth while to refute 

letter by Prof. M. Schmidt, in Merx' the view of Tychsen, Jost (Gescli. d. 

Archiv. i. pp. 252-310. The story is Judenth.), and others, that the Jewish 

found in Jos. Ant. xii. 2. 2; Ag. Ap. ii. writers only wrote down for Ptolemy 

4; Philo, de Vita Mosis, lib. ii. § 5-7. the Hebrew words in Greek letters. 

The extracts are most fully given in But the word ^ji'i cannot possibly bear 

Easeh. Pra.>par. Evang. Some of the that meaning in this connection. Comp. 

Fathers give the story, with additional also Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 31. 

embellishments. It was first critically * According to Sopher. i. 8, by five 

called in question by Body (Contra His- persons, but that seems a round number 

toriam Aristene de L. X. interpret, dissert. to correspond to the five books of Moses. 

Oxon. 1685), and has since been generally Fninkel (Ueber d. Eiiitl. d. iialiist. Exeg.) 

regarded as legendary. But its founda- labours, however, to sliow in detail the 

tion in fact has of late been recognized differences between the difierent trans- 

by well nigh all critics, tliongh the letter lators. But his criticism is often strained, 

itself is pseudonymic, and full of fabuhnis and the solution of the question is ap- 

details. parently impossible. 

~ This is also otherwise attested. See 

Meg. 9 a 


l!()(»K nntiii-nlly soon receive the same treatnicnt. They were evidently 
' rendei'cd by a number of})ersons, who possessed very different qualiti- 

"- — ^. cations for their work — the transhition of tlie J3ook of Daniel having 

l)een so defective, that in its i)lace another by Theodotion was after- 
v/ards substituted. The version, as a whole, bears tiie name of the 
LXX. — as some have sui)i)osed irom the nund>erof its translators ac- 
cording to Aristcas' account — only that in that case it should have 
been seventy-two; or from the approval of tlie Alexandrian San- 
hedriu' — although in tliat case it should have been seventy-one; or 
perhaps because, in the ])oj)ular idea, the number of the Gentile 
nations, of which the Greek (Japheth) was regarded as typical, was 
seventy. We have, however, one tixed date by which to compute the 
completion of this translation. Fromthei)rologueto the Apocryphal 
' Wisdom of Jesus the son of Siracli,' we learn that in his days the 
Canon of Scripture was closed; and tliat on his arrival, in his thirty- 
eighth year," in Egypt, which was then under the rule of p]uergetes, 
he found the so-called LXX. version completed, when he set himself 
to a similar translation of the Hebrew work of his grandfather. But 
in the 50th chapter of that work we have a description of the High- 
Priest Simon, which is evidently written by an eye-witness. We 
have therefore as one term the pontificate of Simon, during which 
the earlier Jesus lived; and as the other, the reign of Euergetes, in 
which the grandson was at Alexandria. Now, although there were 
two High-Priests who bore the name Simon, and two Egyptian kings 
with the surname Euergetes, yet on purely historical grounds, and 
apart from critical prejudices, we conclude that the Simon of J]cclus. 
L. was Simon I., the Just, one of the greatest names in Jewish 
traditional history; and similarly, that the Euergetes of the younger 
Jesus was the first of that name, Ptolemy III., who reigned Irom 
247 to 221 B.C.-* In his reign, therefore, we must regard the LXX. 
version as, at least substantially, completed. 

' _B6/^/ would have it, 'the Jerusalem it tiear on the question of the 8o-calhHl 

Sanhedrin!' 'Maccabean Psahns,'and the autliorsiiip 

'■^ But the expression has also been and date of the ]?ook of Daniel. But liis- 

referred to the thirty-eighth year of the torical ((uestloiis should ]w treated inde- 

reign of Euergetes. pendently <jf critical prejudices. Winer 

•^ To ray niiud, at least, the historical (Bibl. Reahvorterb. i. p. 555), and others 
evidence, ai)art from critical considera- after him admit that the Simon of 
tions, seems very strong. Modern writers Ecclus. ch. L. was indeed Simon the .Just 
on the other side have confessedly been (i.), but maintain that the Euergetes of 
influenced Ijy the consideration that the tlie Prologue was the second of tliat 
earlier date of tlie Book of Siracli would luime, Ptohuiiy YII., popularly nick- 
also involve a mucli (>arlier date for the named Kakergetes. Comp. the remarks 
close of till' (). T. Canon than they are dis- of Frifzsche on this view in tlie Knrzgef. 
posed to achnit. More especially would Exeg. Haudb. z. d.Apokr.nte Lief. p. xvii. 



From tliis it would, of course, follow that tho Cauou of the Old CHAP. 
Testaoieut was then i)ractically fixed in Palestine. ' That Cauoii was II 
accepted by the Alexandrian translators, althou^'h the more loose ^ — . — 
views of the Hellenists on ' inspiration,' and the absence of that close 
watchfulness exercised over the text in Palestine, led to additions and 
alterations, and ultimately even to the admission of the Ai)ocryi)ha 
into the G]"eek liible. Unlike the Hebrew arrangement of the text 
into the Law, the Prophets,- and the (sacred) Writings, or Ilagio- 
grapha, the LXX. arrange them into historical, prophetical, and 
l)oetic books, and count twenty-two, after the Hebrew alphabet, 
instead of twenty-four, as the Hebrews. But perhaps both these 
may have been later arrangements, since Philo evidently knew the 
Jewish order of the books." What text the translators may have "Devua 
used we can only conjecture. It differs in almost innumerable sa 
instances from our own, though the more important deviations ai"e 
comparatively few.^ In the great majority of the lesser variati(nis 
our Hebrew must be regarded as the correct text.* 

Putting aside clerical mistakes and misreadings, and making 
allowance for errors of translation, ignorance, and haste, we note 
^ certain ou ts tanding facts as char acteristic of th e Greek versio n. It 
bears evident marks of its origin in Egypt in its use of E gyptian 
words and referen ces, and £!C|jLially evident_traces of its Jewish coni- 
position. By the si de of slavis h and false literalism there is great 
liberty, J f^not licence, in handling the ^original; gi'oss mist;ikcs occur 
along with happy renderings of very difficult passages, suggesting 
the aid of some a))le scholars. I^j^tjjii't Jewish elemenls ;ire un- 
draiably there, which can only be explained by refcicui-e In Jewish 
tradition, although they arc nuich fewer than some critics have 
sujj^oacd.' Tliis we can easily understand, since only those tradi- 

• Comp. liere, besides the passages 
fiuoted in the i)i'evious note, Baba B. 13 b 
and 14 6; for the cessation of revela- 
tion in the Maccabean period, 1 Mace. iv. 
4fi ; ix. 27 ; xiv. 41 ; and, in general, for 
the Jewish view on the subject at the 
time of Christ, Jns. Ag. Aj). i. 8. 

'^ Anterior: .Tosh., Judg., 1 and 2 Sam. 
1 and 2 Kings. Posterior: Major: Is., 
Jer., and Ezek. ; and the Minor Pro- 

■' They occur chiefly in 1 Kings, tlie 
books of Esther, Job, Proverbs, Jeremiah, 
and Daniel. In the Pentateuch we find 
them only in four passages in the Book of 

* There is also a curious correspondence 

between the Samaritan version of the 
Pentateuch and that of the LXX., which 
in no less than about 2,000 passages agree 
as against our Hebrew, although in other 
instances the Greek text either agrees 
with the Hebrew against the Samaritan, 
or else is independent of both. On tho 
connection between Samaritan literature 
and Hellenism there are some very inte- 
resting notices in FreudenthaJ ,\le\\.i^i\ii\. 
pp. 82-103, 130-136, 186, &c. 

•■' The extravagant computations in 
this respect of Frankel (Ijoth in his work, 
Ueber d. Einfl. d. Palast. Exeg., and 
also in the Yorstud. z. Se])t. pp. 189-191) 
have been rectiti('(l l)y Ufrz/eld (Gesch. 
d. Vol. Isr. vol. iii.),who, perhaps, goes to 


BOOK tioiis would tiud a place which at that early time were not only 
1 received, but in general circulation. The distinctively Grecianjele-^ 

^— ^.^ — ' ments, however, are at present of chief interest to us. They consist^f 
allusions to Greek mythological terms, and adai)tations of Greek phi- 
losophical ideas. However few, ' even one well-authenticated instance 
would lead us to suspect others, and in general give to the version 
the character of Jewish Hcllenising. In the same class we reckon 
what constitutes the prouiiueiit characteristic of the LXX. version, 
which, for want of better terms, we would designate as rationalistic 
and apologetic. Difficulties — or what seemed such — are removed by 
the most l)old UK'tliods, and by free handling of the text; it need 
scarcely be said, often very unsatisfactorily. More especially a 
strenuous eff'ort is made to banish all anthro})omori)hisms, as incon- 
sistent with their ideas of the Deity. The supertlcial observer might 
be tempted to regard this as not strictly Hellenistic, since the same 
may be noted, and indeed is much more consistently carried out, in 
the Targum of Onkelos. Perhaps such alterations had even been 
introduced into the Hebrew text itself.^ But there is this vital 
difft'rence between Palestinianism and Alexandriaiiism, that, broadly 
speaking, the Hebrew avoidance of anthropomorphisms depends on 
objective — theological and dogmatic — the Hellenistii; on subjective 
— philosophical and apologetic — grounds. The Hebrew avoids them 
as he does wluit seems to him inconsistent with the dignity of Biblical 
heroes and of Israel. ' Great js the power of the prophets,' he writes, 

■ Mechuta ' wlio likcu the Creator to the creature; ' or else"" ' a thing is written 
only to break it to the ear ' — to adapt it to our human modes of 
speaking and understanding; and again," the ' Avords of the Torah 
are like the speech of the children of men.' But for tliis very pur- 
pose the words of Scripture may be presented in another form, if need 

the other extreme. Herzfekl (pp. 548- this is not tlie sole Instance of the kind. 
650) admits — and even this with hesita- ''■ As in the so-called ' Tiqquney ISa- 

tion — of only six distinct references to 'pherim,^ ov 'emendations of the scribes.' 

Halakhoth in the following- passages in Comp. here generally the investigations 

the LXX.: Gen. ix. 4; xxxii. 32; Lev. of Geiger (Urschrift n. tleberse z. d. 

xix. 19; xxiv. 7; Deut. xxv. 5; xxvi. 12. Bibel). But these, however learned and 

As instances of Haggadah we may men- ingenious, require, like so many of the 

tion the renderings in Gen. v. 24 and dicta of modern Jewish criticism, to be 

Ex. X. 23. taken with the utmost caution, and in 

1 Dahne and Gfrorer have in this each case subjected to fresh examination, 

resi)ect gone to the same extreme as since so large a i)roportion of tlieir writ- 

Frankel on the Jewish side. But even ings are what is best designated by the 

SiP[ifried{^\\\\.o v. Alex. p. S) is obliged to German Tendenz-Schriften, and their in- 

admit that the LXX. rendering, i) deyi) ferences Tendenz-Schlilssf. But the critic 

7JV dopcxro- (XKai KaraaKsvaaroi and the historian should have no Tfe//- 

Gen. i. 2), bears undeniable mark of Gre- druz — except towards simi>le fact and 

cian philosophic views. And certainly historical truth. 

on Ex. xix. 


he even inoditicd, so as to obviate possible inisuiiderstaiulin^-, or doy,- CHAP. 
niatic error. The Alexandrians arrived at the same eonelusion, but II 

from an opposite direction. The}' had not theological but philo- ^^-^r — ' 
sophieal axioms in their minds — truths which the hhjhest truth could 
not, and, as they held, did not contravene. Only dig deeper; get 
beyond the letter to that to which it pointed; divest abstract truth of 
its concrete, national, Judaistic envelope — penetrate through the dim 
porch into the temple, and you were surrounded by a blaze of light, 
of which, as its portals had been thrown open, single rays had fallen 
into the night of heathendom. And so the truth would appear -7^ 
glorious — more than vindicated in their own sight, triumphant in Xj^ 
that of others! ^^"^^ 

Iu_such manner the LXX. version became really the people's /^'-*-- 
Bible to that large Jewish world through which Christianity was L^ ^ 

afterw ards to address itself to mankind. It was part of the case, that ^ /-^^^^^ 
the original. Otherwise it would have been impossible to make final ^^^'. 

this translation should be regariled by the Hellenists as inspired like 

appeal to the very words of the Greek; still less, to tind in them a ' ' '■ d 
mystical and allegorical meaning. Only that we must not regard -^VX - 
their views of inspiration — except as applying to Moses, and even 


t lierc only partially — as identical Avitli ours. To their minds inspira- 
tion differed quantitatively, not qualitatively, from what the rapt soul '^^'~'*^^ 
might at any time experience, so that even heathen philosophers /Z^ ^^^ 
might ultimately be regarded as at times inspired. So far as the 4 «^- 7^^ 
version of the Bible was concerned (and probably on like grounds), 
similar views obtained at a later period even in Hebrew circles, where .e>^ " m^j 
it was laid down that the Chaldee Targum on the Pentateuch had ^^ . ^^ 
been originally spoken to Moses on Sinai,-' thou2:h afterwards for- '» Ned. 37 6: 
gotten, till restored and re-mtroduced.'' laieg. 3 a 

Whether or not the LXX. was read in the Hellenist Synagogues, 
and the worship conducted, wiiolly or partly, in Greek, must l)e 
matter of conjecture. We tind, however, a significant notice'' to the "Jer. Meg. 
effect that among those who spoke a barbarous language (not Hebrew Ki-ot. p.Vs.r 
—the terra referring specially to Greek), it was the custom for one 
person to read the whole Parashah (oi' lesson for the day), while 
among the Hebrew-speaking Jews this was done by seven persons, 
successively called up. This seems to imply that either the Greek 
text alone was read, or that it followed a Hebrew reading, like the Tar- 
gum of the Easterns. More probably, however, the former would be 
the case, since both Hebrew manuscripts, and persons qualified to 
read them, would be ditRcult to procure. At any rate, we know that 


i;{,(»K t lie Greek Scriptures wcic authoritatively acknowledged in Palef!tiiiej2_ 
I and tliat the ordinary daily prayers iiught be said in (ireek.- The 

— ■;' — LXX. deserved this distinction I'roni its general faithfulness — at least, 
in regard to the I'eiitateuch — and from its preservation of ancient 
doctrine, 'rtius. without further referring to its full acknowledgment 
of the doctrine of Angels (comp. Deut. xxxii. H, xxxiii. 2). we s})eeially 
mark that it preserved the Messianic interpretation of (irn. xlix. 10, 
and Numb. xxi\. T. IT, 2:;, bringing us evidence of what had been 
the generally received view two and a half centuries before the birth 
of Jesus. It must have been on the ground of the use made of the 
LXX. in argument, that later voices in the Synagogue declared this 
version to have ])een as gi-eat a calamity to Israel as the making of 
the gohlen caHV and that its eompletion had been followed l)y the 
terril)le omen of an eclijjse, that lasted three days.'' For the Ral)l)is 
declared that upon investigation it had been found that the Torah 
could lie adetpiately translated (udy into Greek, and they are most 
extravagant in their i)raise of the Greek version of Aky/as, or Aquila, 
the i)roselyte, Avhich was made to counteract the influence of the 
LXX.' I)Ut in Egypt the anniversaiw of the completion of the LXX. 
was celebrated by a feast in the island of Pharos, in which ultimately 
even heathens seem to have taken i)ait.'' 

/ ^ Meii". i. S. It i.<. Iiowt'ver. fair to con- 
fess strong douljt, on my part, wlictliei- 
this pa-ssuiiie may not refer to tlie Greek 
translation of AkyUts. At tlie same time 
it simply speaks of a translation into 
(rreek. And l)efore the version of Aquila 
the LXX. alone held that place. It is 
one of the most darini:: modern .Tewisli 
perversions of history to identify tliis 
Akylas, wlio Hourislied about KJO after 
Christ, with the Aquila of the Book of 
Acts. It wants even the excuse of a 
(■olourai)le ])erversion of the confused 
story about Akylas. whicli EpipfidniKs 
who is so jjenerallv inaccurate, uives in 

De I'ond. el .Mensur. c. .\lv. 

- The -Shema" (.Jewish creed), with its 
collects, tlie eif^hteen 'bene(rictious,' and 
■ the ,2:race at meat. ' A later Ilabtji vindi- 
cated the use of the ' Shema ' in Greek 
l)y tlie ariiumeiit that tlie word Slipmn 
meant not only -Hear,' l)Ut also 'un- 
derstand ■ (.Ter. Sotali vii. l.)Conip. .Sotah 
vii. 1. 2. In P>er. 40 h. it is said that 
tlie I'arashah connected witli the woman 
suspected of adultery, the jirayer and 
confession at tlie brin<;inii: of the tithes, 
and the various beneilictions over food, 
may l)e said not only in Hebrew, but in 
any other lanii'nases. 




'VuK ti;n islati()ii of the OhMVstaiucu.t Iiiti i Greek AiiLiOu_l)i::.ll'ganie<l CHAP. 
jis the staitiiuj;-j)j>iiit ol" HelleuisiiK It rendered ^)ossil)le tlie lioix' m 

that what ill its original torni hadjjceu eontined to tlu' few. might ^ — ^"^ 

become aeeessible to the world at large.' l>ut much yet remained to '/'/»/<-, <i6 

he done. If the religion of the Old Testament had been bronght near ea. Man-' 

gey. ii- v- 

to the (irecian world of tlKtnght, the latter had still to be brought near n^" 
to Judaism. Some intermediate stage must be tbund; some eonnnon 
ground on which the two might meet: some original kindredness 
of s})irit to which their later divergences might be carried l)ack. and 
where they might finally be reconciled. As the first attemjjt in this 
dii-ection — first in order, if not always in time — Ave mark the so- 
called Apocryphal literature, most of which was cither written in 
(Jreek, or is the product of llellenising Jews.' ^jts general object 
wa.s twofold. First, of course, it was a])ologetic — intended to fill gajis 

in Jewish llistoi-y oi' tiiouglil. but e.-pecially to stl-eilgthen the J(A\isll 

mind against attacks from without, an<l. generally to extol the dignity 
of Israel. Thus, more withering sarcasm could scaicely be jjoured 
(tn heathenism than in the apocryphal story of • Bel and the Di-agon,' 
or in the so-called • Kpistle of Jeremy." with which the I>ook of 
• ilarucir closes, 'i'he same strain, only in more lotty tones, resounds 
through the Hook of the • ^^■isdonl of Solomon. ' '' along with the '■ comp. s.- 
constantly implied contrast l)etwi'en the righteous, or l>rael. anil 
sinners, or the heatlien. Ijut the next o1>ject was to show that the 
decpc rjind ])urer thinking of heathenism in its highest i)hiIoso|)]ry 
supported- -nay. in some respects, was identical with the funda- 
nicntal teaching of the Old Testament. This, of coui'se, was 
apologt>tii' of the Old Testament, but it also i)repared the way for a 

' All ttie -Apocrypha were ori,i;iiially course, -tiu^ • Wisdom of Jesus tlie Sou of 
written in Greek, e.xcept 1 Mace, .Judith. Sirach." 
part of Bariich, probably Tobit. aud. of 




HOOK reconciliation with Greek philosophy. We notice this cspccdally in 

I tli(! so-called Fourth Book ofMaccabees, so lon,ii: erroneously attributed 

^- — ^1^—^ to Josephus/ and in the 'Wisdom of Solomon." The first postulate 

here would be the acknowledgment of truth among the Gentiles, 

which was the outcome of Wisdom — and Wisdom was the revelation 

of God. This seems already implied in so thoroughly Jewish a book 

«comi,. for as that of Jesus the Son of Sirach.'' Of course there could be no 

ex. Ef'i'lus. ..... 

xxiv. f, alliance with Epicureanism, which was at the opposite })ole of the Ohl 
Testament. But the brilliancy of Plato's speculations would charm, 
while the stern self-abnegation of Stoicism would prove almost 
equally attractive. The one would show why they believed, the other 
why they lived, as they did. Thus the theology of the Old Testament 
would find a rational basis in the ontology of Plato, and its ethics 
in the moral philosophy of the Stoics. Indeed, this is the very line 
of argument which Joscphus follows in the conclusion of his treatise 
"11.39,40 against Apion.'' This, then, was an unassailable position to take: 
« comp. ai- contempt poured on heathenism as such," and a rational philoso- 

SO Jos. Ag. ^ ' ' ^. 

Ap. 11. 34 pliical basis for Judaism. They were not deep, only acute thinkers, 
these Alexandrians, and the result of their speculations was a curious 
Eclecticism, in which Platcmism and Stoicism are found, often hetero- 
geneously, side by side. Thus, without further details, it may be said 
that the Fourth Book of Maccabees is a Jewish Stoical treatise on 
the Stoical theme of ' the supremacy of reason' — the proposition, 
stated at the outset, that * pious reason bears absolute sway over the 
passions, ' being illustrated by the story oi' the martyrdom of Eleazar, 

dcomp. 2 and of the mother and her seven sons.'' On the other hand, that 

vinV^'" sublime work, the 'Wisdom of Solomon,' contains Platonic and Stoic 
elements ^ — chiefly perhaps the latter — the two occurring side by side. 

■^ ch. vii. 22- Thus'' ' Wisdom,' which is so concretely presented as to be almost 


fvv. 22-24 hypostatised,^ is first described in the language of Stoicism, "^ and 

fVv. 25-29 afterwards set forth, in that of Platonism,- as 'the breath of the 

power of God:' as 'a pure influence floAving from the glory of the 

Almighty;' ' the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted 

mirror of the power of God, and the image of His goodness.' Siini- 

' It is jirhited in Havercami)'s edition -^ Compare especially ix. 1; xviii. 14- 

of .losephus, vol. ii. pp. 497-520. The 16, where the ideaofcro</>/<:i- passes into 

best edition is in Fnyzsc/ip, 'LWm A\)o- that of theXoyo?. Of course the" above 

cryplii Vet. Test. (Lips. 1871). remarks are not intended to dei)reciate 

■^ AVr/A/lCJosch. d. Volkes Isr., vol. iv. the .2;reat value of this book, alike in 

pp. 62()-(;:{2) lias ^iven a ,2;lowinf!: sketch itself, and in its practical teaching, in 

of it. Ewald rightly says that its Grecian its clear enunciation of a retribution as 

elements have been exaggerated; but B?^- awaiting man, and in it,s important 

c/ier (Lehre vom Logos, pp. .59-62) utterly bearing on the New Testament revela- 

fails in denying their i)resence altogether. tion of Me Adyoi. 


Inrly, we have'' a Stoical eiiuiucration of the four cardinal virtues, chap. 
temperance, prudence, justice, and fortitude, and close b}^ it the HI 
riatonic idea of the soul's pre-existence.'' and of earth and matter ' — -r — ' 
|)ressing it down." How such views would point in the direction of i^hkJ'- vui. 
the need of a perfect revelation from on hig-h, as in the Bible, and of 1. in w. 19, 
its rational possibility, need scarcely be shown. ". . 

But how did Eastern Judaism bear itself towards this Apocryphal 
literature ? We lind it described by a term which seems to corre- 
spond to our 'Apocrypha,' as Sephay'im Genuzim,^ 'hidden books,' 
i.e., (uther such whose origin was hidden, or, more likely, books 
withdrawn from common or congregational use. Although they were, 
of course, carefully distinguished from the canonical Scrii)tures, as not 
being sacred, their use was not only allowed, l>ut many of them are 
(pioted in Talmudical writings.' In this respect they are placed on 
a very ditt'erent footing from the so-called Sepharim Chitsonim^ or 
' outside books, ' which probably included both the products of a 
certain class of Je^^■ish Hellenistic literature, and the Siphrey Minim, or 
writings of the heretics. Against these Rabbinism can scarcely find 
terms of sufficient violence, even debarring from share in the world to 
come those who read them." This, not only because they were used in ■' sanh. 100 
controversy, but because their, secret influence on orthodox Judaism 
WHS dreaded. For similar reasons, later Judaism forbade the use of 
the Apocrypha in the same manner as that of the Sepharim Chitsonlm. 
But their influence had already made itself felt. The Apocrypha, the 
more greedily perused, not only for their glorification of Judaism, but 
that they were, so to speak, doubtful reading, which yet afforded a 
glimpse into that forbidden Greek Avorld, opened the way for other 
Hellenistic literature, of which unacknowledged but frequent traces 
occur in Talmudical writings.-/ 

To those who thus sought to wekl Grecian thought with Hebrew 
revelation, two objects would naturally present themselves. They 
must try to connect their Greek philosophers with the Bible, and they 
must find beneath the letter of Scripture a deeper meaning, which 
would accord with i)hilosophic truth./- So far as the text of Scrip- 
ture was concerned, they had a method ready to hand. Tlie Stoic 
])hilosophers had busied themselves in finding a deeper aUegirricul 
meaning, especially in the Avritings of Homer. By applying it to 

' Some Apocryphal books whicli have biiyger, vol. ii. pp. 6()-70. 
not been preserved to ns are mentioned - Com]). Siajfried, Pbilo von Alex. i)p. 
in Talmndiciil writin^-Hi, amonj;' tlieni 27r)-29!l, wiio, liowever, perhaps over- 
one, 'The roll of tlie bnildini;; of the states the matter. 
Temple,' alas, lost to us! Comp. Ham- 


Till-: pi;i-;i'Ai;.\Ti<)\ i-oi; tiik (josi-kt.. 

]!()()K mythical stories. <ir to tl.c popular hclicts. and In traciii;^:' the supposed 
I syml)()li('al iiicaiiiiiLi' of names, nnmhei's. ikr.. it hecaiue easy to prove 

■ — .■ — almost anythin.u'. or to extract tVoni these i)hilosophical truths (ethical 
priiicii)les. ami e\cn the later results of natural science.' .Such a. 
|)rocess was ix'culiarly pleasinii' to the ima.ii'inat ion. and The results 
alike astouudinii' and <at istactoi-y. since as they could not he j)rove(l, 
so neither c()uld t hey he di>pro\ cd. This alleii'orical met lux P was the 
welcome key by which the Hellenists nii.LiiiT uid(»ck the hidden 
treasury of Scriptui-e. In point of fact, we liml it appli<'d -o early as 
in the ■ ^^'isdom of Solomon." ' 

But as yet Hellenism had scarcely lel't the donmin of sol>ei- iuter- 
l)retation. It is otherwise in the letter of the Pseudo-Aristeas, to 
which reference has already heen made.' Here the wildest syinbolism 
is put into tin' mouth of the 11 iiih-1'riest Kleazar, to eonvinee Aristeas 
and his hdlow-ambassador that tiie ^Tosaic ordiiunieeseoneernin,t^l"o<»d 
had not only a political i-eason —to keej) Isi-ael separate from impious 
nations — and a sanitary one. hut chiefly a mystical nieauiui^. The 
hirds allowed foi' food wei'e all tame and ])Ui('. and they fe<l on corn 
or veg'etahle pi'oducts. the op|)osite hein.ii' the case wit h t hose torbiddeii. 
The first less(m which this was inten(h:'(l to teach was. that Israel must 
lie just, and not seek to obtain au,Si"ht from others by \i(»lence; l)ut, so 
to si)eak. imitate the habits of those birds Avhich were allowed th<Mu. 
The next lesson would be, that eaeii must learn to *i'overn his passions 
and inclinations. Similarly, the direction al)out cloven hoofs })ointed 
to the need of makina: separation — that is. between uood and <'vil: 
and that about chewiuii" the cud to the nee(l of remembei-iiiL;'. viz. (Jod 

' Comp. Sii'i/fried, pp. !)-!() : Hmi- 
vKiiuK Eiise Verb. tl. A. Tpst. iiiit il. X.. 
pp. 568-.572. 

- This is to l)e carefully 'listliiiiUL^heil 
from the ty|)ical uilenn-etation ami from 
the mystical — the type tjein-j; proplietic. 
tlie mystery spiritually umlerstooil. 

■' Not to .^peak of such sounder inter- 
pretations as that of the t)razen serpent 
(Wis(h xvi. (), 7), and of the Fall (ii. 24). 
or of the view presented of the early 
history of the chosen race in eh. x.. we 
may mention as instances of alleiijorical 
interpretation that of the manna (xvi. 
2() 2S). and of the hif<h-i)riestly dre.^s 
(xviii. 24). to wliioji, no dou])t. others 
miij;ht l)e added. P.ut I caimot lind suf- 
ficient evidence of this allegorical method 
in the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Siracli. 
The reasoninic of Ha /(man n (n. .<., ])p. 
")42-.i47) .seems to me irreatlv strained. 

Of tlie existence <jf allegorical inter- 
pretations in the Synoi)tic Gospels, or of 
any connection with Hellenism, nuch as 
Ilartmann. Siegfried, and Loesner (0])s. 
ad. X.T. e Phil. Alex. ) put into them, 1 
cannot, on examination, discover any 
evidence. Similarity of expressions, or 
even of thouglit. afford no evidence of 
inward comiectlon. Of the Go.spel ])v 
St. John we shall speak in the sequel. 
In the Paul ne Epistles we find, as might 
be expected, some allegorical interpre- 
tations, chiefly in those to tlie Corin- 
thians, perhai)s owing to the connection 
of that church witli Apollos. Comp. 
here 1 Cor. ix. 0; x. 4 (Phllo, Quod de- 
ter. i)Otiori insid. ?>\]: 1 Cor. iii. 1(1: 
Gal. iv. 21. Of the Epi.slle to the H«'.- 
brews ami tlie Ajiocalypse we cannot 
here speak. 
< See )). 2."). 

Ai,iJ-;r;(>i;icAi. intki!Imm-:tati(>ns. 


.•111(1 His will.' Ill siicli iiiaiiiici-. nccoi-dini:- to Aristcns. did tlic Iliiiii 
J'ricst go tlii'oiiuii t lie ciitiili tunc df things lorliiddcii. ;iiid of ;niiiii;ds to 
l)e sacriticcd, sliDwiug TrDiii their • ]iid(h'ii iiicniiing ' llic iiinjcsty ;iiid 
sanctity ol" the Law . ' 

Tliis was ail iiiii)()rtaiit line to take, and it diU'crcd in |)riuciple 
IVom tlic allegorical method adopteil by the i^astein .lews. Xot only 
the horslicij llcsli n iiii)th."' <)\' >i'x\vv\\in-^ out ol'tlie suhtielies oi' ScripturO, 
ofthcir indications, hut e\'eii theoi'dinai'V llaggadist employed, indeed, 
allegoric interpretations. Thereby Akiba vindicated tor the -Song of 
Songs" its place in the Canon. Did not Script ure say : -One thing- 
spake (iod, twofold is what I heard,' ' and did not this ini])ly a twofold 
meaning; nay, could not the Torali be exi)laiiied by many ditferent 
niethods?' AVhat, for exami)le. was the Avater which Israel sought in 
the wilderness, orthe bread and raiment which .lacoli aske(l in Bethel, 
but the Tuvdli and the dignity which it conferred y But in all these, 
and inminieralile similar instances, the allegorical intcr])retation was 
only an ap]>lication of Scrii)ture for homiletical imrposes, not a search- 
ing into a rdtioiutlc beneath, such as that of the Jlellenists. The 
latter the Rabbis would have utterly repudiated, on their express jirin- 
cil)le that •S(jiptnre goes not lieyond its jilain meaning. "•' They 
sternly insisted, that we ought not to search into the ulterior object 
and rationale of a law, but simply obey it. Hut it was this very 
/■(itioiKifc of tho Law which the Alexandrians sought to tind under its 
letter. It was in this sense that Aristobulus. a Hellenist Jew of 
Alexandria,'' sought to explain Scrii»ture. Only a fragment of his 

' A sniiilar jn-inciiile applied to tlif of God it^ like a liaiiinier that breaks llic 
l)r<)liibitioii of siicii .«pecie.s as the mouse rock hi a tliou.saiid i)ii'('es. Coiiip. 
or the weasel, not only because tliey Kasbi on Gen. .xxxiii. 20 


destroyetl everythuig, but l)ecause the 
latter, from its mode of coiiceiviiiii- and 
bearing, symbolized listening' to evil 
tales, and exaggerated, lyiiiii. or mali- 
cious sjieeoh. 

- Of course this iiietlnxl is conslaiiliy 
ailopted l)y .losephus. Coinp. for exani- 
l)le, Ant. iii. 1. (i: 7. 7. 

■' Or Dorshp.ji ('luimiiroth, searchers of 
dlfticult passages, '/.miz. Gottesd. \'orlr. 
p. .'52:^, note J). 

^ The seventy lan2;ua,2;es in wliicli tlie 

■' Pei'haiis we on.iiht here to point out, 
tuie of the most imiiortant principles of 
Katibinism, which has ])een almost en- 
tirely overlookeil in modern criticism of 
the Talmud. It is tliis: tJiat any ordi- 
nance, not only of the l)iviiH> law, iiut of 
tlie Ivabbis. even thoui;;]! only ^-iveii for 
a particular time or occasion, or for a 
speciid reason, remains in full force for 
all time unless it be expressly recalled 
I IJetsah a A). Tlius Maimonides (8ei)lier 
la .Mitsv.) declares the law to extiriiatn was sui)|iosed to have lieen written tlie ranaanites as continuinij: in its obii 
below Mount Kbal (Sotah vii. 5). lean- .tiations. The inferences as to the pcr- 
not help feeling' this may in part also pctxal ohJi'idtloii. not only of the cere- 
refer to the various modes of interpret- monial law. but of sacrifices, will Ix* 
inij; Holy Scriiiture. and that there is obvious, and their bearing- on the Jewish 
an allusion to this in Shabb. 88 b, where controversy need not be explained. 
I's. Ixviii. 12. and Jer. xxiii. 29. are Conip. Chief Rabbi IlohJheim. A. Cere- 
ipioted. the latter to siiow that Ilie woivl monial Geset/. in Messiasreicli. ]s4.^. 

"Ps. LNii.ll; 
Saiili. ::4 .' 


BOOK work, which seems to have been a Coinineutary on the Pentateuch, 
1 iledicated to King Ptolemy (Philometor), has been preserved to us (by 

— -,- — Clement of Alexandria, and l)y J^usebius") . According to Clement 
of Alexandria, his aim was, ' to bring the Peripatetic philosophy out 
of the law of Moses, and out of the other prophets.' Thus, when avc 
read that God stood, it meant the stable order of the world; that He 
created the world in six days, the orderly succession of tinu^; the rest 
of the Sabbath, the preservation of what was created. And in such 
manner could the whole system of Aristotle be found in the Bil)le. 
But how was this to be accounted for? Of course, the Bible had not 
learned from Aristotle, but he and all the other philosophers had learned 
from the Bible. Thus, according to Aristobulus, Pythagoras, Plato, 
and all the other sages had really learned from Moses, and thel)r()ken 
rays found in their writings were united in all their glory in thcTorah. 

It was a tempting path on which to enter, and one on which there 
was no standing still. It only remained to give fixedness to the allegori- 
cal method by reducing it to certain principles, or canons of criticism, 
and to form the heterogeneous mass of Grecian philosoi)hemes and 
Jewish theologuraena into a compact, if not homogeneous system. 
This was the work of Pliilo of Alexandria, born about 20 B.C. It 
concerns us not here to inquire what were the intermediate links be- 
tween Aristobulus and Philo. Another :md more important point 
claims our attention. If ancient Greek ])hil()so])hy knew the teacliing 
of Moses, where was the historic evidence for it? If such did not 
exist, it must someh(3w be invented. Orpheus was a name which had 
always lent itself to literary fraud, ''and so Aristobulus boldly produces 
(whether of his o^v^n or of others' making) a number of spurious 
citations from Hesiod, Homer, Linus, but especially from Orpheus, all 
Biblical and Jewish in their cast. Aristobulus was neither the first 
nor the last to commit such fraud. The Jewish Sibyl boldly, and, 
as we shall see, successfully personated the heathen oracles. And 
tliis opens, generally, quite a vista of Jewish-Grecian literature. 
In the second, and even in the tliird century before Christ, there were 
Hellenist historians, such as Eupolemus, Artapanus, Demetrius, and 
Aristeas; tragic and epic poets, such as p]zekiel, Pseudo-Philo, and 
Theodotus, who, after the manner of t)ie ancient classical writers, but 
for their own i)urposes, described certain periods of Jewish history, or 
sang of such themes as the Exodus, Jerusalem, or the rape of Dinah. 

The mention of these spurious quotations naturally leads >is to 
another class of spurious literature, which, although not Hellenistic, 
has many elements in common with it, and, even Avhen originating 


with Palestinian Jew!^ is not Palestinian, nor yet has been i)res('rve(l in chap. 
its language. We allude to what are known as the I'seudcijigraphie, HI 
or Pseudonymic Writings, so called because, with one exception, they ^- — ^.^-^ 
bear false names of authorship. It is difficult to arrange thcni 
otherwise than chronologically — and even here the greatest dirt'ei-ence 
of opinions prevails. Their general character (with one exception) 
may be described as anti-heathen, perliai)s missionary, hut chietly as 
Apocalyptic. They are attempts at taking up the key-note struck 
in the prophecies of Daniel; rather, we should say, to lift the veil 
only partially raised by him, and to point — alike as concerned Israel, 
and the kingdoms of the world — to the past, the present, and the 
future, in the light of the Kingship of the Messiah. Here, if any- 
where, we might expect to find traces of New Testament teaching; 
:ind yet, side by side with frequent similarity of form, the greatest 
ditierence — we had almost said contrast — in spirit, prevails. 

Many of these works must have perished. In one of the latest 
of them ^ they are put down at seventy, probably a round number, MEsdras 
having reference to the supposed number of the nations of the earth, 
or to every possible mode of inter])reting Scripture. They are de- 
scribed as intended for 'the wise among the people,' probably those 
whom St. Paul, in the Christian sense, designates as ' knowing the 
time'"^ of the Advent of the Messiah. Viewed in this light, they ''Rom.xm. 
embody the ardent aspirations and the inmost hopes ^ of those who 
l(»ngcd for the 'consolation of Israel,' as they understood it. Nor 
should we judge their personations of authorship according to our 
Western ideas.'' Pseudonymic writings were common in that age, 
and a Jew might perhaps plead that, even in the Old Testament, 
l)ooks had been headed by names which confessedly were not those 
of their authors (such as Samuel, Ruth, Esther). If those inspired 
poets who sang in the spirit, and echoed the strains, of Asaph, adoi)te(l 
that designation, and the sons of Korah preferred to be known l)y 
that title, might not they, who couhl no longer claim the authority 
of inspiration seek attention for tlieir utterances by adopting the 
names of those in whose spirit they professed to write if 

The most interesting as well as the oldest of these l)ooks arc 

' The Katpo? of St. Paul seems here the Psendepisrapha. Their ardour of 

u.-(ed HI exactly the .same sense as iu later expectancy ill ac;rees with the modem 

Hel)rew ]'^t. The LXX. render it so in theories, which would eliminate, if pos- 

tive passages (Ezr. v. 8; Dan. iv. .'5:^; vi. sible, the Messianic hope from ancient 

10 ; vii. 22, 25). Judaism. 

- Of course, it suits .Jewish writers. ^ Comp. Dnimimn iu Ilerzoij's Real- 

like Dr. .Tost, to dei)recate the value of Kncykl. vol. xii. p. :*>(>1. 



TiiK ri;i:i"Ai;ATi(»N foi; tiik cospkl. 

BOOK tliosc known sis I lie Hook of Enoch, the Sibij/Jiiic Oracles. tln'Rsalter 
I of Solomon, ;iinl tlic Jlook of ■tifbilccs. or Lilflc dciicsis. ( hily the 

■ — , — • bricrcst notice of tluMU cjin here find w jjliicc' 

Tlic Hook of KuocJk the oldest ]);ii-t,< of wliicli date a criitui-y and 
a hair Ix'forc Christ, comes to lis from Palestine. It jirofesscs to be 
a vision vouchsafed to tlmt I'ati-iai'cli. and tells of the fall of the Angels 
and its ('(msequeiices, and of what he saw and heard in his ra])t 
journeys throtiii-h heaven and earth. Of dee])est, thouii-h otlen sad, 
interest, is winit it says of tlie Kin.u'dom of Heaven, of the advent 
of .Messiah and His Kin,irdom. and of the last tliinji-s. 

On the other hand, the Sibi/lli/ic Oracles, of which the oldest ))or- 
tions date trom about KiO B.C. come to us from K«>Ti)t. it is to the 
latter only that we here i-efer. 'fheir most interestini-- i)ai'ts are also 
the most characteristic. In them the ancient heathen myths of the 
first a.ii'es of man are wehhnl toiicther with Old Testament notices, 
while the heathen Theoii'ony is recast in a .lewisli mould. Thus Noah 
becomes Uranos, Sheni Saturn, Jlam Titan, and Jai)lieth Japetus. 
Similarly, we have fraiiinents of ancient heathen oracles, so to speak, 
recast in a Jewish edition. The straiiii'est circumstance is, that the 
utterances of this .hidaisin.i;- and .lewish Sibyl seem to have passe<| 
as the oracles of the ancient Krythr;ean, which had i)redicted the fall 
of Troy, and as those of the Sibyl of Cunue, which, in the infancy of 
Rome, Tarquinius Superlnis had deposited in the Cai)itoI. 

The collection of eighteen hymns known as the Psalter of Solon 1.011 
dates from more than half a century before our era. N<j doubt the 
original was Hebrew, though they breathe a somewhat Hellenistic 
spirit. They express ardent Messianic asi)irations. and a tiini faith 
in the Resurrection, and in eternal i-ewards and i)unishments. 

Diticrent in character from the preceding woiks is Tin- flook of 
Jubilees — so called from its chi'onological arrangement into •.Jtd>ilee- 
periods ■ — or • fJttle Genesis.' It is chiefly a kind of legendary suj)- 
plenient to the Hook of (irenesis, intended to e.xjdain some of its historic 
difficulties, and to till \\\) its historic Incnna'. It was probably written 
about the time of Christ — and this gives it a sp(M'ial interest — by a 
ralestinian, and in Hebrew, m rathei- Aranuean. But. like tlie rest 
of the Apocryphal and Pseudei)igra])hic literature which conu^s from 
Palestine, or was originally written in Hebrew, we ])ossess it no longer 
in that language, but only in translaticm. 

If from this brief review ol' Hellenist and Pseudepigraphic lite- 
rature we turn to take a reti-os})eci. we can scarcely fail to })er<MMve, 

' Fdl- Jl lirict' review of the • I'>eu<le)rn;l:i|iliic WritilliTS,' StH' Appelltliv !. 



on the one hiiud. llic (IcvclopnuMit <»l the old. iiiid on tlic otlicr tlic ciiAl'. 
])i'('i)iii-ation foi- tlic new — in otlici- words, the iiirand oxpcctiincv HI 
iiwnkcncd. jind the li'i'and propai'ation made. One stc]) only ri'iiniincd — 
to coniplctc what llcllcnisin had already bcii-uii. That coniplction 
cauic thi'oniih one who. althonii-h hiniself nntonchcd 1)\ the (iospcl. 
pci'liaps more than any othor prepared alike his co-reli^ionisls flu^ 
Jews, and his eonntrynien the (Jreeks, for the new teaehinii-. wliieh, 
indeed, was presented by many of its early advocates in the Ibrins 
which they had learned trom him. That man was IMiilo the Jew. of 




BOOK It is strange how little we know ot the personal history of the 
I greatest ot" uninsi)ire(l Jewish writers of old , though he occupied so 

/prominent a position in his time.' Philo was born in Alexandria, 
atK)ut the year 20 l)efore Christ. He was a descendant of Aaron, and 
belonged to one of the wealthiest and most intluential families among 
jjo^. the Jewish merchant-princes of Egypt. His l)rother was the politi- 
^^/>n •'*fcal head of that community in Alexandria, and he himself on one 
I %\ fl5>^ occasion represented his co-religionists — though unsuccessful!}' — at 
A^-Wmio Rome,'' as the head of an embassy to entreat the Emperor Caligula 
for protection from the persecutions consequent on the Jewish re- 
^ 2;^ sistance to placing statues of the Emperor in their Synagogues. But 

it is not with Philo, the wealthy aristocratic Jew of Alexandria, but 
with the great writer and thinker who, so to speak, completed Jew- 
ish Hellenism, that we have here to do. Let us see what was his 
relation alike to heathen philosophy and to the Jewish faith, of both 
of which he was the ardent advocate, and how in his system he com- 
bined the teaching of the two. 

To begin with. Philo united in rare measure Greek learning with 
Jewish enthusiasm. In his writings he very frequently uses classi- 
cal modes of expression: - he names not fewer than sixty-four Greek 
wi-iters;^ and he either alludes to, or quotes frequently from, such 
sources as Homer, Hesiod. Pindar, Solon, thegreat Greek tragedians, 
Plato, and others. But to him these men were scarcely 'heathen.' 
He had sat at their feet, and learned to weave a system from Pytha- 
goras, Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. The gatherings of these 

• Hausrath (N.T. Zeitjr. vol. ii. p. 222 collected a vast number of iiarallel ex- 
Ac.) has given a hiijiily imaginative pressions, cliiefly from Plato anrl Plntarch 
picture of Philo — as, indeed, of many (p)). .30-47). 
other persons and things. " •■ Comi). Grossmroiu, Qua'st. Phil. 1. \\ 

- Siegfried has, witli immense lal)oi-, 5 &c. 


philosophers were ' holy,' and riato was ' the great.' But holier than cHAP. 
all was the gathering of the true Israel; and incomparably greater TV 
than any, Moses. From him had all sages learned, and with him — .' — ' 
alone was all truth to be found — not, indeed, in the letter, but under 
the letter, of Holy Scripture. If in Numb, xxiii. 19 we read 'God 
is not a man,' and in Deut. i. 81 that the Lord was * as a man,' did 
it 'not imply, on the one hand, the revelation of absolute truth bj^ ~/2jZ. 
God, and, on the other, accommodation to those who were weak?>-i^^ ' 

Here, then, was the principle of a twofold interpretation of the Word ^ ^^^^*'*^ 
of God — the literal and the allegorical. The letter of the text must^7*^^^!f'*^ 
be held fast; and Bil)lical personages and histories were real. But^JS^^^*'^^?''^ 
only narrow-minded slaves of the letter would stop here; the more so, *-'*''^**j^^"*^ 
as sometimes the literal meaning alone would be tame, even absurd ;^*^^ 
while the allegorical interpretation gave the true sense, even thougl^^i^^^T^;**'*^ 
it might occasionally run counter to the letter. Thus, the patriarchs ^*'*'^^n^~' T ^ 
represented states of the soul; and, whatever the letter might bear, ^^^* ^** 
Joseph represented one given to the fleshly, whom his brothers rightly 
hated; Simeon the soul aiming after the higher; the killing of the 
Egyptian by Moses, the subjugation of passion, and so on. But this 
allegorical interpretation — l)y the side of the literal (the Peshat of the 
Palestinians) — though only for the few, was not arbitrary. It had its 
' laws, ' and ' canons ' — some of which excluded the literal interpreta- 
tion, while others admitted it by the side of the higher meaning.' 

To begin with the former: the literal sense must be wholly set 
aside, when it implied anything unworthy of the Deity, anything un- 
meaning, impossible, or contrary to reason. Manifestly, this canon, 
if strictly a])plied, would do away not only with all anthropomorphisms, 
l)utcutthc knot wherever difficulties seemed insupera])le. Again, Philo 
would find an allegorical, along with the literal, interpretation indicated 
in the reduplication of a word, and in seemingly superfluous words, 
particles, or expressions.- These could, of course, only bear such a 
meaning on Philo's assumption of the actual inspiration of the LXX. 
version. Similarlv, inexact accordance with a Talmudical canon,'' 'BabaK. 
any repetition of what had been already stated would point to some- 
thing new. These were comparatively sober rules of exegesis. Not 
so the licence Avhich he claimed of freely altering the i)unctuation ^ of 

' In this sketch of the system of Phih) ing to some special meaning, since there 
I iiave Uirii:ely availed myself of the was not a word or particle in Scrip- 
careful analysis of Siegfried. tare without a detinite meaning and 

^ It should be noted that these are object, 

also Talmudical canons, not indeed for -^ To illusti'ate what use might be 

allegorical interpretation, but as point- made of such alterations, the Midrasb 

w a 


■I'liK i'i.'i:i'AiiATi().\ I'oi; TiiK (;(»si'i:l. 


scutciici's. :iii(l his notion tlinl, ifonc I'loni ;iiuon<i' several synonymous 
words was chosen in a |»assa^'e, this pointed to some si)ecial meauing 
attaeliini"' to it. Kven more extruva^'nnt was the iden^ thi\ t_ii_w(.>21^ 
whic_Uj ^-etirred in the LXX. mi<i'ht bei titerijreted according to ev ery 
shade jjt ' meaning which it bore in the Greek, and that even another 
meaning might lie given it by slightly altering tlie letters. However, 
like otiier of Philo"s allegorical canons, these were also adoptcil by the 
l\alil)is. and Ilaggadic interi)retations were Ircquentl}' i)reiaced by: 
■ Head not thus — but thus.' If sucli violence might l)e done to the 
text, we need not wonder at interpretations based on a })lay upon 
words, or even upon ])arts of a W(n*d. Of course, all seemingly strange 
or [x'cuiiar modes of ex])ression, or of designation, occurring in 
Scriptui-e, must have their special nu^aning. and so also every particle, 
adverb, or i)reposition. Again, the position of a verse, its succes.sion 
by another, the ajjparently unaccountable i)rescnce or absence of a 
word, might furnish hints for some deeper meaning, and so would 
an unexpected singular for a i)]ural, or vice versa, the use of a tense, 
even the gender of a word. Most serious of all, an allegorical inter- 
pretation might l)e again employed as the basis of another. • 

We repeat, that these allegorical canons of Philo are essentially 
the sanu' as tlu)se of Jewish traditionalism in the Haggadah,^ only 
tlie latter were not rationalising, and far more brilliant in their api)li- 
cation.-' In another resjjcct also the ralestinian had the advantage 
of the Alexandrian exegesis. Reverently and cautiously it indicated 
what might be omitted in public reading, and Avliy; what expressions 
of the original might be moditied by the Meturgenuin. and how; so 
as to avoid alike one danger by giving a passage in its literality, and 
another l)y adding to the sacred text, or conveying a wrong impres- 
sion of the Divine Being, or else giving occasion to the unlearned and 

(Ber. 11. (ij) would have us puuctuatc 
Gen. xxvii. 19, as follows: 'Aud Jacob 
said unto his father, I (viz. am he who 
will receive the ten conniiandmeuts) — 
(V»ut) Esau (is) thy firstborn.' In Yalkut 
there is the still more curious exiilauation 
that in heaven the soul of Jacob was the 

' Kach of these positions is capable of 
ample proof from Philo's writini^s. as 
shown by Siet:;fried. But only a Ijare 
statement of these canons was here pos- 

'•' Comp. our above outline with the 
'XXV. thesi's demodis et formulis (piibus 
pr. ib'hr. doctorcs SS. intei-pretari etc. 
soliti fuei'uiit." in Surcnhusius, BifJXoi 

KaraXXayi}?, pf). 57-88. 

^ For a comparison between Philo and 
Rabbinic theolof2:y, see Api)endix II.: 
' Philo and Rabbinic Theology.' Freuden- 
thal (Hellen. Studien, pp. 67 &c.) ai)tly 
designates this mixture of the two as 
'Hellenistic Midrash,' it beinjz; dittlcult 
sometimes to distinguish whether if 
originated in Palestine or in Egvpt. or 
else in both independently. Freudenthal 
ijives a number of curious instances in 
whicli Hellenism and Rabl)inism agree in 
their interpretations. For other iiUe- 
restinji; conu'tirisons ])etween Haj;'<:;adic 
interprt^talions and those of Philo, see 
Joel, Bliek in d. Ueliiiions<?esch. i. p. lis 

niii.o AM) THK i;ai;i!Is. 43 

iitivv.MT ol' I )(■(•( tmiiiij,- ciitaii.iihMl in (Ijiii^croiis sprciihitioiis. .Icwisli cilAl'. 
tiiiditinii Iktc hivs down some |)i-iiici[)l('s uliicli would Ix- of uTCiit >^' 

|»riH'tical use. Tlius we uvv told.' tluit Scripliiic uses t lie modes of - — — 
('X|>n\ssioii ('oiiiiiiou Jiiiioiiii' iiKMi. 'I'liis would, of course, iurlude nil " '''i- -1 '- 
iiiitliropoiiiorpliisuis. A^aiii. soinetiiues witli coiisidei-nble iii,u-eniiit_\ . 
a suggcstiiMi is taken tr(»ui a word, -iieli as that .Moses knew the 
s(!r[>(Mit was to bo made of brass from the simihirity of the two word.- 
{nachfish. a serpent, and iicchD.shrf/i, brass.'' Similarh. it is uoteil 'isn. 1;. :ii 
that Scripture uses eiiplieniistie lan.iiuaiic so as to preserve the ^ui-eat- delicacy.' Tliese instances miuiit lie niidt iplie(l, but the above ■ u.'i-. u. th 
will Huttice. 

In his symlx^lical interpretation- i'hilo only paitially took the 
same road as the Rabbis. The .symbolism of nnmlx'i's and. so far as 
the Sanctuary was concerned, that of colours, and even materials, 
may, indeed, be said to have its foundation in the Old Testament 
itself. The same remark a])plies partially to that of names. The 
Ilabbis cei'tainly so inti-i'preted them.' iSut the api)lication which 
I'hilo nnnle of this symbolism was very ditlerent. Everythinji' became 
synd)olicaI in his hands, if it suited his pur])ose: numbers (in a very 
arbitrary nmnner),V)easts. birds, fowls, ci-eejiinu' thing-s, ])lants. stones, 
elements, substances, conditions, e\en >c\ — ;ind so a term or an ex- 
]H'Ossion miii'ht even have several and contradictory im-aninii's. from 
which the intei'jjreter was at liberty to choose. 

From the consideration of the method by which Philo derived 
Irom Scriptures his theological views, we turn to a brief analysis of 
these views.'-' 

1. Theology. — In reference to Uod, we tind, side by side, the 
apparently contradictory views of the Platonic and the Stoic schools. 
Following- the former, the sharpest distinction was drawn between 
(rod and the world, (xod existed neither in space, nor in time; He 
had neither Inunan ipialities nor atiections: in fact. He was without 

' Ttius, to give only a few out <tf many is tlie curious .<ynil)olical derivation of 

examples, Ruth is derived from rc<r?v///, to MfphfhosJK'th. wiio is sujjposed to have 

satiate to give to drink, because David, set David ritflit on lialai<liio ([uestions. 

her descendant, satiated God with his -At-. MippihosJiefh: ' frommynioutli sluiin- 

Psalms of in-aise (Ber. 1 h). Here the in<;.' 'l)ecause he put to slumu' tiie face 

principle of the significance of Bible- of David in tlie Halakliah." Similarly in 

names is deduced from Ps. xlvi. 8 (9 in Siphre (Par. Beliaalotlieklia. od. Fritnl- 

the Hebrew): 'Come, beliold the works mann, p. 20 r/) we liave very tjeautiful 

of the Lord, who hath made names on and inijeuious interpretations of the 

earth,' the word 'desolations,' snaMoTU. names liet'el. Hohuh and Jethro. 
being altered to shcmoth, 'names.' In - It would be imi)ossil)Ie here to give 

i;eneral, that section, from Ber. :'. h. to tiie references, wliicli woidd occui»y too 

tlie end of 8 (/, is full of Hafi<i;adic Scrip- much space, 
ture interpretations. On fol. 4 a there 


IJOOK any qualities {aTtoios), and even without any name {apprfTog)'^ 
I lienee, \vlu)lly uncognisable by man {cxKaraKifTtrog). Thus, clianging 

^ -r — the punctuation and the accents, the LXX. of Gen. iii. 9 was made to 

read: 'Adam, thou art somewhere;' but God liad no somewhere, as 
Adam seemed to think when he hid himsell' from Him. In the 
above sense, also, V.x. iii. 14, and vi. .3, were explained, and the two 
names Elolihit and Jehova](Aw\o\v^Q\\ really to the two supreme Divine 
'Potencies,' while the fact ofGod'sl:)eing uncognisable appeared from 
Ex. XX. 21. 

But side by side with this we have, to save the Jewish, or rather 
Old Testament, idea of creation and providence, the Stoic notion of 
God as immanent in the world — in fact, as that alone which is real 
in it, as always working: in short, to use his own Pantheistic expres- 
sion, as ' Himself one and the all ' {eig Kai to nav). Chief in His 
Being is His goodness, the forthgoing of which was the ground of 
creation. Only the good comes from Him. AVith matter He can 
have nothing to do — hence the plural number in the account of 
creation. (Jod only created the soul, and that only of the good. 
In the sense of being 'immanent,' God is everywhere — nay, all 
things are really only in Him, or rather He is the real in all. But 
chiefly is God the wellspring and the light of the soul — its 'Saviour' 
from the ' Egypt ' of passion. Two things follow. With Pliilo's ideas 
of the separation between God and matter, it was impossible always 
to account for miracles or interpositions. Accordingly, these are 
sometimes allegorised, sometimes rationalistically explained. Furthei', 
the God of Philo, whatever he might say to the coutrai-y, was not 
the God of that Israel Avhicli was His chosen people. 

2. Intermediary Beings. — Potencies {dwdi^ieig, \6yoi). If, in 
what has preceded, we have once and again noticed a remarkable simi- 
larity between Philo and the Rabbis, there is a still more curious 
analogy between his teaching and that of Jewish Mysticism, as ul- 
timately fidly developed in the 'Kabbalah.' The very term Kabbalah 
(from qibbel,to hand down) seems to point out not only its Ascent by 
oral tradition, 1)ut also its ascent to ancient sources.' Its existence is 

• chaaii. 1 presupposed, and its leading ideas are sketched in the Mishnah." The 
Targums also bear at least one remarkable trace of it. May it not 
be, that as Philo frequently refers to ancient tradition, so both . 
Eastern and Western Judaism may here have drawn from one and 
the same source — we will not venture to suggest, how high up — 

1 For want of liandier material I must the Kabl)alali in the 'History of the 
take leave to refer to my brief sketch of Jewish Nation,' pp. 434-446. 


while each made sueh use of it as suited their distinctive tendencies? CHAP. 
At any rate the Kabbalah also, likening Scripture to a person, com- JV 

pares those who study merely the letter, to them who attend only to ^ ^< — -" 

the dress; those who consider the moral of a fact, to them who attend 
to the body; while the initiated alone, who regard the hidden 
meaning, are those who attend to the soul. Again, as Philo, so the 
oldest part of the Mishnah " designates God as Maqom — ' the place '— " ^^- ^- * 
the TOTtog, the all-comprehending, what the Kabbalists called i\\Q En- 
Soph^ 'the boundless,' that God, without any quality, Who becomes 
cognisable only by His manifestations.' 

The manifestations of God! But neither Eastern mystical 
Judaism, nor the philosophy of Philo, could admit of any direct 
contact between God and creation. The Kabbalah solved the diffi- 
culty by their Sephiroth,'^ or emanations from God, through which 
this contact was ultimately l)rought about, and of which the En- 
SopjJij or crown, was the spring: 'the source from which the intlnite 
light issued.' If Philo found greater difficulties, he had also more 
ready help from the philosophical systems to hand. His SepJdrotJi 
were 'Potencies' (dwdpieig), ' Words' (Ao;>/oi), intermediate powers: 
'Potencies,' as we imagine, when viewed Godwards; 'Words,' as 
viewed creationwards. They were not emanations, but, according to 
Plato, 'archetypal ideas,' on the model of which all that exists was 
formed; and also, according to the Stoic idea, the cause of all, per- 
vading all, forming all, and sustaining all. Thus these ' Potencies ' 
were wholly in God, and yet wholly out of God. If we divest all 
this of its philosophical colouring, did not Eastern Judaism also 
teach that there Avas a distinction between the Unapproachable God, 
and God manifest?^ 

Another remark will show the parallelism between Philo and 
Rabbinism.^ As the latter speaks of the two qualities {Mlddoth) of 
Mercy and Judgment in the Divine Being,'' and distinguishes l)etween bjer.Ber. 
Elohlm. as the God of Justice, and Jeliovah as the God of Mercy 
and Grace, so Philo places next to the Divine Word {Ssiog Xoyog), 
Goodness {ayaSoryjg), as the Creative Potency {noiijTiKrj 6vva/.iig), 

' In short, the \dyoi aTteftf-iariKoi of and Rabbinic Theology.' 
the Stoics. * A very interesting question arises: 

■^ Supposed to mean either iiinnera- how far Philo was actiuainted with, and 

Hones, or splendour. But why not derive influenced by, the Jewisli traditional law 

the word from acpaipa'! The ten are: or the Halakhah. Tliis has been treated 

CroiDn, Wisdom, Intelligence, Me)-cy, by Dr. 5. 7?/yi'er in an able tractate (Philo 

Judgment, Beaut}/, TriMm-ph, Praise, u. die Halach.), although he attributes 

Fotindation, Kingdom. more to Philo than the evidence seems to 

■^ For the teaching of Eastern Judaism admit, 
in this respect, see Appendix II. : ' Philo 

ix. 7 





''Or Ruach 
liam Maijom, 
Ab. iii. 10, 
and fre- 
quently in 
the Tal- 

and Power [e^ovcria), as the Ruling Potenc}^ {/3a<JiXiKt} Svvaptig), 
l)roving- this Ijv a curious etymological derivation ot* the words for 
' God ' and ' Lord ' [Oeos and Kvpiog) — apparently unconscious that 
the LXX., in direct contradiction, translated Jehovah by Lord 
(Kvpiog), and Elohim by God (©fo's")! These two potencies of good- 
ness and power, Pliilo sees in the two Cherubim, and in the two 
' Angels ' which accompanied God (the Divine Word), Avhen on his 
way to destroy tlie cities of the plain. But there were more than 
these two Potencies. In one place Philo enumerates six, according to 
the number of the cities of refuge. The Potencies issued from God 
as the beams from the light, as the waters from the spring, as the 
breath from a person: they were immanent in God, and yet also 
without Him — motions on the part of God, and yet independent 
beings. They were the ideal world, which in its imjiulse outwards, 
meeting matter, produced this material world of ours. They were 
also the angels of God — His messengers to man, the media through 
whom He revealed Himself.' 

' 3. The Logos. — Viewed in its Ijearing on New Testament teacli- 
ing, this part of Philo's system raises the most interesting questions. 
But it is just here that our difficulties are greatest. We can under- 
stand the Platonic conception of the Logos as the ' archety])al ide a,' 
and that of the Stoics as of the 'world-reason' pervading matter. 
Similarly, we can perceive, how the Apocrypha — especially the Book 
of Wisdom — following up the Old Testament typical truth concern- 
ing ' Wisdom ' (as sjiecially set forth in the Book of Proverbs) almost 
arrived so far as to present ' Wisdom ' as a special ' Subsistence ' (hy- 
postatising it). More tlmn this, in Talmndical writings, we find men- 
tion not only of the Shem, or 'Name,'^ but also of the Shekhinah,' 
God as manifest and present, which is sometimes also presented as 
the linacli ha Qodesh, or Holy Spirit." But in the Targumim we 
meet yet another expression, Avhich, strange to say, never occurs in the 

' At the same time there is a reinari<- 
aljie diHerence liere l)etween Philo and 
Raljbinism. Philo .holds that the crea- 
tion of the world was brouiiht about l)y 
the Poff'/ici'es, but that the Law was ,2;iven 
dii'ectly through Moses, and )iot by the 
mt^'/irifioti of (tnijels. But this latter was 
certainly the view generally entertained 
in Palestine as expressed in the LXX. 
renilering of Deut. xxxii. 2, in the Tar- 
gumim on that passage, and more fully 
still in ./o.s. Ant. xv. 5. 3. in the Mid- 
rashim and in the Talmud, where we are 

told (Mace. 24 a) tliat only the opening 
words, ' I am the Lord thy God, thou 
shalt have no other gods but Me,' were 
spoken by God Himself. Comp. also 
Acts vii. 38, 53; Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2. 
"^ Hainmejuchdd, 'approi)riatum ;' hnm- 
ine'pliorasli, 'expositum.' 'sei)aratum,'the 
'tetragrammaton,' or four-lettered name, 
;-;•,-;«. There was also a ><}win with 
'twelve,' and one with 'forty-two' let- 
ters (Kidd. 71 a). 



Talmiid.^ Jt is tliatortlieiJ/emv'o, Log-os, or ' AVoi-d." Not that tlietcrm 
is exclusively applied to the Divine Logos. ^ But it stands out as perhaps 
the most remarkable fact in this literature, that God — not as in Ilis per- 
manent manit'estation, or manifest Presence — but as revealing" Himself, 
is designated Memra. Altogether that term, as applied to God, occurs 
in the Targum Onkelos 170 times, in the so-called Jerusalem Targum 99 
times, and in the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan 321 times. A critical anal- 
ysis shows that in 82 instances in Onkelos, in 71 instances in the Jeru- 
salem Targum, and in 213 instances in the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, 
the designation Memra is not only distinguished from God, l)ut evi- 
dently refers to God as revealing Himself." But what does this im- 
ply '( The <listinction between God and the 3fcmra of Jehovah is marked 
in many passages.* Similarly, the Menvra of JehovaJi iadistrngmshed 
from the SheMiinali.'" Nor is the term used instead of the sacred word 
Jehovah; "^ nor for the well-known Old Testament expression ' the Angel 
of the Lord; ' ' nor yet for the Metatron of the Targum Pseudo- Jonathan 
and of the Talmud.'^ Does it then represent an older tradition under- 
lying all these V Beyond this Babbinic theology has not preserved to 
us the doctrine of Personal distinctions in the Godhead. And yet, if 


' Leiiy (Neuliebr. Worterb. i. p. 374 a) 
seems to imply that in tbe Midrash the 
term dihhnr occupies the same place and 
meaning?. But with all deference I can- 
not agree with this opinion, nor do the 
passages quoted bear it out. 

■^ The ' word,' as spoken, is distin- 
guished from the ' Word ' as speaking, or 
revealing Himself. The former is gen- 
erally designated by the term -pif/ir/amo.' 
Thus in Gen. xv. 1, • After these words 
(things) came the ' ' pithgama " of Jehovah 
to Abram in prophecy, saying, Fear not, 
Abram, My "Memra" shall be thy 
strength, and thy very great reward.' Still, 
the term Memra, as applied not only to 
man, but also in reference to God, is not 
always the equivalent of 'the Logos.' 

•' The various passages in the Targum 
of Onkelos, the Jerusalem, and the 
Pseudo-Jonathan Targum on the Penta- 
teuch will l)e found enumerated and 
classified, as those in which it is a doubt- 
ful, a fair, or an loupiestionabJe infer- 
ence, that the word Memra is intended 
for God revealing Himself, in Ai)i)endix 
H. : ' Philo and Rabbinic Theology.' 

* As, for example. Gen. xxviii. 21, 'the 
Memra of Jehovah shall be my God.' 

^ As, for example, Num. xxiii. 21, ' the 
Memra of Jehovah their God is their 
helper, and the Shekhinah of their King 

is in the midst of them.' 

•> That term is often used by Onkelos. 
Besides, the expression itself is 'the 
Menu'a of Jehovah.' 

" Onkelos only once (in Ex. iv. 24) 
paraphrases Jehovah by ' Malakha.' 

^ Metatron, either = ixetcl bpbvov, or 
f^iETCL TVfjavvov. \\\ tlie Talmud it is ap- 
plied to the Angel of Jehovah (Ex. xxiii. 
20), 'the Prince of the World,' -the 
Prince of the Face ' or ' of the Presence,' 
as they call him ; he who sits in the inner- 
most chamber before God, while the other 
angels only hear His commands from be- 
hind the veil (Chag. 15 « ; 16 r? ; Toseft. ad 
ChuU. (iO a ; Jeb. 16 h). This Metatron of 
the Talnuid and the Kabbalah is also the 
Adam (jadmoii, or archetypal man. 

■' Of deep interest is Onkelos' render- 
ing of Dent, xxxiii. 27, where, instead of 
' underneath are the everlasting arms,' 
Onkelos has, ' and by His Menwa was 
the world created,' exactly as in St. Johu 
i. 10. Now this divergence of Onkelos 
from the Hebrew text seems unaccount- 
able. Winer, whose inaugural disserta- 
tion, ' De Onkeloso ejus(iue paraph. 
Ghald.' Lips. 1820, most nu)dern writers 
have followed (with amplifications, chiefly 
from Luzzato^s Philoxenus), makes no 
reference to this passage, nor do his suc- 
cessors, so far as I know. It is curious 




" Gen. xli.x. 
10. 11; 
Num. xxiv. 

words have any meaning, the Memra i.s a hypostasis, though the dis- 
tinction of permanent, per.-^onal Subsistence is not marked. Nor yet, 
to complete this subject, is the Memra identified with the Messiah. 
In tlie Targum Onkelos distinct mention is twice made of Him, ^ while 
in the other Targumim no fewer than seventy-one Biblical passages 
are rendered with explicit reference to Him. 

If we now turn to the views expressed by Philo about the Logos we 
find that they are hesitating, and even contradictory. One thing, how- 
ever, is plain: the Logos of Philo is not the Memra of the Targumim. 
For, the expression Memra ultimately rests on theological, that of 
Logos on philosophical grounds. Again, the Logos of Philo approxi- 
mates more closely to the Metatron of the Talmud and Ka])balah. As 
they speak of him as the ' Prince of the Face,' Avho bore the name of 
his Lord, so Philo represents the Logos as 'the eldest Angel,' 'the 
nuuiy-named Archangel,' in accordance with the JcAvish view that the 
name JeHoYaH unfolded its meaning in seventy names for the God- 
head.' As they speak of the ' Adam Qadmon," so Philo of the Logos 
as the human refiection of the eternal God. And in t)oth these re- 
spects, it is worthy of notice that he appeals to ancient teaching.^ 

What, then, is thcLogos of Pliilo ? Not a concrete i)ersonalitv . jind 

yet, from another point of view, not strictlv i mpersonal, nor merely a i^ro - 

ha.-: scarcely icceiveil a.-< yet .siitticient 
treatrnout. Mr.'.s Article in 
Smith's ' Dictionary of the Bible' (since 
reijrinted in liis 'Remains.') is, though 
brilliantly written, unsatisfactory. Dr. 
Diiridson (in Kitto's Cyclop., vol. iii. pp. 
!)4S-9G(;) is, as always, careful, laborious, 
and learned. Dr. Volck's article (in Her- 
zog's Real-Encykl.. vol. xv. ])p. 672-68.S) 
is witliuut much intrinsic value, though 
painstakinii. We mention these articles, 
besides the treatment of the subject in 
the Introduction to- the Old Testament 
(Keil, De Wette-Schrader. Bleek-Kamp- 
hausen. Reuss), and the \vf)rks of Znnz, 
Geiger, Noldeke, and others, to whom 
partial reference has already been made. 
Fraid-el's interestintr and learned book 
(Zu dem Tar2;uni der Proijheten) deals al- 
most exclusively with tlie Tarjjjum .Jona- 
than, on which it was impossible to enter 
within our limits. As modern bi'ocKures of 
interest the followinj; three may be men- 
tioned: Mayhaum, Anthroiiomorphien bei 
Onkelos; Gronema n n JYw ion&th. Pentat. 
Uebers. uu Verhaltu. z. Halacha; and 
Sinr/er, Onkelos im Verhiiltn. z. Halacha. 

' See the enumeration of these 70 
Names in the Baal-ha-Tiuim on Numb, 
xi. 16. 

'^ Comp. Siegfried, u. s.. ))p. 221-223. 

that, as our present Hebrew text of this 
verse consists of three worels, so does the 
rendering of Onkelos, and that both end 
with the same word. Is the rendering of 
Onkelos then a paraphrase, or does it 
represent another reading? Another in- 
teresting passage is Dent. viii. 3. Its quo- 
tation by Christ in St. Matt. iv. 4 is deeply 
interesting, as read in the light of the ren- 
dering of Onkelos, • Not by bread alone is 
man sustained, but by every forthcom- 
ing Memra from before Jehovah shall 
man live.' Yet another rendering of 
Onkelos is significantly illustrative of 
1 Cor. X. 1-4. He renders Deut. xxxiii. 
3 ' with power He brought them out of 
Egyi)t; they were led under thy cloud; 
they journeyed according to (by) thy 
Memra.' Does this represent a difier- 
ence in the Hebrew from the admittedly 
dithcult text in our present Bil)le? Winer 
refers to it as an instance in which Onkelos 
'suopte ingenio et copiose admodum 
eloquitur vatum divinorum mentem.' add- 
ing, ' ita nt de his. (puis singulis vocibus 
inesse crediderit, significationibus non 
possit recte judicari ; ' and Winer's suc- 
cessors say much the same. But this is 
to state, not to explain, the difficulty. 
In general, we may here be allowed to 
eay that the question of the Targumim 



portv of tlic Doitv . but the shadow, as it were, which the litrlit of God CHAP. 
casts — an<l if Himself li^'ht, only the manifested reflection of God, Hi s IV 
spiritual, even as the worhl is His material, habitation . Moreover, the "- — r — 
Log-QS is ' the inuige of God ' (siKOjv), upon which man was made,'' or , ^ Gen. i. 27 
to use the platonic term, Hhe archetv])al idea.' As regards the 
relation between the Logos and the two fundamental Potencies (from 
which all others issue), the latter are variously represented — on the one 
liand, as proceeding from the Logos; and on the other, as themselves 
constituting the Logos. As regards the world, the Logos is its real 
being. He is also its archetype; moreover the instrument (opyavor) 
through Whom God created all things. If the Logos separates between 
God and the world, it is rather as intermediary; He separates, but He 
also unites. But chiefly does this hold true as regards the relation 
between God and man. The Logos announces and interprets to man the 
will andmiiidof God {spjxr^vsv^ Ka I Trpo^fjrfjg)- He acts as mediator; 
He is the real High-Priest, and as such by His purity takes away the 
sins of man, and by His intercession procures for us the mercy of 
God. Hence Philo designates Him not only as the High-Priest, but as 
the ' Paraclete. ' He is also the sun whose rays enlighten man, the 
medium of Divine revelation to the soul; the Manna, or support of 
spiritual life; He Who dwells in the soul. And so the Logos is , 
in t he full est sense, Melchisedek, the priest of the most high God . 
the kmu' of riirhteousnessJ Bao-iXevc diKaiog), ^\\d the king of Salem 
{l^aaiXetK sipijvijs), Wlio lu'ings righteousness and peace to the souL '' ^ De Leg, 
But the Logos ' does not come into anv soul tliat is dead in sip . ' That 2 5, 26 
there is close similai'itv of form between these Alexandrian vie ws "and 
liiucli 111 the arguuu'utation of the E))istle to the HebrowSr niust__b e 
evident Uj_a[\ — no less than that there is the widest possiljle divergence 
in sul)stance and spirit. ^ The Logos of Philo is shadowv. unreal not n 
Person; - there is no need of an atoiiPDionf • the High-Priest iiiter- 
cedes, but has no sacrifice to ofl'er as the basis of His intercession, least 
of all that of Himself; the old Testament types are only typical ideas, 

' For a full discussion of tbis sinii- showing, the writer of the Epistle to the 

larity of form and divergence of si)irit, Hebrews displays few traces of a Pales- 

bctween Philo — or, rather, between Alex- tinian training. 

aiulriauism — and the Epistle to the He- ^ On the subject of Philo's Logos 

brews, the reader is referred to the generally the brochure of Harnoch (Kd- 

niasterly treatise by Biehm (Der Lehr- nigsberg, 1879) deserves perusal, al- 

begriff d. HebrJierbr. ed. 1867. especially though it does not furnish much that is 

l)p. 247-268, 411-424:, 658-670, and 855- new. In general, the student of Philo 

S60). The author's general view on the ought especially to study the sketch bj' 

subject is well and convincingly formu- Zeller in his Philosophie der Gr., vol. 

lated on p. 249. We must, however, add, iii. pt. ii. 3rd ed. pp. 338-418. 
in ojiposition to Riehm, that, by his own 





» Aa for 



not typical ttu't.-i; tlicy i)()iiit to a Prototypal Idea in the eternal past, 
not to an Antitypal Person and Fact in history; there is no cleansing 
of the soul by l)lood, no sprinklingof the Mercy Seat, no access for all 
through the rent veil into the immediate Presence of God; nor yet a 
quickening of the soul from dead works to serve the living God. If 
the argumentation of the Papistic to the Hebrews is Alexandrian, it is 
an Alcxandrianism which is overcome and past, which only furnishes 
the form, not the substance, the vessel, not its contents. The closer 
therefore the outward similarity, the greater is the contrast in 

The vast difference ])etween Alexandrianism and the Xew Testa- 
ment will api)ear still more clearly in the views of Philo on Cosmology 
and A ntlrropologii. In regard U) the former, his results in some respects 
run parallel to those of the students of mysticism in the Talmud, and 
of the Kab])alists. To.u'ether witli tlic Stujc \icw. wh iVj) i-r-pv c^c^iti-rl 
God as 'the active cause of this world , and nuitter as • the passive .' 

Philo holils the Platonic idea, that matter was somethinu* existent.. and 
that it resisted G<'d.' Such si)e<'uh(tions must have been current 

^ Shem. R. 

among the Jews long before, to judge by certain warnings given by the 
Son of Sirach."'^ And Stoic views of the origin of the world seem 
implied even in the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon (i. 7; vii. 24; 
viii. 1; xii. 1).^ The mystics in the Talmud arrived at similar 
conclusions, not through Greek, but through Persian teaching. Their 
speculations* Ixjldly entered on the dangerous ground,^ forbidden to 
the many, scarcely allowed to the few.,*^ where such deep questions as 
the origin of our world and its connection with God were discussed. 
It was, perhaps, only a l^eautiful poetic figure that God had taken of 
the dust under the throne of His glory, and cast it upon the waters, 
which thus became earth.'' But so far did isolated teachers become 

1 With singular and characteristic in- 
consistency, Philo, however, ascribes 
also to God the creation of matter (de 
Somn. i. 13). 

-' So the Talinudists certainly under- 
stood it, .Ter. Chasz;. ii. 1. 

^ Conij). (rrimin, Exe^i:. Handb. zu d. 
Apokr., Lief. vi. pp. 55, 56. 

* They were arranged iuto those con- 
cerning the Maasey Bereshith (Creation), 
and the MaaHei/ Merkahhah, ' the chariot' 
of Ezekiel's vision (Providence in the 
widest sense, or God's manifestation in 
the created world). 

^ Of the four celebrities who entered 
the 'Pardes,' or enclosed Paradise of 

theosophic speculation, one became an 
ai)0state. another died, a third went 
wrong (Ben Soma), and only Akiba es- 
caped unscathed, according to the 
Scrijiture saying, ' Draw me. and we will 
run ■ (Chag. U b). 

* • It is not lawful to enter upon the 
Maasfij Bereshith in presence of two. 
nor upon the Merkabhah in presence of 
one, unless he be a "sage," and under- 
stands of his own knoAvledge. Any one 
who ratiocinates on these four things, it 
were better for him that he had not been 
born : What is above and what is below ; 
what was afore, and what shall be here- 
after.' (Chag. ii. L) 


intoxicated' by tlu; new wine of tliese strang-e si)eeuliition8, that they CHAP. 
whisj)ered it to one anotlicr that water was the oriji'iiuil eh'iiieiit of the IV 
worhl,^ which had successively been hardened into snow ;iiid tlu-n into ^ — .' 
earth.'' ^ Other and later teachei's fixed uiion the air or the tire as the '.ler. chag. 
original element, arguing- the i)re-existence ot nuitter troni the use ot 
the word 'made' in Gen. i. 7. instead of 'created.' Some moditied 
this view, and suggested that God had originally created the three 
elements of water, air or spirit, and lire, from which all else was 
developed.* Traces also occur of tlie doctrine of the })re-existence of 
things, in a sense similar to tliat of Plato." i-Ber. r. i. 

Like Plato and the Stoics. Philo reu'arded matter as devoid of al l 
(iualit\, and even form . Matter in itself was dead — nun'e than that . 
it was t'vU . This matter, which was already existing, God formed 
(not made), like an architect who uses his materials according to a 
pre-existing plan — which in this case was the archetypal world. 

This was creation, or rather formation, brought al)out not by God 
Himself, bnt by the Potencies, especially by the Logos, Who was the 
connecting bond of all. As for God, His only direct work was the 
soul, and that only of the good, not of the evil. Man's immaterial 
part had a twofold aspect: earthwards, as Sensuousness {aiatiijcris); 
and heavemvards, as Reasoij (koi)^). The sensuous part of the soul 
was connected with the l)ody. It had no heavenly past, and would 
have no future. But 'Reason' {vov5) was that ))reath of true life 
whicli God had breathed into man {7rv€vj.ia) whereby the earthy 
became the higher, living si)irit, with its various faculties. Before 
time began the soul was without body, an archetype, the 'heavenly 
man,' pure spirit in Paradise (virtue), yet even so longing after its 
ultimate archetype, God. Some of these pure spirits descendetl into 

' 'Ben Soma went astray (mentally): A very cm-ions idea is that of R. Josluia 

he shook the (Jewish) world".' ben Levi, acc()nUii,ii- to which all the 

- That criticism, which one would des- works of creation were really finished on 

ifj;nate as impertinent, which would find the tirst day, and only, as it were, ex- 

this view in 2 Peter iii. 5, is, alas! not tended on the other days. This also 

confined to Jewish writers, but hazarded represents really a doubt of the Biblical 

even by De Wette. account of creation. Stran.iie thou<ih it 

•^ Judah bar Pazi. in the second cen- may sound, the doctrine of develoimient 

tury. Ben Soma lived in the first century was derived from the words (Gen. ii. 4). 

of our era. ' These are the generations of heaven and 

■• Accordins; to the Jerusalem Talmud earth when they were created, in the day 

(Ber. i. I) the firmament was at first soft, when Jahveh Elohim made earth and 

and only ,2;radually became hard. Ac- heavens.' It was ari^ued, that the ex- 

cordln,ii; " to Ber. R". 10, G(id creat(>d the i)ression implied, they were developed 

world from a mixture of tire and snow, from the day in which they had been 

other Rabbis sus:fi;estinf>; four ori.s^inal created. Others seem to have held, that 

elements, according to the quarters of the the three principal things that were 

globe, or else six, adding to them that created— earth, heaven, and water — re- 

whlch is above and that which is l)elow. mained. each for three days, at the end 




bodies and so lost their purity. Or else, the union was brought about 
by God and by powers lower than God (daemons, drjfxiovpyoi). To 

"-^^-""^ the latter is due our earthly part. God breathed on the formation, 
and the ' earthly Reason ' became ' intelligent' ' spiritual ' soul {ipvxt) 
rospd). Our earthly part alone is the seat of sin. ^ 

This leads us to the great quest ion of Original Sin . Here the 
views of Philo are those of the f]astern Rabbis. Butboth are en- 
tirely different from ^ those on which the argument in the Epis tle to 
the Romans turns. It was neither at the feet of Gamaliel, ncir vet 
from Jewish Hel lenism, that Saul of Tarsu s learned t he doctrine of 
original sin. The statement that as in Adam all spiritually died, so 
in ^lessiah all should be made alive, ^ finds absolutely no parallel in 
Jewish writings.^ What may be called the starting point of Chris- 
tian theology, the doctrine of hereditary guilt and sin, through the 
fall of Adam, and of the consequent entire and helpless corruption of 
our nature, is entirely unknown to Rabbinical Judaism. The reign of 
physical death was indeed traced to the sin of our first parents.* But 

»Ber. 61a tlic Taluiud cxprcssly teaches," that God originally created man with 
two propensities, "one to good and one to evil {Yetser tobh, and Yetser 

fcsanh. 917; hara^). The evil impulse began immediately after birth."' But it 

of which they respectively developed 
what is connected with them (Ber. R. 12). 

1 For further notices on the Cosmology 
and Anthropology of Philo, see Appen- 
dix n. : ' Philo and Rabbinic Theology.' 
■/ ^ 'l_ We cannot help quoting the beauti- 
ful Haggadic explanation of the name 
Adam, according to its three letters, 
A, D, M — as including these three names, 
Adam. David, Messiah. 

* Rayinundus Martini, in his 'Pugio 
Fidei' (orig. ed. p. 675; ed. Voisin et 
CdU'pzor, pp. 860, 867), quotes from the 
iDOok Siplire: 'Go and learn the merit of 
Messiah tlie King, and the reward of the 
righteous from the first Adam, on whom 
was laid only one commandment of a 
prohibitive character, and he trans- 
gressed it. See how many deaths were 
appointed on him, and on his genera- 
tions, and on the generations of his 
generations to the end of all genera- 
tions. {Wiinsche, Leiden d. Mess. p. 
05. makes here an unwarrantable addi- 
tion, in his translation.) But which at- 
tribute fmeasuring?) is the greater — the 
attribute of. goodness or the attribute of 
punishment, (retribution)? He answered, 
the attribute of goodness is the greater, 
and tiie attribute of punishment the less. 
And Messiah the King, who was clias- 
tcned and suffei-ed for the transgressors, 
as it is said, •• He was wounded for our 

transgressions," and so on — how nuich 
more shall He justify (make righteous — 
by His merit) all generations ; and this 
is what is meant when it is written. 
"And Jehovah made to meet upon Him 
the sin of us all."' We have rendered 
this passage as literally as possible, but 
we are bound to add that it is not found 
in any now existing copy of Siphre. 

* Death is not considered an absolute 
evil. In short, all the various conse- 
quences which Rabbinical writings as- 
cribe to the sin of Adam may be desig- 
nated either as phj-sical, or, if mental, 
as amounting only to detriment, loss, 
or imperfeiGtness. These results had 
been partially counteracted by Abraham, 
and would be fully removed by the 
Messiah. Neither Enoch nor Elijah had 
sinned, and accordingly they did not die. 
Comp. generally. Hamburger. Geist d. 
Agada. p]). 81-84, and in regard to 
death as connected with Adam, p. 85. 

^ These are also hypostatised as An- 
gels. Comp. Levy, Chald. Wtii'terb. \\. 
342 a; Neuhebr. Worterb. p. 259, ((, h. 

* Or with 'two reins,' the one, advis- 
ing to good, being at his right, the other, 
counselling evil, at his left, according 
to Eccles. X. 2 (Ber. 61 a, towards the 
end of the page). 

' In a sense its existence was necea- 
sarv for the continuance of this world. 

PHiLO's p:thics. 53 

was within the power of man to vanquish sin, and to attain porfoct chap. 
righteousness; in fact, this stage had actually been attained/ l^' 

Similarly, Philo regarded the soul of the child as ^nakoil ■ (A (him ^- — ^i ' 

and Eve), a sort of tabula rasa, as wax w hich and \v(iii1(l fiiin form 
and mould. Rnt tin's state ceased Avhc n <(^ft'oc tion' })i-e[^ciitc(l itsel f 
to reason, and thus sensuous lust arose, which was the suriuii.- of al l 
sin. The grand task, then, w as to get rid of the sensuous, and t o 
rise to the spiritual. In this, the ethical part of his system, Phil o 
was most under the influence of Stoic ])hilosoohv . We might almost 
.say, it is no longer th e Hebrew wlio Hellenises, but th e >Tc11cmo who 
Ilebraises. And yet it is here also that the most ingenious and wide- 
reaching allegorisms of Scripture are introduced. It is scarcely pos- 
i^ible to convey an idea of how brilliant this method becomes in the 
liands of Philo, how universal its application, or how captivating it 
must have proved. Philo describes man's state as, first one of sen- 
suousness, but also of unrest, misery and unsatisfied longing. If per- 
sisted in, it would end in complete spiritual insensibility.^ But from 
this state the soul must pass to one of devotion to reason.^ This 
change might be accomplished in one of three wa3's: first, by study 
— of which physical was the lowest; next, that which embraced the 
ordinary circle of knowledge ; and lastly, the highest, that of Divine 
l)hilosophy. The second method was Askesis : discipline, or prac- 
tice, when the soul turned from the lower to the higher. But the 
best of all was the third way: the free unfolding of that si)iritual 
life which cometh neither from study nor discipline, but from a 
natural good disposition. And in that state the soul had true rest^ 
and joy.* 

Here we must for the present pause.® Brief as tliis sketch of 
Hellenism has been, it must have brouglit the question vividly before 
the mind, whether and how far certain parts of the New Testament. 
cs])ecially the fourth Gospel ,' are connected with the d irection ot 

The conflict between these two impulses Theology.' 

coustituted the moral life of man. ^ The views of Philo on the Messiah 
1 The solitary exception hei'e is 4 will be presented in another coiuiection. 
Esdras, where the Christian doctrine of ' This is not the place to enter on the 
original sin is most strongly expressed, (luestion of the composition, date, and 
l)eing evidently derived from New Tes- authorship of the four Gosiiels. But as 
tament teaching. Comp. especially 4 regards the point on which negative criti- 
Esdras (our ApocrjiJhal 2 Esdras) vii. cism has of late spoken strongest— and 
4()-53, and other passages. "Wlierein the on which, indeed (as Weiss rightly re- 
hope of safety lay, appears in ch. ix. marks) the very existence of ' the Tilbin- 
'^ Symbolised by Lot's wife. gen School ' depends — that of the Johan- 
^ Symbolised by Ebher, Hebrew. nine authorship of the fourth Gospel. I 
* The Sabbath, Jerusalem. would refer to Weisf:, Leben Jesu (1882 : 
^ For further details on these points vol. i. pp. 84-139), and to Dr. Salmon's 
see Appendix H. : 'Philo and Rabbinic Introd. to the New Test. pp. 2iUi-'Mh). 




]!0()K tliou^lit ( lc8cril)e(l in tlic ])recudiiig pages . Without yielding- to that 
[ scliool of critics, whose perverse ingenuity discerns everywnere a 

- ^^^ — ^ sinister motive or tendency in the Evangelic writers,' it is evident 

that each of them had a special object in view in constructing his 
narrative of the One Life; and primarily addressed himself to a special 
audience. If, without entering into elaborate discussion, we might, 
according to St. Luke i. 2, regard the narrative of St. Mark as the 
grand representative of that authentic 'narration' {du'/yijaig)^ though 
not by Apostles,'^ which was in circulation, and the Gospel by St. 
Matthew as representing the 'tradition' handed down (the Ttapadoaig), 
by the Apostolic eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word,^ we should 
reach the following results. Our oldest Gospel-narrative is that by 
St. Mark, which, addressing itself to no class in particular, sketches 
in rapid outlines the picture of Jesus as the Messiah, alike for all 
men. Next in order of time comes our present Gospel by St. 
Matthew. It goes a step further back than that by St. Mark, and 
gives not only the genealogy, but the history of the miraculous birth 
of Jesus. Even if we had not the consensus of tradition, every one 
^; must feel that this Gospel is Hebrew in its cast, in its citations from 

^jij^ % the Old Testament, and in its whole bearing. Taking its key-note 

from the Book of Daniel, that grand Messianic text-book of Eastern 
Judaism at the time, and as re-echoed in the Book of Enoch — which 
expresses the popular apprehension of Daniel's Messianic idea — it 
presents the Messiah chiefly as 'the Son of Man,' 'the Son of David,' 
' the Son of God.' We have hei-e the fulfilment of Old Testament law 
and prophecy ; the realisation of Old Testament life, faith, and hope. 
Third in point of time is the Gospel by St. Luke, which, passing back 
another step, gives us not only the history of the birth of Jesus, but 
also that of John, 'the preparer of the way.' Jt is Pauline, and 

y . addre sses itself, or rather, w e should sav. i^resonts the Person of the 

Messia h, it may be ' to the Jew first.' but certainlv ' also to the (Jrcck .' 
The term which St. Luke, alone of all Gospel writers,* applies to 

' No one not acquainted witli this - I do not, of course, mean tliat tlie 
literature can imao;ine the character of narration of St. Mark was not itself de- 
the ar^-uments sometimes used by a cer- rived chiefl.y from Ajjostolic preachiiiij, 
tain class of critics. To say that they especially that of St. Peter. In fjeneral, 
proceed on tlie most forced perversion tlie ([uestion of the authorship and source 
of the natural and obvious meanin.i>; of of tlie various Gospels uuist be reserved 
passages, is but little. But one cannot for separate treatment in another place, 
restrain moral indiijnation on flndinii- tliat •' Comji. Ma/u/oftTs ed. of B/cek, Einl. 
to Evauiielists and Apostles is imputed, in d. N.T. (P>te Aufl. 1S7.")), p. 34<). 
on sucli ii'rounds, not only systematic ^ WitJj the sole exception of St. Matt, 
falsehood, l)ut falseliood with the most xii. IS, where the expression is a quota- 
sinister motives. tion from the LXX. of Is. xlii. 1. 


Jesus, is that of the nai; or 'servant' of God, in the sense in which CHAP. 
Isaiah has spoken of the Messiah as the ' Ebhcd Jehovah, ' ' servant of IV 
the Lord.' St. Luke's is, so to speak, the Isaiali-Gospel, presenting "- — ■:——^ 
the Christ in His bearing on the history of God's Kingdom and of the 
world — as God's Elect Servant in Whom He delighted. In the Old 
Testament, to adopt a beautiful figure,' the idea of the Servant of the 
Lord is set before us like a pyramid: at its base it is all Israel, at its 
central section Israel after the Spirit (the circumcised in heart), re- 
presented by David, the man after God's own heart; "while at its apex 
it is the 'Elect' Servant, the Messiah.^ And these three ideas, with 
tlieir sequences, are presented in the third Gospel as centring in Jesus 
the Messiah. By the side of this pyramid is the other: the Son of 
Man, the Son of David, the Son of God. The Servant of the Lord of 
Isaiah and of Luke is the p]nlightener, the Consoler, the victorious 
Deliverer; the Messiah or Anointed: the Prophet, the Priest, the 

Yet another tendency — shall we sny^ wnn t ? — remained, so to 


speak, unmet and unsatisfied. That large wor ld of latest and nu)st a pi 


promising Jewish thought , whose task it seemed to bridge over the 
chasm between heathenism and Judaism — th e Western Jewish worh 

must have the Christ presen ted t o them, y For in every direction is C W j -^ 

He the Christ. And not oulv thev, l )u t that larger Greek world , so 
far as Jewish Hellenism could ])ring it to the threshold of the Church . 
This Hellenistic and Hellenic world now stood in waiting t o enter it, 
th ough as it were by its northern porch , and to be baptized at it s 
font. All this must have forced itself on the m ind of St^J olm, re - 
siding in the midst of them at Ephe sus, even as St. Paul's E]) istles 
contain almost as many allusions to Hellenism as to Eabbinism. ^ 
And so the fourth Gospel Ijccame, not the supplement, but the com - 

' First expressed by Delitzsch (Bibl. although the inferences may be false. 
Comni. ii. d. Proph. Jes. p. 414), and tiaen Theoloiiy sliould not here rashly inter- 
adopted by OeJder (Theol. d. A. Test. fere. JBut whatever the ultimate result, 
vol. ii. \l\^. 270-272). these two are certainly the fundamental 

-' The two fundamental principles in facts in the history of the Kinndom of 

the history of the Kin,<j;dom of God are God, and, mai'king them as sucli. the 

selt-ctioii and ilerehrpmpnt. It is surely devout philosopher may rest contented.^ 
remarkable, not stranse, that these are ■' The Gnostics, to whom, in the opinion' 

also the two fundamental truths in the of nuin,v, so frequent references are nuide 

history of that other Kingdom of God, in the writings of St. John and St. Paul, 

Nature, if modern science has read them were only an otTspring (rather, as the 

correctly. These two s/^/wA^w/hvs would Germans woidd term it. an Abart) of 

mark the /nfc^s as ascertained; the r/r/y«'- Alexandrianism on the one hand, ami 

twes. which are added to them by a on llie otlier of Eastern notions, which 

certain class of students, mark oidy their are so lari^ely embodied in the later 

uifprettcfs from these facts. These facts Kabl)alah. 
may be true, even if as yet incomplete, 



BOOK pleiiicnt, of the other tliree^ There is no other Gospel more Pales- 
I tiiiiau than this in its modes of expression, alhisions, and references. 
^-^•^^r — ' XQ,i we must all feel how thoroughl}' Hellenistic it also is in its ca st.^ 
in what it reports and what it o mi ts — in short, in its whole aim ; 
ho w adapted to H el lenist wants its presentation of deep centr al 
truths; how suitably, in the report of His Discourses — even so fa r 
as their form is concerned — the promise was here fulfilled, of bring in"^ 
» St. John a ll things to remem b rance whntmoever He had said / It is the tru e 
Light which shineth, of which the full meridian-blaze li es on the 
Hellenist and Hellenic world. There is Alexandrian form of thought 
not only in the whole conception, but in the Logos, ^ and in His 
presentation as the Light, the Life, the Wellspring of the world.'' 
But these forms are filled in the fourth Gospel with quite other sub- 
stance. God is not afar off, uncognisable by man, without properties, 
without name. He is the Father. Instead of a nebulous reflection 
(\ of the Deity we have the Person of the Logos; not a Logos with 

^ %-'f "* - ^ -' the two potencies of goodness and power, but full of grace and 
^ aJ^ J truth. The Gospel of St. John also begins with a ^Bereshith' — but 
*^* it is the theological, not the cosmic Bereshith, when the Logos was 

f /?/*/^ with God and was God. Matter is not pre-existent; far less is it 

/ At^Xf ^ g^,^j_ g^_ John strikes the pen through Alexandrianism when he lays 
it down as the fundamental fact of New Testament history that ' the 

1 A coiiipleineut, not a supplement, as on statements so entirel.y hiaccurate. 
many critics put it {Eirald, Weizsacker, ^ Dr. Buclie); whose book, Des Apos- 

and even Hengstenberg) — least of all a tels Johannes Lehre vom Logos, deserves 

rectification {Godet, Evang. Job. p. 63.3). careful perusal, tries to trace the reason 

'' Keim (Leben Jesu von Nazara, i. a, of these peculiarities as indicated in the 

pp. 112-114) fully recognises this; but I Prologue of the fourth Gospel. Bucher 

entirely differ from tlie conclusions of differentiates at great lengtli between the 

his analytical comparison of Philo with Logos of Philo and of tlie fourtli Gospel, 

the fourth Gospel. • He sums up his views by stating that in 

'* The student who has carefully con- the Prologue of St. John the Logos is 
sidered the views ex])ressed by Philo presented as the fulness of Divine Light 
about the Logos, and analysed, as in and Life. This is, so to speak, tlie tlieme, 
the Appendix, the passages in the Tar- Avliile the Gospel history is intended to 
gumira in which the word Memra oc- present the Logos as the giver of tiiis 
curs, cannot fail to perceive the im- Divine Light and Life. While the otiier 
mense difference in the presentation of Evangelists ascend from" the manifesta- 
the Logos hy St. John. Yet M. Rcikui. tion to the idea of the Son of God. St. 
in an article in the ' Contemi)orary Re- John descends from the idea of the Logos, 
view' for September 1877, with utter as expressed in tlie Prologue, to its con- 
disregard of the historical evidence on crete realisation in His history. The 
the question, maintains not only the latest tractate (at the present writing, 
identity of these three sets of ideas, but 1882) on the Gospel of St. Joim, by l)r. 
actually grounds on it his argument 31uller, Die Johann. Frage, gives a 
against the authenticity of the fourth good summary of the argument on both 
Gospel. Considering the importance of sides, and deserves the careful attention 
the subject, it is not easy to sjieak witli of students of the question, 
moderation of assertions so bold based 


Logos was made tiesh,' just as St. Paul does when he proclaims the chap. 
great mysteiy of 'God manifest in the flesh.' Best of all, it is not iv 
by a long course of study, nor by wearing discipline, least of all \)\ '- — ~' — 
an inl)orn good disposition, that the soul attains the new life, but 1)y 
a birth from above, by the Holy Ghost, and by simple faith which is 
brought witliin reach of the fallen and the lost.^ 

Pliilo had no successor. In him Hellenism had completed its 
cycle. Its message and its mission were ended. Henceforth it 
needed, like Apollos, its great representative in the Christian Church, 
two things: the baptism of John to the knowledge of sin and need, 
iind to have the way of God more perfectly expounded.'' On the "Actsxviii. 
other hand, Elastern Judaism had entered with Hillel on a new stage. 
This direction led farther and farther away from that which the New 
Testament had taken in following up and unfolding the spiritual 
elements of the Old. That development was incapable of transfor- 
mation or renovation. It must go on to its final completion — and be 
either true, or else be swept away and destroyed. 

' I cannot agree with Weiss (u. s., p. to the Apostle's mind, as evidenced in 

122) that the great object of tlie fourth his Epistle, but the object in view could 

Gospel was to oppose the rising Gnostic not have been mainly, nor even primarily, 

movement, This may have been present negative and controversial. 


chaptp:r y. 


OF ^\•^:8TERN civilisation. 

BOOK We have spoken of Alrxaiidria as the eajjital of the Jewish world in 
I tlie West. Antioch was, indeed, nearer to Palestine, and its Jewish 

-— ^^ — ^ population — inchuling the tloating ])art of it — as numerous as that 
of Alexandria. But the wealth, the thought, and the influence of 
Western Judaism eentred in the modern capital of the land of the 
Pharaohs. In those days Greece was the land of the past, to which 
the student might resort as the home of beauty and of art, the time- 
hallowed temple of thought and of poetry. But it was also the land 
of desolatcness and of ruins, where fields of corn waved over the 
remains of classic anticpiity. The ancient Greeks had in great measure 
sunk to a nation of traders, in keen competition with the Jews. 
Indeed, Roman sway had levelled the ancient world, and buried its 
national characteristics. It was otherwise in the far P]ast; it was 
otherwise also in Egypt. Egypt was not a land to l)e largely in- 
habited, or to be 'civilised' in the then sense of the term: soil, 
climate, history, nature forbade it. Still, as now, and even more 
than now, was it the dream-land of untold attractions t(j the traveller. 
The ancient, mysterious Nile still rolled its healing waters out into the 
blue sea, where (so it was supposed) they changed its taste within a 
radius farther than the eye could reach. To ha gently borne in bark 
or ship on its waters, to watch the strange vegetation and fauna of 
its banks ; to gaze beyond, where they merged into the trackless 
desert ; to wander under the shade of its gigantic monuments, or 
within the wierd avenues of its colossal temples, to see the scroll of 
mysterious hieroglyphics ; to note the sameness of manner and of 
people as oi old, and to watch the unique rites of its ancient religion 
— this was indeed to be again in the old far-away world, and that 
amidst a dreaminess bewitching the senses, and a gorgeousness 
dazzling the imagination. ^ 

' Wliat cliann Euypt liad tor tlie of tlicir mosaics and frescoes. Coiiip. 
Romans may be withered from so many Frii-dlnndi'r, w. s. vol, ii. pp. i:U-l:i(i. 


We arc still far out at sea, iiiakiug for the port of Alcxiiiidria — 
the only safe shelter all along the coast of Asia and Africa. Quite 
thirty miles out the silver sheen of the lighthouse on the island of 
Pharos' — connected l)y a mole with Alexandria — is burning like a 
star on the edge of the horizon. Now we catch sight of the palm- 
groves of Pharos; presently the anchor rattles and grates on the 
sand, and we arc ashore. What a crowd of vessels of all sizes, shapes, 
and nationalities; what a multitude of busy people; what a very 
IJabel of languages; what a commingling of old and new world civi- 
lisation; and what a variety of wares piled up, loading or unloading! 

Alexandria itself was not an old Egyptian, but a comparatively 
modern, city; in ICgypt and yet not of Egypt. Everything was in 
character — the city, its inhabitants, public life, art, literature, study, 
amusements, the very aspect of the place. Nothing original anywhere, 
but combination of all that had been in the ancient world, or that 
was at the time — most fitting place therefore to be the capital of 
Jewish Hellenism. 

As its name indicates, the city was founded by Alexander the 
Great. It was built in the form of an o])en fan, or rather, of the 
outspread cloak of a Macedonian horseman. Altogether, it measured 
(16,360 paces) 8,160 paces more than Rome; but its houses Avere 
neither so crowded nor so many-storied. It had been a large city 
when Rome was still inconsiderable, and to the last held the second 
place in the Emi)ire. One of the five quarters into which the city was 
di\ided, and which were named according to the first letters of the 
alphal)et, was wholly covered by the royal palaces, with their gardens, 
and similar buildings, including the royal mausoleum, where the body 
of Alexander the Great, preserved in honey, was kept in a glass coffin. 
But these, and its three miles of colonnades along the principal high- 
way, were only some of the magnificent architectural adornments of 
a city full of palaces. The population amounted, })robably, to nearly 
a million, drawn from the East and West by trade, the attractions of 
wealth, the facilities for study, or the amusements of a singularly 
frivolous city. A strange mixture of elements among the people, 
combining the quickness and versatility of the Greek with the gra- 
vity, the conservatism, the dream-grandeur, and the luxury of the 

Three worlds met in Alexandria: Europe, Asia, and Africa; and 

1 Tliis immense lighthouse was square recorded repairs to tliis nia,s;nilioent 
up to tiie middle, then covered by an structure of blocks of marble were made 
octagon, the top lieing round. The last in the year 1303 of our era. 


BOOK brought to it, or fetched from it, their treasures. Ahoveall, it was a 
I comiuercial city, furnished with anexceHent harbour — or rather with 

^— ^* five harbours. A special fleet carried, as tribute, from Alexandria to 

Italy, two-tenths of the corn produce of Egypt, which sufficed to feed 
the cajntal for four months of the year. A magnificent fleet it was, 
from tlie liglit (juick sailer to those immense corn-ships wliich hoisted 
a special flag, and whose earh* arrival was awaited at Puteoli^ with 
more eagerness than tliatof any modern ocean-steamer.^ The com- 
merce of India was in the hands of the Alexandrian shippers.* Since 
the days of the Ptolemies the Indian trade alone had increased six- 
fold.* Xor was the native industry inconsiderable. Linen goods, to 
suit tlie tastes or costumes of all countries: woolen stuffs of every 
hue, some curiously wrought with figures, and even scenes; glass of 
every shade and in every shape; paper from the thinnest sheet to the 
coarsest ]ia eking paper; essences, perfumeries — such were the native 
products. However idly or luxuriously inclined, still every one seemed 
busy, in a city where (as the Emperor Hadrian expressed it) 'money 
was the people's god; ' and every one seemed well-to-do in liis own 
way, from tlie waif in the streets, who with little troulile to himself 
could pick uj) sufficient to go to the restaurant and enjoy a comfort- 
aljle dinner of fresh or smoked fish with garlic, and his pudding, washed 
down with the favourite Egyptian l)arleybeer, up to the millionaire 
banker, who owned a palace in the city and a villa by the canal that 
connected Alexandria with Canobus. What a jostling crowd of all 
nations in the streets, in the market (where, according to the joke of 
a contemporary, anything might be got except snow), or by the hai-- 
bours; what cool shades, delicious retreats, vast halls, magnificent 
libraries, where the savants of Alexandria assembled and taught every 
conceivable branch of learning, and its far-famed i)Iiysicians prescribed 

^ The average passage from Alexandria were small ships comparefl witJi those 

to Puteoli was twelve days, the ships built for the conveyance of marble blocks 

touching at Malta and in Sicily. It was and columns, and especially of obelisks, 

in such a ship, the 'Castor and Pollux,' One of these is said to have carried, be- 

carrying wheat, that St. Paul sailed from sides an obelisk, 1.200 passengers, a 

Malta to Puteoli. where it would be freight of paper, nitre, pepper, linen, 

among the first arrivals of the season. and a large cargo of wheat. 

2 They bore, painted on the two sides ■'* The journey took about three months, 

of the prow, the emblems of the gods to either up the Nile, thence by caravan, 

whom they were dedicated, and were and again by sea; or else i)erhap8 Ijy 

navigated by Egyptian pilots, the most the Ptolemy Canal and the Red Sea. 

renowned in the world. One of these * It included gold-dust, ivory, and 

vessels is described as 180 by 45 feet, mother-of-pearl from the interior of 

and of about 1,. 575 tons, and is computed Africa, spices from Arabia, pearls from 

to have returned to its owner nearly the Gulf of Persia, precious stones 

3,000-'. annually. (Comp. Frifdldnder, and byssus from India, and silk from 

u. s. vol. ii. p. i;^l, itc.) And yet these China. 


for tlio poor consumptive patients sent thither from all parts of CHAP. 
Italy! What bustle and noise among- that ever excitable, chatty, con- ^^ 
ceited, vain, pleasure-loving multitude, whose highest enjoyment was ^-"^f — -' 
the theatre and singers; what scenes on that long canal to Canobus, 
lined with luxurious inns, where barks full of pleasure-seekers revelled 
in the cool shade of the banks, or sped to Canobus, that scene of all 
dissipation and luxury, proverbial even in those days! And yet, close 
by, on the shores of Lake Mareotis, as if in grim contrast, were the 
chosen retreats of that sternly ascetic Jewish party, the Therapeutas, * ^ on the ex- 

_ ^ ^ ^ ist6ncG of 

whose views and practices m so many iiomts were kindred to those tue Tuera- 

. * peutes 

of the Essenes in Palestine! comp. Art. 

I'hilo in 

This sketch of Alexandria will help us to understand the sur- smith & 


roundings of the large mass of Jews settled m the Egyptian capital. Diet, of 
Altogetlier more than an eighth of the population of the country yoi. iv. 
(one million in 7,800,000) was Jewish. Whether or not a Jewish 
colony had gone into Egypt at the time of Nebuchadnezzar, or even 
earlier, the great mass of its residents had been attracted by Alexander 
the Great," who had granted the Jews equally exceptional privileges ^Mommsm 
with the Macedonians. The later troubles of Palestine under the Gesch. v. p. 


Svrian kings greatly swelled their number, the more so that the ascribes 

'^ '^ "^ . ' this rather 

Ptolemies, with one exception, favoured them. Originally a special toptoiemy 
quarter had been assigned to the Jews in the city — the ' Delta ' by the 
eastern harbour and the Canobus canal — -probably alike to keep the 
community separate, and from its convenience for commercial purposes. 
The privileges which the Ptolemies had accorded to the Jews were 
confirmed, and even enlarged, hy Julius Caesar. The export trade in 
grain was now in their hands, and the harbour and river police com- 
mitted to their charge. Two quarters in the city arc named as spe- 
cially Jewish — not, however, in the sense of their being confined to 
them. Their Synagogues, surrounded by shady trees, stood in all 
parts of the city. But the chief glory of the Jewish community in 
Egypt, of which even the Palestinians boasted, was the great central 
Synagogue, Iniilt in the shape of a basilica, with double colonnade, 
and so large that it needed a signal for those most distant to know 
the proper moment for the responses. Tlie different trade guilds sat 
there together, so that a stranger would at once know where to find 
Jewish employers or fellow-workmen." In the choir of this Jewish ^sukk. 5if. 
cathedral stood seventy chairs of state, encrusted with precious stones, 
for the seventy elders who constituted the eldership of Alexandria, on 
the model of the great Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. 

It is a strange, almost iiiexi)licable fact, that the Egyptian Jews 


BOOK liad actually built a sehisuuitic Temple. Duriug the terrible Syrian 
I persecutions in Palestine Onias, the son of the murdered High-Priest 

^^■— ,^ ' Onias III., had sought safety in Egypt. Ptolemy Philometor not 

only received him kindly, but gave a disused heathen temple in the town 
of Leontopolis for a Jewish sanctuary. Here a new Aaronic priest- 
hood ministered, their support being derived from the revenues of the 
district around. The new Temple, however, resembled not that of 
Jerusalem either in outward appearance nor in all its internal tittings.* 
At tirst the Egyptian Jews were very i)roud of their new sanctuary, 
"Is. xix. 18 and professed to see in it the fultilment of the prediction,^ that tive 
cities in the land of Egypt should speak the language of Canaan, of 
which one was to be called Ir-ha-Heres, which tlio LXX. (in their 
original form, or by some later emendation) altered into ' the city of 
righteousness.' This temple continued from about 160 B.C. to shortly 
after the destruction of Jerusalem. , It could scarcely be called a rival 
to that on Mount Moriah, since the P^gyptian Jews also owned that of 
Jerusalem as their central sanctuary, to which tliey made pilgrimages 
^phiioAi. and brought their contributions,'' while the priests at Leontopolis, 
Ma'ngey bcforc uiarrving, always consulted the official archives in Jerusalem to 
cjos Ag. ascertain the puritv of descent of their intended wives." The Pales- 

Ap. 1. 7 1 . 

tinians designated it contemptuously as ' the house of Chonyi ' (Onias), 
and declared the priesthood of Leontopolis incapable of serving in Jeru- 
salem, although on a par with those who were disqualified only by some 
bodily defect. Offerings brought in Leontopolis were considered null, 
unless in the case of vows to which the name of this Temple had been 
a Men. xiii. cxprcsslv attached.'* This qualified condemnation seems, however, 

10, and the ^ "^ . ^ .... , 

Gemara. strangelv mild, excei)t on the supposition that the statements we have 

109 a and b "- "^ ' ^ .1,^^1,111 1 

quoted only date from a time when both Temples had long passed 

Nor were such feelings unreasonable. The Egyptian Jews had 
spread on all sides — southward to Aliyssinia and Ethiopia, and west- 
ward to, and beyond, the province of Cyrene. In the city of that 
name they formed one of the four classes into which its inha!)itants 
- strabo in wcrc divided." A Jewish inscription at Berenice, apparently dating 
xiv. 7, 2' from the year 13 B.C., shows that the Cyrenian Jews formed a distinct 
community under nine 'rulers ' of their own, who no doulit attended 
to the communal affairs — not always an easy matter, since the 
Cyrenian Jews were noted, if not for turbulence, yet for strong anti- 

^ Iii.stoivd of the seven-branched golden suspended from a chain of tlie 
candlestick there was a golden lamp, metal. 


Koiiian feeling, which more than once was cruelly quenched in blood. ^ CHAP. 

Other inscriptions prove,- that in otlier places of their dispersion also V 

the Jews had their own Archontes or 'rulers, ' while the special direction ^— -y— -^ 

of pul)lic worship was always entrusted to the Archisynagogos, or 

'chief ruler of the Synag-ogue, ' both titles occurring side by side.^ 

It is, to say the least, very doubtful, whether the High-Priest at 

Leontopolis was ever regarded as, in any real sense, the liead of the 

Jewish community in Egypt.* In Alexandria, the Jews were under 

the rule of a Jewish EfJinarch,'' whose authority was similar to that 

of 'the Archoii' of independent cities." But his authority'' was "Straboin 

transferred, l)y Augustus, to the whole 'eldership.''' Another, prob- siv. 7. 2' 

ably Roman, office, though for obvious reasons often filled by Jews, '^hlcc"'ia 

was that of the Alabarch, or ratlier Arnbardi, who was set over the ^^-nsey, n. 

Arab population." Among others, Alexander, the brother of Philo, 

lield this post. If we may judge of the position of the wealthy Jewish 

lamilies in Alexandria by that of this Alabarch, their influence must 

have been very great. The firm of Alexander was jn'obalily as rich as 

the great Jewish bankinu- and shiiiping liouse of Saranialla in Antioch." ' Jos. Ant. 

T . „ . Xiv. la. 5; 

Its chief was entrusted with the management of the aflairs of war. 1. 13,5 

Antonia, the much respected sister-in-law of the Emperor Tiberius." ;jAnt. xix. 

It was a small thing for such a man to lend King Agrippa, when liis 

fortunes were very low, a sum of about 7,000/. with which to resort 

to Italv,'' since he advanced it on the guarantee of Agrippa's wife, "Ant. xvui. 

^ 6. 3 

whom he highly esteemed, and at the same time made provision that 

the money should not be all spent l)efbre the Prince met the 

Emperor. Besides, he had his own i>lans in the matter. Two of his 

sons married daughters of King Agrippa; while a third, at the 

price of apostasy, rose successively to the posts of Procurator of 

Palestine, and finally of Governor of Egypt.' The Temple at Jeru- 'Ant. xix. 

salem bore evidence of the wealth and munificence of this Jewish 

millionaire. The gold and silver with which the nine massive gates 

^ Could there liave been any such fi29). The subject is of great imiwrtance 

meaning in laying tlie Roman cross which as illustrating the rule of the Synagogue 

Jesus had to bear upon a Cyrenian (St. in the days of Christ. Another desigua- 

Luke xxiii. 2(5)? A symbolical meaning tion on the gravestones vrarijp crvva- 

It certainly has, as we remember that the ycoyrfi seems to refer solely to age — 

last Jewish rebellion (132-135 a.d.); one being described as 110 years old. 

which bad Bar Cochba for its Messiah, * Jost, Gesch. d. Judenth. i. p. 345. 

first broke out in Cyrene. "What terrible * 3farquard( (Rom. Staatsverwalt. vol. 

vengeance was taken on those who fol- i. p. 297). Note 5 suggests that sBvo? 

lowed the false Christ, cannot here be may here mean clai^ses, ordo. 

told. « The office itself would seem to have 

'^ Jewisli inscriptions have also been been continued. (Jos. Ant. xix. 5. 2.) 

found in Mauritania and Algiers. '' Comp. WesKeliug, de Jud. Archont. 

^ Onatomljstoneat Capua(3/i9?»?H.sp», pp. (i3, &c., i\\)m\ ScliUrer, pp. ()27, (i28. 
Inscr. R. Neai). 3,()57, apud Schurer, \). 




• Probably 
about 200 


were covered, which led into the Temple, were the gift of the great 
Alexandrian banker. 

The possession of such wealth, conpled no doubt with pride and 
self-assertion, and openly spoken contempt of the superstitions around,' 
would naturally excite the hatred of the Alexandrian populace against 
the Jews. The greater number of those silly stories about the origin, 
early history, and religion of the Jews, which even the philosophers 
and historians of Rome record as genuine, originated in Egypt. A 
whole series of writers, beginning with Manetho,'' made it their 
business to give a kind of historical travesty of the events recorded in 
the books of Moses. The boldest of these scribblers was Apion, to 
whom Josephus replied — a world-famed charlatan and liar, who wrote 
or lectured, with equal presumption and falseness, on every conceivable 
object. He was just the man to suit the Alexandrians, on Avhom his 
unblushing assurance imposed. In Rome he soon found his level, and 
the Emperor Tiberius well characterised the irrepressible boastful 
talker as the ' tinkling cymbal of the world.' He had studied, seen, 
and heard everything — even, on three occasions, the mysterious sound 
on the Colossus of Memnon, as the sun rose upon it! At least, so he 
graved upon the Colossus itself, for the information of all generations.'^ 
Such was the man on whom the Alexandrians conferred the freedom 
of their city, to whom they entrusted their most important affairs, and 
whom they extolled as the victorious, the laborious, the new Homer. ^ 
There can be little doubt, that the popular favour was jjartly due to 
Apion's virulent attacks upon the Jews. His grotesque accounts of 
their history and religion held them up to contempt. But his real 
object was to rouse the fanaticism of the populace against the Jews. 
Every year, so he told them, it was the practice of the Jews to get 
hold of some unfortunate Hellene, whom ill-chance might bring into 
their hands, to fatten him for the year, and then to sacrifice him, 
partaking of his entrails, and burying the body, while during these 
horrible rites they took a fearful oath of ])cri)etual enmity to the Greeks. 
These were the people who battened on the wealth of Alexandria, who 
had usurped quarters of the city to which they had no right, and 
claimed exceptional privileges; a peoi)lc who had proved traitors 
to, and the ruin of every one who had trusted them. ' If the 
Jews,' he exclaimed, 'are citizens of Alexandria, why do they not 
worship the same gods as the Alexandrians ? ' And, if they wished 

' Comp., for example, such a trenchant 
chapter as Baruch vi., or the 2nd Fragm. 
of the Erythr. Sibyl, vv. 21-33. 

''■ Comp. Friedlander, n. s. ii. p. 155. 

3 A very good sketch of Apion is given 
by Hausrath, Neutest. Zeitg. vol. ii. pp. 



to enjoy the protection of the Csesars, why did they not erect statues, 
and pay Divine honor to them?^ There is nothing strange in these 
appeals to the fanaticism of mankind. In one form or another, they 
have only too often been repeated in all lands and ages, and, alas! by 
the representatives of all creeds. Well might the Jews, as Phihj 
mourns, ' wish no better for themselves than to be treated like other "Leg. ad 

, Caj. etl. 

men ! Frcf. 

We liave already seen, that the ideas entertained in Rome about 
the Jews were chieily derived from Alexandrian sources. But it is 
not easy to understand, how a Tacitus, Cicero, or Pliny could have 
credited such al)surdities as that the Jews had come from Crete 
(Mount Ida — Id£ei=Jud8ei), been expelled on account of leprosy from 
Egypt, and emigrated under an apostate priest, Moses; or that the 
Sabbath-rest originated in sores, which had obliged the wanderers to 
stop short on the seventh day; or that the Jews worshipped the head 
of an ass, or else Bacchus; that their abstinence from swine's flesh was 
duo to remembrance and fear of leprosy, or else to the worship of that 
animal — and other puerilities of the like kind.'' The educated Roman ^Comp. 
regarded the Jew with a mixture of contempt and anger, all the more Hist.v!2-t; 
keen that, according to his notions, the Jew had, since his subjection pos.'iV. 5 
to Rome, no longer a right to his religion; and all the more bitter 
that, do what he might, that despised race confronted him everywhere, 
with a religion so uncompromising as to form a wall of separation, 
and with rites so exclusive as to make them not only strangers, but 
enemies. Such a phenomenon was nowhere else to be encountered. 
The Romans were intensely practical. In their view, political life and 
religion were not oulj' intertwined, but the one formed part of the 
other. A religion apart from a political organisation, or which 
offered not, as a quid pro quo, some direct return from the Deity to his 
votaries, seemed utterly inconceivable. Ever}" country has its own 
religion, argued Cicero, in his appeal for Flaccus. So long as Jeru- 
salem was unvanquished, Judaism might claim toleration; but had not 
the immortal gods shown what they thought of it, when the Jewish 
race was conquered? This was a kind of logic that appealed to the 
humblest in the crowd, which thronged to hear the great orator 
defending his client, among others, against the charge of preventing 
the transport from Asia to Jerusalem of the annual Temple-tribute. 
This was not a popular accusation to bring against a man in such an 
assembly. And as the Jews — who, to create a disturbance, had (we 
are told) distributed themselves among the audience in such numbers, 

' Jos. As- Ap. li. 4. 5. fi. 



BOOK that Cicero somewhat rhetorically declared, he would fain have spoken 
I with bated breath, so as to be only audible to the judges — listened t(j 

^- — 'r — ' the great orator, they must have felt a keen pang shoot to their hearts 
while he held them up to the scorn of the heathen, and touched, with 
rough tinger, their open sore, as he urged the ruin of their nation as 
the one unanswerable argument, which Materialism could bring 
against the religion of the Unseen. 

And that religion — was it not, in the words of Cicero, a * barbar- 

»Hist. Nat. ous superstition,' and were not its adherents, as Pliny had it,"* ' a race 
distinguished for its contempt of the gods ' ? To begin with their 
theology. The Roman philosopher would sympathise with disbelief of 
all sjiiritual realities, as, on the other hand, he could understand the 
popular modes of worship and superstition. But what was to be said 
for a worship of something quite unseen, an adoration, as it seemed 
to him, of the clouds and of the sky, without any visible symbol, con- 
joined with an utter rejection of every other form of religion — Asiatic, 
Egyptian, Greek, Roman — and the refusal even to pay the customary 
Divine honor to the Csesars, as the incarnation of Roman power? 
Next, as to their rites. Foremost among them was the initiatory rite 
of circumcision, a constant subject for coarse jests. What could be 
the meaning of it; or of what seemed like some ancestral veneration 
for the pig, or dread of it, since they made it a religious duty not to 
partake of its flesh? Their Sabbath-observance, however it had 
originated, was merely an indulgence in idleness. • The fast young 
Roman literati w^ould find their amusement in wandering on the 
Sabbath-eve through the tangled, narrow streets of the Ghetto, 
watching how the dim lamp within shed its unsavory light, while the 
inmates mumbled prayers 'with blanched lips;'" or they would, like 
Ovid, seek in the Synagogue occasion for their dissolute amusements. 
The Thursday fast was another target for their wit. In short, at the 
best, the Jew was a constant theme of popular merriment, and the 
theatre would resound with laughter as his religion was lampooned, 
no matter how absurd the stories, or how poor the punning.' 

And then, as the proud Roman passed on the Sabbath through 
the streets, Judaism would obtrude itself upon his notice, by the 
shops that were shut, and l^y the strange figures that idly moved about 
in holiday attire. They were strangers in a strange land, not only 
without sympathy with what passed around, but with marked 
contempt and abhorrence of it, while there was that about their 
whole bearing, which expressed the unspoken feeling, that the time 
' Comp. the quotation of such scenes in the Introd. to the Midrash on Lamentations. 

•> Persius v. 


of Rome's tall, and of their own .sui)rcniacy, was at hand. To put CHAP, 
the general feeling in the words of Tacitus, the Jews kept close to- ^^ 
gether, and were ever most liberal to one another ; but they were tilled "-^^r— ^ 
with bitter hatred of all others. They would neither eat nor sleep 
with strangers ; and the first thing which they taught their proselytes 
was to despise the gods, to renounce their own country, and to rend 
the bonds which had bound them to parents, children or kindred. 
To be sure, there was some ground of distorted truth in these charges. 
For, the Jew, as such, was only intended for Palestine. By a neces- 
sity, not of his own making, he was now, so to speak, the negative 
element in the heathen world; yet one which, do what he might, 
would always obtrude itself upon public notice. But the Roman 
satirists went further. They accused the Jews of such hatred of all 
other religionists, that they would not even show the way to any who 
worshipped otherwise, nor point out the cooling spring to the thirsty." "•/'"• sat. 
According to Tacitus, there was a political and religious reason for 
this. In order to keep the Jews separate from all other nations, 
Moses had given them rites, contrary to those of any other race, that 
they might regard as unholy what was sacred to others, and as lawful 
what they held in al)omination.^ Such a people deserved neither "Hist. v. 13 
consideration nor pity ; and when the historian tells how thousands 
of their number had l)een banished by Tiberius to Sardinia, he 
dismisses the probal:)ility of their perishing in that severe climate 
with the cynical remark, that it entailed a 'poor loss'" (vile ^Ann., 

Comp. Suff. 

damnum). Tib. 36 

Still, the JcAV was there in the midst of them. It is impossible 
to fix the date when the first Jewish wanderers found their way to the 
capital of the world. We know, that in the wars under Pompey, 
Cassius, and Antonius, many were brought captive to Rome, and sold 
as slaves. In general, the Republican party was hostile, the Ca?sars 
were friendly, to the Jews. The Jewish slaves in Rome proved an 
unprofitable and troublesome acquisition. They clung so tenaciously 
to their ancestral customs, that it was impossible to make them con- 
form to the wavs of heathen households.'' How far they would carrv 'P/'iVo.Lejr. 

act Caj. pii. 

their passive resistance, appears from a story told l)y Josephus," about Frcf- p- wi 
some Jewish priests of his acquaintance, who, during their captivity 
in Rome, refused to eat anything but figs and nuts, so as to avoid the 
defilement of Gentile food.^ Their Roman masters deemed it prudent 

^ Lutterbeck (Neutest. Lebrbegr. p. 384, 402. etc.). re.siard.s these priests as 
119), follo\viii«: up the suggestions of the acousei's of 8t. Paul, who brought 
Wieseler (Chroii. <1. Apost. Zeitalt. ])p. about liis martynloiii. 

Life ;i 


BOOK to give their Jewish slaves their freedom, either at a small ransom, or 
I even without it. These freedmen {liberti) formed the nucleus of the 

^-"v^-^ Jewish community in Rome, and in great measure determined its 
social character. Of course they were, as always, industrious, sober, 
pushing. In course of time many of them acquired wealtli. By-and- 
by Jewish immigrants of greater distinction swelled their number. 
Still their social position was inferior to that of their co-religionists in 
other lands. A Jewish population so large as 40,000 in tlie time of 
Augustus, and 60,000 in that of Til)erius, would naturally include all 
ranks — merchants, bankers, literati^ even actors.^ In a city which 
offered such temptations, they would number among them those of 
every degree of religious profession ; nay, some Avho would not only 
imitate the habits of those around, but try to outdo their gross 
licentiousness.^ Yet, even so, they would vainly endeavor to efface 
the hateful mark of being Jews. 

Augustus had assigned to the Jews as tlieir special quarter the 
' fourteenth region ' across the Tiber, which stretched from the slope 
of the Vatican onwards and across the Tiber-island, where the boats 
from Ostia were wont'to unload. This seems to have been their poor 
Mart. i.4i; (juartcr, chiefly inhabited by hawkers, sellers of matches,* glass, old 
clothes and second-hand wares. The Jewish ])urying-ground in that 
quarter* gives evidence of their condition. The whole appointments 
and the graves are mean. There is neitlier marble nor any trace of 
painting, unless it be a rough representation of the seven-1)ranched 
candlestick in red coloring. Another Jewish quarter Avas l)y the 
Porta Capena, where the Appian Way entered the city. Close by, 
the ancient sanctuary of Egeria was utilized at the time of Juvenal * 
as a Jewish hawking place. But there must have been richer Jews 
also in that neighl^orhood, since the burying-place tlierc discovered 
has paintings — some even of mythological figures, of which the meaning- 
has not yet been ascertained. A third Jewish burying-ground was 
near the ancient Christian catacombs. 

But indeed, the Jewish residents in Rf)me must have s])read over 
every quarter of tlio city — even the l)est — to judge by the location of 
their Synagogues. From inscriptions, we have been made acquainted 
not only with the existence, but with the names, of not fewer than 

' Conip., for exami)le. Mart. x\. {)\; Gesch. Lsr. vol. vii. p. 27. 
Jos. Life 3. ^ Described by Bnsio, but since un- 

'^ Martialis, n. s. The ' Anc/n'ohis' known. Com\).Frie(Ud/ide7% U.S. vol. 

by wbom the poet would have the Jew iii. pp. 510, ~A\. 
swear, is a corrui)tion oi Annchi Elohhn * Sat. iii. 13; vi. 542. 

( ' I am God ') in Ex. xx. 2. Com)). EirahJ. 

Xll. o 


seven of tlieso Synagogues. Three of them respectively bear the 
names of Augustus, Agripjja, and Vohnnnius, eitlieras tlieir i)atrons, 
or because the worshij)pers were cliietly their attencUints and clients: 
while two of them derived tiieir names from W\q, Campua Martua^, and 
the quarter Suhura in wliich they stood.' The ^ Sijnafjocje Elaias' 
may have been so called from bearing on its front the device of an 
olive-tree, a favourite, and in Rome specially signiticant, emblem of 
Israel, whose fruit, crushed beneath heavy weight, would yield the 
[)recious oil by which the Divine light would shed its brightness 
through the night of heathendom.- Of course, there must have 
been other Synagogues besides those wdiose names have been dis- 

One other mode of tracking the footsteps of Israel's wanderings 
seems strangely signiticant. It is l)y tracing their records among the 
dead, reading them on broken tombstones, and in ruined monuments. 
They are rude, and the inscriptions — most of them in bad Greek, or 
still worse Latin, none in Hebrew — are like the stannnering of 
strangers. Yet what a contrast between the simple faith and earnest 
hope which they express, and the grim proclamation of utter disbelief 
in any future to the soul, not unmixed with language of coarsest 
materialism, on the graves of so many of the polished Romans ! 
Truly the pen of God in history has, as so often, ratified the sentence 
which a nation had })ronounced upon itself. That civilisation was 
doomed which could inscribe over its dead such words as: ' To eternal 
sleep; ' 'To perpetual rest; " or more coarsely -express it thus, ' I was 
not, and I became; I was, and am no more. Thus much is true; who 
says other, lies; for I shall not be,' adding, as it were by way of 
moral, ' And thou who livest, drink, play, come.' Not so did God 
teach His people: and, as Ave i)ick our way among these broken 
stones, we can understand how a religion, which proclaimed a hope 
so different, must have spoken to the hearts of nmny even at R(une, 
and much more, how that blessed assurance of life and immortality, 
which Christianity afterwards lu'ought, could win its tliousands, 
though it were at the cost of poverty, shame, torture, and the 

Wandering from graveyard to graveyard, and deciphering the 
records of the dead, we can almost read the history of Israel in the 
days of the Caesars, or when Paul the prisoner set foot on the soil of 
Italy. When St, Paul, on the journey of the 'Castor and I'ollux,' 
touched at Syracuse, he would, during his stay of three days, find 

' Coiiip. Fripdiander. u. s. vol. iii. p. 510. - Midr. R. <iii Ex. 'M\. 




■•' Jns. Ant. 
xvii. 12. 1; 
War il. 7. : 

^ Acts 
xxviii. 17 

himself ill the midst of u Jewish commimit}', as we learn trom an 
inscription. When he disembarked at Puteoli, he was in the oldest 
Jewish settlement next to that of Rome,'' where the loving hospitality 
of Christian Israelites constrained him to tarry over a Sabbath. As 
he ' went towards Rome, ' and reached Capua, he would meet Jews 
there, as we infer from the tombstone of one * Alfius Juda,' who had 
been 'Archon ' of the Jews, and 'Archisynagogus ' in Cai)ua. As he 
neared the city, he found in Anxur (Terracina) a Synagogue. ^ In Rome 
itself the Jewish community was organized as in other places." It 
sounds strange, as after these many centuries we again read the 
names of the Archons of their various Synagogues, all Roman, such as 
Claudius, Asteris, Julian (who was Archon alike of the Campesian and 
the Agrippesian Synagogue j^riest, the son of Julian the Archisyn- 
agogus, or chief of the eldership of the Augustesian Synagogue). 
And so in other places. On these tombstones we find names of 
Jewish Synagogue-dignitaries, in every centre of population — in 
Pompeii, in Venusia, the birthplace of Horace; in Jewish catacombs; 
and similarly Jewish inscriptions in Africa, in Asia, in the islands of 
the Mediterranean, in ^-Egina, in Patrae, in Athens. Even where as 
yet records of their early settlements have not been discovered, we 
still infer their presence, as we remember the almost incredible extent 
of Roman commerce, which led to such large settlements in Britain, 
or as we discover among the tombstones those of '■ Syrian' merchants, 
as in Spain (where St. Paul hoped to preach, no doubt, also to his own 
countrymen), throughout Gaul, and even in the remotest parts of 
Germany.^ Thus the statements of Josephus and of Philo, as to the 
dispersion of Israel throughout all lands of the known world, are 
fully borne out. 

But the special importance of the Jewish community in Rome lay 
in its contiguity to the seat of the government of the world, where 
every movement could be watched and influenced, and where it could 
lend support to the wants and wishes of that compact body which, 
however widely scattered, was one in heart and feeling, in thought 
and purpose, in faith and practice, in suflfering and in prosperity.'^ 
Thus, when upon the death of Herod a deputation from Palestine 
appeared in the capital to seek the restoration of their Theocracy 

' Comp. Cassel, in Ersch u. Gruber's 
Encyclop. 2d sect. vol. xxvii. p. 147. 

'■^ Comp. Friedldnder, u. s. vol. ii. 
pp. 17-204 passim. 

■* It was probably this unity of Israel- 
itisli interests which Cicero had in view 

(Pro Flacco, 28) when he took such 
credit for his boldness in daring to stand 
up against the Jews — unless, indeed, the 
orator only meant to make a point in 
favour of his client. 


under a Roman protectorate," no less than 8,000 of the Roman Jews CHAI\ 
joined .it. And in case of need they could find powerful friends, v 
not oidy among the Herodian princes, but among court favourites ^ — — ' 
who were Jews, like the actor of whom Josephus speaks;" among "^'^"l' ^^\. 
those who were inclined towards Judaism, like Poppaea, the dissolute war.n. e.i 
wife of Nero, whose coffin as that of a Jewess was laid among the 
urns of the emperors;' or among real proselytes, like those of all 
ranks who, from sui)crstition or conviction, had i(lentified themselves 
with the Synagogue.'-' 

In truth, there was no law to prevent the si)read of Judaism. 
Excepting the brief period when Tiberius" banished the Jews from '^ioa.d. 
Rome and sent 4,000 of their number to fight the banditti in Sardinia, 
the Jews enjoyed not only perfect liberty, but exceptional privileges. 
In the reign of Caesar and of Augustus we have quite a series of 
edicts, which secured the full exercise of their religion and their 
communal rights.^ In virtue of these they were not to be disturlK'd 
in their religious ceremonies, nor in the observance of their sabbaths 
and feasts. The annual Temi:)le-tribute Was allowed to be transported 
to Jerusalem, and the alienation of these funds by the ci\il magis- 
trates treated as sacrilege. As the Jews objected to bear arms, or 
march, on the Sabbath, they were freed from military service. On 
similar grounds, they were not obliged to appear in courts of law on 
their holy days. Augustus even ordered that, Avhen the public dis- 
tribution of corn or of money annuig the citizens fell on a Sabliath, 
the Jews were to receive their share on the following day. In a 
similar spirit the Roman authorities confirmed a decree by which the 
founder of Antioch, Seleucus I. (Nicator),"* had granted the Jews the '^ob.asoB.c. 
I'ight of citizenship in all the cities of Asia Minor and Syria whicli 
he hatl built, and the privilege of receiving, instead of the oil that 
was distributed, which their religion forbade them to use,"" an equi- -Ab. sar. 
valcnt in money. "^ These rights were maintained by Vespasian and f./,«. Am. 
Titus even after the last Jewish war, notwithstanding the earnest ^"" ^" ^ 
remonstrances of these cities. No wonder, that at the death of 
Caesar*-' the Jews of Rome gathered for many nights, waking strange f44B.c. 
feelings of awe in the city, as they chanted in mournful melodies 
their Psalms around the pyre on which the body of their benefactor 

' Sc/itl/er (Gesch. fl. Rom. Kaiser- - Tlie question of Jewisli iiroselytes 

reiclis, p. 588) denies tliat PopjK^a was a will be treatefl in anotlier i)hice. 

in'osclyte. It is, indeed, true, as he ■■• Conip. ./o.v. Ant. xiv. H». itassim, and 

ari:;ues, that the fact of her entomlmient .xvi. (i. These edicts are collated in Krehs. 

afibrds no absolute evidence of this, if Decreta Ronianor. iiro .Tiul. facta, with 

taken liy itself; but conip. Jos. Ant. xx. lon.i? comments by the author, and l)y 

8. 1 1 ; Life 3. Lc/rysftohn. 


1500K had been burnt, and raised their pathetie dirges." The measures of 

I Tiberius against them were Uue to tlic iutluence of his favourite 

^^^. — ' Sejanus, and ceased with his sway. Besides, they were the outcome 

'Suet.cxs. Qf j)nl)lic feeling at the time against all foreign rites, which had l)een 

roused by the vile conduct of the priests of Isis towards a Roman 

matron, and was again provoked 1)y a gross imposture upon Fulvia, a 

noble Roman proselyte, on the part of some vagabond Rabbis. But 

even so, there is no reason to believe that literally all Jews had left 

Rome. Many Avould find means to remain secretly behind. At any 

rate, twenty years afterwards Philo found a large communit}' there, 

ready to support him in his mission on behalf of his Egyptian 

countrymen. Any temporar}' measures against the Jews can, 

therefore, scarcely be regarded as a serious interference with tlieir 

privileges, or a cessation of the Imperial favour shown to them. 




It was not only in the capital of the Empire that the Jews enjoyed CHAP, 
the rights of Roman citizenship. Many in Asia Minor could boast ^^l 
of the same privilege.'' The Seleucidic rulers of Syria had previously ^- — "< ' 
bestowed kindred privileges on the Jews in many places. Thus, they xi^'^'io"*' 
possessed in some cities twofold rights: the status of Roman and ^^f^^^j-j 
the privileges of Asiatic, citizenship. Those who enjoyed the former '-^^"^ 
were entitled to a civil government of their own, under archons of 
their choosing, quite independent of the rule and tribunals of the 
cities in which they lived. As instances, we may mention the Jews 
of Sardis, Ephesus, Delos, and apparently also of Antioch. But, 
whether legally entitled to it or not, they probably everywhere 
claimed the right of self-government, and exercised it, except in 
times of persecution. But, as already stated, they also possessed, 
besides this, at least in many places, the privileges of Asiatic citizen- 
ship, to the same extent as their heathen fellow-citizens. This two- 
fold status and jurisdiction might have led to serious complications, 
if the archons had not confined their authority to strictly communal 
interests,'' without interfering with the ordinary administration of bcomp. 

• • • Acts xix 14 

justice, and the Jews willingly submitted to the sentences i)ronounced ix. 2 
by their own tribunals. 

But, in truth, they enjoyed even more than religious liberty and 
communal privileges. It was quite in the spirit of the times, that 
]X)tentates friendly to Israel bestowed largesses alike on the Temple 
in Jerusalem, and on the Synagogues in the provinces. The magni- 
ficent porch of the Temple was ' adorned ' with many such 'dedicated 
gifts. ' Thus, we read of repeated costly oiferings by the Ptolemies, 
of a golden wreath which Sosius offered after he had taken Jerusalem 
in conjunction with Herod, and of rich flagons which Augustus and c jos. Ant. 
his wife had given to the Sanctuary." And, although this same xili.Vi: 
Emperor praised his grandson for leaving Jerusalem unvisited on his 5 f Ant xiV. 
journey from Egypt to Syria, yet he himself made provision for a v^'it" 

" Jos. War 
ii. II). i: 11 
17. •> 


iiooK daily ScU'ritice on his helialf, whit-h only ceased when the last war 
' against Rome was i)roclaimed.^ Even the circumstance that tliere 

- — ■ ' ' — ' was a ' Court of the Gentiles, ' with marble screen beautifully orna- 
mented, bearing tablets which, in Latin and Greek, warned Gentiles 
not to proceed further,' proves that the Sanctuary was largely attended 
by others than Jews, or, in the words of Josephus, that ' it was held 
in reverence by nations from the ends of the earth.' ^' 

In Syria also, where, according to Josephus, the largest numlier of 
Jews lived, ^ they experienced special favour. In Antioch their rights 
and immunities were recorded on tables of brass. ^ 

But, indeed, the capital of Syria was one of their favourite 
resorts. It will be remembered what importance attached to it in 
the early history of the Christian Church. Antioch was the third 
city of the Empire, and lay just outside what the Rabbinists desig- 
nated as ' Syria' and still regarded as holy ground. Thus it formed, 
so to speak, an advanced post between the Palestinian and the 
Gentile world. Its chief Synagogue was a magnificent building, to 
which the successors of Antiochus Epiphanes had given the spoils 
which that monarch had brought from the Temple. The connection 
between Jerusalem and Antioch was very close. All that occurred 
in that city was eagerly watched in the Jewish capital. The spread 
of Christianity there must have excited deep concern. Careful as 
the Talmud is not to afford unwelcome information, which might 
have led to further mischief, we know that three of the principal 
Rabbis went thither on a mission — we can scarcely doubt for the 
purpose of arresting the progress of Christianity. Again, we find at 
a later period a record of religious controversy in Antioch l)etween 
Rabbis and Christians.* Yet the Jews of Antioch were strict!}'' 
Hellenistic, and on one occasion a great Rabl)i was unable to find 
among tliem a copy of even the Book of Esther in Hebrew, which, 
accordingly, he had to write out from memory for his use in their 
Synagogue. A fit place this great border-city, crowded l)y Hellenists, 
in close connection Avith Jerusalem, to be the birthplace of the name 
'Christian,' to send forth a Paul on his mission to the Gentile world, 
and to obtain for it a charter of citizenship far nobler than that of 
which the record was graven on tablets of brass. 

But, whatever privileges Israel might enjoy, history records an 

' One of tlie.-<e tablets has lately ])eeii - War, vii. :>. 3. 

excavated. Comp. 'The Temple: its ■' War, vii. 5. 2. 

Ministry and Services in the Time of * Comp. generally Nenbnner, Googr. 

Christ,"' p. 24. (hi Tahnud, pp. S12." :-!l:!. 


almost continuous series of attc]ni)ts, on the part oT tlie commu- CHAP, 
nities anionii' wliom they lived, to deprive them not only of their vi 
immunities, hut even of their common rights. Foremost among "— ^r' — ' 
the reasons oi' this antagonism we i)laee the absolute contrariety 
be'tween heathenism and the Synagogue, and the social isolation 
which Judaism rendered necessary. It was avowedly unlawful for 
the Jew even ' to keep company, or come unto one of another nation. ' " » Acts x. 28 
To quarrel with this, was to tind fault with the law and the religion 
which made him a Jew. But besides, there was that pride of descent, 
creed, enlightenment, and national privileges, which St. Paul so graphi- 
cally sums up as ' making l)oast of God and of the laAv. ' '' However dif- '' comp. 
ferently they might have expressed it, Philo and Hillel would have been 24 
at one as to the absolute superiority of the Jew as such. Pretensions 
of this kind must have been the more provocative, that the populace 
at any rate envied the prosperity which Jewish industry, talent, and 
capital everywhere secured. Why should that close, foreign corpora- 
tion possess every civic right, and yet be free from many of its burdens? 
Why should their meetings be excepted from the ' collegia illicita " ? 
why should they alone be allowed to export part of the national 
wealth, to dedicate it to their superstition in Jerusalem ? The Jew 
could not well feign any real interest in what gave its greatness to 
Ephesus, its attractiveness to Corinth, its influence to Athens. He 
was ready to profit by it*; but his inmost thought must have been 
contempt, and all he wanted was quietness and protection in his own 
pursuits. What concern had he with those petty squabbles, ambitions, 
flr designs, which agitated the turbulent populace in those Grecian 
cities ? what cared he for their popular meetings and noisy discus- 
sions ? The recognition of the fact that, as Jews, they were strangers 
in a strange land, made them so loyal to the ruling powers, and pro- 
cured them the protection of kings and Cgesars. But it also roused 
the hatred of the populace. 

That such should have been the case, and these widely scattered 
memliers have been united in one body, is a unique fact in history'. 
Its only true explanation must be sought in a higher Divine impulse. 
The links which bound them together were: a common creed, a 
common life, a common centre, and a common Iwpe. 

Wherever the Jew sojourned, or however he might differ from 
his brethren. Monotheism, the Divine mission of Moses, and the 
authority of the Old Testament, were equally to all unquestioned 
articles of belief. It may well have been that the Hellenistic Jew, 
living in the midst of a hostile, curious, and scurrilous population, did 



BOOK not. care to oxhil)it over his house and doorposts, at the right of the 
I entrance, the Mezuzah,^ which enclosed the folded parchment that, on 

^-^-^r — ' twenty-two lines, bore the words from Deut. iv. 4-9 and xi. 13-21, 
or to call attention b}' their In'eadth to the I'ephiUin,' or phylacteries 
on his left arm and forehead, or even to make observable the Tsitsith,^ 
or fringes on the borders of his garments/ Perhaps, indeed, all these 
observances may at that time not have been deemed incumbent on 
every Jew.' At any rate, we do not find mention of them in 
heathen writers. Similarly, they could easily keep out of view, or 
they nmy not have had conveniences for, their prescribed purifications. 
But in every place, as we have abundant evidence, where there were 
at least ten BaUanim — male householders who had leisure to give 

» Acts XV. 21 themselves to regular attendance — they had, from ancient times," 
one, and, if possible, more Synagogues." Where there was no Syn- 

bActsxvi. agogue there was at least a Proseuche,^' or meeting-place, under the 
open sky, after the form of a theatre, generally outside the town, near 
a river or the sea, for the sake of lustrations. These, as we know 
from classical writers, were well known to the heathen, and even 
frequented by them. Their Sabbath observance, their fasting on 
Thursdays, their Day of Atonement, their laws relating to food, and 
their pilgrimages to Jerusalem — all found sympathisers among Juda- 
ising Gentiles. '^ They even watched to see, how the Sabbath lamp 
was kindled, and the solemn prayers spoken which marked the 
beginning of the Sabbath.® But to the Jew the Synagogue was the 

1 Ber. iii. 3 ; Meg. i. 8 ; Moed K. iii. 4 ; already been pointed out in that book 

Men. iii. 7. Comp. Jo.s. Ant. iv. 8. 13; and of gigantic learning, Spencer, De Leg. 

the tractate Mezuzah in Kirchheim, Sep- Hebr. p. 1213. F/-rt«^-e^ (Ueber d. Eintl. 

tern libri Talmvid. parvi Hierosol. pp. d. Pal. Exeg., pp. 89, 90j tries in vain to 

12-17. controvert the statement. The insuffi- 

^ St. Matt, xxiii. 5; Ber. i. 3; Shabb. vi. ciency of his arguments has been fully 

2 ; vii. 3 ; xvi. 1 ; Er. x. 1, 2 ; Sheq. iii. 2 ; shown by Ilerzfeld (Gesch. d. Volk. Isr. 

Meg. i. 8; iv. 8; Moed. Q. iii. 4; Sanh. vol. iii. p. 224). 

xi. 3; Men. iii. 7; iv. 1; Kel. xviii. 8; '^ avvayooyr}, Jos. Ant.x\\.6.^;Vfnv, 

Miqv. X. 3; Yad. iii. 3. Comp. Kirch- ii. 14. 4. 5; vii. 3. 3; Philo, Quod omnis 

7<e(?rt, Tract. Tephillin, u. s. pp. 18-21. probus liber, ed. Mangey, ii. i). 458; 

3 Moed K. iii. 4; Eduy. iv. 10; Men. avvaycbyiov, Philo, Ad Caj. ii. p. 591; 

iii. 7; iv. 1. Comp. Kirchheim, Tract. cTafifiarelov, Jos. Ant. xvi. 6. 2; npo- 

Tsitsith. u. s. pp. 22-24. crevKrijpiov, Philo, Vita Mosis, lib. iii., 

* The Tephilliii enclo-sed a transcript ii. p. KJS. 

of Exod. xiii. 1-10. 11-16; Deut. vi. 4-9; ' TCpoaevx)). Jos. Ant. xiv. 10. 23, 

xl. 13-21. The Tsifsith were worn in Life 54: Philo, In Place, ii. p. 523; Ad 

obedience to the injunction in Num. xv. Caj. ii. pp. 565, 596; Epiphnn. Ha»r. 

37 etc. ; Deut. xxii. 12 (comp. St. Matt. Ixxx. 1. Comp. J^i/^-ew. Sat. iii. 296: 'Ede 

ix. 20; xiv. 36; St. Mark V. 27; St. Luke ubi consistas? in qua te quajro pros- 

viii. 44). eucha? ' 

^ It is remarkable that Aristeas seems ** Comp.. among others, Ovid, Ars 

to speak only of the phylacteries on the Amat. i. 76: Jnr. Sat. xiv. 96, 97; Ilor. 

arm, and Piiilo of those for the head. Sat. i. 5. 100; 9.70; Suet. Aug. 93. 

Avhile the LXX. takes the command en- " Persius v. iso. 
tirely in a metaphorical sense. This has 


l)on(l of union throughout tlie worUl. There, on Sabbath and feast CHAP. 
days they met to read, from the same Leetionary, the same Seri})ture- VI 
lessons which their brethren read throughout the world, and to say, ^— -v^^ 
in the words of the same liturgy, their common prayers, catching 
echoes of the gorgeous Temple-services in Jerusalem. The heathen 
must have been struck with awe as they listened, and watched in the 
gloom of the Synagogue the mysterious light at the far curtained end, 
where the sacred oracles were reverently kept, wrapped in costly 
coverings. Here the stranger Jew also would find himself at home: 
the same arrangements as in his own land, and the well-known ser- 
vices and })rayers. A hospitable welcome at the Sabbath-meal, and 
in many a home, would be pressed on him, and ready aid be proffered 
in work or trial. 

For, deepest of all convictions was that of their common centre; 
strongest of all feelings was the love which bound them to Palestine 
and to Jerusalem, the city of God, the joy of all the earth, the glory 
of His pco])le Israel. ' H" I forget thee, Jerusalem, let my right hand 
forget her cunning; let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth.' 
Hellenist and Eastern equally realised this. As the soil of his native 
land, the deeds of his people, or the graves of his fathers draw the 
far-off wanderer to the home of his childhood, or fill the mountaineer 
in his exile with irrepressible longing, so the sounds ^^1lich the Jew 
heard in his Synagogue, and the observances which he kept. Nor 
was it with him merely matter of patriotism, of history, or of associ- 
ation. It was a religious principle, a spiritual hope. No truth more 
firmly rooted in the consciousness of all, than that in Jerusalem alone 
men could truly worship." As Daniel of old had in his hour of »st. John 
worshi}) turned towards the Holy Cit}', so in the Synagogue and in 
his prayers every Jew turned towards Jerusalem; and anything that 
might imply want of reverence, when looking in that direction, was 
considered a grievous sin. From every Synagogue in the Diasjjora 
the annual Temple-tribute went up to Jerusalem,^ no doubt ofteu 
accompanied by rich votive offerings. Few, Avho could undertake or 
a fiord the journey, but had at some time or other gone up to the Holy 
City to attend one of the great feasts.^ Philo, who was held by the 
same spell as the most bigoted Rabbinist, had himself been one of 
those dejMited by his fellow-citizens to offer prayers and sacrifices in 
the great Sanctuary.-^ Views and feelings of this kind help us to un- 

^ Comp. Jos. Ant. xiv. 7. 2 ; xvi. 6, - Philo, De Moiiarchia, ii. p. 223. 

passiuni; Ph/h, De Mouarchia, ed. Man- * Philo, in a fragment preserved in 

gey. ii. p. 224; Ad Caj. ii. p. 568; Contra Euseh.. Pra^par. Ev. viii. 13. Wliat tlie 

Flacc. ii. ]). 524. Temple was in the estimation of Israel, 

Iv. 20 




' War vi. 9. 
3: comp. ii. 
14. 3 

" Hos. si. 11 

c Mldr. on 
Cant. i. 1.5, 
ed. War- 
shau, p. 11& 

a Men. 53 h 

derstand, how, on .some gTeat feast, as Joseplms states on sufficient 
authority, the i)opukxtion of Jerusalem — within its ecclesiastical 
boundaries — could have swelled to the enormous number of nearly 
three millions/' 

And still, there was an even stronger liond in their common hope. 
That hope pointed them all, wherever scattered, back to Palestine. 
To them the coming (jf the Messiah undoubtedly implied the restora- 
tion of Israel's kingdom, and, as a tirst i)art in it, the return of 'the 
dispersed.' ' Indeed, every devout Jew prayed, day by day: ' Proclaim 
by Thy loud trumi)ct our deliverance, and raise up a l)anner to 
gather our dispersed, and gather us together from the four ends of 
the earth. Blessed be Thou, Lord! Who gatherest the outcasts 
of Thy peojjle Israel.'^ That prayer included in its generality also 
the lost ten tribes. So, for example, the prophecy'' was rendered: 
' They hasten hither, like a bird out of Egypt, ' — referring to Israel 
of old; 'and like a dove out of the land of Assyria' — referring to 
the ten tribes."^ And thus even these wanderers, so long lost, were 
to be reckoned in the field of the Good Shepherd. * 

It is worth while to trace, how universally and warmly both 
Eastern and Western Judaism cherished this hope of all Israel's 
return to their own land. The Targumim l)ear repeated reference to 
it;'* and although there may be question as to the exact date of 
these paraphrases, it cannot be doubted, that in this respect they 
represented the views of the Synagogue at the time of Jesus. For 
the same reason we may gather from the Talmud and earliest com- 
mentaries, what Israel's hope was in regard to the return of the 
' dispersed."** It was a l)eautiful idea to liken Israel to the olive-tree, 
which is never stripped of its leaves.'' The storm of trial that had swept 
over it was, indeed, sent in judgment, but not to destroy, only to 
pui-ity. Even so, Israel's persecutions had served to keep them from 

II Messia, p. 253. 

* Notably in connection witli Ex. xii. 
42 (both in tlie Pseudo-Jon. and Jer. 
Targ;uni); Numb. xxiv. 7 (Jer. Targ.); 
Deut. XXX. 4 (Targ. Ps.-Jon.): Is. xiv. 29; 
Jer. xxxiii. i:^: Hos. xiv. 7; Zech. x. (i. 
Dr. Drummond, in his 'Jewish Messiah,' 
p. :H3.5. quotes from tlie Targnm on 
Lamentations. But tiiis dates from long 
after the Talmudic period. 

^ As each sentence which follows 
would necessitate one or more references 
to difiereiU works, the reader, who may 
be desirous to verify the statements in 
the text, is generally referred to Cnstelli, 
w. s. pp. 251-2.'j.'i. 

and what its loss boded, not only to 
them, but to the whole world, will be 
shown in' a later part of this book. 

1 Even Maimonides, in spite of liis 
desire to minimise the Mes.sianic expect- 
ancy, admits this. 

••'"This is tlie tcntli of the eigiiteen (or 
ratlier nineteen) l)enedictions in the daily 
l)rayers. Of these tlie tirst and the last 
three are certainly the oldest. But this 
tenth also dates from liefore tiie des- 
truction of Jerusalem. Cornp. Ziniz, 
Gottesd. Vortr. d. Juden. p. 368. 

■^ Comp. Jer. Sanh. x. (i; Sanh. 110 />: 
Yalk. Shim. 

* The suggestion is made by Castelli. 



becoiniiiii" mixed with the (jlciitiles. Heaven and cartli might ])C 
destroyed, but not Israel; and their final deliverance would Jar out- 
i^trip in nmrvellousness that ironi Egyi)t. The winds would blow to 
bring together the dispersed; nay, if there were a single Israelite in a 
land, howeverdistant, he would be restored. With every honour would 
the nations l)ring them V)aek. The patriarchs and all the just would 
rise to share in the joys of the new possession of their land; new 
hymns as well as the <jld ones would rise to the praise of Gotl. Nay, 
the bounds of the land would be extended far l)eyond what they had 
ever been, and nmde as wide as originally promised to Abraham. 
Nor would that possession be ever taken from them, nor those joys 
be ever succeeded by sorrows/ In view of such general expectations 
we cannot tail to nuirk with what wonderful soll^riety the Apostles put 
the question to Jesus: 'Wilt Thou at this time restore the kingdom 
to Israel ?'•■' 

Hopes and expectations such as these are expressed not only in 
Talmudical writings. We find them throughout that very interest- 
ing Ai)ocalyptic class of literature, the Pseudepigrapha, to which 
reference has already been nmdc. The two earliest of them, the 
Book of Enoch and the Sibylline Oracles, are equally emphatic on 
this subject. The seer in the Book of Enoch beholds Israel in the 
Messianic time as coming in carriages, and as borne on the wings of 
the wind from East, and West, and South." Fuller details of that 
happy event are furnished by the Jewish Sibyl. In her utterances 
these three events are connected together: the coming of the Mes- 
siah, the rebuilding of the Temple,' and the restoration of the dis- 
persed,'' when all nations would bring their wealth to the House of 
God.'^ The latter trait specially reminds us of their Hellenistic origin. 
A century later the same joyous contidenco, only perhaps more clearly 
worded, appears in the so-called 'Psalter of Solomon.' Thus the 
seventeenth Psalm bursts into this strain: ' Blessed are they who shall 
live in those days — in the reunion of the tribes, which God brings 
al)out."^ And no wonder, since they are the days when 'the King. 


' The fiction of two Messiahs — one 
the Sou of David, the otlier the Son of 
Joseph, the latter beincj connected with 
the restoration of the ten tribes — has been 
conclusively shown to he the i)Ost-Chris- 
tian date (conip. Schottgen, Home Hebr. 
i. \). 359; and Wiinsche, Leiden d. Mess, 
p. 109). Possil)ly it was invented to 
find an explanation for Zech. xli. 10 
(comp. Slice. 52 a), just as the Socinian 
doctrine of the assumption of Christ into 

heaven at the beii'inniniz; of His ministry 
was invented to account for St. Joim iii. 

- M. Maurice Vernes (Hist, des Idees 
Messian. pp. 43-119) maintains that the 
writers of Enoch and Or. Sib. iii. ex- 
pected this period under the rule of the 
Maccabees, and reii'arded one (»f tliem as 
the Messiali. It imi)Iies a jieculiar read- 
in^• of iiistory, and a lively inuiii'lnatiou, 
to arrive at such a conclusion. 

!< Book of ; 
comp. xc.aa 

■: B. In. 286- 
294; comp. 
B. V. 414- 

a iii. 732-735 

e iii. 766-783 

f Ps. of Sol. 
vsii. 50: 
comp. also 
Ps. xi. 




» Ps. Sal. 
xviii. 23 

*> V. 25 

•^T. 27 

'1 V. 28 

e vv. 30, 31 

t Book or. 
•Jub. cli. i. ; 
fomp. al^>( 
ell. xxili. 

e St. .John 
11. 19 

the Son of David,"" having purged Jerusalem" and destroyed the 
heathen l)y the word of His mouth," would gather together a holy 
people which He would rule with justice, and judge the tribes of His 
people/ • dividing thein over the land according to tribes; ' when ' no 
stranger would any longer dwell among them.''' 

Another pause, and we reach the time when Jesus the Messiah 
appeared. Knowing the characteristics of that time, we scarcely 
wonder that the Book of Jubilees, whicli dates from that period, 
should have been Rabbinic in its cast rather than Apocalyptic. Yet 
even there the reference to the future glory is distinct. Thus we are 
told, that, though for its wickedness Israel had been scattered, God would 
' gather them all from the midst of the heathen, ' ' build among them 
His Sanctuary, and dwell with them. ' That Sanctuary was to ' be for 
ever and ever, and God would appear to the eye of every one, and 
every one acknowledge that He was the God of Israel, and the Father 
of all the Children of Jacob, and King upon Mount Zion, from ever- 
lasting to everlasting. And Zion and Jerusalem shall be holy. "^ When 
listening to this language of, perhaps, a contemporary of Jesus, we can in 
some measure understand the popular indignation which such a charge 
would call forth, as that the Man of Nazareth had proposed to destroy 
the Temple,® or that he thought merely of the children of Jacob. 

There is an ominous pause of a century before we come to the next 
work of this class, which bears the title of the Fourth Book of Esdras. 
That century had been decisive in the history of Israel, Jesus had 
lived and died; His Apostles had gone forth to bear the tidings of the 
new Kingdom of God; the Church had been founded and separated 
from the Synagogue; and the Temple had been destroyed, the Holy 
City laid waste, and Israel undergone sufferings, compared Avith which 
the former troubles might almost be forgotten. But already the new 
doctrine had struck its roots deep alike in Eastern and in Hellenistic 
soil. It were strange indeed it\ in such circumstances, this book 
should not have been diflerent from any that had preceded it; stranger 
still, if earnest Jewish minds and ardent Jewish hearts had re- 
mained wholly unaffected by the new teaching, even though the 
doctrine of the Cross still continued a stumbling-block, and the Gospel- 
announcement a rock of offence. But perhaps we could scarcely 
have been prepared to find, as in the Fourth Book of Esdras, doctrinal 
views which were wholly foreign to Judaism, and evidently derived 
from the New Testament, and which, in logical consistency, would 
seem to lead up to it.^ The greater part of the book maybe described 

^ The doctrinal ))art of IV. Esdras may 
be said to be saturated with tlie do<;ma 

of original sin, which is wholly foreign 
to the theology alike of Rabbinic and 


as restless tossing, the seer being agitated by the problem and the 
consequences of sin, which here for tlietirst and only time is presented 
as in the New Testament; by the question, Avhy there are so few who 
are saved ; and especially by what to a Jew must have seemed the 
inscrutable, terrible mystery of Israel's sufferings and banishment/ 
Yet, so far as we can see, no other way of salvation is indicated than 
that by works and personal righteousness. Throughout there is a 
tone of deep sadness and intense earnestness. It almost seems some- 
times, as if one heard the wind of the new dispensation sweeping 
before it the withered leaves of Israel's autumn. Thus far for the 
princijjal portion of the l)Ook. The second, or Apocalyptic, part, 
endeavors to solve the mystery of Israel's state b}' foretelling their 
future. Here also there are echoes of New Testament utterances. 
What the end is to be, we are told in unmistakable language. His 
'Son,' Whom the Highest has for a long time preserved, to deliver 
' the creature ' by Him, is suddenly to appear in the form of a Man. 
From His mouth shall proceed alike woe, fire, and storm, which are 
the trilnilatiolis of the last days. And as they shall gather for war 
against Him, He shall stand on Mount Zion, and the Holy City 
shall come down from heaven, prepared and ready, and He shall 
destroy all His enemies. But a peaccal)le multitude shall now be 
gathered to Him. These are the ten tribes, who, to separate themselves 
iVorn the ways of the heathen, had wandered far away, miraculously 
lielped, a journey of one and a half years, and who were now similarl}' 
restored by (jrod to their own land. But as for the 'Son,' or those 
who accompanied him, no one on earth would l)e able to see or know 
them, till the day of His appearing."- 

It seems scarcely necessary to complete the series of testimony "'^^"' "'^"^^ 
by referring in detail to a book, called 'The Prophecy and Assump- 
tion of Moses,' and to what is known as the Apocalypse of Baruch, the 
servant of Jeremiah. Both date from probably a somewhat later period 
than the Fourth Book of Esdras, and both are fragmentary. The one 
distinctly anticipates the return of the ten tribes ; '' the other, in the '<Proi> 

Ass. Mos. 

letter to the nine and a half tribes, far beyond the P]uphrates,'" with iv. 7-u: 

vii. 20 

which the book closes, preserves an ominous silence on that point, or cAp. Bar. 
rather alludes to it in language which so strongly reminds us of the ^^^"' "^"^ 

Hellenistic Juduism. Comp. ^'is. \. oli. niatic part, seems successively to take up 

ill. 21, 22; iv. 30. 38; Vis. iii. ch. vi. these three subjects, a!tliou<iii from nuite 

18. 19 (ed. Fritzsche, p. 607); 33-41; vii. another i)oint of view. How different 

46-48; viii. 34-35. the treatment is, need not be told. 

1 It almost seems as if there were a - The better reading is ' in tempore 

l)arallelism between this book and the diei ejus. (v. 52).* 
Epistle to the Romans, which in its dog- 


liOOK adverse oi)iiiioii exi)resse(l in the Talmud, that we cannot help sus- 
I pecting some internal connection l)etween the two.' 

"— ^r~"^ The writing's to which we have referred have all a decidedly 
Hellenistic tinge of thought.^ Still they are not the outcome of 
pure Hellenism. It is therefore with i)eculiar interest that we turn 
to Philo, the great representative of that direction, to see whether he 
would admit an idea so purely national and, as it might seem, exclu- 
sive. Nor are we here left in douht. So universal was this belief, 
so deep-seated the conviction, not only in the mind, but in the heart 
of Israel, that we could scarcely find it more distinctly expressed than 
l)y the great Alexandrian. However low the condition of Israel 
»DeExe- might be, he tells us,'' or however scattered the people to the ends of 
cAi. Frcf. the earth, the banished would, on a given sign, be set free in one day. 

pp. 936, 937 ' ) t. ?? >^ J 

In consistency with his system, he traces this wondrous event to 
their sudden conversion to virtue, which would make their masters 
ashamed to hold any longer in Ijondage those who were so much 
better than themselves. Then, gathering as by one impulse, the dis- 
persed would return from Hellas, from the lands of the barljarians, 
from the isles, and from the continents, led l)y a Divine, superhuman 
api)arition invisible to others, and visible only to themselves. On 
their arrival in Palestine the waste places and the wilderness would ]}e 
inhabited, and the l)arren land transformed into fruitfulness. 

Whatever shades of difterence, then, we may note in the expres- 
sion of these views, all anticipate the deliverance of Israel, their re- 
storation, and future pre-eminent glory, and they all connect these 
events with the coming of the Messiah. This was 'the promise' 
unto which, in their ' instant service night and day, the twelve tribes,' 
bActs however grievously oppressed, hoped to come. ^' To this 'sure word 

xxvi. 7 

of prophecy' 'the strangers scattered' throughout all lands would 
'take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place,' until the 

' 111 Sanh. 110 /^ we read, 'OurEabbirf the one, and tormented in the other 

teach, that the Ten Tribes have no part in (Apoc. Bar. Ix.xxiii. 8). 
the era to come, because it is written ^ Thus, for example, the assertion that 

"Tlie Lord drave them out of their land there had been individuals who fulfilled 

in anger, and in wrath, and in great the commandments of God, Vis. i. ch. iii. 

indignation, and cast them into another 36; the domain of reason, iv. 22; v. 9; 

huul." " Tlie Lord drave them from their general Messianic blessings to the world 

land" — in the present era — "and cast at laige, Vis. i. ch. iv. 27, 28; the idea 

them into another land " — in the era to of a law within their minds, like that of 

come.' In curious agreement with this, which St. Paul sjieaks in the case of the 

Pseudo-Baruch writes to the nine and a heathen, Vis. iii. ch. vi. 45-47 (ed. 

half tribes to 'prepare their hearts to Fritzsche, p. 609). These are only in- 

that wliich they had formerly ijelieved,' stances, and we refer besides to the gen- 

lest they should sutler 'in l)oth eras {ab eral cast of the reasoning. 
utroque sceculo),^ being led captive in 


day dawned, and the daj-star rose in their liearts." It was this CHAP, 
which gave meaning to their worship, tilled them with patience in vi 
suflering, kept them separate from the nations around, and ever tixed " — ~-r — ' 
their hearts and thoughts upon Jerusalem. For the 'Jerusalem' ''2Pet. i. 19 
which was above was '■ the mother ' oi' them all. Yet a little while, 
and He that would come should come, and not tarry — and then all 
the blessing and glory would be theirs. At any moment the glad- 
some tidings might burst upon them, that He had come, when their 
glory would shine out from one end of the heavens to the other. All 
the signs of His Advent had come to pass. Perhaps, indeed, the 
Messiah might even now be there, ready to manifest Himself, so soon 
as the voice of Israel's repentance called Him from His hiding. Any 
hour might that banner be planted on the top of the mountains; 
that glittering sword be unsheathed; that trumpet sound. Closer 
then, and still closer, must be their connection with Jerusalem, as 
their salvation drew nigh; more earnest their longing, and more 
eager their gaze, till the dawn of that long expected day tinged the 
Eastern sky with its brightness. 




' Mac. 23 /' 

' Rosh 
HaSh. 11 a 

t Ber. R. 44 
■' Yalkut S 2 

Ber. R. 1 



The pilgrim who, leaving other countries, entered Palestine, must 
have felt as if he had crossed the threshold of another world. 
Manners, customs, institutions, law, life, nay, the very intercourse 
between man and man, were quite different. All was dominated by 
the one all-absorbing idea of religion. It penetrated every relation 
of life. Moreover, it was inseparably connected with the soil, as well 
as the people of Palestine, at least so long as the Temple stood. 
Nowhere else could the Shekhinah dAvell or manifest itself; nor could, 
unless under exceptional circumstances, and for ' the merit of the 
fathers,' the spirit of prophecy be granted outside its bounds. To 
the orthodox Jew the mental and spiritual horizon was bounded by 
Palestine. It was 'the land'; all the rest of the world, except 
Babylonia, was ' outside the land. ' No need to designate it specially 
as 'holy '; for all here bore the impress of sanctity, as he understood 
it. Not that the soil itself, irrespective of the people, was holy; it 
was Israel that made it such. For, had not God given so many com- 
mandments and ordinances, some of them apparently needless, simjjly 
to call forth the righteousness of Israel;'' did not Israel possess the 
merits of 'the fathers,"' and specially that of Abraham, itself so 
valuable that, even if his descendants had, morally speaking, been as 
a dead body, his merit Avould have been imputed to them?" More 
than that, God had created the Avorld on account of Israel, '' and for 
their merit, making preparation for them long before their appear- 
ance on the scene, just as a king who foresees the birth of his son; 
nay, Israel had been in God's thoughts not only before anything had 
actually been created, but even before every other creative thought.'' 
If these distinctions seem excessive, they were, at least, not out of 
proportion to the estimate formed of Israel's merits. In theory, the 
latter might be su])posed to How from 'good works,' of course, in- 
cluding the strict practice of legal i)iety, and from 'study of the law.' 


But ill reality it was ' study " alone to which such supreme merit chap. 
attached. Practice required knowledge for its direction; such as the Vii 

Am-lui-arets {^ country people,' plebeians, in the Jewish sense of ])eing ^ ^-^-^ 

unlearned) could not possess,'' who had bartered away the highest '.tJomp.Ab. 

crown for a spade with which to dig. And ' the school of Arum ' — 

the sages — the * great ones of the world ' had long settled it, that 

stiuly was before w^orks.'' And how could it well be otherwise, since "Jer. chag. 

* . i. hal 7 

the studies, which engaged His chosen children on earth, equally occu- towards 
pied their Almighty Father in heaven?" Could anything, then, be Jer. Pes', 
lugher than the peculiar calling of Israel, or better cpialify them for cAb. z. 3 6 
l)oing the sons of God? 

It is necessary to transport oneself into this atmosphere to under- 
stand the views entertained at the time of Jesus, or to form any con- 
ception of their infinite contrast in spirit to the new doctrine. The 
abhorrence, not unmingicd with contempt, of all Gentile ways, 
thoughts and associations; the worship of the letter of the Law; the 
self-righteousness, and pride of descent, and still more of knowledge, 
])ecome thusintelligil)le to us, and, equally so, the absolute antagonism 
to the claims of a Messiah, so unlike themselves and their own ideal. 
Tlis first announcement might, indeed, excite hope, soon felt to have 
l)een vain; and His miracles might startle for a time. But the boun- 
dary lines of tlie Kingdom which He traced were essentially different 
from those which they had fixed, and within which t\\Qj had arranged 
everything, alike for the present and the future. Had He been 
content to step witliin them, to complete and realise what they had 
indicated, it miglit have been different. Nay, once admit their funda- 
mental ideas, and there was much that was beautiful, true, and even 
gi'and in the details. But -it was exactly in the former that the diver- 
gence lay. Nor was there any possibility of reform or progress here. 
The past, the present, and the future, alike as regarded the Gentile 
world and Israel, were irrevocably fixed: or rather, it might almost be 
said, there were not such — all continuing as they had lieen from the 
creation of the world, nay, long before it. The Torah had really 
existed 2,000 years before Creation;' the patriarchs had had their ashir 
Academies of study, and they had known and observed all the ordi- onViiuVt. v. 
nances; and traditionalism had the same origin, both as to time and siiau, i).266 
authority, as the Law itself As for the heathen nations, the Law had 
been offered by God to them, l)ut refused, and even their after re])ent- 
ance would prove hypocritical, as all their excuses would lie shown to be 
futile. But as for Israel, even though their good deeds should l)e few, 
yet, by cumulating them frf)m among all the peojile. they would appear 


BOOK ji'reat in the end, and God would exact payment for their .sins as a man 
I docs from his triends, taking little sums at a time. It was in this 

^- — ~^' ' sense, that the Ra))bis employed that sublime tjtjcnre, representing the 
Church as one Ijody, of whicli all the members suH'ered and joyed to- 
gether, which St. Paul adopted and applied in a vastly ditierent and 

»Eph. iv. ic. spiritual sense.'' 

If, on the one hand, the pre-eminence of Israel depended on the 
Land, and, on the other, that of the Land on the presence of Israel 
in it, the Rabbinical comjjlaint was, indeed, well grounded, that its 
M)oundaries were l)ecoming narrow.' We can scarcely expect any 
accurate demarcation of them, since the question, wliat belonged to 
it, was determined by ritual and theological, not by geographical con- 
siderations. Not only the imuiediate neighborhood (as in the case of 
Ascalon), but the very wall of a city (as of Acco and of Caesarea) 
might be Palestinian, and yet the city itself be regarded as ' outside ' the 
sacred limits. All depended on who had originally ])ossessed, and now 
held a place, and hence what ritual ol)ligati(ms lay upon it. Ideally, 
as we may say, ' the land of promise' included all wliich God had 
covenanted to give to Israel, although never yet actually possessed by 
them. Then, in a more restricted sense, the 'land' comprised what 
' they who came u\) from Egypt took possession of, from Chezib [about 
three hours north of Acre] and unto the river [Euphrates], and unto 
Amanah.' This included, of course, the conquests made by David in 
the most prosperous times of the Jewish commonwealth, supposed to 
have extended over Mesopotamia, Syria, Zobali, Achlah, &c. To all 
these districts the general name of Soria, (jr Syria, was afterwards 
given. This formed, at the time of which we Avrite, a sort of inner 
band around 'the land,' in its narrowest and only real sense; just 
as the countries in which Israel was specially interested, such as 
Egypt, Babylon, Amnion, and Moab, formed an outer band. These 
lands were heathen, and yet not quite heathen, since the dedication of 
the so-called Tcru)notJ(, or first-fruits in a prepared state, was expected 
from them, while Soria shared almost all the obligations of Palestine, 
except those of the 'second tithes,' and the fourth year's product of 

'■Lev. xi.x. plants.'' But the wavesheaf at the Paschal Feast, and the two loaves 
at Pentecost, could only l)e brought from wliat had grown on the 
holy soil itself. This latter was roughly defined, as 'all which they 
who came u]) from Babylon took possession of, in the land of Israel, 
and unto Cliozil)." Viewed in this light, there was a special significance 
in the fact that Antioch. where tlie name 'Christian' first marke<l the 
Acts xj. 26 new 'Sect' which had sprung up in Palestine," and where the first 



Gentile Church was lunned," lay just outside the nortliern l)oun(lar3^ CHAP. 
ot ' tlie laud.' .Siuiilarly, we understand, why those Jewish zealots ^^ 
who would tain have imposed on the new Church the yoke of the Law/' ^-^"^c -^ 
concentrated their tirst efforts on that Sorid which was reirarded as a l^^ctsxi. 20, 
kind of outer Palestine. '' Acts xv. 1 

But, even so, there was a ii'radation of sanctity in the Holy Land 
itself, in accordance with ritual distinctions. Ten degrees arc here 
enumerated, beginning with the bare soil of Palestine, and culuiinat- 
ing in the Most Holy Place in the Temple — each implying some ritual 
distinction, which did not attach to a lowei- degree. And yet, although 
the very dust of heathen soil was supposed to carry delilement, like 
corruption or the grave, the spots most sacred were everywhere sur- 
rounded by heathenism ; nay, its traces were visible in Jerusalem 
itself The reasons of this are to be st)ugiit in the political circum- 
stances of Palestine, and in the persistent endeavour of its rulers — 
with the exception of a very brief i^eriod under the Maccabees — to 
Grecianise the country, so as to eradicate that Jewish particularism 
which must always be antagonistic to every foreign element. In 
general, Palestine might be divided into the strictly Jewish territiny, 
and the so-called Hellenic cities. The latter had been built at ditferent 
l)eriods, and were politically constituted after the model of the Greek 
cities, having their own senates (generally consisting of several hundred 
persons) and magistrates, each city with its adjoining territory forming 
a sort of commonwealth of its own. But it must not be imagined, 
that these districts were inhabited exclusively, or even chiefly, by 
Greeks. One of these groups, that towards Peraea, was really Syrian, 
and formed part of Syria Decapolis] ^ while the other, along the coast 
of the Mediterranean, was Phcenician. Thus ^ the land' was hemmed 
in, east and west, within its own borders, while south and north 
stretched heathen or semi-heathen districts. The strictly Jewish 
territory consisted of Judaia proper, to which Galilee, Sanuiria and 
Pertea were joined as Toparchies. These Toparchies consisted of a 
group of townships, under a Metropolis. The villages and townships 
themselves had neither magistrates of their own, nor civic constitu- 
tion, nor lawful popular assemblies. Such civil adminstration as 
they required devolved on ' Scribes' (the so-called Koo/uoypa/x/uaTsis 
or TOTToypajupinTSig). Thus Jerusalem was really, as well as nominally, 

I Tlie followina: cities probably formed Dion, Pella. Gerasa. and Canatiia. On 

the Decripo/i.'i, tliouo;!! it is ditticult to these cities, comi). Caspnri. Ghronol. 

feel (luite sure in reference to one or tlie GJeoiir. Einl. in d. Lebeu J. Christi, pp. 

other of them: Damascus, Philadeli)liia, 83-90. 
Rai)hana, Scythopolis, Gadara, Hippos, 


BOOK tlie capital of the whole land. Judaea itself was arranged into eleven, 

I or rather, more exactly, into nine Toparchies, of which Jerusalem was 

— ^^"^ tlie chief. While, therefore, the Hellenic cities were each independent of 

the other, the whole Jewish territory formed only one ' Civitas.'' Rule, 

government, tribute— in short, political life — centred in Jerusalem. 

But this is not all. From motives similar to those which led to 
the founding of other Hellenic cities, Herod the Great and his imme- 
diate successors built a number of towns, which were inhabited chiefly 
by Gentiles, and had independent constitutions, like those of the Hel- 
lenic cities. Thus, Herod himself built Sebaste (Samaria), in the 
centre of the country; Cassarea in the west, commanding the sea-coast; 
Gaba in Galilee, close to the great plain of Esdraeion; and Esbonitis 
in Percea.^ Similarly, Philip the Tetrarch built Caesarea Philippi 
and Julias (Bethsaida-Julias, on the western shore of the lake); and 
Herod Antipas another Julias, and Tiberias.'* The object of these 
cities was twofold. As Herod, well knowing his unpopularity, sur- 
rounded himself by foreign mercenaries, and reared fortresses around 
his palace and the Temple which he built, so he erected these forti- 
fied posts, which he populated with strangers, as so many outworks, 
to surround and command Jerusalem and the Jews on all sides. Again, 
as, despite his profession of Judaism, he reared magnificent heathen 
temples in honour of Augustus at Seljaste and Caesarea, so those 
cities were really intended to form centres of Grecian influence within 
the sacred territory itself. At the same time, the Herodian cities en- 
joyed not the same amount of liberty as the 'Hellenic,' which, with 
the exception of certain imposts, were entirely self-governed, while in 
the former there were representatives of the Herodian rulers.^ 

Although each of these towns and districts had its special deities 
and rites, some being determined by local traditions, their prevailing 
character may be described as a mixture of Greek and S3Tian worship, 
the former preponderating, as might be expected.* On the other 
hand, Herod and his successors encouraged the worship of the Emperor 
and of Rome, which, characteristically, was chiefly practised in the 
East." Thus, in the temple which Herod built to Augustus in 

1 Herod rebuilt or built other cities, Die Stadt. u. biirgerl. Verf. d. Roin. 
such as Autipatris, Cypros, Phasaelis, Reichs, 2 vols. ; and for this part, \(il. ii. 
Anthedon, &c. Schiirer describes the pp. 336-354, and i)p. 370-372. 

two first as built, but they were only * A good sketch of the various rites 

rehmlt or fortitied (com]). Ant. xiii. I.'). prevailing in different places is given by 

1; War i. 21. 8.) by Herod. Schiirer, Neutest. Zeitg. pp. 378-3X5. 

2 He also rebuilt Sepphoris. ^ Comp. Weisefer. Beitr. z riclit. Wiir- 
•^ Comp. on the subject of the civic in- dig. d. Evaug. pp. 90, !)1. 

stitutionr^ of the Roman Empire, Knhn, 


Caesarea, there were statues of the Emperor as ()lyini)ian Zeus, and CHAP, 
of Rome as Hera.'' He was wont to excuse this conformity to heathen- vn 

ism before his own people on the ground of political necessity. Yet, ' — ^^ — ' 

even if his religious inclinations had not been in that direction, he "-^'^-Ant. 

~ ' XV. 9. b: 

would have earnestly striven to Greciauise the people. Not only in ^[^^' '• '^^• 
Cassarea, but even in Jerusalem, he built a theatre and amphitheatre, 
where at great expense games were held every four years in honour of 
Augustus.' Nay, he placed over the great gate of the Temjjle at 
Jerusalem a massive golden eagle, the symbol of Roman dominion, as 
a sort of counterpart to that gigantic golden vine, the symbol of Israel, 
which hung above the entrance to the Holy Place. These measures, in- 
deed, led to popular indignation, and even to conspiracies and tumults,*" " Ant. xv. s. 
thougli not of tlie same general and intense character, as when, at a e. 2 
later period, Pilate sought to introduce into Jerusalem images of the 
Emperor, or when the statue of Caligula was to be placed in the 
Temple. In connection with this, it is curious to notice that the 
Talmud, while on the wiiole disapproving of attendance at theatres 
and amphitheatres — chiefly on the ground that it implies * sitting in 
the seat of scorners,' and might involve contributions to the main- 
tenance of idol-worship — does not expressly prohibit it, nor indeed 
speak very decidedly on the subject." ^ so at least 

The views of the Rabbis in regard to pictorial representations are tha*!^ comp! 
still more interesting, as illustrating their abhorrence of all contact sion and"^ 
with idolatry. We mark here differences at two, if not at three cmiouYar- 
periods, according to the outward circumstances of the peoi)le. The favou?*o/° 
earliest and strictest opinions" absolutely forbade any representation fn Ab.Ta^n 
of things in heaven, on earth, or in the waters. But the Mishnah'' foiiowfng 
seems to relax these prohibitions by subtle distinctions, which are ''Mer-niita 

'■ '' ' on Ex. XX. 

still further carried out in the Talmud.^ 4,e(i.wei8s, 

p. To a 

To those who held such stringent views, it must have been pecu- eAb. zar. 
liarly galling to sec their most sacred feelings openly outraged by their 
own rulers. Tlius, the Asmonean princess, Alexandra, the mother-in- 
law of Herod, could so far forget the traditions of her house, as to 
send i)ortraits of her son and daughter to Mark Antony for infamous 
purposes, in hope of thereby winning him for her ambitious plans. ^ fjo«. Ant. 
One would be curious to know who painted these pictures, for, when 
tlie statue of Caligula was to be made for the Temi)le at Jerusalem, no 

' The Actiau jj'ames took place every (Aut. xvi. 5. 1; coiiip- War i. 21. 8). 

fifth year, tlu-ee years always intervening. . '^ For a full statement of the Tainnidi- 

The games in Jerusalem were held in the cal views as to images, representations 

year 28 b.o. (Jos. Ant. xv. 8. 1); the first on coins, and the most ancient Jewish 

games iu Caesarea in the year 12 b.c. coins, see Appendix IH. 


XV. 2. 5 and 




" ./o.<. War V. 
4. i 

1' Acts xii.23 

'■ Ant. xix. 
9. 1 

d Dan. vii. 

' Miclr. R. 
on Ex. Par. 

f Alj. Z. 2 h 

2 Ab. Z. 10«; 
Gitt. 80 a 

'' Ps. Ixxvl. 

native artist could bo toiiiid, and the work was entrusted to Phoe- 
niciaus. It must have been these foreigners also who made the ' figures, ' 
with which Herod adorned his palace at Jerusalem, and 'the lirazen 
statues' in the gardens 'through which the water ran out,"" as well as 
the colossal statues at Csesarea, and those of the three daughters of 
Agrippa, which after his death'' were so shamefully abused by the 
soldiery at Sebaste and Csesarea." 

This abhorrence of all connected Avith idolatry, and the contemi)t 
entertained for all that was non-Jewish, will in great measure exi)laiu 
the code of legislation intended to keej) the Jew and Gentile apart. If 
Judaea had to submit to the power of Rome, it could at least avenge 
itself in the Academies of its sages. Almost innnmeral)le stories are 
told in which Jewish sages, always easily, confute Roman and Greek 
philosophers; and others, in which even a certain Emperor (Antoninus) 
is represented as constantly in the most menial relation of self-abase- 
ment before a Rabbi. ^ Rome, which was the fourth beast of Daniel," 
would in the age to come,- when Jerusalem would be the metropolis 
of all lands," be the first to excuse herself on false though vain pleas 
for her wrongs to Israel.'' But on worldly grounds also, Rome was con- 
temptible, having derived her language and writing from the Greeks, 
and not possessing even a hereditary succession in her empire.*^ If 
such was the estimate of dreaded Rome, it may lie imagined in what 
contempt other nations were held. Well might 'the earth treml)le,''' 
for, if Israel had not accepted the Law at Sinai, the whole world 
would have been destroyed, while it once more 'was still' when that 
happy event took place, although God in a manner forced Israel to it.' 
And so Israel was purified at Mount Sinai from the impurity which 
clung to our race in consequence of the unclean union between Eve 
and the serpent, and which still adhered to all other nations! ^ 

To begin with, every Gentile child, so soon as born, was to be 
regarded as unclean. Those who actually worshipped mountains, hills, 
bushes, &c. — in short, gross idolaters — should be cut down with the 
sword. But as it was impossible to exterminate heathenism, Rab- 
binic legislation kept certain definite objects in view, which nmy be 
thus summarised : To prevent Jews from being inadvertently led into 

1 Comp. here the interestins; tractate 
of Dr. Bodek, 'Marc. Aur. Anton, als 
Freiiud u. Zeitgeuosse ties R. Jehuda lia 

■ T\w Atliidlnhho, 'sfecuhini futiinun." 
to be (li.stin,2;ui.shefl from the Ohnii hiihJxi. 
'the world to come.' 

3 Ab. Z. 22 h. But as in what follows 
the quotations would be too numerous, 
they will be omitted. Each statement, 
however, advanced in tiie text or notes 
is derived from part of the Talmudic 
tractate Abodali Zarali. 

8 from top 


idolatry; to avoid all participation in idolatry; not to do anything CHAP. 
which might aid the heathen in their woi'ship; and, beyond all this, Vll 
not to give pleasure, nor even hel]), to heathens. The latter involved a "~- — r — • 
most dangerous princii)le, ca[)able of almost indelinite ai)plication by 
fanaticism. Even the Mishnah goes so far" as to forbid aid to a "Ab. z. ii.i 
mother in the hour of her need, or nourishment to her babe, in order 
not to bring up a child for idolatry!' But this is not all. Heathens 
Avere, indeed, not to be precipitated into danger, but yet not to bo 
delivered from it. Indeed, an isolated teacher ventiires even u^xtn this 
statement: 'The best among the Gentiles, kill; the best among 
seri)ents, crush its head.'" Still more terrible was the fanaticism "Meruiita, 

. . ed. Weiss, 

Avhich directed, that heretics, traitors, and those who had left the p.^a3i,,nne 
Jewish faith should be thrown into actual danger, and, if they were 
in it, all means for their escape removed. No intercourse of any 
kind was to be had with such — not even to invoke their medical aid 
in case of danger to life,- since it was deemed, that he who had to do 
with heretics was in imminent peril of becoming one himself,^ and 
that, if a heretic returned to the true faith, he should die at once — 
partly, probably, to expiate his guilt, and partly from fear of relapse. 
Terrible as all this sounds, it was probalily not worse than the 
fanaticism disi)layed in what are called more enlightened times. 
Impartial history must chronicle it, however painful, to show the cir- 
cumstances in which teaching so far ditierent was propounded by 

In truth, the bitter liatred which the Jew bore to the Gentile can 
only be explained from the estimate entertained of his character. The 

' The Tahnnd declares it only lawful the arraugements of the world ' (Gitt. 

if done to avoid exciting liatred againrit (51 (/). Tiie quotation so often made 

the Jews. (Ab. Z. 3 (t), that a Gentile wlio occupied 

'' Tliere is a well-known story told of himself with tlie Torah was to be re- 

a Rabbi who was bitten by a serpent. garded as equal to the High-Priest, 

and about to be cured by tlie invocation proves nothing, since in the case sup- 

of the name of Jesus by a Jewish CIn-is- posed the Gentile acts like a Rabbinic 

tian, which was, however, interdicted. Jew. But, and this is a more serious 

•' Yet, such is the moral obli(iuity, that iioint, it is diflicult to believe that those 

even idolatry is allowed to save life, pro- who make this (luotation are not aware, 

vided it be done in secret! how the Talmud (Ab. Z. 3 d) immediately 

* Against this, although somewhat labours to prove that llieir reward is not 

doubtfidly, sucli concessions maybe put e(|ual to that of Israelites. A somewhat 

as that, outside Palestine, Gentiles were similar charge of one-sidedness, if not 

not to be considered as idolators, but as of unfairness, nuist be brought against 

observing the customs of their fathers Drutsch (Lecture on the Talmud, Re- 

(Chull. 13 b\ and that the poor of the mains, pi). U(i, 147), whose sketch of 

Gentiles were to be equally supported Judaism shoidd be compared, for ex- 

with those of Israel, their sick visited, amjile, with the tirst Perek of the Tal- 

and their dead iiuried; it being, how- mudic tractate Abodah Zarah. 
ever, significantly added, ' on account of 


BOOK most vile, and even iinnatural, crimes wore imi)ute<l to them. It was 
I uot safe to leave cattle in their charge, to allow their women to nurse 

^--"v-^'^ infants, or their physicians to attend the sick, nor to walk in their 
company, without taking precautions against sudden and unprovoked 
attacks. They should, so tar as possi))]e, l)e altogether avoided, 
except in cases of necessity or for the sake of business. They and 
theirs were defiled; their houses unclean, as containing idols or 
things dedicated to them; their feasts, their joyous occasions, their 
very contact, was polluted by idolatry; and there was no security, if a 
heathen were left alone in a room, that he might not, in wantonness 
or by carelessness, defile the wine or meat on the table, or the oil 
and wheat in the store. Under such circumstances, therefore, every- 
thing must be regarded as having l)een rendered unclean. Three 
days before a heathen festival (according to some, also three days 
after) every business transaction with them was prohilnted, for fear 
of giving either help or i)leasure. Jews were to avoid passing thr(High 
a city where there was an idolatrous feast — nay, they were not even to 
sit down within tlie shadow of a tree dedicated to idol-Avorship. Its 
wood was polluted; if used in baking, the bread was unclean; if a 
shuttle had been made of it, not only was all cloth woven on it for- 
bidden, but if such had l)een inadvertently mixed with other pieces of 
cloth, or a garment made from it placed with other garments, the 
whole became unclean. Jewish workmen were not to assist in building 
basilicas, nor stadia, nor places where judicial sentences were pro- 
nounced by the heathen. Of course, it was not lawful to let houses 
or fields, nor to sell cattle to them. Milk drawn by a heathen, if a 

= Ab. zar. Jew had not l)een present to watch it, " bread and oil prepared by them, 
were uidawful. Their wine was wholly interdicted^ — the mere touch 
of a heathen polluted a whole cask; ]iay, even to put one's nose to 
heathen wine was strictly prohibited ! 

Painful as these details are, they might be multiplied. And yet 
the bigotry of these Rabbis w^as, perhaps, not worse than that of 
other sectaries. It w^as a painful logical necessity of their system, 
against which their heart, no doubt, often rebelled; and, it must be 
truthfully added, it was in measure accoimted for by the terrible 
history of Israel. 

' According to R. Asi, there was a whether for personal use or for trading, 

threefold distinction. If wine had been Lastly, wine prepared by a Jew, but 

dedicated to an idol, to carry, even on a deposited in custody of a Gentile, was 

stick, so much as tlie weight of an olive prohibited for personal use. but allowed 

of it. detlled a man. Other wine, if for ti-athc. 
prepared by a heathen, was prohibited, 



CHAPTER yill. 


In trying to picture to ourselves New Testament scenes, the ligure 
most prominent, next to those of the chief actors, is that of the Scribe 
(ICID, yptx/jjuaTEvg, Uteratus). He seems ubiquitous; we meet him in 
Jerusalem, in Judsea, and even in Galilee.^ Indeed, he is indisj)en- 
sable, not only in Babylon, which may have been the birthplace of his 
order, but among the 'dispersion' also.'' Everywhere he appears as 
the mouthpiece and representative of tlie people; he pushes to the 
front, the crowd respectfully giving way, and eagerly hanging on his 
utterances, as those of a recognised authority. He has been solemnly 
ordained l)y the laying on of hands; and is the Eabbi,^ 'my great 
one,' Master, am/jjlitudo. He puts questions; he urges objections; 
he expects full exi)lanations and respectful demeanour. Indeed, his 
hyper-ingenuity in questioning has become a proverb. There is not 
measure of his dignity, nor yet limit to his importance. He is the 
' lawyer,'" the ' well-plastered pit,' filled with the water of knowledge 
' out of which not a drop can escape,' "^ in opposition to the weeds of 
uutilled soil ' (c^-;,2) of ignorance." He is the Divine aristocrat, 
among tlu; vulgar herd of rude and ])rofane 'country-people,' who 
'know not the Law' and are 'cursed.' More than that, his 
order constitutes the ultimate authority on all questions of faith 
and practice; he is 'the Exegete of the Laws,' ' the 'teacher of the 
Law,'"* and along with 'the chief priests' and 'eldtn-s' a judge in 
the ecclesiastical tribunals, whether of the capital or in the pro- 
vinces.'' Although generally appearing in comi^any with 'the 
Pharisees,' he is not necessarily one of them — for tliey represent a 


St. Luke 

T. 17 

* Jos. Ant. 
xvlli. 3. 5; 
XX. 11. 2 

1 The title Rahhon {i>nr Mastor) oc- 
curs first in connection witli Gamaliel i. 
(Acts V. S4). Tlie N.T. expression Rab- 
boni or RahhoKui {^X. Mark .\. .')1; St. 
John XX. K!) takes the word Rabbon or 
Rabba/i (here in the absolute sense)= 

Roh//, and adds lo it the i)ersonal suffix 
'my,' pronouncinii' the I\am/'z in the 
Syi'iac maimer. 

- Not t.') '/, as aimd T)('r('iif)Oiir</. Simi- 
lai'jy. his rendering;' • litteralenient, "ci- 
terne vide "" ' seems to me erroneous. 

the legls 
perltus, St. 
Matt. xxil. 
35; St. Luke 
vii. 30; X. 
•25 : xi. 45 ; 
xlv. 3 

'• Ab. ii. 8 
<■ Ber. io 6 2 ; 
Ab. li. 5; 
Bemid. R. 3 

f Jns. Ant. 
SVll. 6. 2 

■^ r'Ojuo5i5ac- 
KaAo?, St. 
Luke V. 17; 
Acts V. 34 : 
comp. also 
1 Tim. i. 7 

I' St. Matt, 
li. 4: XX. 18: 
xxi. \h: 
x.Nvi. 57: 
xxvii. 41; 
St. Mark 
1 : St. Luke 
xxii. 2, 66; 
xxiii. 10; 
Acts iv. 5 

i' Sipiii-i 


2". /> 

'- on 

1' Si,)hr. 
Dent. ] 
lOr. ,( 

'' on 


BOOK religious party, while lie has a status, and holds an oMice.^ In short, 
I he is- tlu; TaliiiUl or learned student, the ('luikliaiii or sage, whose 

^^ — ^^-^ honour is to l)e great in tlu' future world. Kach Scribe outweighed 
all the eounnon people, who must aecordingly i)ay him every honour. 
Nay, they were honoured of God Himself, and their i)raises proclaimed 
by the angels; and in heaven also, each of them would hold the same 
rank and distinction as on earth." Such was to be the resi)ect i)aid 
to their sayings, that they were to be absolutely 1)elieved, even if they 
were to declare that to 1)e at the right hand which Avas at the left, or 
vice versa ^ 

An institution which had attained such proportions, and wielded 
such powei-. could not have been of recent grovrtli. In ))oint of fact, 
its rise was very gra<lual, and stretched back to the time of Xehemiah. 
if not beyond it. Altliough from the utter confusion of historical 
notices in Ivabbinic writings and their constant practice of ante- 
dating events, it is impossible to furnish satisfactory details, the genei'al 
developnu'ut of the institution can be traced witli sufficient precision. 

cEzravu.f;, If Kzra is described in Holy Writ' as 'a ready {experfjiH) Scribe,' 
' ■ ' who liad ' set his heart to seek (seek out the full meaning of) the law 

'T*"" of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach in Israel,'' this might indicate 

I'l'^'t'"" ^^ ^^^^ successors, the Sopherim (Scribes), the threefold direction A\iiich 
their studies afterwards took: the J\['ulrash^ the Hdlal^liali, and the 

• Nedar. iv. H((gf/n(Jtif/ ,' ' of wh'iQh the one pointed to Scriptural investigation, 
the other to Avhat was to be observed, and the third to oral teaching 
in the widest sense. But Ezra left his work uncompleted. On 
Nehemiah's second arrival in Palestine, he found nmtters again in a 

fNeh. xiii. statc of utmost confusiou.' He must have felt the need of establish- 
ing some permanent authority to watch over religious affairs. This 
we take to have been ' the Great Assembly, ' or, as it is commonly 
called, the Mlreat Synagogue.' It is impossible with certainty to 
determine,'^ either who composed this assend)ly, or of how man} 
members it consisted.* Prol)ably it comprised the leading men in 

' The (listhictioii between 'Phai'isees' tares on tli is subject have been hazarded, 

and '.Scribes,' is marked in many pas- whidi need not here tind a place. Comp. 

sages in the N.T., for e.\"anii)le. St. Alatt. for ex. the two articles of Gratz in 

xxiii. passim; St. Luke vii. :iO; xiv. S; Frankeri^ Mouatsschrift for 1857, pp. 31 

and especially in St. Luke xi. 4M. comp. etc. fil etc., the main ])Ositions of which 

with V. 40. TJie words ' Scribes and have, however, been adopted ])y some 

Phari.sees. hypocrites.' in ver. 44. are, learned English writers, 
accordiny- to all evidence, spurious. * The Talmudic notices are often incon- 

'■* In Ned. iv. :5 this is the actual divi- sLstent. The nundjer as uiven in them 

sion. Of course, in another sense the Mid- amounts to about 120. B>it tiie modern 

rash mi<?ht be coiisldei'ed as the source of doubts (of Kuenen and others) against 

both the llalhkhali and tiie Haiiiiadali. the in.stitution itself cannot be sustained. 

■' Very straniiv and uu,ur(>\iiult'il eonjec- 

THK (iREAT SVNA(;()(; IK ' AND TlIK • ('< ;l PI.KS.' 95 

(Miureh and State, tlic chicr pi-R'sts, elders, and 'Jiidg'cs" — the latter CHAP, 
two classes includinii' -the Sci-ibes," il", indeed, that order was already ^'tn 

separately organised.' Probably also the term -Great Assem))ly ' ^- — -^.' — ' 

refers rather to a succession of men than to one Synod; the ingen- »Ezrax. ii; 

. ' ^ Nell. V. 7 

uity of later times tilling such parts of the historical canvas as had 
been left blank with fictitious notices. In the nature of things such an 
assend)ly could not exercise permanent sway in a sparsely pojudated 
country, without a strong central authority. Noi- could they iiave 
wielded real i)()wer during the political difficulties and troubles of 
foreign domination. The oldest tradition'' sums up the result of their 'Ab. 1. 1 
activity in this sentence ascribed to them: ' Bii careful in judgment, 
set up many Talmidim, and make a hedge about the To rah (Law).' 

In the course of time this rope of sand dissolved. The High- 
Priest, Simon tilt Just,'' is already designated as 'of the remnants of •= in the be- 

■ . . ginning of 

the Great Assemblv.' But even this exi)ression does not necessarily tu. tiurd 

A _ • (•(•ntui-y 

imply that he actually belonged to it. In the troublous times which ^■^'■ 
followed his Pontificate, the sacred study seems to liav(^ been left to 
solitary individuals. The Mishnic tractate Aboth, which records -the 
sayings of the Fathers,' here gives us only the name of Antigonus 
of Socho. It is significant, that for the first time we now meet a (ii-eek 
name among Rabbinic authorities, together with an indistinct allusion 
to his disciples.*'^ The long interval between Simon the Just and ''Ab. i. 3, 4 
Antigonus and his disciples, brings us to the terrible time of Antiochus 
Kpiphanes and the great Syrian persecution. The \'eiT sayings at- 
tributed to these two sound like an echo of the political state of the 
country. On three things, Simon was wont to say, the permanency 
of the (Jewish?) world depends: on the Torah (faithfulness to the I/aw 
and its i)ursuit), on worship (the non-i)articipation in (ilrecianism). 
and on works of righteousness.'' They Avere dark times, when (Jod's ' Ab. i. 2 
l)ersecuted people were tcmi)ted to think, that it might be vain to serve 
Him, in wliich Antigonus had it: ' IJe not like servants who serve 
their nuister for the sake of reward, but be like servants who serve 
their lord Avithout a view to the getting of reward, and let the feai- of 
heaven be upon you.' ' After these two names come those of the so- fAb. s. 3 
<'allcd Aa'C Zugoth, or 'couples,' of Avhom Hillel and Shammai are the 
last. Later tradition has represented these successive couples as, 

• Zunz lias well pohited out tliat, if in statiiiff tliat. except for .special reason.^. I 

Ab. i. 4 tlie first ' couple ' is said to liave shall not refer to previous writers on 

'received from tlieni ' — wliile only An- this subject, partly lK>cause it would ne- 

tiuonus is nieiilioned in the precediiid;- cessitate too nuuiy (luotations, but ciiictly 

Mishnah. it must imply Antiii-onus and because the line of arii;unient 1 have 

Ills uiHKuned disciples and followers. In taken dlflers from that of my predeees- 

iivneral. 1 may take lliis opportunity of sors. 



BOOK respectively, the Nasi (president), and Ab-beth-din (vice-president, of 
I the Satihedrin). Of the first three of these 'couples' it may be said 

^— ^.^ — " that, except significant allusions to the circumstances and dangers of 
their times, their recorded utterances clearly point to the development 
of the purely Sopheric teaching, that is, to the Rabbinistic part of 
their functions. Fr(nn the fourth 'couple,' which consists of Simon 
ben Shetach, who figured so largely in the political history of the 
later Maccabees' (as Ab-beth-din), and his superior in learning and 
judgment, Jehudah bcu Tabbai (as Nasi), we have again utterances 
which show, in harmony with the political history of the time, that 
judicial functions had been once more restored to the Rabbis. The 
last of the five couples brings us to the time of Herod and of Christ. 
We have seen that, during the period of severe domestic troubles, 
beginning with the persecutions under the Seleucidse, which marked 
the mortal struggle between Judaism and Grecianism, the 'Great 
Assembly' had disappeared from the scene. The SopJierim had ceased 
to be a party in power. They had become the Zeqenim, ' Elders, ' whose 
task was purely ecclesiastical — tlie preservation of their religion, 
such as the dogmatic labours of their predecessors had made it. Yet 
another period opened with the advent of the Maccabees. These had 
been raised into power by the enthusiasm of the Ghasidim, or ' pious 
ones,' who formed the nationalist party in the land, and who had 
gathered around the liberators of their faith and country. But the 
later bearing of the Maccabees had alienated the nationalists. Hence- 
forth they sink out of view, or, rather, the extreme section of them 
merged in the extreme section of the Pharisees, till fresh national 
calamities awakened a new nationalist party. Instead of the Ghasidim, 
we see now two religious parties within the Synagogue — the Phari- 
sees and the Sadducees. The latter originally represented a reaction 
from the Pharisees — the moderate men, who sympathised with the 
later tendencies of the Maccabees. Josephus places the origin of 
these two schools in the time of Jonathan, the successor of Judas 

i6a-i43B.c. Maccabee," and with this other Jewish notices agree. Jonathan 
accepted from the foreigner (the Syrian) the High-Priestly dignity, 
and combined with it that of secular ruler. But this is not alL 
The earlier Maccabees surrounded themselves with a governing 
eldershi))." ^ On the coins of their reigns this is designated as the 
Ghebher, or eldership (association) of the Jews. Thus, theirs was what 

>> The Te- 


1 Maco. xii. 
6: xin. 36; 
xiv. 28 : Jna. 
Ant. xul. i. 

9; 5. 8 

' See Apiieiiflix IV. : ' Political History 
of the .Jews from the Reign of Alexander 
to the Accession of Ilerod.' 

^ At the same time some kind of ruling 
AepoDo-ia existed earlier than at this pe- 
iii>d, if we ma.v judge from Jos.Aut. xii. 


Jose]ihiis designates as an aristocratic government," and of which he CHAP. 

soniewiiat vagnely says, that it histed ' from the Captivity nntil the vni 

descen(Uuits of the Asmoneans set up kingly government." In this ^— ^. — -' 

aristocratic government the lligh-Priest would ratlier be thechiel'of j^^"^- ^^■*- 
a representative ecclesiastical body of rulers. 'IMiis state of things 
continued until the great breach between llyrcanus, tlu' iburth Irom 
Judas Maccabee, and the Tharisaical ijarty,' which is equally recorded 

by .losephus " and the Talmud,*^ with only vai-iations of names and bAnt. xiu. 

details. The dispute apparently arose from the desire of the Phari- ,.^l^^^ ,.,,;„ 
sees, that Hyrcanus should be content with the secular power, and 
resign the Pontiticate. lint it ended in thei)ersecution, and removal 
from power, of the Pharisees. Very signiticantly, Jewish tradition 
introduces again at this time those j)urely ecclesiastical authorities 

which are designated as 'the couples.'*' In accordance with this, '.ler.Maas. 

altered state of things, the name ' Chebher ' now disappears from the end, p. 56//: 

coins of the Maccabees, and the Rabbinical celebrities ('the couples" i>. 2V(( 
or Zugoth) are only teachers of traditionalism, and ecclesiastical 

authorities. The ■ eldershij),' ' which under the earlier Maccabees 'vfpoi«7?ia 

was called • the tribunal of the Asmoneans,''^ now passed into the ri*^^ 

Sanht'drin.''" Thus avc place the origin of this institution about the ^nn 

time of Hyrcanus. ^^'ith this Jewish tradition tully agrees.^ The ganhsoa'^ 

power of the Sanhedrin would, of course, vary with political circum- a^. z. 36'/ 

stances, being at times almost absolute, as in the reign of the Pharisaic '^<^'""^^""' 

devotee-Queen, Alexandra, while at others it Avas shorn of all bnt |j/J^e^T 

ecclesiastical authoritv. But as the Sanhedrin was in full force at the ^^^^"^ "'^^^ 

' -yepoucrta, 

time of Jesus, its organisation will claim our attention in the sequel, and twice 
After this brief outline of the origin and development of an insti- "f^^l^"" 
tution which exerted such decisive influence on the future of Israel, it ^^^.^,.. 

' xxii. ()6: 

seems necessary similarly to trace the growth of the ' traditions of the ^^^^ ^^"' ^ 
Eldei's,' so as to understand what, alas ! soefi'ectually, opi)osedthe new 
<loctrine of the Kingdom. The tirst place must here be assigned to 
those legal determinations, which traditionalism declared al)Solutely 
binding on all — not only of equal, but even gi'eater obligation than 
Scrijiture itself.'' And this not illogically, sinct' ti'adition was etjually 

Tint he uses tli(> term somewhat vuiiuely. io me. historically, impossible. Hut iiis 

applyin.i;' it even to the time of Jaddua opinion to that effect (u. s. ];. S7) is ap- 

(Ant. xi. 8. 2). pavently contradicted at p. !K?. 

1 Even Ber. 48 a fiuniishes evidence of '^ Sc/iUn'i; follo\vin,ii' 11 V^wVc/-. supposes 

this 'enmity.' On the hostile relations the Sanhedrin to have Ijeen of Honiaii 

l)etvveen the Pharisaical i)arty and the institution. But tlie ariiuments of 

^[accabees see Iliimburger, Real-Enc. Wlcselcr on this point (Beitr. zur richt. 

ii. ]). ?>{\1. Com]). Jer. Taan. iv. 5. Wiird. d. Evani;:. p. 224 1 are incoiiciu- 

-' f)ere)ihnitrg takes a different view, give, 

and identities the tril)unal of the As- * Conij). Dcrenho}! r<i. \\. s. ji. !)."). 

moneans with, the Sanhedi'in. This seems = Tims we read: • Tlie saviniis of tiie 

98 Tin-: i'i;i:i'AiiATi()X foi; tiik cosi'KL. 

BOOK of Divine uiiiiiii with Holy Seriptiii'c, and .uitlioritativoly explained 
1 its nieanin>i- : supplcMiKMitod it : ,u'ave it ap])]i('ation to cases not 

^-*^r~"*^ expressly provided for. perliai)s not even foreseen in Bihlieal times ; 
and generally gniai-ded its sanctity by extending and adding to its 
j)rovisions, drawing ' a hedge," aronnd its 'garden enclosed.' Thus, in 
new and dangerous circumstances, would the full meaning of God's 
Law, to its every tittle and iota, l)c elicited and obeyed. Thus also 
would their feet be arrested, who might sti'ay from within, or break 
in from without. Accordingly, so important was tradition, that the 
greatest merit a Rabbi could claim was the strictest adherence to tlie 
traditions, which he had received from his teacher. Nor might one 
Sanhedrin annul, or set aside, the decrees of its predecessors. To 
such length did they go in this worship of the letter, tlmt the great 
Hillel was actually wont to mispronounce a word, because his teacher 

"Eduy. i. 3. bcforc lilm had done so.' 

(viiiimentof Tliesc traditional ordinances, as already stated, bear the general 

iues ' nanu.' of the Halakhah. as indicating alike the way in which tin? 
fathers had walked, and that which their children were bound to 
follow.' TheiiQ ffalahi/otJi were either simply the laws laid down in 
Scri|)tuie: or else derived from, (u* traced to it by some ingenious and 
artificial method of exegesis : or added to it, by way of amplification 
and for safety's sake; or, finally, legalised customs. They ])rovided 
for every [)ossible and inipossible case, entered into every detail of 
private, fainih^, and public life ; and with iron logic, unbending rigour, 
and most minute analysis pursued and dominated man, turn whithei- 
lie might, laying on him a yoke which was truly inibearable. 'I'he; 
return which it offered was the ideasure and distinction of knowledge, 
the acquisition of righteousness, and the final attainment of rewards ; 
one of its chief advantages over our modern traditionalism, that it 

' was expressly forbidden to draw inferences from these traditions, which 

should have the force of fresh legal determinations.- 

In describing the historical growth of the HaJah'/iah,"' we nmy 

elders liavc more wei^'lit tliaii tlioso of law — in tlio Rabbinic seiifie — was worso 
the proijliets ■ (Jcr. Ber. i. 7); 'an otience than adolatry. luiflcanness. oi' tlic siied- 
ai^ainst the sayhi^s of the Scribes is dina; of blood. See i;eneral]y that Intro- 
worse than one ajiiainst tliose of Scripture ' duction. 

(Sanh. xi. 3). Compare also Er. 21 />. ' It is so explained in the Aruch (ed. 

Tile comparison between such claims and Jjindan. vol. ii. i). 529, col h). 

tlu)se sometimes set up on belialf of - Com]). Tlamburger. \\. s. p. ?,\?,. 

'creeds' and 'articles' (Z^(Y/o'.v Cyclop., ■'• Comj). here especially the detailed 

2nd ed., p. 786, col (() does not seem descri|)tion by llprzfdd (u. s. vol. iii. 

to me a])i)]ica1)Ie. In the introduclion j))). 22(), 2()3); also the Introduction of 

to tlie Midr. on Lament, it is inlcrrcd Maiinonides, and the very able ami 

from .ler. ix. 12, 1:5, that to forsai<e tlie learned works (not sutticiently appre- 

TUB iiist()1.m(;ai. (jkowtii of ti;at)itiox.mjsm. 99 

dismiss in a lew sentcuccs the le/i'euds of .Icwisli tradition about riiAl'. 
|)ati'iai'<*hal limes. They assure us, tliat there was an Academy and ^'I^' 
a lval)l)inie tril)unal of Shem. and they si)eak of tradit ions delivercMl ^— ^.^— ^ 
i»y that Tatriareh to Jaeoh; ot diligent atteu(hince by the hitlei' on 
tlic Kabbinie College; of a tractate (in 400 seetions) on i(h)hitr3 by 
Abraliam, and of his observance of the wlioh^ traditional law: of tlio 
introduction of the three daily times of ])rayei', successively by 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; of thetliree benedictions in the custom- 
ary 'grace at meat," as ijroponnded by Moses, Joshua, and I)a\i(l 
and Solomon: of the Mosaic introduction of the practice of reading 
lessons from the laAv on Sabbaths, New Moons, and Feast Days, and 
even on tlie Mondays and Thursdays ; and of that, by the same 
authority, of preaching on the three great festivals about those feasts. 
Further, they ascribe to Moses the arrangement of the priesthood into 
eight courses (that into sixteen to Samuel, and that into twenty-four to 
David), as also, the duration of the time for marriage festivities, and 
for mourning. But evidently these are vague statements, with the 
object of tracing traditionalism and its observances to primaeval times, 
even as legend had it, that Adam was born circumcised,' and latci- ^Micu-. 

11111 111 T Shochar 

writers that he had kept all the ordinances. xobhonPs. 

Hut other i)rinciples apply to the traditions, from Moses down- warshaii. 

T 1 T • 1 • /-< T 1 1 • -tr p. 14 6 ; Ab. 

wards. According to the Jewish view, God had given Moses on deK. Nath. 

. 2 

Mount Smai alike the oral and the written Law, that is, the Law 
with all its interpretations and applications. From Ex. xx. 1, it was 
inferred, that God ha<l communicated to Moses the Bible, the Mishnah, 
and Talmud, and the Haggadah, even to thatwiiich scholars would in 
latest times propound.' In answer to the somcMdiat natural objection, 
why the Bible alone had been written, it was said that Moses had pro- 
posed to write down aUAlw teaching entrusted to him, but the Almighty 
had refused, on account of the future subjection of Israel to the nations, 
who would take from them the written Law. Then the unwritten tradi- 
tions would remain to se])ara te between Israel and the Gentiles, Popula r 
exegesis found this indicated even in the language of prophecy.'' 'hos. vm. 

12: comp. 

ciiited) t)y Or. //. S. llirscltfcl'l. Ilalii- written.' tlie ri'djdicts ami ll;iiii(ii:rapli:u 

chische Exe.u'ese (Berlin. is40), and -that thou niayesf tcacli them;" the Tal- 

}Iafi"'lie Exeii'ese (Berlin, lS-17). Per- mud — ■ whicii shows that they were all 

haps I may also take leave to refer to uiveii to Mo.-^es on Sinai" (Ber. o <i. line.s 

the corresitoiidinii' chapters In my 'His- ll-KV). Alike application was made of 

tory of the .Jewish Nation.' the various clauses in Cant. vii. 12 (Erub. 

' Similarly, the expressions in Ex. 21//). Nay, by an alteration of the words 

xxiv. 12 were thus exiilained: 'the ta- in IIos. \\\\. 10, it was shown that the 

bles of stone,' the ten commandments; banished had been brouffht back for the 

the 'l-aw,' the written Law; the 'coin- merit of their study [of the sacrilicial 

mandments.' the Mishnah : ■ which T have sections] of the Mishnah (Vayyik B. 7). 

Shem. B. 46 


Tin-: i'i,'ki'ai;at[()N fok tiik gospel. 



Jei'. cihai;. 
I. 7(i <l 

' Tos. 
Shabb. xiv. 

Enib. 51'- 

Deut. i. 5 

But traditiunaiisiii wont lurther, and placed the oral actually 
above the written Law. The expression," ' After the tenor of these 
Avords I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel,' was 
ex])lained as meaning;, that God's covenant was founded on the spoken, 
in oi)position to the written words.'' If the written was thus placed 
below the oral Law, we can scarcely wonder that the reading of the 
Ilagiographa was actually prohibited to the people on the Sabbath, 
from fear that it might divert attention from the learned discourses of 
the Rabbis. The study of them on that day was only allowed for the 
l)urpose of learned investigation and discussions."' 

But if traditionalism was not to be committed to writing by 
Moses, measures had been taken to prevent oblivion or inaccuracy. 
Moses had always repeated a traditional law successively to Aaron, to 
his sons, and to the elders of the i)eople, and they again in turn to 
each other, in such wise, that Aaron heard the Mishnah four times, his 
sons tlu-ee times, the Elders twice, and the people once. But even 
this was not all, for by successive repetitions (of Aaron, his sons, and 
the Elders) the people also heard it four times.'' And, before his 
death, Moses had sununoned any one to come forward, if he had 
forgotten aught of what he had heard and learned." But these 
' Halakhoth of Moses from Sinai ' do not make up the whole of 
traditionalism. According to Maimonides, it consists of five, but 
more critically of three classes.^ The ./?>-.sY of these comprises both 
such ordinances as are found in the Bil)le itself, and the so-called 
Halokhotli of 3Ioses from Sinai — that is, such laws and usages as 
prevailed from time immemorial, and which, according to the Jewish 
view, had ))een orally delivered to, but not written down by Moses. 
For these, therefore, no [yroof was to he sour/Jit in Scripture — at most 
support, or confirmatory allusion {Asmakhtii).^ Nor were these 
open to discussion. The second class formed the 'oral law, ''or the 
'traditional teaching''' in the stricter sense. To this class belonged 
all that was supposed to be implied in, or that could be deduced from, 
the Law of Moses.* The latter contained, indeed, in substance or 

' Another ivasoii also is. liowever. ineii- 
tioned for his i)roliibitlon. 

- Hirschfeld. w. s. \)\). !)2-9!). 

^ From "i^D. to lean aa;ainst. At the 
same time tlie ordinances, for which an 
apijeal conld be made to As))iak/ifa. were 
better liUed than those which rested on 
tradition alone (Jer. Chap;. ]). "(i, col r/). 

* In connection with this it is very 
sii>nilicant that R. Jochanan ben Zaccai, 

wlio tauiiht not many years after the 
Crucifixion of Christ, was wont to say. 
that, in the future, Halakhahs in reii'ard 
to i)urity, which had not the sui)port of 
Scripture, would be repeated (Sot. 27 6, 
line l(i from tojV). In .ii'eneral, the teach- 
ing of R. .Jochanan should be studied to 
understand the unacknowledged influ- 
ence which Christianity exercised u|)on 
the Synagogue. 



<i,"enii, everythiiiii'; l)ut it had not been l)r()U.ii'ht out, till circiiiustunces 
succcsstully evolved what from the lirst had been provided in prinei- 
])le. For this class of ordi nances reference to, a nd iirooffroni. Scrijil nrc 
ivns required. Xot so for the third class of ordinances, which were 
'the hediie' drawn by the Rabbis around the Law, to i)revent any 
breach of the Law or customs, to ensui'e their exact o))servance. oi' to 
meet peculiar circumstances and dang'crs. These ordinances consti- 
tuted 'the saying-s of the Scribes'-' or 'of the Rabbis"''' — and wei-e 
Q\t\wv positive in their character ( 7eq(janoth),i)V v\^(:s negative {(lezeroih 
from (jazar to cut off'). Perhaps the distinction of these two 
cannot always be strictly carried out. But it was ])robably to this 
third class especially, confessedly unsui)ported by Scripture, that 
these words of Christ referred:'^ 'All therefore whatsoever they 
tell you, that do and observe; but do not ye after their works: for 
they say, and do not. For they l)ind heavy burdens and grievous to 
l)e Ijorne. and lay them on men's shoulders: but with their tinker 
they will not move them away (set in motion).'- This view has two- 
fold contirnmtion. For. this third class of Halakhic ordinances was 
the only one open to the discussion of the learned, the ultimate de- 
cision being according to the majority. Yet it possessed jjractically 
(though not theoretically) the same authority as the other two classes. 
In further confirnmtion of our view the following may be (pioted: 'A 
(rezerah {i.e. this third class of ordinances) is not to be laid' on the 
congregation, uidess the majority of the congregation is able to bear 
if' — words which read like a commentary on those of Jesus, and 
show that these burdens could be laid on, or moved away, according 
to the varying judgment or severity of a Rab])inic College.^ 

This l)ody of traditional ordinances forms the subject of the 3£i.'<h- 
rtah, or second, repeated law. We have here to [)lace on one side the 


'■ St. Matt, 
xxiil. 3, 4 

' But this is not always. 

■^ To elucidate the meaniiiii; of Clirist. it 
seemed necessary to submit an avowedly 
difficult text to fresh criticism. I have 
taken the word kiveIv. moreo in the 
i^eui^eolircfticio {Grimm. ClavisN.T. ed. 
2'i^ J). 2-li fi). hut I have not adoi)ted 
tlie inference of Met/cr (Krit. Exeiret. 
Handl). ]). 45.5). In classical Gi'eek also 
KivFAv is used for -to remove, to alter.' 
My reasons against what may be called 
the traditional interpretation of St. Matt, 
xxiii. 'A. 4, are: 1. It seems scarcely pos- 
sible to suppose that, before such an au- 
dience, Christ would have contemplated 
the i)ossibility of not observhiii' either of 

the two first classes of Ualukhoth. which 
were re<i;arded as beyond controversy. 
2. It could scarcely be truthfully charijed 
against the Scribes and Pharisees, that 
they did not attemj)! to keep themselves 
the ordinances which they imjjosed upon 
others. The expression in the i)arailel 
passage (St. Luke xi. 4r)) must be ex- 
plained in accordance with the com- 
mentation on St. Matt, xxiii. 4. Nor is 
there any serious difficulty aljout it. 

■' For the classitication. arrangement, 
origin, and enunu'ration of tiiese Mal- 
akhoth. see .\i)pendix V.: • IJahbinic 
Theology and literature." 



i',( )( )K Law ot'Moses as recorded in the Peiitaleueh, as staiidiiiii- by itself. All 
I else — even the teaching of the Prophets and of the llagiographa, as 

^— ^r^"^ well as tlie oral traditions — bore the general name ot'(Jabbalah — • that 
whicli has been i-eceivcd.' The sacred study — or Mldrasli, in the 
original ai)i)li('ation of tiie term — concerned eitliei' the H(i/al'/i(i/i, tra- 
ditional ordiiudice, which was always -that wiucli had been heard'- 
{Sheiiidtha), or else thQ HaggadaJt, 'that which was said" upon the 
authority of individuals, not as legal ordinance. It was illustration, 
connnentary, anecdote, clever or learned saying, Jkc. At first the 
Halakhah renuiined unwritten, probably owing to tlie disputes be- 
tween Pharisees and Sadducees. But the necessity of tixedness and 
order led in course of time to more or less complete collections of the 
HalaA-hofJt.^ The oldest of these is ascribed to R. Akiba, in the time 

» 132-135 of the Emperor Hadrian.'- But the authoritative collection in the so- 
called Mishnah is the work ()f Jehudah the Holy, who died about the 
end of the second century of our era. 

Altogether, the Mishnah comprises six 'Orders" {JSedariin), each 
devoted to a special class of subjects.^ These 'Orders' are divided 
into tractates {Massi'khtoth, Massel-htiijoth, 'textures, webs"), of which 
there are sixty-three ( or else sixty-two ) in all. These tractates are again 
subdivided into chapters (Peraqim) — in all 525, which severally consist 
of a certain number of verses, or JlisItnaJis {JlisJinayotJi, in all 4, 187). 
Considering the variety and complexity of the subjects treated, the 
Mishnah is arranged with remarkable logical perspicuity. The 

' See the learned remarks of Li^i'i/ Nasirate. The fourth ' Order " (A>2#V/?/^ 

about the reasons for the earlier prohibi- 'damages') contains the civil and 

tion of writing down the oral law, and criminal law. Ciiaracteristically, it in- 

the tinal collection of the Mishnah eludes all the ordinances concerning 

(Neuhebr. u. Chald. Worterb. vol. ii. p. idol-worship (in the tractate Ahhodah 

435). Zarah) and 'the sayings of the Fathers' 

'^ These collections are enumerated in {AJihotli). The fifth •Owhn-' {Qrxhixlnm. 

the Midrash on Eccles. xii. 3. They are -holy things') treats of the various 

also distinguished as 'the former' and classes of sacrifices, ofl'erings. and tilings 

'the later" Mishnah (Xedar. 91 a). belonging (as the tirst-borii). or dedicated, 

■^ The first ' Order ' (Zerr^^7/^, 'seeds') to God, and of all questions which can be 
begins with the ordinances concern- groujied under ' sacred things ' (snch as 
ing 'benedictions,' or the time, mode, the redemption, exchange, or alienation 
manner, and character of the prayers of what liad been dedicated to God). It 
prescribed. It then goes on to detail also includes the laws concerning the 
what may be called tlie religio-agrarian daily morning and evening service 
laws (such as tithing. Sabbatical years, ( TnmiiT). and a description of the struc- 
first fruits, itc). The second 'Order' ture and arrangements of the T(miii)I(> 
(Moed, 'festive time') discusses all con- {Middolh, 'the measurements'). Finally, 
nected with the Sabbath observance and the sixth 'Order' (Toharofh, 'clean- 
the other festivals. The third ' Order ' nesses ') gives every ordinance connected 
{NasJum, 'women') treats of all that with the questions of 'clean and un- 
concerns betrothal, marriage and divorce, clean,' alike as regards human beings, 
but also includes a tractate on the animals, and inanimate tilings.- 

TilK .MlSIIXAJl, Till-: JKKISAI.K.M AM) T1!H JJAini.oN TAL.Ml'D. 103 

laii<i'uage is Hebrew, tliouji'h (.)fe()iii'se not that oftlic Old Te>tanieiit. <"HAP. 
The A»'()i'(ls I'eiidei'ed iieeessaiy hy the new circuinstanccs ai'c ehietiv ^ '" 
derived t'roni tlie (Jrcck, the S^yriae, and the Latin, witli Hebrew trr- ^— ^ ^^-^ 
niinations.' Hnt all conneetedwitli social intereoiusc or ordinary lite 
(such as contracts), is written, not in Hebrew, lait in Arainiean, as 
the laniiiniiic of the people. 

l^)Ul the traditional law enibodie(l othei" nnderials than the 
Hahikhotli collected in the ^lishnah. Sonu' that had not been 
recordeil there, tbnnd a phice in the works of certain Kabbis, or were 
derived from their schools. These are called BovaitJias — that is. tra- 
ditions v.rfcnial to the Mishiudi. finally, there were • additions" (or 
Tosephtoth)^ dating after the completion of the Mishnah. but probably 
not later than the third centur^^ of our era. Such thei'e are to not 
fewer than tifty^-two out of the sixty-three Mishnic tractates. When 
spcakina: of the ffalakltaJt as distinguished froni the Ha/jgadali, we 
iniT^t not, however, suppose that the latter could 1)e entirely separated 
from it. In point of fact, one whole tractate in the J//-s7(f;i«/i (Aboth: 
The Sayings of the ' Fathers ) is QwiiveX} Hagrjadnh; a second {Middoth: 
the ' Measurements of the Temple') has Halalxhuh in only fourteen 
places; while in the rest of the tractates Haggadali occurs in not 
fewer than 207 places. - Onl}^ thirteen out of the sixty-three tractates 
of the Mishnali are entirely free from Hagrjadah. 

Hitherto we have only spoken of the ]Mishnah. IJut this coni- 
l)rises only a very snudl part of traditionalism. In course of time the 
discussions, illiistrations, explanations, and additions to Avhicli the 
Mishnah gave rise, whether in its application, or in the Academies of 
the Rabbis, were authoritatively collected and edited in what are 
known as the two Talmvds or Oemaras. ^ H' we imagine something 
combining law reports, a Rabbinical ' Hansard,' and notes of a theo- 
logical debating club — all thoroughly Oriental, full of digressions, 
anecdotes, quaint sayings, fancies, legends, and too often of what, 
from its profanity, superstition, and even obscenity, could scarcely be 
(juoted, we may form some general idea of what the Talmud is. The 
oldest of these two Talmuds dates from alxmt the close of the fourth 
century of our era. It is the product of the Palestinian Acadennes, 
and hence called the Jerusalem Talmud. The second is about a century 
younger, and the outcome of the Rabylonian schools, hence called the 

' Comp. the very interer!thv2; tractate '-' Coiiij). tbe ("iminorutioii in Phnicr, 

by Dr. Bi'ilN (Freiiid^pr Kodeiisart in d. u. s. 

Taliimd), as well as Dr. Eish'r'n Beitniii'e ■' Tabniid: tlraf wiiicli is learned, doc- 

z. Raid), u. Aitertliiuiisk., .1 fascic: Sac/is. trine, (rnnitvfi: eitlier tlie same, 

Beitr. z. Kabl). u. Alterthnnisk. ' l)erfpcfi()n." ■completion.' 


JiooK lUibijlon (afterwai'ds also 'our') Talmud. We do not possess either 
1 of these works complete. ^ The luost detective is the Jerusalem Tal- 

— '^. umd, which is also much briefei", and contains far fewer discussions 

than that of Bal)ylon. The Babylon Talmud, Avhicli in its present 
form extends over thirty-six out of the sixty-three tractates of the 
Mishnah, is al)out ten or eleven times the size of the hitter, and more 
than four times that of the Jerusalem Talnmd. It occupies (in our 
editions), with marginal commentations, 2,94*7 folio leaves (pagesaand 
b). Both Talmuds are written in Aramaean; the one in its western, 
the other in its eastern dialect, and in both the Mishnah is discussed 
seriatim^ and clause by clause. Of the character of these discussions it 
would be impossible to convey an adequate idea . When we bear in mind 
the many sparkling, beautiful, and occasionally almost sublime passages 
in the Talmud, but especially that its forms of thought and expression 
so often recall those of the New Testament, only ])rejudice and hatred 
could indulge in indiscriminate vituperation. On the other hand, it 
seems unaccountable how any one who has read a Talmudic tractate, 
or even part of one, could compare the Talnmd Avith the New Testa- 
ment, or find in the one the origin of the other. 

To complete our brief survey, it should be added that our editions 
of the Babylon Talmud contain (at the close of vol. ix. and after the 
fourth 'Order') certain Boraithas. Of these there were originally 
nine, but two of the smaller tractates (on ' the memorial fringes, ' and 
on -non-Israelites") have not been preserved. The first of these 
Boraithas is entitled Abhoth de Rabbi Xatlian, and partially corre- 
sponds with a tractate of a similar name in tlie Mishnah. - Next 

1 The following: will explain our mean- kliotli were collected in a work fdatinj? 

hig: On tiie ./fr.sV 'order' we iiave the from alxmt 800 a. d.) entitled Ha/ak/iof/i 

Jei'usalem Talmud complete, tliat is, on Gedolotli. They are arranu'ed to corre- 

every tractate (comprisinn- in all (1.3 folio s])ond witli the weekly lectionary of tiie 

leaves), while the JJabylon Talmud ex- Pentateuch in a work entitled Sheeltofh 

teud.s only over its first tractate (Berak- (-Questions: "best ed./>vAc/-/(/V//V/;, 1786). 

]iofh). (in the .sf^co«(? order, the four last The Jerusalem Talmiul extends over 31), 

chapters of one tractate (Shahhath) are the Babyhmian over 3()J tractates — 15i 

wanting- in the Jerusalem, and one whole tractates have no Gemara at all. 

tractate |.S7^er/«?;?«) in the Babi/Joi) Tal- '■* The last ten chai)ters curiously gi'oup 

mud. The ///?r(Z order is com])lete in both toffether events or thin.a;s under numerals 

Gemaras. On t\\^,fouvt]i ordera clia])ter from 10 downwards. The most generally 

is wantinn- in one tractate (3A/Z7.vV//) in interestinu-of these is that of the 10 AV///- 

the JeTiisdlem, and two whole tractates doth, or passaues of Scrii)ture in which 

{Ed>ij/ofh and AbhotJi) in both (iemaras. letters are nuirked by dots, together with 

^\w Jjftli order is wholly wanting in the the explanation of their reasons (ch. 

Jerusalem, and two and a half tractates xxxiv.). The whole Boraitha seems com- 

of it (Middoth, Qiniiim. ami half Taviid) posed of parts of three difierent works, 

in the Babylon Talmud. Of the sixth and consists of forty (or f(jrty-one) chaj)- 

order only one tractate (Niddnh) exists ters, and occuiiies ten folio leaves, 
in both Gemaras. The iirincipal Ilala- 


follow six minor tractates. These are respectively entitled Soiiherim chap. 
(Scribes)/ detailing the ordinances about copying the Scriptures, the Vlii 
ritual of the Lectionary, and festive prayers; Ebhel Rabbafhi or ^^ — ^r^*-^ 
SemaA'hoth,'- containing llalakhah and Ilaggadah about funeral and 
mourning observances; Kallah,-^ on the married relationship; Derekh 
Erets,* embodying moral directions and the rules and customs of 
social intercourse; Derekh Erets Zuta,^ treating of similar subjects, 
but as regards learned students; and, lastly, the Pereq ha Shalom,'^ 
Avhich is a eulogy on peace. All these tractates date, at least in their 
present form, later than the Talmudic period.' 

But when the Halakhah, however varied in its application, was 
something fixed and stable, the utmost latitude was claimed and given 
in the HaggadaJi. It is sadly characteristic, that, practically, the main 
body of Jewish dogmatic and moral theology is really only ffaggadah, 
and hence of no absolute authority. The ITalak/uih indicated with 
the most minute and painfid punctiliousness every legal ordinance 
as to outward observances, and it explained every bearing of the Law 
of Moses. But beyond this it left the inner man, the spring of 
actions, untouched. What he was to believe and what to feel, was 
chiefly matter of the Ilaggadah. Of course the laAVS of moi"ality, 
and religion, as laid down in the Pentateuch, were fixed ijrinciples, 
but there was the greatest divergence and latitude iu the explanation 
and api)lication of many of them. A uum might liold or propound 
almost any views, so long as he contravened nt)t the Law of Moses, 
as it was understood, and adhered in teaching and i)i-actice to the 
traditional ordinances. In {principle it was the same liberty which the 
Romish Church accords to its professing meuibei's — only with much 
wider application, since the debatahle ground einl)]-aced so many 
matters of faith, and the liberty given Avas not only that of i)rivate 
opinion but of pu])lic utterance. We emj^hasise this, because the 
absence of authoritative direction and the latitude in matters of faith 

' Tn twenty-one chniiters. eacli ediitiiin- altou'ether. with abundant notes, only 

inga nunilier of Halakhalis, and occupy- forty-four snui 11 l)a<;'es, whicli ti'eal of tlie 

ing in all four folio leaves. copyiiiii- of the Bible {Sephir Tovult, 1q 

'■^ In fourteen chapters, occupying rath- live chapters), of the Meziizah, or niem- 

er more than three folio leaves. orial on tlie doorposts (in two cliapters), 

* It fills litth^ more than a folio page. of Pln/lncfen'es {Tpphillin, in one eliap- 

* In eleven cliapters, covering about ter), of the Tsifsif//. or memorial-fringes 
If folio leaves. (in one diapter). of N/r/rw (Ahhadim, 

■> In nine chapters, tilling one folio leaf. in tlu'ee chapters) of tlie Cuf/irdiis, or 

" Little more than a folio column. Sanuu'itans (in two chapters), and, finally, 

' Besides these. liaphof^l Kirvliht'ini a curious tractate on Proselytes {Gerim, 

has published (Frankfort, ls,il) the so- in four chajtters). 

called seven smaller tractates, covering 




■> St. Matt. 
XV. 11, lt< 

iiud iuiK-r looliiig' staiul side In' side, and in such sliarp contrast, with 
tli(> most minute i)unctiliousness in all matters of outward observance. 
And here we may nmrk the fundamental distinction between the teach- 
in<;- of -Jesus and Kabbinism. He lett the Ifalakhah untouched, putting 
it, as it were, on one side, as soinethini>: quite secondary, while He 
insisted as pi-imnry on that wliicli lo them waschietly matter of Hagga- 
(hdi. And this rightly so, for, in His own words. 'Not that which 
goeth into the mouth detileth a man; but that whic-l' cometh out of 
the mouth,' since 'those things Avhich proceed out of the mouth 
come forth from the heart, and they detile the man.'" The ditference 
Avas (m(^ of fundamental i)rincii)le, and not merely of development, 
form, oi' detail. The one develoix'il the Law in its outward direction 
as ordinances and commandments; the other in its inward applica- 
tion as life and liberty. Thus I»al)l)inism occupied one pole — and the 
outcome of its tendency to i)ure externalism was the Halakhah, all that 
Avas internal and higher ])eing merely Haggadic. The teaching of Jesus 
occupied the opi)osite ])ole. Its starting-i)oint was the iinier sanc- 
tuary in which (Jod was known and worsiiii)i)ed. and it might well 
leave the Rabbinic Halaklujth aside, as not worth controversy, to be 
in the meantime 'done and observed,' in the tirm assurance that, in 
the course of its develoi)ment. the si)irit would create its own appro- 
l)riate forms, or, to use a New Testanumt tigure, the new Avine burst 
the old bottles. And, lastly, as closely connected with all this, and 
nmrking the climax of contrariety; Kabbinism started with demand of 
outward obedience and righteousness, and pointed to sonshi]) as its goal: 
the Gospel started Avith the free gift of forgiveness through faith and 
of sonshi[), and i)ointed to obedience and righteousness as its goal. 

In truth, Kabbinism, as such, had no system of theology; only Avhat 
ideas, conjectures, or fancies the Haggadah yielded concerning God, 
Angels, demons, man, his future destiny and })resent position, and 
Israel, Avith its past history and coining glory. Accordingly, by the 
side of Avliat is noble and pure, what a tei-rible mass of utter incon- 
gruities, ofcontlicting statements and too often debasing superstitions, 
the outcome of ignorance and narrow nationalism: of legendary colour- 
ing of r>il)lical narratives and scenes, profane, coarse, anddegradingto 
them; the Almighty Himself and His Angels taking part in the con- 
versations of Rabbis, and the discussions of Academics: nay, forming 
a kind of heavenly Sanhedi'in. which occasionally requires the aid of 
an earthh' Kabbi.' The miraculous merges into the ridiculous, and 

' Tliiis. in U. Mi'Z. S(i a. we read of u llic snlijcct nf i»urity. wlicii l{al)l)ali was 
iliscus.sion ill tlic litnivenlv AcadiMiiv en .-iuinniuiuMl to heaven In deatli, aitliou^h 



even tlie revoltiiiu'. Miraculous cures, uiiracul(»us supplies, iiiiraculuus 
help, all for the glory of great Ilabbi.s/ who by a look or woi'd can 
kill, and restore to life. At their l)iddiiig the eyes ol" a I'ival tall out. 
and are again inserted. Nay, siu-h was tlie veneration due to l\al)bis, 
that K. Joshua used to kiss the stone on which R. Eliezer had sat and 
lectured, saying: 'This stone is like Mount Sinai, and he who sat on 
it like the Ark." Modern ingenuity has, indeed, striven to suggest 
deeper symbolical meaning lor such stories. It should own the terrible 
contrast existing side by side: Hebrewism and Judaism, the Old 
Testament and traditionalism; and it should recognise its deeper 
cause in the absence of that element of spiritual and inner life which 
Christ has l)rought. Thus as between the two — the old and the new 
— it may be fearlessly asserted that, as regards their substance and 
spirit, there is not a dilference, but a total divergence, of funda- 
mental principle between Rabbinism an<l the New Testament, so that 
comparison between them is not possiljle. Here there is absolute 

The i)ainful fact just referred to is only too clearly illustrated l)y 
the relation in which traditionalism places itself to the Scriptures 
of the Old Testament, even though it acknowledges their inspira- 
tion and authority. The Talmud has it, ' that he who busies himself 
with Scripture only {i.e. without either the jMisJuxiIi ov Geinuru) has 
merit, and yet no merit.- Even the comparative ])aucity of references 
to the Ril)le in the Mishnah'' is siii'nificant. Jsrael had made void 


" Baba 

Mets. 33 a 

tliis required a miracle, since he was con- 
stantly engaged in sacred study, i^lioci';- 
ing to write, it needed tlie authority of 
lJal)])ah to attest the correctness of the 
Ahiiighty's statement on the Halakhic 
((uestiou discussed. 

' Some of these miracles are detailed 
in B. Mets. 85 h. 86 a. Thus, Resh Lakish. 
wlien searching for tiie tomb of K. Chija. 
found that it was miraculously renu>ved 
from his sight, as being too sacred for 
ordinary eyes. The same Rabbi clainu'd 
.sucii merit, that for his sake the Law 
siiould never be forgotten in Israel. 
Sudi was the power of tlie i)atriarchs 
tiuit, if they had been raised u)) together, 
they would have brought Messiah iiefoiv 
His lime. When R. Ciiija praye*!, succes- 
sively a storm arose, the rain descended, 
and the earth trembled. Again. Rab])ah, 
when about to be arrested, caused the 
face' of the messenger to be turned to 
his l)ack, and again restored it; next, l)\ 
his prayer lie made a wall burst, and so 

escai)ed. In Abhod. Zar. 17 //. a miracle 
is recorded in favour of R. Eleazar, to .set 
him free from his persecutors, or, rather, 
to attest a false statement which he 
made in order to escape martyrdom. 
Vo\- further extravagant jtraises of the 
Ralibis, comj). 8anh. 101 a. 

- Similarly we read in Aliotli d. R. 
Natlian 2!): -He who is master of the 
Midrash. Imr knows no Halakhahs, is like 
a iiei'o, 1)ui there are no ai'ins in his hand, 
lie that is master of tlie Halaklioth, but 
knows nothing of the ^lidrashim. is a 
wcalv person who is |)rovided with arms. 
Hut he that is master of both is both a 
hero and armed." 

•' Most of these, of coiu'se, are IVom the 
Pentateuch. References to any other Old 
Testament books are generally loosely 
made, and serve chietly as /lo/iifs (/'(tppi/i 
for Rabbinical sayings. Scriptui'al (piota- 
tions occur in .M out of the (!:i tractate.s 
of the Mi.'^hnah. the number of verses 
(pioti'd being A'.'iO. \ ((notation in the 




the Law b}- its traditions. Under a load of outward ordinances and 
observances its spirit had been crushed. The religion as well as the 
gi-aiid hope of the Old Testament had become externalized. And so 
alike Heathenism and Ju(Uiism — for it was no longer the pure religion 
of tlie Old Testament — each following its own direction, had reached 
its goal. All was prepared and waiting. The very i)orch had l)een 
Iniilt, through which the new, and yet old, religion was to pass into 
the ancient world, and the ancient world into the new religion. 
Only one thing was needed: the Coming of the Christ. As yet 
darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness lay upon the people. 
I3ut far away the golden light of the new day -was already tingeing 
the edge of the horizon. Presently would the Lord arise upon Zion, 
and His glory be seen upon her. Presently would the Voice from 
out the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord; i)resently would it 
herald the Coming of His Christ to Jew and Gentile, and that 
Kingdom of heaven, which, established uj^on earth, is righteousness, 
and ])eace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. ^ 

Mishiiah is ,2;eneriilly iiitrotlnced l),v the 
formula 'as it is said.' Tliis in all but 
sixteen instances, wliere the ([uotation is 
prefaced by, 'Scripture means to say.' 
But, in general, the difference in the 
mode of quotation in Rabbinic writings 
seems to depend partly on the context, 
but chiefly on the place and time. Thus, 
' as it is written ' is a Chaldee moile of 
quotation. Half the quotations in the 
Tahnud are prefaced by 'as it is said;' 
a lifth of them Ijy • as it is written ; ' a 
tenth by 'Scripture means to say;' and 
the reiiiaining tifth by various other 
formulas. Comp. Pinner's Introduction 

to Berakhoth. In the .Jerusalem Talmud 
no al-fikre ('read not so, but read so') 
occurs, for the iMiri)oses of textual criti- 
cism. In the Talmud a Tavourite mode 
of quoting from the Pentateuch, made in 
about 600 passages, is by introducing it 
as spoken or written by xi^tm- "The 
vai'lous modes in which Biblical quota- 
tions are made in .Jewish writings are 
enumerated in Sifrenfiusii's BifiXo? 
KaraAXay))^, p)). 1-.36. 

^ For details on the Jewish views on 
the Canon, and historical and mystical 
tiieology, see Ajipendix V. : • Rabl)inic 
Theology and Literature.' 

BOOf? II. 


• Fortitudo iiilirniatiir, 
Parva tit iinmensitas; 
Liberator alligatiir, 
Nascitur a?ternitas. 
O quam mira i)erpetrasti 
Jesu propter hoiiiinem ! 
Tani ardeuter ([ueni aniasti 

Paradiso exulem.' — Ancient Latin Hymn. 




If the du8t ol'ti-n ('iMiturics vowUl liavc Ix'cii wiped Iroiu tlio cvclitls CHAP, 
of those slcepci'8, and one of thoiii who tliroii.uccl -Icnisah'in in the I 

highday of its glory, (hiring the I'eign of King Solomon, had returned ^— ^r^^^ 
to its streets, he would seareely have recognised the once familiar 
city. Then, as now, a Jewish king reigned, who bore undivided rule 
over the whole land ; then, as now, the city was filled with riches and 
adorned with palaces and architectural monuments ; then, as now, 
Jerusalem was crowded with strangers trom all lands. Solomon and 
Herod were each the last Jewish king over the Land of Promise;* 
Solomon and Herod, each, built the Temple. Hut with the son of 
David began, and with the Idunnean ended, 'the kingdom'; or 
rather, having fulfilled its mission, it gave place to the spiritual 
world-kingdom of ' David's greater Son." The sce])tre departed from 
Judah to where the nations were to gather under its sway. And the 
Temple which Solomon built was the first, hi it the Sliekhinah 
dwelt visibly. The Temple which Herod reared was the last. The 
ruins of its burning, which the torch of the Romans had kindled, 
were never to be restored. Herod was not the aiitityi»e, he was the 
Barabbas, of David's Royal Son. 

In other respects, also, the difterence was almost eipially great. 
The four 'comi)anion-like' hills on which the city was built," the «Ps. cxxii, 
deep clefts l)y which it was surrounded, the Mount of Olives rising 
in the the east, were the same as a thousand years ago. There, as of old 
were the Pool of Siloam and the royal gardens — nay, the very Avail 
that had then surrounded the city. And yet all was so altered as to be 
scarcely recognisal)le. The ancient Jebusite fort, the City of David, 
Mount Zion.' was now the priests' ([iiarter, Ophel. and the old royal 
palace and stables had been thrown into the 'I'diiiile area — now com- 

• I do not here reckon the brief reign on the traditional site, on the western hill 

of King An:rippa. of Jerusalem, but on the eastern, south 

2 It will be seen that, with the most of the Temple area. 
I'eoent explorers. I locate Mount Zion not 


BOOK pletely levelled — where they formed the luagniticent treble eolonnade, 
II known as the Royal Torch. Passing through it, and out by the 
^ — -'^ ' Western Gate of the Temple, we stand on the innnense bridge 
which spans the 'Valley of the Cheesemongers,' or the Tyropceon, 
and connects the Eastern with the Western hills of the city. It is 
perliaps here that we can best nuirk the outstanding features, and 
note the changes. On the right, as we look northward, are (on 
the Eastern hill) Oi)hel, the Priest-quarter, and the Temple — oil, how 
Avondrously V)eautiful and enlarged, and rising terrace upon terrace, 
surrounded by massive walls: a palace, a fortress, a Sanctuary of 
shining marble and glittering gold. And bejond it frowns the old 
fortress of Baris, rebuilt by Herod, and named after his patron, 
Antonia. This is the Hill of Zion. Right below us is the cleft of 
the Tyrojioeon — and here cree])S up northwards the 'Lower City' or 
Acra, m the form of a crescent, widening into an almost square 
' suburb.' Across the Tyropceon, westward, rises the ' Upper City.' 
If the Lower City and suburb form the business-quarter with its 
markets, bazaars, and streets of trades and guilds, the ' Upper City' 
is that of palaces. Here, at the other end of the great bridge which 
connects the Temple with the 'Upper City,' is the palace of the 
Maccabees; beyond it, the Xystos, or vast colonnaded enclosure, 
where popular assemblies are held ; then the Palace of Ananias 
the High-Priest, and nearest to the Temple, ' the Council Chamber ' 
and public Archives. Behind it, westwards, rise, terrace upon terrace, 
the stately mansions of the Upper City, till, quite in the north-west 
corner of the old city, we reach the Palace which Herod had built for 
himself — almost a city and fortress, flanked l)y three high towers, and 
enclosing spacious gardens. Beyond it again, and outside the city 
walls, b(3th of the first and the second, stretches all north of the city 
the new suburb of Bezetha. Here on every side are gardens and 
villas; here passes the great northern road; out there must th(}y 
have laid hold on Simon the Cyrenian, and here must have led the 
way to the place of the Crucifixion. 

Changes that marked the chequered course of Israel's history 
had come even over the city walls. The first and oldest — that of 
David and Solomon — ran round the west side of the Upper City, 
then crossed south to the Pool of Siloam, and ran up east, round 
Ophel, till it reached the eastern enclosure of tlie Temple, whence 
it passed in a straight line to the point from which it had started, 
forming the northern l)oundary of the ancient city. But although 
this wall still existed, there was now a marked addition to it. When 



the Maccabee Jonathan finally cleared Jerusalem of the Syrian chap. 

garrison that lay in Fort Aera,'' he built a wall right 'through the 1 

middle of the city,' so as to shut out the foe.'' This wall probably ran ^- — ^r — ' 

from the western aniile of the Temiile southwards, to near the pool of "iMacc. i. 

. ' ' ^ 33, and 

8iloam, following the winding course of the Tyropoeon, but on the f'"en:hut 

' '=' '^ . *' ^ ' the precise 

other side of it, where the declivity of the Upper City merged in the pfJJ^""" 
valley. Another monument of the Syrian Wars, of the Maccabees, '.fort'i« 

*' '' y 'in dispute 

and of Herod, was the fortress Antonia. Part of it had, probably, MMacc 
been formerly occupied by what was known as Fort Acra, of such Ant.'xiii.''5! 
unhappy prominence in the wars that preceded and marked the early wi"thT"xiv. 
Maccabean period. It had passed from the Ptolemies to the S3Tians, vi! ■i'.2;'Ki 
and always formed the central spot round which the fight for the city 
turned. Judas Maccabee had not been able to take it. Jonathan 
lirtd laid siege to it, and built the wall, to which reference has just 
been made, so as to isolate its garrison. It was at last taken by 
Simon, the brotlicr and successor of Jonathan, and levelled with 
the ground." Fort Baris, which was constructed by his successor <-i4ib.c. 
Hyrcanus I.,'^ covered a much wider space. It lay on the north- t^^s-ioe 
western angle of the Temj)le, slightly jutting beyond it in the west, 
hut not covering the whole northern area of the Temple. The rock 
ou which it stood was higher than the Temple,^ although lower than 
the hill up which the new suburb Bezetha crept, which, accordingly, 
was cut olf by a deep ditch, for the safety of the fortress. Herod 
greatly enlarged and strengthened it. Within encircling walls the 
fort rose to a height of sixty feet, and was flanked by four towers, of 
which three had a height of seventy, the fourth (S.E.), which jutted 
into the Temple area, of 105 feet, so as to command the sacred 
enclosure. A subterranean passage led into the Temple itself,'" which 
was also connected with it by colonnades and stairs. Herod had 
adorned as well as strengthened and enlarged, this fort (now Anto- 
nia), and made it a palace, an armed camp, and almost a city.'' f./o.s. war 

Hitherto we have only spoken of the first, or old wall, which 
was fortified by sixty towers. The second wall, which had only 
fourteen towers, began at some ]ioint in the nortliern wall at the Gate 
Gennath, whence it ran north, and then east, so as to enclose Acra 
and the Suburb. It terminated at Fort Antonia. Beyond, and all 
around this second wall stretched, as already noticed, the new, as 
yet unenclosed suburb Bezetha, rising towards the north-east. But 

'It is, to say the least, doubtful, v. 5. 8), appliestoitsboiirlitioomp. -S'^Wss, 
whether the numeral 50 cubits (7.''i feet). Das Jerus. d. .Jos. p. fifiV 
which Josephus assigns to this rock (War 



BOOK those changes were as iiutliiug compared with those within the city 
n itself. First and foremost was the great transformation in the 
^-^-^(^-^ Temi^le itself/ which, from a small building, little larger than an 
ordinary church, in the time of Solomon,^ had become that great and 
glorious House which excited the admiration of tlu^ foreigner, and 
kindled the enthusiasm of every son of Israel. At the time of Christ 
it had been already forty-six years in building, and workmen were 
still, and for a long time, engaged on it.'^ But what a heterogeneous 
crowd thronged its ixirches and courts! Hellenists; scattered 
wanderers from the most distant parts of the earth — east, west, north, 
and south; Galileans, quick of temper and uncouth of Jewish speech; 
Judseans and Jerusalemites; white-robed Priests and Levites; Temple 
ofticials; broad-phylacteried, wide-fringed Pharisees, and courtly, 
ironical Sadducees; and, in the outer court, curious Gentiles! 
Some had come to worship; others to pay vows, or bring offerings, 
or to seek purification; some to meet friends, and discourse on 
religious subjects in those colonnaded porches, which ran round the 
Sanctuary; or else to have their questions answered, or their causes 
heard and decided, by the smaller Sanhedrin of twenty-three, that sat 
in the entering of the gate or by the Great Sajdiedrin. The latter 
no longer occupied the Hall of Hewn Stones, Gazith, l)ut met in some 
chamber attached to those 'shops,' or booths, on the Temple Mount, 
which belonged to the High-Priestly family of Ananias, and where 
such profita])le trade was driven by those who, in their cupidity and 
covetousness, were worthy successors of the sons of Eli. In the Court 
of the Gentiles (or in its porches) sat the official money-changers, who 
for a fixed discount changed all foreign coins into those of the 
Sanctuary. Here also was that great mart for sacrificial animals, and 
all that was requisite for offerings. How the simple, earnest country 
people, who came to pay vows, or bring offerings for purifying, must 
have wondered, and felt oi)i)ressed in that atmosphere of strangely 
blended religious rigorism and utter worldliness; and how they must 
have been taxed, imposed ui)on, and treated with utmost curtness, 
nay, rudeness, by those who laughed at their boorishness, and despised 
them as cursed, ignorant country people, little better than heathens, 
or, for that matter, th-an brute beasts. Here also there lay about 
a crowd of noisy beggars, unsightly from disease, and clamorous 
for helj). And close by passed the luxurious scion of the High- 

' I must take leave to refer to the de- Part viii. ]). (is2 li. speaks of the dimen- 

8criptioii of .Jerusalem, and esjieciallv sioiis of the old Sanctuary lus little more 

of the Tenii)le, in the 'Temple and ils than those of a villa,i,^e church. 
Services at tiie Time of .Tesus Christ.' •' It was only finished in 64 a.d., that 

■■'Dr. MUhhni, in Riehm's TTandw/irterl). is. six VPars before its destruction. 


Priestly families; the i)r()U(l, intensely s(?ll-conscious Teacher of the CHAr. 
Law, respcetfully followed l)y his disciples; and the quick-witted, I 

subtle Scribe. These were men who, on Sal)baths and feast-days, ^— ^r'— ^ 
would come out on the Temple-terrace to teach the people, or con- 
descend to answer their questions; who in the Syna.u'o^'ues would 
hold their i)u/,zled hearers spell-hound by llieir traditional loi'e and 
subtle argumentation, or tickle the fancy of tiie entranced multitude, 
that thronged every available space, by their ingenious frivolities, 
their nmi'vellous legends, or their clever sayings; but w ho would, if 
occasion required, (piell an opi)onent by well-i)oised questions, or crush 
him beneath the sheer weight of authority. Yet others were there 
who, desi)ite the utterly lowering intluence which the frivolities of 
the prevalent religion, and the elaborate ti'itling of its endless observ- 
ances, must have exercised on the nioi-al and religious feelings of 
all — perhaps, because of them — turned aside, and looked back with 
loving gaze to the spiritual promises of the past, and forward with 
longing exi)ectancy to the near 'consolation of Israel,' waiting for it 
in jn-ayei-ful fellowship, and with bright, heaven-granted gleams of its 
dawning light amidst the encircling gloom. 

Descending fnnn the Tenqile into tlie city, there was more than 
enlargement, due to the increased i)opulation. Altogether, Jerusalem 
covered, at its greatest, about ;^00 acres.' As of old there were still 
the same nari'ow streets in the business quarters; but in close con- 
tiguity to bazaars and shops rose stately mansions of wealthy merchants, 
and palaces of. princes.^ And what a change in the aspect of these 
streets, in the character of those shops, and, aliove all, in the appear- 
ance of the restless Eastern crowd that surged to and fro! Outside their 
shops in the streets, or at least in sight of the passers, and within reach 
of their talk, was the shoenudvcr hammering his sandals, the tailor 
])lying his needle, the cari)enter, or th(! worker in iron and brass. Those 
who were less busy, or nn)re enterprising, passed along, wearing some 
end)lem of their trade: the dyer, variously coloured threads; the car- 
penter, a rule: the wi-iter, a reed behind his ear; the tailor, with a 
needle prominently stuck in his dress. In the side streets the less 
attractive occiq^ations of the butcher, the wool-comber, or the flax- 
spinner were carried on. In these large, shady halls, artistic trades 
Avere pursued: the elegant worknninship of the goldsmith and jeweller; 
the various arficlcs de luxe, that adorned the houses of the rich; the 
Avork of the designer, the moulder, or th(> artificer in iron or brass. 

' See Conder, Heth and Moab, ji. !(4. 

'■* Such as the Palace of Grapte, and tluit nf Queen Helena of Adiabeue. 




b Arakh. vi. 

<-' Baba K. 
X. 4 

■i Men. xiii. 
8; Baba K. 
iil. 9 

<■ Tos. Sheq. 
ii. ; To.s. 
Ar. iv. 

'Men. xili. 

=' Tos. Balsa 
Mets. iv 

■> Yoma 35 b 

• Peah viii. 

In tliese streets and lanes everytliiiiii- nii^ht be purchased: the pro- 
duction of Palestine, or imported from foreign lands — nay, the rarest 
articles from the remotest parts. Exquisitely shaped, curiously de- 
signed and Jewelled cups, rings and other workmanship of })reci()us 
metals; glass, silks, tine linen, woollen start's, ])ur])le, and costly hang- 
ings; essences, ointments, and perfumes, as i)recious as gold; articles 
of food and drink from foreign lands — in short, what India, Persia, 
Arabia, Media, Egyi)t, Italy, Greece, and even the far-oft" lan<ls of the 
Gentiles yielded, might be had in these bazaars. 

Ancient Jewish writings enal)]e us to identify no fewer than 118 
different articles of import from foreign lands, covering more than even 
modern hi.xury has devised. Articles of luxury, especially from abroad, 
fetched indeed enormous jirices; and a lady might spend .36^. on a 
cloak: " silk would be paid 1)}' its weight in gold; purple wool at 3^. o-s. 
the i)ound, or, if double-dyed, at almost ten times that amount; while 
the price of the best balsam and nard was most exorbitant. On the 
other hand, the cost of common living was very low. In the bazaars 
you miglit get a complete suit for your slave for eighteen or nineteen 
shillings," and a tolerable outfit for yourself from Bl. to 61. For the 
same sum you might purchase an ass,' an ox,'' or a cow," and, for little 
more, a horse. A calf might lie liad for less than fifteen shillings, a 
goat for five or six.*^ Sheep were dearer, and fetched from four to 
fifteen or sixteen shillings, Avhile a land) might sometimes be had as low 
as two pence. No wonder living and hdxtur were so cheap. Corn of 
all kinds, fruit, wine, and oil, cost very little. Meat Avas about a penny 
a pound; a nmn might get himself a small, of course unfurnished, 
lodging for about sixpence a week.^ A day lal)ourer was paid about 
l^d. a day, though skilled labour would fetch a good deal more. In- 
deed, the great Hillel was i)opularly su])posed to have supported his 
family on less than twopence a day," while proi)erty to the amount of 
about G/. , oi- ti'ade with 21. or 3^ of goods, was supposed to exclude a 
person from charity, or a claim on what was left in the corners of 
fields and to the gleaners.' 

To tliese many like details might be added.' Sufficient has been 
said to show the two ends of society: the exceeding dearness of luxu- 
ries, and the col-responding cheapness of necessaries. Such extremes 
w^mld meet especially at Jerusalem. Its population, computeil at 
frcnn 200.(100 to 2.")0.000.'- was enormously swelled by travellers, and ])y 

' Com\). Ucr2f('l<r.'< liaiiik'ls.i^esch. modern city. Comp. Dr. ,SV7//V7r in .1. J/. 

■-' Anci(Mit .k'nisait'in is supposed to Luncz, ' Jerusalem,' for 18S2. 
liavecovcr('(l about dmililf thf aroaof the 



l)ilgrims (luring thogTcat lestivals.' The great Palace wari the residence 
of King and Court, with all tlieir following and luxury; in Antonia 
iay afterwards the Roman garrison. The Temple called thousands of 
priests, many of them with their families, to Jerusalem; while the 
learned Academies were filled with hundreds, though it may have been 
mostly poor, scholars and students. In Jerusalem must ha nc been many 
of the large warehouses tor the near commercial harboiii- of J(»|)pa; 
and thence, as from the industrial centres of busy Galilee, would 
the pedlar go forth to carry his wares over the land. More especially 
would the markets of Jerusalem, held, however, in bazaars and streets 
rather than in squares, be thronged with noisy sellers and bargaining 
l)uyers. Thither would Galilee send n()t only its manufactures, but its 
provisions: fish (fresh or salted), fruit* known for its lusciousness, oil, 
grape-syrup, and wine. There were special inspectors for these mar- 
kets — the Agardemis or Agronimos — w^ho tested weights and measures, 
and officially stamped them,'* tried the soundness of food or drink,'' and 
occasionally fixed or lowered the market-prices, enforcing tlieir 
decision,'" if need were, even with the stick.' ' Not only was there an 
ui)per and a lower market in Jerusalem, '^ but we read of at least seven 
special markets: those for cattle,^ wool, iron-ware,'' clothes, wood,' 
l)read, and fruit and vegetables. The original market-days were 
Monday and Tuesday, afterwards Friday.'' The large fairs (Yeridiu) 
were naturally confined to the centres of import and export — the bor- 
ders of Egypt (Gaza), the ancient Phoenician maritime towns (Tyre 
and Acco), and the Emporium across the Jordan (Botnah). Besides, 
every caravansary, or khan (qatlis, atlis, KataXvffig), was a soi't of 
mart, where goods were unloaded, and especially cattle set oiif^ fbi- sale, 
and purchases made. But in Jerusalem one may suppose the sellei's 
to have been every day in the market; and the magazines, in which 
greengrocery and all kinds of meat were sold (the Beth hciSIievaqim),'" 
nmst have been always open. Besides, there were the many shojis 
(Chanuyoth) either fronting the streets, or in courtyards, or else movable 
wooden booths in the streets. Strangelv enough, occasionally Jewish 


» Maaser ii. 

b Baba B. 

89 a 

<: .Ter. Ab. Z. 
44 J>: Ab. Z. 
58 a 

i' Jer. Dein. 

22 c- 

<■ Yonia '.I " 

f Sanh. 89 " 

? Erub. s. '.I 

'' Jo,: ^^ ar 
V. 8. 1 

i Ibid. ii. 
19. 4 

k To8. Baba 
Mets. lii. 

I Kerltli. 
lii. 7; 
Temur. ill. 

'" Makhsh. 
vi. 2 

^ Altlmutrh .Jerusalem covered only 
about :^00 aci-e.s, yet. froui the narrowness 
of Oriental street.-^, it would hold a very 
much larijer poindation than any West- 
ern city of the same e.xtent. Besides, we 
must remember that its ecclesia.stical 
boundaries extended l)eyond the city. 

■^ On the question of ofhcially fi.xini;- 
the market-price. diverKiuii; opinions are 
expressed, Baba B. 89 h. It was tliouii;ht 
that the market-i)rice should leave to the 

producer a i)rofit of oiu^-sixth on the 
cost (Baba B. !>0 ti). In liienei'al, the 
laws on these subjects form a nuist in- 
teresting- study. " B/oi/i (Mos. Talni. 
l\)lizeir.^ holds, tliat there were two 
classes of nuirket-officials. But this is 
not supported by suthcieiit evidence, nor, 
indeed, would such an arraiiiiement seem 

•' that of Botnah was the lar2;est, Jer. 
Ab. Z. 'M) (7. 




X. i 

* St. Mark 
xiv. 66 

k St. Luke 
xxiii. 6, 7 

■Jos. War 
U.3. 1 

<• Ant. XV. 
8. 1 

' Ant. xvii. 
10. 2; War 
H. 3. 1, 2 

women wero oni ployed in .selling.' Bnsinet^.s was also done in the 
restaurants and wineshops, of which there were many; w^here you 
might be served witli some dish: fresh or salted fish, fried locusts, a 
mess of vegeta])les, a dish of soup, pastry, sweetmeats, or a piece 
of a fruit-cake, to be w'ashed down with Juda;an or Galilean wine, 
Idumaean vinegar, or foreign beer. 

If from these busy scenes we turn to the more aristocratic quarters 
of the Upper City, ^ we still see the same narrow streets, but tenanted 
by another class. First, we pass the High-Priest's palace on the 
slope of the hill, with a low^er story under the ]H-incipal apartments, 
and a porch in front. Here, on the night of the Betrayal, Peter was 
'beneath in the Palace.'" Next, we come to Xystos, and then 
])ause for a moment at the Palace of the Maccal)ees. It lies higher up 
the hill, and westward from the Xystos. From its halls you can look 
into the city, and even into the Temple. We know not which of the 
Maccabees had l)uilt this palace. But it was occupied, not by the 
actually reigning prince, who always i-esided in the fortress (Baris, 
afterwards Antonia), but by some other member of the family. From 
them it passed into the possession of Herod. There Herod Antipas 
was when, on that terrible Passover, Pilate sent Jesus from the old 
palace of Herod to be examined by the Ruler of (ialilee.'' If these 
buildings pointed to the difference between the past and present, two 
structures of Herod's were, perhaps, more eloquent than any words in 
their accusations of the Idumaean. One of these, at least, would come 
in sight in passing along the slopes of the U])per City. The Macca- 
bean rule had l^een preceded l)y that of corruj)t High-Priests, wdio 
had prostituted their office to the vilest puri)oses. One of them, who 
had changed his Jewish name of Joshua into Jason, had gone so tVir, 
in his attempts to Grecianise the people, as to l)uild a Hippodrome and 
Gymnasium for heathen games. We infer, it stood where the West- 
ern hill sloped into the Tyropoeon, to the south-west of the Temijle." 
It was probably tliis which Herod afterwards enlarged and beautified, 
and turned into a theatre. Xo expense was spared on the great games 
held there. The theatre itself was magnificently adorned with gold, 
silver, precious stones, and trophies of arms and records of the victories 
of Augustus. But to the Jews this essentially heathen place, over against 
their Temple, was cause of deep indignation and plots.' Besides this 
theatre, Herod also built an imn^ense am])hitheatre, wiiich we must 
locate somewhere in the north-west, and outside the second city wall.*' 

All this was Jerusalem above ground. But there was an under- 
' Compare liere irpiierally Unrnh, D. alte Jerusalem. 


jj:r(iuii(l Jerusalem also, which burrowed evervwh(>rc under the city — chat*. 
under the Tapper City, under the 'renii)le, beyond the city walls. Its ' 

extent may be gathered tVoni the eircumstanee that, after the capture ^ ~''' ' 
of the city, besides the living who had sought shelter there, no fewer 
than 2,000 dead l)odies were found in those subterranean streets. 

Close by the tracks of heathenism in Jerusalem, and in sharp 
contrast, was what gave to Jerusalem its intensely Jewish character. 
It was not only the Temple, nor the festive i)ilgrims to its feasts and 
services. l>ut there were hundreds' of Synagogues,' some for different " 
nationalities — such as the Alexandrians, or the Cyrenians: some for, 
or perhaps founded by, certain trade-guilds. If possible, the Jewish 
schools were even more numerous than the Synagogues. Then there 
were the many Rab1)inic Academies ; and, l)esides, you miglit also see 
in Jerusalem that mysterious sect, the Essenes, of which the members 
were easily recognized by their white dress. Essenes, Pharisees, stranger 
Jews of all hues, and of many dresses and languages! One could have 
inuigined himself almost in another world, a sort of enchanted land, 
in this Jewish metropolis, and metropolis of Judaism. When the 
silver trumpets of the Priests Avoke the city to prayer, or the strain 
of Levite music swept over it, or the smoke of the sacritices hung 
like another Shekhinah over the Temple, against the green background 
of Olivet; or when in every street, court, and housetop rose the booths 
at the Feast of Tabernacles, and at night the sheen of the Temple 
illumination threw long fantastic shadows over the city; or when, at 
the Passover, tens of thousands crowded up the Mount with their 
Paschal lambs, and hundreds of thousands sat down to the Paschal 
supper — it would be almost difficult to believe, that heathenism was 
so near, that the Roman was virtually, and would soon be really, 
nmster of the land, or that a Herod occupied the Jewish throne. 

Yet there he was; in the pride of his power, and the reckless 
cruelty of his ever-watchful tyranny. Evei-ywhere was his mark. 
Temples to the gods and to Ca:'sar, magniticent, and magnificently 
adorned, outside Palestine and in its non-Jewish cities; towns re- 
built or built: Sebaste for the ancient Samaria, the splendid city and 
harl)our o\' Ca^sarea in the west, Antipafris (after his father) in the 
north, Kypros and Pltasaelis (after his mother and brother), and 

' Tradition exaggerates their munber men were sufficient to form a Synagogue, 

as 4()0 (.Jer. Ketlmi). 35 c.) or even 480 and liow many — wliat may be called 

(Jer. Meg. 73 d). But even the large ' private ' — Synagogues exist at present 

number (proportionally to tbe size of the in every town .where tliere is a large and 

city) nu^ntioned in tlie text need not orthodox Jewish population, 
surprise us when we remember that ten 

1 •_><) 



" Baba B. 
3 6 

!■ Bern id. 
R. 14 

Agrippvioii : iincouquerablo tbi-trcsses,sucli as Essebonifis and Machui- 
nis in l\'ici'a, Alexandreion, Herodeion, Hyrcania, and Masada in 
J udaaa — proclaimed his name and sway. But in Jerusalem it seemed as 
if he had gathered up all his strength. The theatre and amphitheatre 
spoke of his Grecianism; Antonia was the representative fortress; for 
his religi(ni he had built that glorious Temple, and for his residence 
the noblest of palaces, at the north-western angle of the Ujjper City, 
close by wliere Milo had been in the days of David. It seems 
almost incivdible, that a Herod should have reared the Temple, and 
yet we can understand his motives. Jewish tradition had it, that a 
Rabbi (Baba ben Buta) had advised him in this manner to conciliate 
the people,' or else thereby to expiate the slaughter of so many 
Rabbis.''' Probably a desire to gain popularity, and superstition, 
may alike have contributed, as also the wish to gratify his love for 
si)lendour and building. At the same time, he may have wished to 
show himself a better Jew than that rabble of Pharisees and Rabbis, 
who perpetually would cast it in his teeth, that he was an Idumsean. 
Whatever his origin, he was a true king of the Jews — as great, nay 
greater, than Solomon hiiiiself. Certainly, neither labour nor money 
had been spared on the Temple. A thousand vehicles carried up the 
stone; -10,000 workmen, under the guidance of 1,000 priests, wrought 
all the costly material gathered into that house, of which Jewish 
tradition could say, 'He that has not seen the Temple of Herod, 
has never known what beauty is."^ And yet Israel despised and 
abhorred the builder! Nor could his apparent work for the God of 
Israel have deceived the most credulous. In youth he had browbeaten 
the venerable Sanhedrin, and threatened the city with slaughter and 
destruction; again and again had he murdered her venerable sages; 
he had shed like water the blood of her Asmonean princes, and of 
every one who dared to be free; had stilled every national aspiration 
in the groans of the torture, and (luenchod it in the gore of his victinis. 
Not once, nor twice, but six times did he change the High-Priesthood, 
to bestow it at last on one who bears no good name in Jewish theology, 
a foreigner in Judaea, an Alexandrian. And yet the powei- of that 
Idumjean was but of vesterdav, and of mushroom growth! 

' Tile occasion is siiid to have bfeii. 
that tlie Mabljis, in answer to Herod's 
question, quoted Deut. xvii, 15. Baba 

ben Buta himself is sui<i to iia\e escaped 
the slaujiiiter, indeed. l)nt to liave been 
deprived of his eyes. 




It is an intoiisely painful liistory,^ in the course of which Herod made CHAP, 
his way to the thi-one. We look back nearly two and a half centuries n 
to where, with the empire ot Alexander, Palestine fell to his sue- "-^-r^^ 
cessors. For nearly a century and a half it continued the battle-field 
of the Egyptian and Syrian kings (the Ptolemies and the Seleucidae). 
At last it was a corrupt High-Pric^sthood — with which virtually the 
government of the land had all along lain — that betrayed Israel's 
precious trust. The great-grandson of so noble a figure in Jewish 
history as Simon the Just (compare Ecclus. 1. ) bought from the Syrians 
the High-Priestly office of his brother, adopted the heathen name 
Jason, and sought to Grecianise the people. The sacred oflice fell^ if 
l)ossible, even lower when, through bribery, it was transferred to his 
l)r()ther Menelaus. Then followed the brief jieriod of the terrible 
persecutions of Antiochus Epiphancs, when Judaism was all but exter- 
minated in Palestine. The glorious uprising of the Maccabees called 
forth all the national elements left in Israel, and kindled afresh the 
smouldering religious feeling. It seemed like a revival of Old Testa- 
ment times. And when Judas the Maccabee, with a band so inferior 
in numlx'rs and discipline, defeated the best of the Syrian soldiery, 
led by its ablest generals, and, on the anniversary of its desecration 
by heathen rites, set up again the great altar of burnt-offering, it 
a]ii)eare(l as if a new Theocracy were to be inaugurated. The cere- 
monial of that feast of the new * dedication of the Temple,' when each 
.light the inimber of lights grew larger in the winter's darkness, seemed 
symbolic of what was before Israel. But the Maccabees were not the 
Messiali; nor yet the Kingdom, which their sword would have restored 
— that of Heaven, with its blessings and ])eace. If ever, Israel might 
then have learned what Saviour to look for. 

The period even of promise was more brief than might have been 
expected. The fervour and purity of the movement ceased almost 

' For a fuller sketcli of tliis history see Appendix IV. 




« Com p. 
1 Mace. vi. 

with its success. It was certainly never the golden age of Israel — 
not even among those who remained i'aithlul to its God — which those 
seem to imagine who, forgetful of its history and contests, would trace 
to it so much that is most precious and spiritual in the Old Testa- 
ment. It may have been the pressure of circumstances, but it was 
anything but a pious, or even a ' happy " thought • of Judas the 
Maccabee, to seek the alliance of the Romans. From their entrance 
on the scene dates the decline of Israel's national cause. For a time, 
indeed — though after varying fortunes of war — all seemed prosi)erous. 
The Maccabees became both High-Priests and Kings. But ]iarty- 
strife and worldliness, ambition and corruption, and Grecianism on 
the throne, soon brought their sequel in the decline of moi^ale and 
vigour, and led to the decay and decadence of the Maccabean house. 
It is a story as old as the Old Testament, and as wide as the history 
of the world. Contention for the throne among the Maccabees led to 
the interference of the foreigner. When, after capturing Jerusalem, 
and violating the sanctity of the Temple, although not plundering its 
treasures, Pompey placed Hyrcanus II. in possession of the High- 
Priesthood, the last of the Maccabean rulers ^ was virtually shorn of 
power. The country was now trilnitary to Rome, and subject to the 
Governor of Syria. Even the shadow of political power passed from 
the feeble hands of Hyrcanus when, shortly afterwards, Gabinius (one 
of the Roman governors) divided the land into five districts, inde- 
pendent of each other. 

But already a person had appeared on the stage of Jewish affairs, 
who was to give them their last decisive turn. About fifty years 
before this, the district of Idumaea had been conquered by the Mac- 
cabean King H3Tcanus I., and its inhabitants forced to adopt Judaism. 
By this Idumaea we are not, however, to understand the ancient or 
Eastern Edom, which was now in the hands of the Nal^ataeans, but 
parts of Southern Palestine which the Edomites had occupied since 
the Babylonian Exile, and esj^ecially a small district on the northern 
and eastern boundary of Judaea, and below Samaria." After it became 
Judaean, its administration was entrusted to a governor. In the reign 
of the last of the Maccabees this office devolved on one Antipater, a 
1 .an of equal cunning and determination. He successfully interfered 
in the unhappy dispute for the crown, which was at last decided by 
the sword of Pompey. Antipater took the part of the utterly weak 
Hyrcanus in that contest with his energetic brother Aristobulus. He 

' So Sckiirer in his Neutestam. Zeit- 

■■^ A table (if the Maccabean and Hero- 
(lian faniiiie.^ l.s .a;iven in Appendl.x VI. 


soon became the virtual ruler, and Ilyreanus II. only a puppet in his 
hands. From the accession of Judas Maccabaeus, in 166 B.C., to the 
year 63 B.C., when Jerusalem was taken by Pompey, only about a 
century had elapsed. Other twenty-four years, and the last of the 
Maccabees had given i)lace to the son of Antipater: Herod, snrnaraed 
the Great. 

The settlement of Pompey did not prove lasting. Aristobulus, the 
brother and defeated rival of Hy rcanus, was still alive, and his sons 
were even more energetic than he. The risings attempted by them, 
the interference of the Parthians on behalf of those who Avere hostile 
to Rome, and, lastly, the contentions for supremacy in Rome itself, 
made this period one of confusion, turmoil, and constant warfare in 
Palestine. When Pompey was finally defeated by Caesar, the pros- 
pects of Antipater and Hyrcanus seemed dark. But they quickly 
changed sides; and timely help given to Caesar in Egypt brought to 
Antipater the title of Procurator of Judasa, while Hyrcanus was left 
in the High-Priesthood, and, at least, nominal head of the people. The 
two sons of Antipater were now made governors: the elder, Phasaelus, 
of Jerusalem; the younger, Herod, only twentj^-five years old, of 
Galilee. Here he displayed the energy and determination which 
were his characteristics, in crushing a guerilla warfare, of Avhich the 
deeper springs were probably nationalist. The execution of its 
leader brought Herod a summons to appear before the Great San- 
hedrin of Jerusalem, for having arrogated to himself the power of 
life and death. He came, but arrayed in purple, surrounded i)y a 
body-guard, and supported by the express direction of the Roman 
Governor to Hyrcanus, that he was to be acquitted. Even so he 
would have fallen a victim to the apprehensions of the Sanhedrin — 
only too well grounded — had he not been persuaded to withdraw from 
the city. He returned at the head of an army, and was with difficulty 
persuaded by his father to spare Jerusalem. Meantime Caesar had 
named him Governor of Coelesyria. 

On the murder of Caesar, and the possession of Syria by Cassius, 
Antipater and Herod again changed sides. But they rendered such 
substantial service as to secure favour, and Herod was continued in 
the position conferred on him by Caesar. Antipater was, indeed, 
poisoned by a rival, but his sons Herod and Phasaelus repressed and 
extinguished all opi)osition. When the battle of Philippi placed the 
Roman world in the hands of Antony and Octavius, the former 
obtained Asia. Once more the Idumaeans knew how to gain the new 
ruler, and Phasaelus and Herod were named Tetrarchs of Judaea. 


BOOK Afterwards, when Antony was held in the toils of Cleopatra, matters 
" seemed, indeed, to assume a diflerent aspect. The Parthiansentere<l 

' 'c — ' the land, in support of the rival Maccabean prince Antigonus, the son 

of Aristobulus. By treachery, Phasaelus and Hyrcanus were induced 
to go to the Parthian camp, and made captives. Phasaelus shortly 
afterwards destroyed himself in his prison,' while Hyrcanus was de- 
prived of his ears, to unfit him for the High-Priestly office. And so 
Antigonus for a short time succeeded both to the High-Priesthood and 
royalty in Jerusalem. Meantime Herod, who had in vain warned 
his brother and Hyrcanus against the Parthian, had been able to 
make his escape from Jerusalem. His family he left to the defence 
of his brother Joseph, in the inaccessible fortress of Masada; himself 
tied into Arabia, and finally made his way to Rome. There he suc- 
ceeded, not (jnly with Antony, but obtained the consent of Octavius, 
and was ])roclaimed by the Senate King of Judaea. A sacrifice on the 
('ai)itol, and a banquet by Antony, celebrated the accession of the new 
successor of David. 

But he had yet to conquer his kingdom. At first he made way 
by the help of the Romans. Such success, however, as he had gained, 
was more than lost during his ])rief absence on a visit to Antony. 
Joseph, the brother of Herod, was defeated and slain, and Galilee, 
which had been subdued, revolted again. But the aid which the 
Romans rendered, after Herod's return from Antony, was much more 
liearty, and his losses were more than retrieved. Soon all Palestine, 
with the exception of Jerusalem, was in his hands. While laying 
siege to it, he went to Samaria, there to wed the l)eautiful Maccabean 
princess Mariamme, who had been betrothed to him five years before.^ 
That ill-fated Queen, and her elder brother Aristobulus, united in 
themselves the two rival branches of the Maccabean family. Their 
father was Alexander, the eldest son of Aristobulus, and brother of 
that Antigonus whom Herod now besieged in Jerusalem; and their 
mother, Alexandra, the daughter of Hyrcanus II. The uncle of 
Mariamme was not long able to hold out against the combined forces 
of Rome and Herod. The carnage was terrible. When Herod, by 
rich presents, at length induced the Romans to leave Jerusalem, they 
took Antigonus with them. By desire of Herod he was executed. 

This was the first of the Maccabees who fell victim to his jealousy 
and cruelty. Tlu^ history which now follows is one of sickening car- 
nage. The next to experience his vengeance were the principal ad- 

' By dashing out his V)rains against one Doris, \\w issue of the marriage be- 
tlie prison walls. ing a son, Antipater. 

''■ He had pre\iousIy been married to 


heronts in Jerusalem of his rival Antigonus. Forty-tive of the noblest CHAP. 
and richest were executed. His next step was to a])point an obscure ll 
liabylonian to the Hig-h-Priesthood. This awakened the active '^— ^r — 
hostility of Alexandra, the mother of Mariamme, Herod's wife. The 
Maccabean princess claimed the High-Priesthood for her son Aristo- 
l)ulus. Her intrigues with Cleopatra — and through her with Antony 
— and the entreaties of Mariamme, the only being whom Herod loved, 
though in his own mad way, prevailed. At the age of seventeen 
Aristobulus Avas made High-Priest. But Herod, who well knew the 
hatred and contempt of the Maccabean members of his family, had 
his mother-in-law watched, a precaution increased after the vain 
attempt of Alexandra to have herself and her son removed in coffins 
from Jerusalem, to flee to Cleopatra. Soon the jealousy and suspicions 
of Herod were raised to murderous madness, by the acclamations 
which greeted the young Aristobulus at the Feast of Tabernacles. So 
dangerous a Maccabean rival must be got rid of; and, by secret order 
of Herod, Aristobulus was drowned while bathing. His mother 
denounced the murderer, and her influence with Cleopatra, who also 
hated Herod, led to his being summoned before Antony, Once more 
l)ribery, indeed, prevailed ; but other troubles awaited Herod. 

When oljcying the summons of Antony, Herod had committed 
I he government to his uncle Joseph, who was also his brother-in-law, 
having wedded Salome, the sister of Herod. His mad jealousy had 
prompted him to direct that, in case of his condemnation, Mariamme 
was to be killed, that she might not become the wife of another. 
Unfortunately, Joseph told this to Mariamme, to show how much she 
was loved. But on the return of Herod, the infamous Salome 
accused her old husband of impropriety with Mariamme. When it 
appeared that Joseph had told the Queen of his commission, Herod, 
regarding it as confirming his sister's charge, ordered him to be 
executed, without even a hearing. External complications of the 
gravest kind now sui)ervened. Herod had to cede to Cleopatra the 
districts of Phocnice and Philistia, and that of Jericho with its rich 
balsam plantations. Then the dissensions between Antony and 
Octavius involved him, in the cause of the former, in a war with 
Arabia, whose king had failed to pay tribute to Cleopatra. Herod 
was victorious; but he had now to reckon with another master. The 
battle of Actiunr' decided the fate of Antony, and Herod had to "aiis.c. 
make his peace with Octavius. Happily, he was al)le to do good 
service to the new cause, ere presenting himself before Augustus. 
But, in order to be secure from all possible rivals, he had the aged 
Hyrcanus II. executed, on pretence of intrigues with the Arabs. 


IJOOK Herod was Kuccessl'iil with Augustus; and when, in the following 
H suiuuier, he i'urnished hiui supplies on his march to Egypt, he was 

'^- — ~, rewarded by a substantial addition of territory. 

When about to appear before Augustus, Herod had entrusted to 
one Soenius the charge of Mariainnie, with the same fatal directions 
as formerly to Joseph. Again Mariamme learnt the secret; again 
the old calumnies were raised — this time not only by Salome, but 
also by K^pros, Herod's mother; and again Herod imagined he had 
found corroborative evidence. Soemus was slain without a hearing, 
and the beautiful Mariamme executed after a mock trial. The most 
fearful paroxysm of remorse, passion, and longing for his murdered 
wife now seized the tyrant, and brought him to the brink, of the 
grave. Alexandra, the mother of Mariannne, deemed the moment 
favorable for her plots — but she was discovered, and executed. Of 
the Maccabean race there now remained only distant members, the 
sons of Babas, who had found an asylum with Costobarus, the 
Governor of Iduma^a, who had wedded Salome after the death of her 
tirst husband. Tired of him, as she had been of Joseph, Salome 
denounced her second husband ; and Costobarus, as well as the sons 
of Babas, fell victims to Herod. Thus perished the family of the 

The hand of the maddened tyrant was next turned against his 
own family. Of his ten wives, we mention only those whose children 
occupy a i)lace in this history. The son of Doris was Antipater; 
those of the Maccabean Mariamme, Alexander and Aristobulus; 
another Mariamme, whose father Herod had made High-Priest, bore 
him a son named Herod (a name which other of the sons shared); 
Malthake, a Samaritan, was the mother of Archelaus and Herod 
Antipas; and, lastly, Cleopatra of Jerusalem bore Philip. The sons 
of the Maccabean princess, as heirs presumptive, were sent to Rome 
for their education. On this occasion Herod received, as reward 
for many services, the country east of the Jordan, and was allowed to 
appoint his still remaining brother, Pheroras, Tetrarch of Peraea. On 
their return from Rome tlie young princes were married : Alexander to 
a daughter of tlie King of Cappadocia, and Aristol)ulus to his cousin 
Berenice, the daughter of Salome. But neither kinship, nor the yet 
nearer relation in which Aristobulus now stood to her, could extin- 
guish the hatred of Salome towards the dead Maccalx'an i)rincess or 
her children. Nor did the young princes, in their pride of descent, 
disguise their feelings towards the house of their father. At first, 
Herod gave not heed to the denunciations of his sister. Presently he 
yielded to vague a])preliensions. As a first step, Antipater, the son 

LAST ti;a(;i<;i)Ii;s of iikijods keicx. 12t 

of Doris, w;is rccallcMl Irom exile, imd sent to IJoiiie lor education. CIIAI'. 
So tlie l)rea('li Ix'cauie open; and Herod took lii.s sous t(j Italy, to lay H 

Ibrnial aeeiisatioii against tiieni hetbrc Augustus. The wise counsels - — ~^''' — ' 
of the Eiiil)eror restored i)eaee lor a time. But Antipater hoav re- 
turned to ralestine, and joined his calumnies to those of Salome. 
Once more the King of Cappadocia succeeded in reconciling Herod 
and his sons. l>ut in the end the intrigues of Salome, Antipater, and 
of an infamous foreigner who had made his way at Court, i)revailed. 
Alexandei- and Aristobulus were imprisoned, and an accusation of 
high treason laid against them before the Emperor. Augustus gave 
llerod full powers, but advised the convocation of a mixed tribunal 
of Jews and Romans to try the case. As might have been expected, 
the two princes Avere condemned to death, and when some old soldiers 
ventured to intercede for them, 300 of the supposed adherents of the 
cause were cut down, and the two princes strangled in prison. This 
happened in Samaria, where, thirty years before, Ilerod had wedded 
their ill-fated mother. 

Antipater was now the heir presumi)tive. But, imi)atient of the 
throne, he plotted with Herod's brother, Pheroras, against his father. 
Again Salome denounced her nepliew and her brother. Antipater 
withdrew to Rome; but when, after the death of Pheroras, Herod 
obtained indubitable evidence that his son had plotted against his 
'ife, he lured Antipater to Palestine, where on his arrival he was 
cast into prison. All that was needed was the permission of Augustus 
for his execution. It arrived, and was carried out only five days 
before the death of Herod himself. So ended a reign almost unparal- 
leled for reckless cruelty and bloodshed, in which the murder of the 
Innocents in Bethlehem formed but so trilling an ei)isode among the 
many deeds of blood, as to have seemed not deserving of record on 
the page of the Jewish historian. 

But we can understand the feelings of the people towards such a 
King. They hated the Idumaean; they detested his semi-heathen 
reign; they abhorred his deeds of cruelty. The King had surrounded 
himself Avith foreign councillors, and was protected by foreign mer- 
cenaries from Thracia, Germany, and Gaul. " So long as he lived, ru) ^^;';" ^'?/- 
woman's honour was safe, no man's life secure. An army ot all- 
powerful spies pervaded Jerusalem — nay, the King himself was said 
to stoop to that office. ^' If pique or private enmity led to denuncia- ;__Ant. xv. 
tion, the torture would extract any confession from the most innocent. 
What his relation to Judaism had l)een, may easily be inferred. He 
would be a Jew — even build the Temi)le, advocate the cause of the 
Jews in other lands, and, in a certain sense, conform to the Law of 

10. 4 


I'.ooK .liidaisiii. Ill hiiildinji," the Teini)lc, he was so anxious to conciliate 
II national ])rcju(lice, that the Sanctuary itself was entrusted to the 

' — ' worknninslii|) of |)i'iests only. Nor did he ever intrude into the 
Holy Phice, nor interfere with any functions of the priesthood. None 
of his coins bear devices which could have shocked popular feeling, 
nor did any of the l)uildings he erected in Jerusalem exhil)it any for- 
bidden eniblenis. The Sanhcdrin did exist during his reign, 'though 
it must have been shorn of all real power, and its activity confined to 
ecclesiastical, or semi-ecclesiastical, causes. Strangest of all, he 
seems to have had at least the passive support of two of the greatest 
• Ant. xiv. Rabbis — the Pollio and Sanieas of Josephus" — supposed to represent 
i' 10. 4 those great figures in Jewish tradition, Abtalion and Sheniajah. ''■•' 
^Aii. 1, 10, ^^y^, (,,jj^ ju^^ conjecture, that they preferred even his rule to what had 
l)receded; and ho])e(l it might lead to a Roman Protectorate, which 
would leave Judiva practically independent, or rather under Rabbinic 

It was also under the government of Herod, that Hillel and 
Shammai lived and taught in Jerusalem:^ the two, whom tradition 
cEdiLiM. 4 designates as 'the fathers of old.''' Both gave their names to 
' schools, ' whose direction was generally difterent — not unfrequently, 
it seems, chiefly for the sake of opposition. But it is not correct to 
describe the former as consistently the more liberal and mild. * The 
teaching of both was supposed to have been declared by the 'Voice 
from Heaven' {tJte JkitJi-(Jol) as 'the words of the living God; ' yet 
"jer.Ber. the Luw was to bc henceforth according to the teaching of Hillel." 

3 '' lines 3 ... 

and 2 from But to US Hillcl IS SO intensely interesting, not merely as the mild 
and gentle, nor only as the earnest student who came from Babylon 
to learn in the Academies of Jerusalem; who would support his 
family on a third of his scanty wages as a day labourer, that he might 
l)ay for entrance into the schools; and whose zeal and merits were 
only discovered when, after a severe night, in which, from poverty, he 
had been unable to gain admittance into the Academy, his bemiinbed 
form was taken down from the window-sill, to which he had crept u]) 

" Conip. tlie (lirifiLssioii of this (lue^tioii ivnd so in the end the name of Tiod be 

in Wieseler, Beitr. pp. 215 Ac. profaned.' 

'^ Even their recorded fundamental -^ On Hillel and Shammai see the arti- 

princijjles l)ear this out. That of She- cle in Ilerzog's Keal-Encyklop. ; that in 

niajali was : • Love labour, hate lordship. Ilamhuyr/er's; Di-lifzsch, Jesus u. Hillel, 

and do not push forward to the authori- and liooks on Jewish history generally, 

ties.' That of Abtalion was: • Ye sages, *A number of ))oints on which the 

be careful in your words. lest perchance ordinances of Hillel were more severe 

ye incur Ijanishnient, and are exiled to a than those of Shammai are enumerated 

lilace of bad waters, and the disciples in Eduj. iv. 1-12; v. 1-4; Ber. 36 a, end. 

who follow you drink of tliem and die, Comp. also Ber. R. 1. 


not to lose aught of the precious instruction. And for his sake did CIIAP. 
they gladly break on that Sabbath the sacred rest. Nor do we think ll 
of him, as ti-adition fables him-— the descendant of David," possessed ' — ^r — ■ 
of every great (luality of body, mind, and heart; nor yet as the second ''^*'''-"-9* 
Ezra, whose; learning placed him at the head of the Sanhedrin, Avho 
laid down the i)rincii)les afterwards applied and developed ])y Kab- 
l)inism, nnd who was the real founder of traditionalism. Still less do 
we think of him, as he is lalsely represented by some: as he whose 
princii)les closely resemble the teaching of Jesus, or, according to cer- 
tain writers, were its source. By the side of Jesus we think of him 
otherwise than this. We remember that, in his extreme old age and 
near his end, he nuiy have i)resided over that meeting of Sanhedrin 
which, in answer to lIerod"s inquiry, pointed to Bethlehem as the 
birthplace of the Messiah.''' AVe think of him also as the grand- i>st. Matt. 
father of that Gamaliel, at whose feet Saul of Tarsus sat. And to us 
he is the representative Jewish reformer, in the spirit of those times, 
and in the sense of restoring rather than removing; while we think 
of Jesus as the Messiah of Israel, in the sense of bringing the 
Kingdom of God to all men, and opening it to all l)elievers. 

And so there were two worlds in Jerusalem, side l)y side. On 
the one hand, was Grecianism with its theatre and amphitheatj'e; 
Ibreigners tilling the Court, and crowding the city; foreign tendencies 
and ways, from the foreign King downwards. On the other hand, 
was the old Jewish world, becoming now set and ossified in the Schools 
of Hillel and Shanuuai, and ovi^rshadowed l)y Temple and Synagogue. 
And each was pursuing its course, by the side of the other. If Herod 
had every wliere his spies, the Jewish law provided its two police ma- 
gistrates in Jerusalem, the only Judges who received rcnnmeration.''" •^Jer. 
If Herod judged cruelly and despotically, the Sanhedrin Aveighed 35 ,; 

- ,. ,' ' 111 • i- • T < /-^ Kethub. 

most deliberately, the balance always mclin'mg to mercy. It Greek 104 (^ 
was the language of the court and cam]i, and indeed nuist have been 
understood and spoken by most in the land, the language of the 
people, sj^oken also ])y Christ and His Apostles, was a dialect of the 
ancient Hebrew, the Western or Palestinian Aramaic." It seems 
strange, that this could ever have been dcuibted.* A Jewish Messiah 

1 On theelironolo,2;y of tlio lifo of Ilillel - Tlie police laws of the Ral)l)is might 

A-c, see aUo Sr/tmi/i/. Feb. d. Eiitsteh. well serve as a model for all similar leg- 

jVc. (ler Megillatli Taaiiith. esjteeially )>. islatioii. 

:'>4. Hillel is said to liave become ('iiief '■ At the same time T can scarcely agree 

of the Sanhedrin in rSO K.e.. and to have with Delitzsch and others, that this was 

lield the office for f(n-t.v years. These the dialect called -SV''. The latter was 

numl)ers, however, are no doubt some- rather Syriac. Comp. ie?7/, ad voc. 

what exaggerated. * Professor /i\y/(f'/7.s' has a(lvocated. with 


HOOK Wlio would ui'ii-o His claiin uijoii Israel in (ircck, seems almost a 
11 contradiction in terms. Wc know, that the language of the Temple 

^ . — --' and the Synagogue was Hebrew, and that the addrcr^ses of the 

Rabbis had to be 'targumed' into the vernacular Aramaean — and 
can we believe that, in a Hebrew service, the Messiah could have 
risen to address the i)e(jple in Greek, or that He would have argued 
with the I'harisees and Scribes iu that tongue, especially remembering 
that its study was actually forbidden by the Ral)l)is?' 

Indeed, it was a peculiar mixture of two worlds in Jerusalem: 
not only of the Grecian and the Jewish, but of piety and frivolity also. 
The devotion of the people and tiie liberality of the rich were un- 
bounded. Fortunes were lavished on the support of Jewish learning, 
the promotion of i)iety, or the advance of the national cause. 
Thousands of votive ofterings, and the costly gifts in the Temple, 
bore evidence of this. If priestly avarice had artificially raised the 
price of sacrificial animals, a rich man woidd bring into the Temple 
at his own cost the numl)er requisite for the poor. Charity was not 
only open-handed, but most delicate, and one who had been in good 
circumstances would actually be enal)led to live according to his former 
station.- Then these Jerusalemites — townspeople, as they called 
themselves — were so polished, so witty, so pleasant. There was a 
tact in their social intercourse, and a considerateness and delicacy in 
their public arrangements and provisions, nowhere e^lse to be found. 
'Bemid. R. Their very language was different. There was a Jerusalem dialect.' 
wai^h.p. quicker, shorter, 'lighter' {Lishna Qidila)^ And their hospitality, 
i BabaK. Pspccially at festive seasons, was unlimited. No one considered his 
house his own, and no stranger or pilgrim but found reception. And 
how much there was to be seen and heard in those luxuriously fur- 
nished houses, and at those sumptuous ent(n'taininents! In the 
women's apartments, friends from the country would see every novelty 
in dress, adornment, and jewellery, and have the benefit of examining 
themselves in looking-glasses. To be sure, as ])eing womanish vanity, 
their use was interdicted to men, except it were to the members of 

{i:i-eat iiiiieiuiity, tlie view tliat Clirist and, pp. 4-28; to the latter work by tlie 

His Apostles used the Greek iaiisjuaere. same writer (Aittestam. Citate im N. 

See especially his 'Discussions on the Test.); to a very interesting article by 

Gospels.' The Roman Catholic Cliurch Professor Bditzsch in the ' Daheim ' for 

sometimes maintained, that .Jesus and 1874 (No. 27); to Buxforf, sub Gelil; 

His disciples spoke Latin, and in 1S22 a to J. B. GohJhpru, 'The Lauijcuage of 

work appeared l)y HUirk to ju-ove that Christ"; but esi)ecially to ti. de iiossi, 

the N.T.Greek siiowed a Latin ()ri<;:in. Delia lingua ]trop. di Cri.sto (Parma 1772). 
' For a full statement of thearicuuients '^ Thus Hillel was said to have hired a 

on this sul)ject we refer tlie student to horse, and even an outrunner, for a de- 

Bofil, Porsch. n. e. Volk.-;bibel z. Zeit caved rich man ! 



the family of tlie rresidont of tlic Sniilicdiin. on account of their 
intercourse with those in authority, just as for the same reason they 
wore allowed to learn Greek.'' Nor might even women look in the 
glass on the Sabbath.'' But that could only apply to those carried in 
the hand, since one might be tempted, on the holy day, to do such 
servile work as to pull out a grey hair with the pincers attached t(; 
the end of the glass; but not to a glass fixed in the lid of a basket:' 
nor to such as hung on the wall." And then the lady-visitor might 
get anything in Jerusalem; from a false tooth to an Arabian veil, a 
Persian shawl, or an Indian dress! 

"While the women so learned Jerusalem manners in the inner 
apartments, the men would converse on the news of the day, or on 
politics. For the Jerusalemites had friends and correspondents in the 
most distant parts of the world, and letters were carried by special 
messengers," in a kind of post-bag. Nay, there seem to have been 
some sort of receiving-offices in towns/ and even something resem- 
bling our parcel-post.^ And, strange as it may sound, even a species 
of newspapers, or broadsheets, ai)pears to have been circulating 
{3Iikhtabhin), not allowed, however, on the Sabbath, unless they 
treated of public affairs." 

Of course, it is difficult accurately to determine which of these 
things were in use in the earliest times, or else introduced at a later 
period. Perhaps, however, it was safer to bring them into a picture 
of Jewish society. Undoubted, and, alas, too painful evidence comes 
to us of the luxuriousness of Jerusalem at that time, and of the moral 
corruption to which it led. It seems only too clear, that such com- 
mentations as the Talmud' gives of Is. iii. 16-24, in regard to the 
manners and modes of attraction practised by a certain class of the 
female population in Jerusalem, applied to a far later period than that 
of the prophet. With this agrees only too well the recorded covert 
lascivious expressions used by the men, which gives a lamentable 
picture of the state of morals of many in the city," and the notices of 
the indecent dress worn not only by women,' but even by corruj)! 
High-Priestly youths. Nor do the exaggerated descriptions of what 
the Midrash on Lamentations"' describes as the dignity of the Jeru- 
salemites; of the wealth which they lavished on their marriages; of 
the ceremony which insisted on repeated invitations to the guests to 
a banquet, and that men inferior in rank should not be bidden to it ; 
of the dress in which they appeared; the manner in which the dishes 
were served, the wine in white crystal vases; and the punishment of 
the cook who had failed in his duty, and which was to lie commen- 


7 'I 

• Shabl.. 
IW a 

<-■ Kel. xiv. (j 

■' Tos. 

Shabb. xiii. 

11. 130 

' Shabb. X. 4 
f Shabb. 19 « 

s Eosh 
haSh. 9 6 

■i Tos. 



i Shabb. 
62 l> 

^ Com p. 
Shabb. G-Jh, 
last line 
nnd first <ii 
()3 a 

' Kel. xxiv. 
16; xxviU. S 

»' On eh. iv. 



BOOK suratc to the digiiitv ut the i)arty — give a better impression of the 
II great world iu Jerusalem. 

— ^ And yet it was the City of God, over whose destruction not only 

the Patriarch and Moses, but the Angelic hosts — nay, the Ahnighty 
Himself and His iShekhinah — had made bitterest lamentation.' The 
City of the Prophets, also — since each of them whose birthplace had 

Mog. i5-( not I)een mentioned, must be reganled as having sprung from it." 
f]qually, even more, marked, but now for joy and triumph, would be 
tlie hour of Jerusalem's uprising, when it would welcome its Messiah. 
Oh, when would He come? In the feverish excitement of expectancy 
they were only too ready to listen to the voice of any pretender, ho"w- 
cver coarse and clumsy the imposture. Yet He was at hand — even 
now coming: only quite otlier than the Messiah of their dreams. 
' He came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as 
many as received Him, to them gave He power to become children of 
God, even to them that V)elieve on HisXame." 

' See the Iiitroductioti to tlie Midrasli plieinous — that we do not venture on 
on Lamentations. But some of tlie (luotation. 
descriptions are so painful — even bias- 







(St. Luke i. .''.-25.) 

It was tlic time of the Morning Sacrifice' As the massive Templc- 
^ates slowly swung on their liinges, a thrco-tbld blast IVom the silver 
trumpets of the Priests seemed to waken the City, as with the Voice ^— -y^"^ 
of God, to the life of another day. As its echoes came in the still 
air across the cleft of the Tyroi)oeon, up the slopes of the Upper 
City, d(jwn the busy quarters below, or away to the new suburb 
beyond, they must, if but for a moment, have brought holier thoughts 
to all. For, did it not seem to link the present to the past and the 
future, as with the golden chain of promises that bound the Holy 
City to tlie Jei-usalem that was above, which in tyi)e had already, 
and in reality would soon descend from heaven? Patriot, saint, or 
stranger, he could not have heard it unmoved, as thrice the summons 
from within the Temi)le-gates rose and tell. 

It hail not come too soon. The Levites on ministry, and those of 
the laity, whose 'course' it was to act as the representatives of Israel, 
\\hetlier in Palestine or f\ir away, in a sacrifice provided by, and 
otfci-ed for, all Israel, hastened to their duties.' For already the blush 
of dawn, for which the Priest on the highest pinnacle of the Temple 
had watched, to give the signal for beginning the services of the day, 
had shot its brightness far away to Hebron and beyond. Within the 
Courts below all had long been busy. At some time previously, 
unknown to those who waited for the morning — whether at cock- 
crowing, or a little earliei- or later," the sujierintending Priest lia<l "Tamidi.2 
summoned to their sacred functions those who had ' washed, ' according 

' AVe presume, that tlie ministration of 
Zaciiarias (St. Luke i. 9) took place in the 
mornino;, as the principal service. But 
.lA/'/yer (Komni. 1. 2, p. 242) is mistaken 
ill sui)posing, that this follows from the 
reference to the lot. It is, indeed, ti'ue 
that, of the four lots for the priestly func- 
tions, three took i)iace only in the morn- 

in,2:. But that for incensing was repeated 
in the evenins; (Yoma2()r4. Even Bishop 
H((neb(^r<i (Die Relig. Altertii. p. fiOi)) is 
not accurate in this respect. 

- For a (lescrii)tion of tlie details of 
that service, see 'The Temple ami its 
Services,' &c. 


R(^OK to the ordinance. There must have been each day about fifty priests 
n on duty.' Such of them as were ready now divided into two parties, 

■ r — to make inspection of the Temple courts by torchlight. Presently 

they met, and trooped to the well-known Hall of Hewn Polished 

• Yoma25a gtones/Mvhere formerly the Sanhedrin had been wont to sit. The 
ministry for the day was there apportioned. To prevent the disputes 
of carnal zeal, the * lot ' was to assign to each his function. Four 
times was it resorted to : twice before, and twice after the Temple-gates 
were opened. The first act of their ministry had to be done in the 
grey dawn, by the fitful red light that glowed on the altar of burnt 
otfering, ere the priests had stirred it into fresh flame. It was scarcely 
daybreak, when a second time they met for the ' lot,' which designated 
those who Avere to take part in the sacrifice itself, and who were to 
trim the golden candlestick, and make ready the altar of incense 
within the Holy Place. And now morn had broken, and nothing 
remained before the admission of worshippers but to lu'ing out the 
lamb, once again to make sure of its fitness for sacrifice, to water it 
from a golden bowl, and then to lay it in mystic fashion — as tradition 
described the binding of Isaac — on the north side of the altar, with 
its face to the west. 

All, priests and laity, were present as the Priest, standing on the 
east side of the altar, from a golden bowl sprinkled with sacrificial 
blood two sides of the altai', below the red line which marked the 
difterence between ordinary sacrifices and those that Avere to be 
wholly consumed. While the sacrifice was prepared for the altar, 
the priests, whose lot it was, had made ready all within the Holy 
Place, where the most solemn part of the day's service was to take 
place — that of offering the incense, which symbolised Israel's accepted 
prayers. Again was the lot (the third) cast to indicate him^ who was 
to l)e honoured w^ith this highest mediatorial act. Only once in a 

'•Tamiav.2 lifetime might any one enjoy that privilege." Henceforth he was 
called 'rich,'^ and must leave to his brethren the hope of the dis- 
tinction which had been granted him. It was fitting that, as the 

• If we reckon the total number in tbe wliole course would be on duty. This i^^, 

twenty-four courses of, presumably, the of course, considerably more than the 

officiating priesthood, at 20,000, accord- number requisite, since, except for the 

ing to Josej)hus (Ag. Ap. ii. 8), which is incensing priest, the lot for the morning 

very much below the exaggerated Tal- also held good for the evening sacrifice, 

mudic computation of 85,000 for the '^ Yoma 26 r^ The designation 'rich' 

smallest course (Jer. Taan. 69 a), and is derived from the promise which, in 

suppose, tiiat little more than one-third Deut. xxxiii. 11. follows on the service 

of each course had come up for duty. referred to in verse 10. But probably a 

this would give fifty priests for each spiritual application was also intended, 
week-day, while on the Pabbatli the 


custom was, siicli lot slioiild be prceeded by prayer and eoiit'ession of CHAP, 
their faith ' on the part of the assembled priests. ni 

It was the tirst Aveek in October 748 a.u.c, '^ that is, in the sixth ~ — ^r — ' 
year before our present era, when ' the course of Abia'^ — the eighth 
in the original arrangement of the weekly service — was on duty in 
the Temple. True this, as indeed most of the twenty -four ' courses ' 
into which the Priesthood had been arranged, could not claim 
identity, only continuity, with those whose names they liore. For 
only three, or at most four, of the ancient ' courses " had returned 
from Ba))ylon. But the original arrangenjent had been i)reserved, 
the names of the missing courses being retained, and their number 
filled up by lot from among those who had come back to Palestine. 
In oiir ignorance of the number of ' houses of their father,' or 
'families,' which constituted the 'course of Abia,' it is impossible to 
determine, how the services of that Aveek had been apportioned 
among them. But this is of comparatively small importance, since 
there is no doubt about the central figure in the scene. 

In the group ranged that autumn morning around the super- 
intending Priest was one, on whom the snows of at least sixty winters 
had fallen.^ But never during these many years had he been 
honoured Avith the office of incensing — and it Avas perhaps well he 
should have learned, that this distinction came direct from God. 
Yet the venerable figure of Zacharias must have been w^ell known 
in the Temple. For, each course Avas tAvice a year on ministry, and, 
unlike the Levites, the priests Avere not disqualified by age, but only 
by infirmity. In many respects he seemed ditt'erent from those 
around. His home Avas not in either of the great priest-centres — 
the Ophel-quarter in Jerusalem, nor in Jericho^ — but in some snmll 
town in those uplands, south of Jerusalem: the historic ■ liill-countiy 
of Judaea.' And yet he might have claimed distinction. To l)c a 
priest, and married to the daughter of a priest, was supposed to 
convey twofold honour." That he Avas surrounded by relatives and 
friends, and that he was Avell known and respected throughout his 

' Tlic so-called Shcma, consistina; of hotli 'well ,-iti'ickeii in years.' I>iit IVom 

Dent. vi. 4-5): xi. 13-21; \uni. xv. 37-41. Aboth v. 21 we learn, that sixty years 

''■ The question of this date i.s, of was considered ' the coniniencement of, intimately connected with that of aii'eduess.' 

the Nativity of Christ, ami could there- = Accordiuii' to tradition. al)out one- 
fore not be treated in the text. It is dis- fourth of the priesthood was resident in 
cussed in Apiiendix VII.: • On tlie Date Jericho. But, even limit iiii!,' this to those 
of the Nativity of our Lord.' who were in the haljit of otliciatinji;, the 

■' This was the eii^hth course in the statement seems ,2;reatly exacjgerated. 

orij-'inal arraiiiijement (1 Chr. xxiv. 10). " Comp. Ber. 44 a; Pes. 4i) a\ Vayyikra 

* Acconliuii' to St. Luke i. 7, they were R. 4. 



BOOK district, appears iucideiitally Iroin the narrative.' It would, indeed, 

II have been strange had it been otherwise. There was niueh in tlie 

■ — - ,- — - poijuhir habits of tliought, as well as in the office and privileges of 

»st.Lukei. the Priesthood, if worthily represented, to invest it with a vonera- 

58, 59, 61, 65, . . i • • 

C6 tion which the aggressive claims of Kabbinisni could not Avholly 

monopolise. And in this instance Zacharias and Elisabeth, his wife, 
were truly 'righteous," ^ in the sense of walking, so fa'r as man could 
judge, 'blamelessly," alike in those commandments which were 
specially l)inding on Israel, and in those statutes that were of 
universal bearing on mankind.^ No doubt their piety assumed in 
some measure the form of the time, being, if we must use the 
expression, Pharisaic, though in the good, not the evil sense of it. 

There is much about those earlier Rabbis — Hillel, Gamaliel, and 
others — to attract us, and their spirit ofttimes shari)ly contrasts witli 
the narrow bigotry, the self-glory, and the unspiritual externalism of 
their successors. We may not unreasonably infer, that the Tsadcliq 
in the quiet home of the hill-country was quite other than the self- 
asserting Rabbi, whose dress and gait, voice and manner, words and 
even prayers, were those of the religious parvenu, i)ushing his claims 
to distinction before angels and men. Such a household as that of 
Zacharias and Elisabeth Avould have all that was beautiful in the 
religion of the tiiYie: devotion towards God; a home of atl'ection 
and purity; reverence towards all that was sacred in things Divine 
and human; ungrudging, self-denying, loving charity to the poor; 
the teiiderest regard for the feelings of others, so as not to raise a 
blush, nor to wound their hearts;* above all, intense faith and hope 
in the higher and better future of Israel. Of such, indeed, there 
must have been not a few in the land — the quiet, the prayerful, the 
pious, who, though certainly not Sadducees nor Essenes, but reckoned 
with tlie Pharisaic party, waited for the consolation of Israel, and 
received it with joy when manifested. Nor could aught more 
certainly have marked the difference between the one and the other 

^ diKaivi — of course not in tlie strict determine tbeir exact Hebrew equiva- 

sense in which the word is sometimes lents. The LXX. render by these two 

used, especially by St. Paul, but as pius terms not always tlie same Hebrew 

e! bonus. See Vorstms (De Hebraism. words. Comp. Gen. xxvi. 5 witli Deut. 

N.T. pp. 5.5 A-c. ). As tiie account of tlie iv. 40. They cannot refer to the division 

Evan<::elist seems derived from an orii;- of tiic law into atlirmative |24S) and pro- 

inal Hebrew source, the word must have hibiiive (o()5) commandments, 

corresponded to that of Tmddifi in tlie ■' There is. perhaps, no point on which 

then popular siizinitlcation. the Rabbinic Law is more explicit or 

'■^ EVToXai-Aw\ 6 /K-atfij/ztrrcr evidently strin<;ent than on that of tenderest reji-ard 

mark an essential division of the Law at for the feelings of others, especially of 

the time. But it is almost impossible to the poor. 


section than on a matter, whiclnnust almost daily, and most painfully, CHAP, 
have forced itself on Zacharias and Elisabeth. There were amonii- Hi 
the Rabbis those who, remembering the words of the prophet," spoke '- — ■ — ' 
in most pathetic language of the wrong of parting from the wife of "M-iiii- w- 
youth," and there were those to whom the bare fact of childlessness ^■am.wh 
rendered separation a religious duty." Elisabeth was childless. For Yeb. w</ 
many a year this must have been the burden of Zacharias' i)raycr; 
the burden also of reproach, which p]lisabeth seemed always to caiiy 
with her. They had waited together these many years, till in rlic 
evening of life the flower of hope had closed its fragrant cup; and 
still the two sat together in the twilight, content to wait in loneliness, 
till night would close around them. 

But on that bright autumn morning in the Temple no such 
thoughts would come to Zacharias. For the first, and for the last 
time in life the lot had nmrked him for incensing, and every thought 
must have centred on what was before him. Even outwardly, all 
attention would he requisite for the proper performance of his office. 
First, he had to choose two of his special friends or relatives, to 
assist in his sacred service. Their duties were comparatively simple. 
One reverently removed what had been left on the altar from the 
previous evening's service; then, worshipping, retired l)ackwar(ls. 
The second assistant now advanced, and, having spread to the utmost 
verge. of the golden altar the live coals taken from that of burnt- 
olfering, worshipped and retired. Meanwhile the sound of the 
'organ' (the INlagrephah), heard to the most distant pails of the 
Temple, and, according to tradition, far beyond its precinets. had 
summoned priests, Levites, and people to prepare for whatever ser- 
vice or duty was before them. For, this was the innermost i)art 
of the worship of the day. But the celebrant Priest, bearing the 
golden censer, stood alone within the Holy Place, lit by the sheen of 
the seven-branched candlestick. Before him — somewhat farther a way, 
towards the heavy Veil that hung before the Holy of Holies, was the 
golden altar of incense, on which the red coals glowed. To his right 
(the left of the altar — that is, on the north side) was the table of 
shewbread; to his left, (m the right or south side of the altar, was the 
golden candlestick. And still he waited, as instructed to do. till a 
special signal indicated, that the moment had eome to spread the 
incense on the altar, as near as possible to the Holy of Holies. 
Priests and people had reverently withdrawn from the neighbourhood 
of the altar, and were prostrate before the Lord, otfering unspoken 
worship, in which record of past deliverance, longing (or mercies 


i!(K»K |»i'(»iiiiso(l ill the t'litmc. mid cutivaty I'or present blessing and peace,' 

" seemed the iugietlients of the incense, that rose in a fragrant cloud 

^- — .^—- ^ of praise and prayer. Deep silence had fallen on the worshippers, as 

if they watched to heaven the prayers of Israel, ascending in the 

"Kev. V. X; fjoud of ' odours ' that rose from the golden altar in the Holy Place." 
viii. 1. a. 4 . . . . . . 

Zacharias waited, until he saw the incense kindling. Then he also 

iT.uiiid vi. would have ' l)Oweddown in worship,' and reverently withdraAvn,'' had 
not a won< Irons sight arrested his steps. 

On the right (or south) side of the altar, Ijetween it and the 
golden candlestick, stood what he could not but recognise as an 
Angelic form.'- Never, indeed, had even tradition reported such a 
vision to an ordinary Priest in the act of incensing. The two super- 
natural ai)paritions recorded — one of an Angel each year of the 
Pontificate of Simon the Just; the other in that blasphemous account 
of the vision of the Almighty by Ishraael, the son of Elisha, and of 

' Ber. 7 n the coiiversatioii which then ensued '' ^ — had both been vouchsafed to 
High-Priests, and on the Day of Atonement. Still, there was always 
uneasiness among the people as any mortal approached the immediate 

d jer. Yoma Prescncc of God, and every delay in his return seemed ominous.* No 
wonder, then, that Zacharias ^ was troubled, and fear fell on him,' 
as of a sudden — probably just after he had spread the incense on the 
altar, and was about to offer his parting prayer — he beheld Avhat 
afterwards he knew to be the Angel Gabriel ('the might of God'). 
Apart from higher considerations, there could perhaps be no better 
evidence of the truth of this narrative than its accord with psycho- 
logical facts. An Apocryphal narrative would probably have painted 
the scene in agreement with what, in the view of such a writer, 
should have been the feelings of Zacharias, and the language of the 
Angel.* The Angel would have commenced by referring to Zacharias' 
prayers for the coining of a Messiah, and Zacharias would have been 
represented in a highly enthusiastic state. Instead of the strangely 
]irosaic objection which he offered to the Angelic announcement, there 
would have been a burst of spiritual sentiment, or what passed for 
such. But all this would have been psychologically untrue. There 

1 For the prayers offered by the people Simeon ben Asai said : From the side of 

diirin.<r the incensing, see 'The Temple,' the altar of incense.' 

VP. li59, 140. '■> According to the Talmud, Ishinael 

■■' The following extract from Yalkut once went into the innermost Sanctuary, 

(vol. i. p. 113 (I, close) affords a curious when he had a vision of God, AVlio 

illnstration of this Divine communication called ujton the priest to ])ronounce a 

from beside the altar of incense: 'From benediction. The token of God's accept- 

what place did tlie Shekhinah sjieak to aiice luid l^etter not be quoted. 

Moses? R. Natlian said: From the altar * Instances of an analogous kind fre- 

of incense, according to Ex. xxx. (i. quently occur in the Apociyphal Gosi)els. 


are nioinoiits ol' moral laiiiliK'ss, .•^o to speak, wlieii the vital powers ciiaI'. 

of the spiritual heart are depressed, and. as in the ease of the Dis- m 

ciples on the Mount of Trunsliguration and in the (iarden of (letli- '- — -^^ 

scmane, the physieal part of our being and all that is weakest in us 

assert their power. 

It was true to this state of senii-eonseiousness, that the Angxd 

first awakened within Zaeharias the renienit)rancc of life-long i)rayers 

and hopes, which had now passed into the background of his being, 

and then suddenly startled him l)y the promise of their realisation. 

But that Child of so many prayers, who was' to bear the signiticant 

name of John (Jehochanan, or Jochanan), ' the Lord is gracious,' Avas 

to be the source of Joy and gladness to a far wider circle than that of 

the family. This might be called the tirst rung of the ladder by 

which the Angel would take the i)riest upwards. Xor Avas even this 

followed by an immediate disclosure of what, in such a place, and 

from such a messenger, must have carried to a believing heart the 

thrill of almost unspeakable emotion. Rather Avas Zaeharias led 

upAvards, step by step. The Child Avas to be great before the Lord; 

not only an ordinary, but a life-Nazarite,' as Samson and Samuel of 

old had been. Like them, he was not to consecrate himself, but from 

the inception of life Avholly to belong to God, for His Avork. And, 

greater than either of these representatives of the symbolical import 

of Nazarism, he Avould combine the tAvofold meaning of their mission 

— outAvard and inward might in God, only in a higher and more 

spiritual sense. For this life-Avork he Avould be tilled Avitli the 

Holy Ghost, from the moment life Avoke Avithin him. Then, as 

another Samson, Av^ould he, in the strength of God, lift the axe to each 

tree to be felled, and, like another Sanniel, turn nuiny of the children 

of Israel to the Lord their God. Nay, combining these tAvo missions, 

as did Elijah on Mount Carmel, he should, in accordance Avith 

prophecy,'* precede the Messianic manifestation, and, not indeed in the ■ Mai. m. 1 

person or form, but in the spirit and power of Elijah, accomplish the 

typical meaning of his mission, as on that da}^ of decision it had risen 

as the burden of his i)rayer'' — that is, in the Avords of proi)hecv.' "i Kings 
' • . xviii. 37 

'turn the heart of the fathers to the children,' which, m vicav of the cjiai. iv. .5, 

coming dispensation, Avould be 'the disobedient {fo nrdJi') in the ^' 

Avisdom of the just.'" Thus would this new Elijah 'make ready for 'st. Luke 

the Lord a people prepared.' st.Matt^xi! 

If the apparition of the Angel, in that place, and at that time, 
had overwhelmed the aged priest, the Avords Avhich he heard must 

' On the different classes of Nazarites, see 'The Temple, A-c.,' pj). 322-331. 



BOOK have filled him with such bcwildenneut, that for the moment ho 
II scarcely realised their meaning. One idea alone, which had struck 

^— 'v — ' its roots so long in his consciousness, stood out: A son — while, as it 
were in the dim distance beyond, stretched, as covered Avith a mist of 
glory, all those marvellous things that w*erc to be connected with him. 
So, when age or strong feeling renders us almost insensible to the 
present, it is ever that which connects itself with the past, rathei- 
than with the present, which emerges first and strongest in our 
consciousness. And so it was the obvious doubt, that would suggest 
itself, which fell from his lips — almost unconscious of what he said. 
Yet there was in his words an element of faith also, or at least of 
hope, as he asked for some pledge or confirmation of what he had 

It is this demand of some visible sign, by which to 'know' all 
that the Angel had promised, which distinguishes the doubt of 

■iGeii. xvii. Zacharias from that of Abraham, ' or of Manoah and his wife,'' under 

17, IH . . 

bjudg. sin somewhat similar circumstances — although, otherwise also, even a 
^^^ cursory reading must convey the impression of most marked ditfcr- 

ences. Nor ought we perhaps to forget, that we are on the threshold 
of a dispensation, to Avhich faith is the only entrance. This door 
Zacharias was now" to hold ajar, a, dumb messenger. He that would 
not speak the ])raises of God, but asked a sign, received it. His 
dumbness was a sign — though the sign, as it were the dumb child of 
the prayer of unbelief, was its i)unishment also. And yet, when 
rightly a])i)lied, a sign in another sense also — a sign to the waiting 
multitude in the Temple; a sign to p]lisabetli; to all who knew 
Zacharias in the hill-country; and to the priest himself, during those 
nine months of retirement and inward solitude; a sign nho that 
would kindle int(i fiery flame in the day when God would loosen his 

A i)('i-iod of unusual length had ])assed, since the signal for 
incensing luul been given. The prayers of the peojjle had been 
oftered, and their anxious gaze was directed tow^ards the Holy Place. 
At last Zacharias emerged to take his stand on the to]) of the steps 
which led tVom the Porch to the Court of the Priests, waiting to lead 
cNumb. vi. in the priestly benediction," that preceded the daily meat-otfering 
and the cliant of the Psalms of praise, accompanied with joyous 
sound of music, as the drink-offering was poured out. But already 
the sign of Zacharias was to be a sign to all the peojjle. The pieces 
of the sacrifices had been ranged in due order on the altar of burnt- 
off'ering: the priests stood on the steps to the porch, and the people 


were in waiting. Zacluirias essayed to speak the words of bencdic- chap. 
tion, unconscious that tlie stroke liad fallen. But tlie people knew HI 

it by his silence, that he had seen a vision in the Temple. Yet as he ^— -^ 

stood helpless, trying by signs to indicate it to the awestruck assem- 
bly, he renudncd dumb. 

Wondering, they had dispersed — people and priests. The day's 
service over, another family of ministrants took the place of those 
among whom Zacharias had been; and again, at the close of the 
week's service, another ' course ' that of Abia. They returned to 
their homes — some to Ophel, some to Jericho, some to their quiet 
dwellings in the country. But God fulfilled the word which He had 
spoken by His Angel. 

Before leaving this subject, it may be well to inquire into the 
relation between the events just described, and the customs and ex- 
pectations of the time. The scene in the Temple, and all the sur- 
roundings, are in strictest accordance with what we knoAv of the 
services of the Sanctuary. In a narrative that lays hold on some 
details of a very complex service, such entire accuracy conveys the 
impression of general truthfulness. Sinularly, the sketch of Zacharias 
and Elisabeth is true to the history of the time — though Zacharias 
could not have been one of the 'learned,' nor to the Rabbinists, a 
model priest. They would have described him as an ' idiot, ' ' or com- 
mon, and as an Amha-arets, a ' rustic ' priest, and treated him 
with benevolent contempt.^ The Angelic apparition, which he saw, was 
wholly uni)rccedented,and could therefore not have lain within range 
of connnon expectation; though the possibility, or rather the fear, of 
some contact with the Divine Avas always present to the popular mind. 
But it is difficult to conceive how, if not true, the invention of such 
a vision in such circumstances could have suggested itself This 
difficulty is enhanced by the obvicnis differences between the Evangelic 
narrative, and the popular ideas of the lime. Far too much import- 
ance has here been attached by a certain class of writers to a Rab- 
binic saving, " that the names of the Angels were brought from Babylon. ••' Jer. 
For, not only was this saying (of Ben Lakish) only a clever Scriptural uneiofrow 
deduction (as the context shows),, and not even an actual tradition, 
but no com[)etent critic would venture to lay down the principle, that 
isolate<l Rabbinic sayings in the Talmud are to be regarded as 
sufficient foundation for historical facts. On the other hand, Rab- 

1 The word j;«^--, or ■ i<li(it,' when con- erate. See Jer. Sot. 21 A. line .S from 

joined with 'priest" ordinarily ineaii.s a bottom; Sanh. 21 b. Com)), atso Mei:;. 

common priest, in distinction to the Hiiili 12 />: Ber. R. 06. 

priest. But the word un((uestional)ly ■ Accordin,i>- to Sanh. 90 h. such an one 

also signifies vulvar, iiiiiorant. and illit- was not even allowed to get the Terumah. 






•> Dau. ix.21 

<:X. 21 

■1 Moed K. 
•26 a 

f 1 Kinf,'3 
xvlii. 37 (in 
Hebr. with- 
out ' Hint ' 

' again'); 
see Ber. 
31 b, last 
two lines 

K. 14. An- 
other view 
In Par. Vi 

biiiic tradition docs lay it down, that the names of the Angels were 
derived from their mission, and might be changed with it. Thus the 
reply of the Angel to the inquiry of Manoali * is explained as imply- 
ing, that he knew not what other name might be given him in the fu- 
ture. In the Book of Daniel, to which the son of Lakish refers, the 
only two Angelic names mentioned are GabrieP and Michael," while 
the appeal to the B<jok of Daniel, as evidence of the Babylonish ori- 
gin of Jewish Angelology, comes with strange inconsistency from writ- 
ers who date it in Maccabean times. ^ But the question of Angelic 
nomenclature is quite secondary. The real point at issue is, whether or 
not the Angelology and Demonology of the New Testament was derived 
from contemporary Judaism. The opinion, that such was the case, 
has been so dogmatically asserted, as to have almost passed among a 
certain class as a settled fact. That nevertheless such was 7iot the 
case, is capal^le of the most ample proof. Here also, with similarity of 
form, slighter than usually, there is absolute contrast of substance.^ 
Admitting that the names of Gabriel and Michael must have been 
familiar to the mind of Zacharias, some not unimportant differences 
must be kept in view. Thus, Gabriel was regarded in tradition as 
inferior to Michael; and, though both were connected with Israel, 
Gabriel was represented as chiefly the minister of justice, and Michael 
of mercy; while, thirdly, Gal)riel was supposed to stand on the left, 
and not (as in the Evangelic narrative) on the right, side of the 
throne of glory. Small as these divergences may seem, they are all- 
important, when derivation of one set of opinions from another is in 
question. Finally, as regarded the coming of Elijah as forerunner of 
the Messiah, it is to be observed that, according to Jewish notions, he 
was to am^ear personally, Siml not merely ' in spirit and power.' In fact, 
tradition represents his ministry and appearances as almost continu- 
ous — not only immediately before the coming of Messiah, but at all 
times. Rabbinic writings introduce him on the scene, not only fre- 
quently, but on the most incongruous occasions, and for the most diverse 
l)urposes. In this sense it is said of him, that he always liveth.'' Some- 
times, indeed, he is ])lamed, as for the closing words in his prayer about 
the turning of the heart of the people," and even his sacrifice on Carmel 
was only excused on the ground of express command.' But his great 
activity as precursor of the Messiah is to resolve doubts of all kinds; 
to reintroduce those who liiul been violently and improperly extruded 

' Two other Anirel:< arc iiicntioiicil. liiit 
not naine<l. in Dan. x. IH. 20. 
'^ The .JeNvi.sli idea.sand teachins' about 

aiijrels are fully iijiven in Aijpcndix XIII. : 
•.Jewish Aiigeloloffy and l)einonoloiry.' 


from the congregation of Lsracl, and vice-v(4't?a; to make peace; while, CHAP, 

finally, he was connected with the raising of tlie dead." ' IJut no- HI 

where is he prominently designated as intended 'to nmke ready for "--^.^ — 

the Lord a i)eoi)le prepared.''^ w7'"?'S, 

I I I I Slur haSli 

Thus, from whatever source the narrative may be supposed to liavc ^a^a^au 
been derived, its details certainly dilfer, in almost all particulars, from p- ^" 
the theological notions current at the time. And the more Zacharias 
meditated on this in the long solitude of his enforced silence, the more 
fully must new spiritual thoughts have come to him. As for Elisabeth, 
those tender feelings of woman, which ever shrink from the disclosure 
of the dearest secret of motherhood, were intensely deepened and 
sanctified in the knowh'dge of all that had passed. Little as she 
might understand the full meaning of tlie future, it must have been 
to her, as if she also now stood in the Holy IMace, gazing towards the 
Veil which concealed tlie innermost Presence. Meantime she was 
content with, nay, felt tlie need of, absolute retirement from other 
fellowship tlian that of God and her own heart. Like her husband, 
she too would be silent and alone — till another v(nce called her forth. 
Whatever the future might bring, sufficient for the present, that thus 
the Lord had done to her, in days in which He looked down to 
remove her reproach among men. The removal of that burden, its 
manner, its meaning, its end, were all from God, and with God; and 
it was fitting to be quite alone and silent, till God's voice would 
again wake the echoes within. And so five months passed in absolute 

1 All the Rabbinic traditions about great repentance till Elijah — his memory 

'Elijah as the Forerunner of the Messiah' for blessing! — come, as it is said, Mai. 

are collated in Appendix VIII. iv. 6,' &c. From this isolated and enig- 

^ I should, however, remark, that that matic sentence. Professor Deh'tzsck's ini- 

very curious chapter on Repentance, in the plied inference (Zeitschr. fiir Luther. 

Pirke de R. Elieser (c. 43), closes with Theol. 1875, p. 593) seems too sweeping, 
these words : ' And Israel will not make 




(St. Matt. i. ; St. Luke i. 26-80.) 

BOOK From the Temple to Nazareth! It seems indeed most fitting that the 
II Evangelic story shoidd have taken its beginning within the Sanctuary, 

■"'^ — ' and at the time of sacrifice. Despite its outward veneration for them, 
the Temple, its services, and specially its sacrifices, were, by an 
inward logical necessity, fast becoming a superfluity for Rabbinism. 
But the new development, passing over the intruded elements, which 
were, after all, of rationalistic origin, connected its beginning directly 
with the Old Testament dispensation — its sacrifices, priesthood, and 
promises. In the Sanctuary, in connection with sacrifice, and through 
the priesthood — such was significantly the beginning of the era of 
fulfillment. And so the great religious reformation of Israel under 
Samuel had also begun in the Tabernacle, which had so long been in 
the background. But if, even in this Temple-beginning, and in the 
communication to, and selection of an idiot 'priest,' there was marked 
divergence from the Rabbinic ideal, that difference widens into the 
sharpest contrast, as we pass from the Forerunner to. the Messiah, 
from the Temple to Galilee, from the ' idiot ' priest to the humble, 
unlettered family of Nazareth. It is necessary here to recall our 
general impression of Rabbinism: its conception of God, ^ and of the 
highest good and ultimate object of all things, as concentrated in 
learned study, pursued in Academies; and then to think of the un- 
mitigated contempt with which they were wont to speak of Galilee, 
and of the Galileans, whose vary patois was an offence; of the utter 
abhorrence with which they regarded the unlettered country-people, 

' Terrible as it may sound, it is cer- farther in its flaring and speal<s of tiie 

tainly the teachina; of Rabbinism, that Ahuifjhty as arrayed in a white di-ess, or 

God occupied so many hours every day as occupying himself by day with the 

in the study of the Law. Comp. Tarsi. study of the Bible, and' by night with 

Ps.-Jonathan on Dent, xxxii. 4, and that of the six tractates of the Mishnah. 

Abhod. Z. '^ h. Nay, Rabbinism goes Comp. also the Targum on Cant. v. 10. 


ill oi(l(!i' to realise, how sucli an household as that of Joseph and Mary CHAP. 
would be regarded l)y the leaders of Israel. A Messianic announce- IV 
ment, not the result of learned investigation, nor connected with ^ — y — ^ 
the A(^ad(!inies, l)ut in the Sanctuary, to a 'rustic' priest; an Elijah 
una])le to untie the intellectual or ecclesiastical knots, of whose 
mission, indeed, this formed no part at all; and a Messiah, the off- 
s|)ring of a Virgin in Galilee betrothed to a humble workman — 
assuredly, such a picture of the fulfillment of Israel's hope could never 
have been conceive<l by contempoi-ary Judaism. There was in such a 
Messiah absolutely nothing — ])ast, present, or possible; intellectually, 
leligiously, or even nationally — to attract, but all to repel. And so 
we can, at the very outset of this history, understand the intinite 
contrast which it embodied — with all the difRculties to its reception, 
even to those who became disciples, as at almost every step of its pro- 
gress they were, with ever fresh surprise, recalled from all that they 
had formerly thought, to that which was so entirely new and strange. 

And yet, just as Zacharias may be described as the representative 
of the good and the true in the Priesthood at that time, so the family 
of Nazareth as a typical Israelitish household. We feel, that the 
scantiness of particulars here sui>plied l)y the Gospels, was intended 
to prevent the human interest from overshadowing the grand central 
Fact, to which alone attention was to be directed. For, the design of 
tlie Gospels was manifestly not to furnish a biography of Jesus the 
-Messiah, ' but, in organic connection with the Old Testament, to tell 
the history of the long-promised establishment of the Kingdom of 
God upon earth. Yet what scanty details we possess of the ' Holy 
Family' and its surroundings may here fin<l a place. 

The highlands which foi-m the central portion of Palestine are 
broken by the wide, rich ])lain of Jezreel, which severs Galilee from 
the rest of the land. This was always the great battle-tield of Israel. 
Appropriately, it is shut in as between mountain-walls. That along 
the north of the i)lain is formed l)y the mountains of Lower Galilee, 
cleft about the middle by a valley that widens, till, after an hour's 
jouru'-y, we stand within an enclosure which seems almost one of 
Natui'c's own sanctuai-ies. As in an am]ihitheatre, fifteen hill-tops 
rise around. That to the west is the highest — about 500 feet. On 
its lower slopes nestles a little town, its narrow streets ranged like 
terraces. This is Nazareth, probably the ancient Sai-id (or Kn-Sarid), 

' The object wliich the Evaiis;elists hud tains no V)ioi2:nii)liy. The twofold ol)Ject 
in view was certainly not that of bio- of their narratives is indicated l»y St. 
graphy, even as the Old Testament con- Luke i. 4. and by 8t. John xx. M. 




•' Josh. xix. 
10, 11 

wliicli, in the tiiuo of Joshua, marked the northern boundary of 
Zei)uhin. "' 

Climbing this steep hill, fragrant with aromatic plants, and bright 
with rich-coloured flowers, a view almost unsur})assed opens before us. 
For, tlie Galilee of the time of Jesus was not only of the richest 
fertility, cultivated to the utmost, and thickly covered with populous 
towns and villages, but the centre of every known industry, and the 
busy road of the world's commerce. Northward the eye would sweep 
over a rich plain; rest here and there on white towns, glittering in 
the sunlight; then quickly travel over the romantic hills and glens 
which form the scenes of Solomon's Song, till, passing beyond Safed 
(the Tsephath of the Rabbis — the 'city set on an hill'), the view is 
bounded by that giant of the far-ofl' mountain-chain, snow-tipped 
Hermon. Westward stretched a like scene of beauty and wealth — a 
land not lonely, but wedded; not desolate, but teeming with life; 
while, on the edge of the horizon, lay i)urple Carmel; beyond it a 
fringe of silver sand, and then the dazzling sheen of the Great Sea. 
In the farthest distance, white sails, like wings outspread towards the 
ends of the woi-ld; nearer, busy ports; then, centres of industry; 
and close by, travelled roads, all bright in the pure Eastern air and 
rich glow of the sun. But if you turned eastwards, the eye would 
soon be arrested by the wooded height of Tabor, yet not before at- 
tention had been riveted by the long, narrow string of fantastic cara- 
vans, and curiosity roused by the motley figures, of all nationalities 
and in all costumes, busy binding the East to the West by that line 
of commerce that passed along the route winding around Tabor. And 
when, weary with the gaze, you looked once more down on little 
Nazareth nestling on the breast of the mountain, the eye would rest 
on a scene of tranquil, homely beauty. Just outside the town, in the 
north-west, bul)bled the spring or well, the trysting-spot of towns- 
people, and welcome resting-place of travellers. Beyond it stretched 
lines of houses, each with its flat roof standing out distinctly against 
the clear sky; watered, terraced gardens, gnarled wide-spreading fig- 
trees, graceful feathery palms, scented oranges, silvery olive-trees, 
thick hedges, rich pasture-land, then the bounding hills to the south; 

' The name Nazareth may best be re- 
garded as the equivalent of niil. 

' watch ' or ' watcheress.' The name does 
not occur in tlic Tahnud, nor in those 
Midrashim which have been preserved. 
But the ele^y of Eleazar ha Kallir — 
written before the close of the Talmud — 
in wiiich Nazareth is mentioned as a Priest- 

centre, is based upon an ancient Midrash, 
now lost (comp. Neuhauer, Geogr. du 
Talmud, p. 117, note 5). It is, however, 
possible, as Dr. Neuhauer su2:gests fu. s. 
p. 190, note 5), that the name n^Hij; '" 
Midr. on Eccl. ii. 8 should read n^-iy;, 
and refers to Nazaretli. 


and beyoiul, the seemingly unluxinded expanse of the wide plain (jt CHAP. 
Esdraelon! IV 

And yet, withdrawn t'roni the world as, in its enclosure of nioun- ^— --v— ^ 
tains, Nazareth might seem, we must not think of it as a lonely village 
which only faint echoes reached of what roused the land beyond. 
With reverence be it said: such a place niiglit have suited the training 
of the contemplative hermit, not the upbringing of Him Whose sym- 
pathies were to be with every clime and race. Nor would such 
an abode have furnished what (with all due acknowledgment of the 
supernatural) we mark as a constant, because a rationally necessary, 
element in Scripture history: that of inward preparedness in which 
the higher and the Divine afterwards find their ready points of contact. 

Nor was it otherwise iu Nazareth. The two great interests which 
stirred the land, the two great factors in the religious future of Israel, 
constantly met in the retirement of Nazareth. The great caravan- 
route which led from Accoon the sea to Damascus divided at its com- 
mencement into three roads : the most northern passing through Ccesa- 
rea Philippi; the Upper Galilean; and the Lower Galilean. The latter, 
the ancient Via Maris led through Nazareth, and thence either by 
Cana, or else along the northern shoulder of Mount Tabor, to the 
Lake of Gennesaret — each of these roads soon uniting with the L^pper 
Galilean.' Hence, although the stream of commerce between Acco 
and the East was divided into three channels, yet, as one of these 
liassed through Nazareth, the quiet little town was not a stagnant 
pool of rustic seclusion. Men of all nations, busy with another life 
than that of Israel, would appear in the streets of Nazareth; and 
through them thoughts, associations, and hopes connected with the 
great outside world be stirred. But, on the other hand, Nazareth 
was also one of the great centers of Jewish Tem])le-life. It has already 
been indicated that the Priesthood was divided into twenty-four 
'courses,' which, in turn, ministered in the Temple. The Priests of 
the 'course' vs^hich was to be on duty alw^ays gathered in certain 
towns, whence they went up in company to Jerusalem, Avhile those of 
their number who were anal^le to go spent the week in fasting and 
prayer. Now Nazareth was one of these Priest-centres,^ and although 
it may well have been, that comparatively few in distant Galilee con- 
formed to the Priestly regulations — some must have assembled there 
in preparation for the sacred functions, or appeared in its Synagogue. 

1 Comp. the detailed description of '^ Comp. Nenbauer, u. s. p. 190. See a 

these roads, and the references in Her- detailed account in ' Sketches of Jewish 
zoi/s Real-Encykl. vol. xv. pi). IGO, lOl. Social Life,' Arc. p. :J(1. 




Even tlio fact, so well known to all, of this living connection between 
Nazareth and the Temple, must have wakened peculiar feelings. 

-^^y"^ Thus, to take the wider view, a double symbolic signiticance attached 
to Nazareth, since through it passed alike those who carried on the 
traffic of the world, and those who ministered in the Tem])le.' 

We nmy take it, that the peoi)lc of Nazareth were like those of 
other little towns similarly circumstanced:'-^ with all the i)eculiarities of 
the imi)ulsive, straight-spoken, hot-])looded, brave, intensely national 
(lalileans; '^ with the deeper feelings and aluKJSt instinctive habits 
of thought and life, which were tlie outcome of long centuries of 
Old Testament training; but also with the petty interests and jeal- 
ousies of such places, and with all the ceremonialism and punctilious 
self-assertion of Orientals. The cast of Judaism jtrevalent in Nazareth 
would, of course, be the same as in Galilee generally. • We know, 
that there were marked divergences from the observances in that 
stronghold of Ivab1)inism,* Judaea — indicating greater simj^licity and 
freedom from the constant intrusion of traditional ordinances.- The 
home-life would be all the pui'er, time the veil of wedded life was not 
so coarsely lifted as in Judsea, nor its sacred secrecy interfered with 
by an Argus-eyed legislation.'^ The purity of betrothal in Galilee was 

Keth. 12 a less Hkoly to be sullied,'' and weddings were more simple than in 
Judaea — M'ithout the dubious institution of groomsmen,'"^ or 'friends 
of the bridegroom,' " whose office must not unfrequently have degen- 
erated into utter coarseness. The bride was chosen, not as in Judgea, 
where money was too often the nujtive, but as in Jerusalem, with 
cliief regard to 'a fair degree; ' and widows were (as in Jerusalem) 
more tenderly cared for, as we gather even from the fact, that they 
had a life-right of residence in their husband's house.'* 

Such a home was that to which Joseph was about to bring the 
maiden, to whom he had been betrothed. Whatever view may be 
taken of the genealogies in the drospels according to St. Matthew 
and St. Luke — whether they be regarded as those of Joseph and of 

!■ Keth. 12 
and often 

■ St. .John 
iii 29 

1 It is Strange, that tliese two circum- 
stances have not been noticed. Keim 
(Jesu von Nazara i. 2, i)p. 322, 323) only 
cursorily refers to the f:;reat road which 
passed throiii;'!] Nazareth. 

■^ The inference, that the expression of 
Nathanael (St. .John i. 4()) implies a lower 
state of tiie people of Nazareth, is un- 
founded. Even Keim points out, that it 
only marks disbelief that the Messiah 
would come from sucli a place. 

^ Oui' desorii)tion of them is derived 

from notices by Josephus (such as War 
iii. 3, 2), and many passages in the 
Talmud, • 

' Tliese differences are marlced in Pes. 
iv. 5; Ketli. iv. 12; Ned. ii. 4; ChuU. 
62 a; Haba K. HO (C, Keth. 12 ((. 

^ The reailer who wishes to understaml 
what we have only ventured to hint, is 
referred to tlie Mislmic tractate Niddali. 

^ Comp. ' Sketches of Jewish Social 
Life,' &c., pp. 152 &c. 


ii. 24 


Mary/ or, which seems tlie more likely/ as those of Joseph only, chap. 

marking his natural and his legal descent'^ from David, or vice IV 

v(n'sa' — there can be no question, that both Joseph and Mary were of ^— ^r — ' 

tlie royal lineage of David." Most probably the two were nearly 

related,'"' while Mary could also claim kinship with the Priesthood, 

being, no doul)tonlier mother's side, a 'blood-relative' of Elisabeth, 

tlie Priest-wife of Zaeharias.''' Even this seems to imply, that "St. Lukoi. 

Mary's family must shortly before have held higher rank, for only 

with such did custom sanction any alliance on the ]iart of Priests.** 

But at the time of their betrothal, alike Josej)!! and Mary were 

extremely poor, as a})pcars — not indeed from his being a carpenter, 

since a trade was regarded as almost a religious duty — but from the 

offering at the i)resentation of Jesus in the Temple.'' Accordingly, ^st. Luke 

their betrothal must have been of the simplest, and the dowry settled 

the smallest possible.** Whichever of the two modes of betrothal "' 

may have been adopted: in the presence of witnesses — either by 

solemn word of mouth, in due prescribed formality, with the added 

])ledge of a piece of money, however small, or of money's worth for 

use; or else by writing (the so-called Shifre Erusin) — there would 

be no sumptuous feast to follow; and the ceremony would conclude 

with some such benediction as that afterwards in use: ' Blessed 

art Thou, Lord our God, King of the World, Who hath sanctified 

us by His Commandments, and enjoined us about incest, and forbidden 

the betrothed, but allowed us those wedded by Chuppah (the marriage- 

baldachino) and betrothal. Blessed art Thou, Who sanctifiest Israel 

■ The best defence of this view is tliat '^ Tliis is tlie general view of antiquity, 

by Wieseler, Beitr. zur AViirflig. <1. Evang. ' Reference to this union of Levi and 

pp. 133 &c. It is also virtually adopted Judah in tlie Messiah is made in the Test, 

by H^eiS.s- (Leben Jesu, vol. i. iss2). xii. Patriarch., Test. Simeonis vii. (apud 

2 This view is adopted almost unani- Fabr. Cod. Psendepi.UT. vol. ii. p. 542). 

mously by modern writers. Curiously, the gi-eat Hillel was also said 

■' This view is defended with much skill by some to have descended, throuii-h his 

by Mr. McCh-llau in his New Testament, fatlier and mother, from the trilies of 

vol. i. 11]). 409-422. Judah and Levi — all. however, asst^-ting 

* So (irotius, Bishop Lord Arthur Her- ids Davidic origin (conip. Jer. Taan. iv. 

vey, and after him most modern English 2 ; Ber. R. 98 and 33). 

writers. ** Comp, Maimonidps. YadhaChazHil. 

^ The Davidic descent of the Virgin- Sanh. ii. The inference would, of course, 

Mother — which is questioned by some be the same, whether we suppose Mary's 

even among orthodox inter])reters — mother to have V)een the sister-in-law, or 

seems im])lied in the Gospel {St. Luke i. the sister, of Elisabeth's father. 

27, 32, 69; ii. 4), and an almost neces- " Comp. 'Sketches of Jewish Social 

sitr)! inference from such i)assages as Life in the Days of Christ." ])ii. 143-149. 

Uom, i. 3; 2 Tim. ii. S; Hebr. vii. 14. Also the article on ' Marriage ' in Ca.s.sW/'.s' 

The Davidic descent of Jesus is not only Bible-Educator, vol. iv. pp. 2()7-270. 

iidmitted, but elaborately proved — on i" There was a third mode, by cohabita- 

l)urely rationalistic grounds — by Kcim tion; but this was highly disapproved of 

(u. s. pp. 327-329). even by tlie Rabbis. 




HOOK Ity Clmppiih and Ix'trothar — the wliolc being i)erhaps concluded 
II ])\ a benediction over the statutory cup of wine, Avhich was tasted 

— ^f ' in turn by the loetrothed. From tliat moment Mary was the betrothed 

wife of Joseph; their relationship as sacred, as if they had ah-eady 
been wedded. Any breach ofitwouhl be treated as adultery; nor 
could the band be dissolved except, as after marriage, l)y regular 
divorce. Yet months might intervene between the betrothal and 

Five months of Elisabeth's sacred retirement had passed, when 
a strange messenger brought its lirst tidings to her kinswoman in 
far-off Galilee. It was not in the solemn grandeur of the Temple, 
between the golden altar of incense and the seven-branched candle- 
sticks that the Angel Gabriel now appeared, bat in the privacy of a 
humble home at Nazareth. The greatest honor bestowed on man 
was to come amidst circumstances of deepest human lowliness, as if 
the more clearly to mark the exclusively Divine character of what 
was to happen. And, although the awe of the Supernatural must 
unconsciousl}^ have fallen upon her, it was not so much the sudden 
appearance of the mysterious stranger in her retirement that startled 
the maiden, as the words of his greeting, implying unthought bless- 
ing. The 'Peace to thee'^ was, indeed, the well-known salutation, 
while the words, 'The Lord is with thee' might waken the remem- 
judg. vi. brance of the Angelic call, to great deliverance in the past.'' But 
this designation of ' highly favored ' ^ came upon her Avith bewilder- 
ing surprise, perhaps not so much from its contrast to the humble- 
ness of her estate, as from the self-conscious humility of her heart. 
And it was intended so, for of all feelings this would now most 
become her. Accordingly, it is this story of special ' favour ' or grace, 
which the Angel traces in rapid outline, from the conception of the 
Yirgin-Mother to the distinctive. Divinely-given Xame, symbolic of 
the meaning of His coming; His absolute greatness; His acknow- 
ledgment as the Son of God; and the fulfillment in Him of the great 

I The assertion of Professor Wiinsche the Hebrew j;«?r ^"'^ f"*^'' ^'^^ correctness 
(Neue Beitr. zur Erliiuter. d. Evaug. p. 7) of it refer the reader to Grimm'' f< remarks 
that the practice of betrothal was confined on 1 Mace. x. 18 (Exeget. Handb. zu d. 
exclusively, or almost so, to Judaea, is Apokryph. 3"«^ Lief. p. 149). 
quite ungrounded. The passages to which * Bengel aptly remarks. ' Non ut mater 
he refers (Kethub. i. 5 — not 3 — and gratiae, sed ut filiagratite.' Even Jfrew// 
especially Keth. 12 a) are irrelevant. Trn/lor's remarks (Life of Christ, ed. 
Keth. V2 fi marks the simpler and i)urer Pickering, vol. i. p. .OG) would here re- 
customs of Galilee, but does not refer to quire modification. Following the best 
betrothals. critical authorities. I have omitted the 

- I have rendered the Greek xocip^ by words, 'Blessed art tliou among women.' 



Davidic hope, with its never-ceasing royalty,^ and its never-ending, 
boundless Kingdom.^ 

In all this, however marvellous, tliere could V)e nothing strange 
to those who cherished in their hearts Israel's great hope, not merely 
as an article of abstract belief, but as mattei- of certain fact — least 
of all to the maiden of the lineage of David, beti'othed to him of the 
house and lineage of David. So long as the hand of prophetic bless- 
ing rested on the house of David, and before its linger had pointed to 
the individual who ' found favor ' in the highest sense, the con- 
sciousness of possibilities, which scarce dai-cd shape themselves into 
definite thoughts, must at times have stirred nameless feelings — 
perhaps the more often in circumstances of outward depression and 
humility, such as those of the 'Holy Family,' Nor was there any- 
thing strange even in the naming of the yet unconceived Child. It 
sounds like a saying current among tlic people of old, this of the 
Rabbis,'' concerning the six whose names were given before their 
birth: Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and 'the Name of the 
Messiah, Whom may the Holy One, lilessed be His Name, bring 
quickly in our days ! ' ^ But as for the deejier meaning of the name 
Jesus," which, like an unopened bud, enclosed the flower of His 
Passion, that was mercifully yet the unthought-of secret of that 
sword, which should pierce the soul of the Virgin-Mother, and which 
only His future history would lay open to her and to others. 

Thus, on the supposition of tlie readiness of her believing heart, 
and her entire self-unconsciousness, it would have been only the 
glorious announcement of the inqiending event, which would absorb 
her thinking — with nothing strange about it, or that needed further 
light, than the lioiu of her own connection with it.^ And the words. 


a Pirqe tJe 
K. El. 32. 
at the be- 

b St. Matt, 
i. 21 

1 We here refer, as an intei'estinc; cor- 
roboration, to the Tar^um on Ps. xlv. 7 
((> In our A. v.). But thi.s interest is in- 
tensely increased when we read it, not as 
in our editions of the Tarfi;;uni, but as 
found in a M.S. copj' of the year 1208 
feiven by Levy in his Tara;uin. Wcirterl). 
vol. i. p. 390' (t). Transiatinjj; it from 
that reading, tlie Tara;uni thus renders 
Ps. xlv. 7, ' Thy throne, God, in the 
heaven ' (Levy renders, ' Thy throne from 
God in heaven,' but in either case it re- 
fers to the throne of the Messiah) ' is 
for ever and ever' (for 'world witliout 

end,' ^^D'lr "|^:c'"ir. 'a rule of rit;-hteous- 
ness is the rule of Thy kingdom, O Thou 
Kill"; Messiah ! ' 

^ In Pir(|i' de R. El. c. 11, the same 
boundless dominion is ascribed to Mes- 
siah the Kiii.f;'. In that curious 
dominion is ascribed to 'ten kiuiis,' the 
tii'st beinii' r4od, tlie ninth the Alessiah. 
and the tenth a.iiain God, to Wliom the 
kiii<;-dom would be delivered in the end, 
accordiui; to Is. xliv. (5; Zecliar. xiv. 9; 
Ezek. xxxiv. 24, with the result described 
in Is. lii. 9. 

■^ Professor Wilnfiehe's ([notation is 
here not exact (u. s. p. 414). 

* Weis^ (Leben Jesu. 1SS2. vol. i. p. 
213) riffhtly calls attention to the humility 
of her self-sui-render, when she willinii'ly 
submitted to wliat her heart would feel 
hardest to beai- — that of incurrinij sus- 
picion of her purity in the si,t>;ht of all. 



BOOK which she spake, were not of trembling doubt, that required to lean 
H on the staff of~a 'sign,' but rather those of enquiry, lor the further 

^- — ~> ' guidance of a willing self-surrender. The Angel had pointed her 

opened eyes to the shining path: that was not strange; only, that 
She should walk in it, seemed so. And now the Angel still further 
unfolded it in words which, however little she may have understood 
their full meaning, had again nothing strange about them, save once 
more that sAe should be thus 'favoured"; words which, even to her 
understanding, must have carried yet further thoughts of Divine 
favour, and so deepened her humility. For, the idea of the activity 
of the Holy Ghost in all great events was quite familiar to Israel at 
the time,^ even though the Individuation of the Holy Ghost may 
not have l^een fully apprehended. Only, that they expected such 
influences to rest exclusively upon those who were either mighty, or 

i-Nedar-ssa rich, Or wisc." And of this twofold manifestation of miraculous 
' favour ' — that she, and as a Virgin, should be its subject — Gabriel, 
' the might of God,' gave this unasked sign, in what had happened to 
her kinswoman Elisabeth. 

The sign was at the same time a direction. The first, Init also 
the ever-deepening desire in the heart of Mary, when the Angel left 
her, must have been to be away from Nazareth, and for the relief of 
opening her heart to a woman, in all things like-minded, who perhaps 
might speak blessed words to her. And to such an one the Angel 
himself seemed to have directed her. It is only what we would have 
expected, that ' with haste ' she should have resorted to her kins- 
woman, without loss of time, and before she would speak to her 
betrothed of what even in wedded life is the first secret whispered.^ 

It could have been no ordinary welcome that would greet the 
Yirgin-Mother, on entering the house of her kinswoman. Elisabeth 
must have learnt from her husband the destiny of their son, and 
hence the near Advent of the Messiah. But she could not have 
known either when, or of ivhom He would be born. When, by a 
sign not quite strange to Jewish expectancy,* she recognised in her 

but especially in that of her betrothed. 
The whole account, as we gather from 
St. Luke ii. 19, 5L must have been de- 
rived from the i)ersonal recollections of 
the Virgin-Mother. 

' So in almost innumerable Rabbinic 

'^ This in answer to the objection, so 
pertinaciously urged, of inconsistency 
with the narrative in St. Matt. i. 19 &c. 

It is clear, that Mary went ' with liaste ' 
to her kinswoman, and that any com- 
munlcatio)! to .Joseph could only have 
taken place after that, and after the 
Angelic prediction was in all its parts 
confirmed by her visit to Elisabeth. 
Jeremy Taylor (u. s. p. 64) has already 
arranged the narrative as in tlie text. 

•^ According to Jewish tradition, the 
yet unborn infants in tlieir uiotlier's 



near kinswoman the Mother of her Lord, her salutation was that ol" a 
mother U) a mother — the mother of* the ' preparer ' to the mother of 
Him for Whom he would i)repare. To be more precise: the words 
vvhicli, filled with the Holy Uhost, she spake, were the mother's 
utterance, to the mother, of the homage which her unborn babe 
ottered to his Lord; while the answering liymn of Mar}' was the 
ort'ering of that honmge unto God. It was the antiphonal morning- 
psalmody of the Messianic day as it broke, of which the words were 
still all of the old dispensation,^ but their music of the new; the 
keynote being that of 'favour,' 'grace,' struck by the Angel in his 
ttrst salutation: ' favour ' to the Virgin;-' 'favour,' eternal 'favour' 
to all His humble and poor ones;'' and ' favour' to Israel, stretching 
in golden line from the calling of Al)raham to the glorious future 
that now opened.'' Not one of these fundamental ideas but lay 
strictly within the range of the Old Testament; and yet all of them 
now lay beyond it, bathed in the golden light of the new day. 
Miraculous it all is, and professes to be; not indeed in the connection 
of these events, which succeed each other with psychological truth- 
fulness; nor yet in their language, which is of the times and the 
circumstances; but in the underlying facts. ^ And for these there 
can be no other evidence than the Life, the Death, and the Resurrec- 
tion of Jesus the Messiah. If He was such, and if He really rose 
from the dead, then, with all soberness and solemnity, such inception 
of His appearance seems almost a logical necessity. But of this 
whole narrative it may be said, that such inception of the Messianic 
appearance, such announcement of it, and such manner of His Coming, 
could never have been invented by contemporary Judaism; indeed, 
ran directly counter to all its preconceptions.* 


» 1st stanza 
vv. 46-49 

•j 2n(l stan- 
za, vv. 50-53 

<^ 3r(l stan- 
za, vv. 54-5S 

wombs responded by a" Amen to the 
liynui of praise at the Red Sea. This is 
supposed to be indicated by the words 
■^S'^w^ "I'r-D^O '^^- '-"^^''ii- 27; see also 
iiie Tarnuin'on that verse). Coniii. Keth. 
7 i'* and-Sotali-SO ('> (Uxst line) and ;^1 a, 
tliouftli the coarse le,a;endary explanation 
of R. Tanchiuna mars the poetfc beauty 
of the whole. 

' The i)oetic grandeur and the Old 
Testament cast of the Virgin's hymn 
(comp. the Song of Hannah, 1 Sam. ii. 
1-10), need scarcely he jiointed out. 
Perhaps it would read fullest and best 
by trying to recall what must have been 
its Hebrew original. 

- Weiss, while denying the historical 
accuracy of much in the tjospel-narrative 

of it, unhesitatingly accepts the fact of 
the supernatui'al Vurth of Jesus. 

^ Keim elaltorately discusses the origin 
of what he calls the legend of Christ's 
suiiernatural conception. He arrives at 
the conclusion that it was a Jewish- 
Christian legend — as if a Jeifish inven- 
tion of such a ' legend ' were not the most 
unlikely of all possible hypotheses! But 
negative criticism is at least bound to 
furnish some historical basis for the 
origination of such an unlikely legend. 
Whence was the idea of it lirst derived ? 
How did it find such ready acceptance 
in the Clmrch 't Weiss has, at consider- 
able length, and very fully , shown the 
impossiliility of its origin either in Jew- 
isli or iieathen legend. 


BOOK Three months liiid i)iisse(l since tlie Virgin-Mother entered the 

n home of her kinswoman. And now she must return to Nazareth. 
^— -^^ — ' Soon Elisabeth's neighb(jurs and kinsfolk would gather with sympa- 
thetic joy around a home which, as they thought, had experienced 
unexpected mercy — little thinking, liow wide-reaching its conse- 
quences would be. But the Virgin-Mother must not be exposed to 
the publicity of such meetings. However conscious of what had led 
to her condition, it must have iDeen as the first sharp pang of the 
sword which was to pierce her soul, when she told it all to her 
betrothed. For, however deep his trust in her whom he had chosen 
for wife, only a direct Divine communication could have chased all 
questioning from his heart, and given him that assurance, which was 
needful in the future history of the Messiah. Brief as, with exquisite 
delicacy, the narrative is, we can read in the ' thoughts ' of Joseph 
the anxious contending of feelings, the scarcely established, and yet 
delayed, resolve to * put her away, ' which could only be done by 
regular divorce; this one determination only standing out clearly, 
that, if it must be, her letter of divorce shall be handed to her 
privately, only in the presence of two witnesses. The humV)le Tsaddiq 
of Nazareth would not willingly have brought the blush to any face, 
least of all would he make of her 'a public exhibition of shame. '^ 
It was a relief that he could legally divorce her either publicly or 
privately, whether from change of feeling, or because he had found 
just cause for it, but hesitated to make it known, either from regard 
for his own character, or because he had not sufficient legal evidence'^ 
of the charge. He would follow, all unconscious of it, the truer 
• Ketii. 74 6 manly feeling of R. Eliezar,^' R. Jochanan, and R. Zera,*" according 
kKeth 97 6 ^^ which a man would not like to put his wife to shame before a 
Court of Justice, rather than the opposite sentence of R. Meir. 

The assurance, which Joseph could scarcely dare to hope for, was 
miraculously convej^ed to him in a dream-vision. All would now be 
clear; even the terms in which he was addressed ( ' thou son of 
David'), so utterly unusual in ordinary circumstances, would prepare 
him for tlie Angel's message. The naming of the unborn Messiah 
would accord with popular notions;* the symbolism of such a name 

' I bave thus paraijhrased the verb witnesses, or if their testimony could be 

TrapcrSez^^/^arz'^&j, rendered in 6 invalidated by an.y of those i)rovision3 

(A.V.) ' put to an open shame.' Comp. in favour of the accused, of which 

also LXX. Num. xxv. 4; Jer. xiii. 22; traditionalism had not a few. Thus, as 

Ezek. xxviii. 17 (see Grimm, Clavis X.T. indicated in the text, Josei)h mi2;ht have 

p. 3:^3 b) Archdeacon Farrar adopts the privately divorced .Mary, leaving; it open 

reading dEiy/iaricrai. to doubt on what ground he had so acted. 

- For example, if he had not sufficient ■' See a former note. 



was deeply rooted in Jewish hclioi'; ' whik' the explanation of 
Jehoslma or Jesltua (Jenas), as He who would save His people 
(primarily, as he would understand it, Israel) from their sins, described 
at least one generally expected aspect of His Mission,'^ although 
Joseph may not have known that it was the basis of all the rest. 
And perhaps it was not without deeper meaning and insight into His 
character, that the Angel laid stress on this very element in His 
communication to Joseph, and not to Mary. 

The fact that such an announcement came to Him in a dream, 
would dispose Joseph all the more readily to receive it. 'A good 
dream' was one of the three things^ popularly regarded as marks of 
God's favour; and so general was the belief in their significance, as to 
have passed into this popular saying: 'If any one sleeps seven days 
without dreaming (or rather, remembering his dream for interpreta- 
tion), call him wicked' (as being unremembered of God''*). Thus 
Divinely set at rest, Joseph could no longer hesitate. The highest 
<luty towards the Virgin-Mother and the unborn Jesus demanded an 
immediate marriage, which would afford not only outward, but moral 
protection to both.^ 


• Tluis we read in {Shocher Tubh) the 
Midrash on Pro v. xix. 21 (closing part; 
ed. Lemberg. j). 16 5) of eight names 
given to tlie Messiali, viz. Yinnon (Ps. 
Ixxii. 17, 'His name shall sprout [bear 
sprouts] before the Sun ; ' comi). also 
Pirqe de R. El. c. 2); Jehovah; Our 
Righteousness; Tsemach (the Branch, 
Zeeh. iii. 8j; Menachem (the Comforter, 
Is. li. 3); Da rid (Ps. xviii. 50); Shiloh 
(Gen. xlix. 10); Elijah (Mai. iv. 5). The 
Messiah is also called Anani (He that 
Cometh in the clouds, Dan. vii. 13; see 
Tanch. Par. Toledoth 14); ChaninahMt^ 
reference to Jer. xvi. 13 ; the Lepi-ons, 
with reference to Is. liii. 4 (Sanh. 96 h). 
It is a curious instance of the Jewish 
mode of explaining a meaning by gi- 
matreya, or numerical calculation, that 
they \^YO\QTspmach (Branch) and Mena- 
chevi (Comforter) to be the same, because 
the numerical equivalents of the one 
word are equal to those of the other: 

r:=40, :=50, n=8, ::=40, = i38 ; a= 

DO. ?:=40, n=8, = 138. 

' Professor TT7i??.?c/i(e(Erlauter. d.Evang. 
p. 10) proposes to strike out the words 
'from their sins' as an un-.Jewisli inter- 
polation. In answer, it would suffice to 
point him to the passages on this very 
subject which he has collated in a pre- 
vious work : Die Leiden des Messias, pp. 

63-108. To these I will only add a com- 
ment in the Midrash on Cant. i. 14 (ed. 
Warshau, p. \\a and li), where the re- 
ference is undoubtedly to the Messiali (in 
the words of R. Berakhyah, line 8 from 
bottom; and again in the words of R. 
Levi, 11 'b, line 5 from top, Ac). The 
expression ^r^H i^ there explained as 
meaning 'He Who makes expiation for the 
sins of Israel.' and it is distinctly added 
that this expiation bears reference to the 
transgressions aiul evil deeds of the 
children of Abraham, for which God 
provides this Man as the Atonement. 

^ ' A good king, a fruitful year, and a 
good dream.' 

* Rabbi Zera proves this by a reference 
to Prov. xLx. 23, the reading Sabhea (sat- 
isfied) being altered .into Shebha — both 
written -jy^ — while 'j"*:'*' is understood as 
of siiending the night. Ber. 55 a to o't b 
contains a long, and sometimes verj^ 
coarse, discussion of dreams, giving their 
various interpretations, rules for avoid- 
ing the consequences of evil dreams, «tc. 
The fundamental principle is, that ' a 
dream is according to its interpretation ' 
(Ber. 55 /;). Such views about dreams 
would, no doulit, have long been matter 
of popular lielief. before being foi'mally 
expressed in tlie Talmud. 

^ The objection, tluu tlie account of 


BOOK Vie\vin«>; events, not as isolated, but as links welded in the golden 

n chain of the history of the King'doni of (iod, 'all this' — not only the 

^^ — ~." — ' birth of Jesus from a Virgin, nor even His symbolic Name with its 
import, but also the unrestful questioning of Josei)h, — 'happened' ' 

»is. vii. 11 in fulfilment^ of what had ])een prefigured/ The promise of a Virgin- 
born son as a sign of the firmness of God's covenant of old with David 
and his house; the now unfolded meaning of the former symbolic 
name Iminanuel; even the unbelief of Ahaz, with its counterpart in 
the questioning of Joseph — 'all this' could now be clearly read in 
the light of the breaking day. Never had the house of David sunk 
morally lower than when, in the words of Ahaz, it seemed to renounce 
the very foundation of its claim to continuance; never had the 
fortunes of the house of David fallen lower, timn when a Herod sat 
,on its throne, and its lineal representative was a humble village 
carpenter, from whose heart doubts of the Virgin-Mother had to be 
Divinely chased. And never, not even when God gave to the doubts 
of Moses this as the sign of Israel's future deliverance, that in that 

»>Ex. ni. 12 mountain they should worship'' — had unbelief been answered by 
more strange evidence. But as, nevertheless, the stal)ility of the 
Davidic house was ensured by the future advent of Immanuel — and 
with such certainty, that before even such a child could discern 
between choice of good and evil, the land would be freed of its 
dangers; so now all that was then prefigured was to become literally 
true, and Israel to be sailed from its real danger by the Advent of 
Jesus, Immanuel.* And so it had all been intended. The golden 

Joseph and Mary's immediate marriage loss (Wiinsche) 2*n2"l NIH N"", but, as 

is inconsistent witli tlie designation of Professor Delitzscb renders it, in liis new 

Mary in St. Lul^e ii. 5, is sufficiently re- translation of St. Mattiiew, nx mx""'?:'i 

futed by the consideration that, in any Ti^^/iifp^..^,,,,^ ;=■;.,., ^^..t^r,/ 

,, •' ^ . ,• , 1 1 <- u ^"1 "iTi "iwy. Ihetlitferenee IS important, 

other case, Jewish custom would not have '- ' ^«^ ' ' 

allowed Mary to travel to Bethlehem in a"^! Dehtzsch's translation completely 

company with Joseph. The expression established by the snnilar rendering of 

used in St. Luke ii. 5, must be read in the LXX. of 1 Kings ii. 27 and 2 Chron. 

connection with St. Matt. i. 25. xxxvi. 22. 

1 Ilaupt (Alttestam. Citate in d. vier ' A critical discussion of Ls. vii. 14 

Evang. i)p. 207-215) rightly lays stress would here be out of place; though I 

on the words, ' all this was done: He 'i-^ve attempted to express my views in 

even extends its reference to the three- the text. (The nearest approacli to them 

fold arrangement of the genealogy by i^ that by Engelhardt in the Zeitschr. fur 

St. Matthew, as implying the ascending Lut'i. Theol. fur ls72, Ileft iv.). Tlie 

splendour of the line of David, its quotation of St. Matthew follows, with 

middav glory, and its decline. scarcely any variation, tlie rendering of 

- The correct Hebrew equivalent of the the LXX. That theD should have trans- 

rxpression 'that it might be fulfilled' lated the Hebrew ^-ji^'-i^"! by TrapSfVo?, 'a 

'iva TtXii pa)(ir] is not, as Siirenhusiits Virgin,' is surely sufficient evidence of 

(Biblos Katallages, i). 151) and other the admissibility of such a rendering. 

Vi'riters have it, iT^SiiL? n?2 D''^r>> *^till The idea that the promised Son was to l)e 



cup of prophecy wliicli Isaiali had i)hiced einpt}^ on the Holy Table, 
waiting for the time of the end, was now full HIUmI, up to its hrini, 
with the new wine of the Kingdom. 

Meanwliile the long-looked-for event had taken place in the home 
of Zacharias. No domestic solemnity so important or so joyous as 
that in which, by circumcision, the ehild had, as it Avere, laid ui)on it 
the yoke of the Law, Avitli all of duty and privilege which this imi)lied. 
Even the circumstance, that it took i)lace at early morning '■' might 
indicate this. It was, so tradition has it, as if the tiither had acted 
sacriflcially as High-Priest,'' offering his child to God in gratitude and 
love;" and it symbolised thi.s deeper moral truth, that "man must ])y 
his own act complete what God had first instituted.'' To Zacharias 
and Elisabeth the I'ite would have even more than this significance, 
as a(hninistered to the child of their old age, so miraculously given, 
and who was connected with such a future. Besides, the legend wliich 
associates circumcision with Elijah, as the restorer of this rite in the 
apostate ]^eriod of the Kings of Israel, *" was probably in circulation at 
the time.' We can scarcely 1)0 mistaken in supposing, that then, as 
now, a benediction was si)oken l)efore circumcision, and that the 
ceremony closed with the usual grace over the cup of wine,- when the 
cliild received his name in a prayer that jjrobably did not much ditfer 
from this at j)resent in use: -Our God, and tlie God of our fathers, 
raise up this child to his father and mother, and let his name be 
called in Israel Zacharias. the son of Zacharias.'^ Let his fatlier re- 


Pes. 4 a 

'• Yalkiit 
SIi. i. par. 

' Tanch. P. 
at the be- 
ed. War- 
shaii, J). Ill 

'1 Taneli. 

U. M. 

f Pirqi' do 
K. E11(!S. c. 

either that of Ahaz, or else of tlie projiliet, 
cannot stand the test of critical investi- 
gation (see //r^»;'^ U.S., and /jo///, Alttest. 
Citate im N.T. pp. :!-(i). Our difiiculties 
of interpretation are. in .i^reat part, due 
to the abruptness of Isaiah's i)roplietic 
hinijuaii'e, and to our iunorance of sur- 
roundinu- circumstances. Sfe/'i/mi'i/er in- 
geniously argues agaiitjit the niytliical 
theory that, since Is. vii. 14 was i/of 
interjireted by the ancient Synagogue 
in a Messianic sense, that passage could 
not have led to the origination of -the 
legend ' about the ' Virgin's Son ' (Gesch. 
rt.Geb. d. Herrn, p. (io). We add this 
further (|uestion. 1J7/c//(y^ did it oi'igin- 
ate ? 

' Probably the designation of •chaii" 
or 'throne of Elijah.' for the cliair on 
whicii the godparent holding tlie child 
sits, and certaiidy the invocalioi: of lOli- 
jah, are of later date. Indeetl, the in- 
stitution of godi)arents is itself of later 
origin. Curiously enough, the Council 
of Terracina, in i:!;!0, liad to interdict 

Christians acting as godparents at cir- 
cumcision ! Even the great P.uxtorf 
acted as godparent in Kilt) to a .lewish 
child, and was condemned to a tine of 100 
florins for his otl'ence. See Loir, Lebens- 
alter, ]). 8(i. 

- Accoi'dingIo./asY'yy/i'//.s' (Ag. A\). ii. 2(5) 
circumcision was m)t followed by a feast. 
I)Ut. if this be true, the i)ractice wassoou 
altered, and the feast took i)lace on the 
eve t)f circumcision (.ler. Keth, i. .">: B. 
Kanui so a: ]]. Ikith. (iO />. Ac. I. Eater 
.Midrashim ti'aced it ui) to the history of 
Abraham and the feast at tlu> weaning 
of Isaac, which they represented as one- 
al circumcision (Pinie d. 1'. Eliez. 29). 

' Wiinsche I'eiterates the groundless 
objection of IJabbi Edw (u. s. p. !)(i), that 
a fannly-name was oidy given in remem- 
brance of the grandfather,ci'rr(v^s'M/ father. 
oi- other member of the family I Sli'ange, 
that such a statenu'Ut should ever have 
l)een hazarded: stranger still, that it 
slioidd be rejK'atecl after having been 
bdiv refuted bv Pelitzsch. It certaiidy 


BOOK j<)ic(^ in tlie issue of his loins, and liis mother in the fruit of her womb, 

II as it is written in Prov. xxiii. 25, and as it is said in Ezek. xvi. 6, 

^-^^"^ — ' and again in I*s. ev. H, and Gen. xxi. 4; ' the {)assages being, of course, 

quoted in full. The prayer closed with the hope that the child might 

grow up, and successfully, ' attain to the Torah, the nmrriage- 

baldachino, and good works.' ' 

Of all this Zacharias was, though a deeply interested, yet a deaf 
and dunib'^ witness. This only had he noticed, that, in the benedic- 
tion in Avhich the child's name was inserted, the mother had inter- 
rupted the i)rayer. Without explaining her reason, she insisted that 
liis name should not be that of his aged father, as in the peculiai' 
circumstances might have been expected, but John {Jochana7i). A 
reference to the father only deei)encd the general astonishment, when 
he also gave the same name. But this was not the sole cause for 
nuirvel. For, forthwith the tongue of the duml) was loosed, and he, 
who c(nUd not utter the name of the child, now burst into praise of 
the name of the Lord. His last words had been those of uni)elief, 
his tirst were those of praise; his last words had been a question of 
doubt, his first were a hymn of assurance. Strictly Hebrew in its 
cast, and closely following Old Testament i)rophccy, it- is remarkable 
— and yet almost natural — that this hynni of the Priest closely 
follows, and, if the expression be allowable, spiritualises a great part 
of the most ancient Jewish prayer: the so-called PJighteen Benedic- 
tions; rather perhaps, that it transforms the expectancy of that 
prayer into praise of its realisation. And if we bear in mind, that a 
great portion of these prayers was said by the Priests before the lot 
was cast for incensing, or by the people in the time of incensing, it 
almost seems as if, during the long period of his enforced solitude, 
the aged Priest had meditated on, and learned to understand, what 
so often he luid repeated. Opening with the common form of bene- 
diction, his hymn struck, one by one, the deepest chords of that 
])rayer, specially this the most significant of all (the fifteenth P^ulogy), 
' Speedily make to shoot forth the Branch ^ of David, Thy servant, and 

iscontraryto f7o.s'6'7>/('».s'(War iv. 3, 9), and Zacharias was what the Rabbis nnder- 

lo tiu> circumstance tliat both the father stood by w'l" — one deaf as well as dumb, 

and hriitlier of .losephus bore the name Accordin:i;ly tliey communicated with liini 

of Matthias, i^ee also Zuiiz (Z. Gesch. u. by C^T'il ' siirns '. — as Delitzscli correctly 

Liter. |). :^18). renders it : rjN'-'-'^? ^T?:-n 

' The reader will Hnd £.//. .4 ''pri'>r/t7/\ ■< .,., i i * n i »i • 

,, .^, ,1 1 , •»! IT T • * Althouirh a 1 modern authori- 

Herith Abraham with a Hebrew mtro- .. • » r * i 

, ^. , • * ^- ^ ,,- ^ *i ties are against me. I cannot in'rsuade 

duction an interestnifj tractate on the i*: ti ♦ ti • -c'* i i • "u^ 

, . ^ ' T-. n 1 • myself that the exniession s-t. Luke 1. ^'^ 

subject. For another and youni^er version • , , , • , . * ^r • i 

tA J.. • " ,„., rendered • daysorinir in our A. V. is here 

of these prayers, see Loir. u. s. >. 102. , ,, • ' i ^ .• <i ir \ -ha^. 

•^ From 8t. Luke i. 62 we -ather. that "^'^ ^''^^ equiyalent ot the Hebrew n^^ 


<'xalt Thou liis Iiorii l)y Thy salvation, lor in Thy salvation wo trust CHAP. 
all the day long-. Jilesscd art Thou, Jehovah! Who causeth to spring- IV 

forth the Horn of Salvation' (literally, to braneluforth). This analogy - — ^. ' 

between the hymn of Zacharias and the prayers of Israel will best 
appear from the benedietions Avith whieh these eulogies closed. For. 
when thus examined, their leading thoughts will be found to be as 
follows: God as the Shield of Abraham', He that raises the dead, and 
causes salvation to shoot forth: the Holy One; Who graciously fjireth 
knowledge; Who taketh pleasure in repentance; Who multiplieth 
forgiveness; Who redeemeth Israel; Who hecdeth their (spiritual) 
diseases; Who blesseth the years; Who gathereth the outcasts of His 
jieople; Who loveth righteousness and judgment; Who is the abode 
and stay of the righteous; Who buildeth Jerusalem; Who causeth the 
Horn of Scduation to shoot forth; Who heareth prayer; Who bringeth 
back His Shekhinah to Zion; God the Gracious One, to Whom praise 
is due; Who blesseth His people Israel luith peace. 

It was all most fitting. The question of unbelief had struck the 
Priest duml), for most truly unbelief cannot speak; and the answer 
of faith restored to him speech, for most truly does faith loosen the 
tongue. The first eviilenee of his duud)ness had been, that his 
tongue refused to speak the benediction to tlie people; and the first 
i'vidence of his restored power was, that he spoke the benediction of 
God in a rapturous burst of praise and thanksgiving. Tlie sign of 
the unbelieving- Priest stamling before the awe-struck people, vainly 
essaying to make himself understood by signs, was most fitting; most 
fitting also that, when 'they made signs ' to him, the believing father 
should burst in their hearing into a prophetic hynni. 

But far and wide, as these marvellous tidings spread throughout 
the hill-country of Juda'a, fear fell on all — the fear also of a nameless 
hope. The silence of a long-clouded day had l)een broken, and the 
light whieh had suddenly riven its gloom, laid itself on their hearts 
in exj)ectancy: 'What then shall this Child be? Yw the Hand of 
the Lord also was Avith Him!'- 

* Branch." Tlip LXX. at any rate reii- The Eighteen Eulo2;ies are iriveii in full 

(lered -^;^J in Jer. xxiii. 5 : Ezeis. xvi. 7: in the • Hi.story of the Jewish Nation,' 

wii. 10; Zech. iii. 8; vi. 12, by dvaroA)). pp. 8(;3-:i(j7. 

' Tiie italic.-i mark tlie point.s of corre- -' The insertion of yap seems criticallj' 

siiondenee witli tlie hymn of Zaeharias. estalilished, and gives the fuller meau- 

Comp. the best edition of the Jewish ing. j 

Prayer Book (Frankfort, 5601), pp. 21-28. 




BOOK It were an extremely narrow, and, indeed, false view, to regard the 
II diti'erence between Judaism and Christianity as contined to the ques- 

■""^ ' tion of the fultillment of certain prophecies in Jesus of Nazareth, 
These i)redictions could only outline individual features in the Person 
and history of the Messiah. It is not thus that a likeness is recog- 
nised, hut rather by the combination of the various features into a 
unity, and by the expression Avhich gives it meaning. So far as we 
can gather from the Gospel narratives, no objection was ever taken to 
the fulfillment of individual prophecies in Jesus. But the general 
conception Avhich the Rabbis had formed of the Messiah, differed 
totally from what was presented by thi; Prophet of Nazareth. Thus, 
what is the fundamental divergence between the two may be said to 
have existed long before the events Avhich finally divided them. It 
is the coml)ination of letters which constitute words, and the same 
letters may be combined into different words. Similarly, both Rab- 
binism and — what, by anticipation, we designate — Christianity might 
regard the same predictions as Messianic, and look for their fullill- 
nient; while at the same tiuie the Messianic ideal of the Synagogue 
might be quite other than that, to which tlie faith and hope of the 
Church have clung. 

1. The most important point here is to keep in mind the organic 
yi///i'j'/ of tiie Old Testament. Its predictions are not isolateil, but 
features of one grand projjhetic picture; its ritual and institutions 
l)arts of one great system; its history, not loosely connected events, 
but an organic development tending towards a definite end. Viewed 
in its innermost substance, the hist(UT of the Old Testament is not 
difl'erent from its typical institutions, nor yet these two from its pre- 
dictions. The idea, underlying all, is God's gracious manifestation in 
the world — the Kingdom of (Jod: the meaning of all — the establish- 
ment of this Kingdom n])on earth. That gracious ])uriiosc was, so to 
speak, individualized, and flic Kingdom actinilly cstablislied in the 


Mesfiiah. IJolh llic fuiKlaiiiciilal and the liiial rclatioii^liip in vioAV was CHAP. 
tluit of God towards man, and of man towards God: tlie Ibrmcr ascx- V 
l)ressod by the word Fatlier; the latter l)y that of Servant — or rather ^~ — ^^^^ — ^ 
theeoni'oinationof the two ideas: 'Son-Servant.' Tliis was already ini- 
l)lied in the so-called I'rotevang'el; ■' and in this sense also the words »Gen. iii.ia 
of Jesus hold true: ' Before Abraham came into being, 1 am." 

13ut, narrowing our survey to where the history of the Kingdom 
of God begins with that of Abraham, it was indeed as Jesus said: 
' Your father Abraham rejoiced that he should see My day, and he 
saw it, and Avas glad."' For, all that followed from Abraham to the ''St. johu 

vui. 56 

Messiah was one, and bore this twofold impress: heavenwards, that of 
Son; earthwards, that of Servant. Israel was God's Son — His 'first- 
born '; their history that of the children of God; their institutions those 
of the family of God; their predictions those of the household of God. 
And Israel was also the Servant of God — ' Jacob My Servant '; and its 
history, institutions, and predictions those of the Servant of the Lord. 
Yet not merely Servant, but Son-Servant — ' anointed ' to such service. 
This idea was, so to speak, crystallised in the three great repre- 
sentative institutions of Israel. The ' Servant of the Lord ' in relation 
to Israel's history was Kingship in Israel; the 'Servant of the Lord' 
in relation to Israel's ritual ordinances was the Priesthood in Israel; 
the 'Servant of the Lord' in relation to prediction was the Prophetic 
order. But all sprang from the same fundamental idea: that of the 
' Servant of Jehovah." 

One step still remains. The Messiah and His history are not 
|)resented in the Old Testament as something separate from, or 
superadded to, Israel. The history, the institutions, and the predic- 
tions of Israel run up into Him.' He is the typical Israelite, nay, 
typical Israel itself — alike the crown, the completion, and the repre- 
sentative of Israel. He is the Son of God and the Servant of the 
Lord; but in that highest and only true sense, which had given its 
meaning to all the preparatory development. As He was 'anointed' 
to l)e the ' Servant of the Lord,' not with the typical oil, but In- 'the 
Spirit of Jehovah' 'upon' Ilim, so was He also the 'Son" in a 
nni(jue sense. His organic connection Avith Israel is marked by the 
<lesignations 'Seed of Abraham' and 'Son of David,' while at the 
same time He was essentially, what Israel was suliordinately and 

' Tn tilts resjiect there is deep siijnifi- wliioli Cod had shown to Israel in the 
caiice in the .Jewish leu'end (freiiuently wilderness would he done a.ii'uin to re- 
introduced: see. for example. Tancli. ii. deemed Zion in the • latter davs.' 
'.)!) n\ Del). R. 1), that all the nnraeles 


BOOK tyi)i('ally: 'Thou art My Son — this day liavo I ])egotten Thee.' 
II Hence also, in strictest truthfulness, the Evangelist could apply to the 

^■^ — ^ ' Messiah what referred to Israel, and see it fulfilled in Jlis history: 

"i^io^^''^"' '^^'^^ of Egypt luive 1 called my Son.'"^ And this other correlate 
idea, of Israel as ' the Servant of the Lord, ' is also fully concen- 
trated in the Messiah as the Representative Israelite, so that tlie 
JJook of Isaiah, as the series of predictions in which His picture is 
most fully outlined, might be sununarised as that concerning 'the 
Servant of Jehovah.' Moreover, the Messiah, as Rei)resentativc 
Israelite, combined in Himself as ^the Servant of the Lord' the three- 
fold office of Prophet, Priest, and King, and joined together the two 

'•pitii. u. ideas of 'Son 'and 'Servant.''' And the final combination and full 
exhibition of these two ideas was the fullillment of the typical mission 
of Israel, and the establishment of the Kingdom of God among men. 

c &en., Thus, in its final, as in its initial," stage it was the establishment 
of the Kingdom of (}od upon earth — brought about by the 'Servant' 
of the Lord, Who was to stricken humanity the God-sent 'Anointed 
Comforter' (Mnslnach lia-Menachem): in this twofold sense of 'Com- 
forter ' of individuals ('the friend of sinners '), and ' Comforter ' of 
Israel and of the world, reconciling the two, and bringing to both 
eternal salvation. And here the mission of Israel ended. It had 
passed through three stages. The first, or historicaI,vras the prepara- 
tion of the Kingdom of God; the second, or ritual, the typical pre- 
sentation of that Kingdom; while the tliird, or pj'ojjhetic, brought 
that Kingdom into actual contact with the kingdoms of the world. 
Accordingly, it is during the latter that the designation 'Son of 
David ' (tyjHcal Israel) enlarged in the visions of Daniel into that of 
' Son of Man ' (the Head of redeemed humanity). It were a onesided 
view to regard the Babylonish exile as only a punishment for Israel's 
sin. There is, in truth, nothing in all God's dealings in history 
exclusively punitive. That were a merely negative element. But 
there is always a positive element also of actual progress; a step 
forward, even though in the taking of it something should have to 
be crushed. And this step forward was the development of the idea of 
. the Kingdom of God in its relation to the world. 

2. This organic unity of Israel and the Messiah explains how 
events, institutions, and predictions, which initially were ])ur('ly 
Israelitish, could with truth lie regarded as finding their full accom- 
plishment in tlie Messiah. From this point of view the whole Old 
Testament becomes the perspective in which the figure of the Messiah 
stands out. And ])('rha])s the most valu;il)l(' clement in Rabbinic 


coiniHcutatiou on Mcssiniiic times is tliat in wliicli, tis so ti'C({uently, ciiAl'. 
it is explained, that all the miracles and deliverances of Isi-acl's past V 

would be re-enacted, only in a much "wider manner, in the days of "— ^.' — -^ 
the Messiah. Tlius tlu' whole past was symbolic, and typical of the 
future — the Old Testament the ^'lass, thi-ou,nh which tlie universal 
.lilessino:,s of the latter days were seen. It is in this sense that we 
Avould understand the two sayinji's of the Talmud: .-All the pi-ophets 
prophesied only of the days of the Messiah,'" and 'The world was "Sanh. 99»i 
created only for the Messiah.'"' isanii. 98 b 

In accordance with all this, the ancient Synagogue found re- 
ferences to the Messiah in nuiny more passages of the Old Testament 
than those verbal predictions, to which we generally appeal; and the 
latter formed (as in the New Testament) a proportionately snuill, and 
secondary, element in the concei)tion of the Messianic era. This 
is fully borne out by a detailed analysis of those ])assages in the 
Old Testament to which the ancient Synagogue referred as Messianic.^ 
Their number amounts to upwards of 4.56 (75 from the Pentateuch, 
243 from tlie rr(j})liets, aiul 138 from the Hagiographa), and their 
Messianic application is sii])ported by more than 558 references to 
the most ancient Rabbinic writings.- But comparatively few of these 
are what would be termed verl)al i)redictions. Rather would it seem as 
if every event were regarded as prophetic, and every prophecy, whether 
by fact, or by word (prediction), as a light to cast its sheen on the 
future, until the picture of the Messianic age in the far back-ground 
stood out in the hundredfold variegated brightness of prophetic events, 
and i)roi)hetic utterances; or, as regarded the then state of Israel, 
till the darkness of their present night was lit up by a hundred con- 
stellations kindling in the sky overhead, and its lonely silence broken 
by echoes of heavenly voices, and strains of prophetic hymns borne on 
the breeze. 

Of course, there was the danger that, amidst these dazzling lights. 
or in the crowd of tigures, each so attractive, or else in the absorbing 
interest of the general })icture, the grand central Personality should 
not engage the attention it claimed, and so the meaning of the whole 

^ See Appendix IX., wliere a detailed iii.i;' the Midrasli on Levitiout^, no fewer 

list is given of all the Old Testament than twenty-tive close witli an outlook on 

passaj^es which the ancient Syna,2;ogue Messianic times. The same may lie said 

applied Messianically, together with the of the dose of many of the Parashahs in 

references to the Rabbinic works where the Midrashim known as Pesi((ta and 

they are quoted. Tanchuma (Zioiz. u. s. pp. ISl. 2S4). Be- 

''■ Large as this number is, I do not sides, the oldest portions of the Jewish 

present the list as complete. Thus, out liturgy are full of Messianic asi>irations. 
of the thirtv-seven Parashahs constitut- 


BOOK l)e lost in the contemplation of its details. This danger was the 
n greater from the absence of any deeper spiritual elements. All that 
^■^-^r — ^ Israel needed: 'study of the Law and good works/ lay within the 
reach of every one; and all that Israel hoped for, was national restora- 
tion and glory. Everything else was but means to these ends; the 
Messiah Himself only the grand instrument in attaining them. Thus 
vie\v('(l, tlie pictuj'e presented would be of Israel's exaltation, rather 
than of the salvation of the world. To this, and to the idea of Israel's 
exclusive spiritual position in the world, must be traced much, that 
otherwise would seem utterly irrational in the Rabbinic pictures of the 
latter days. But in such a picture there would be neither room nor 
occasion for a Messiah-Saviour, in the only sense in which such a 
heavenly mission could be rational, or the heart of humanity respond 
to it. The Ral^binic ideal of the Messiah was not that of ' a light to 
lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of His people Israel '■ — the satisfac- 
tion of the wants of humanity, and the completion of Israel's mission 
— but quite different, even to contrariety. Accordingly, there was a 
fundamental antagonism l)etween the Rabbis and Christ, quite irre- 
spective of the manner in which He carried out His Messianic work. 
On the other hand, it is equally noteworthy, that the purely national 
elements, which well nigh formed the sum total of Rabbinic expecta- 
tion, scarcely entered into the teaching of Jesus about the Kingdom 
of God. And the more we realise, that Jesus so fundamentally 
separated Himself from all the ideas of His time, the more evidential 
is it of the fact, that He was not the Messiah of Jewish conception, 
but derived His mission from a source unknown to, or at least ignored 
by, the leaders of His people. 

3. But still, as the Rabbinic ideas were at least based on the Old 
Testament, we need not wonder that they also embodied the chief 
features of the Messianic history. Accordingly, a careful perusal of 
their Scripture quotations * shows, that the main postulates of the 
Kew Testament concerning the Messiah are fully supported by 
Rabl)inic statements. Thus, such doctrines as the pre-mundane eoc- 
istence of the Messiah; His elevation above Moses, and even above the 
Angels; His representative character: His cruel sufferings and 
derision] His violent death, and that /or His people: His loork on 
behalf of the living and of the dead; His redemption, and restora- 
■ tion of Israel; the oppo.s7Y/o)M)f the Gentiles; their partial j^^rZgrjwenf 
and conversion; the prevalence of His Laiv\ the universal blessings of 
the latter days; and His Kiiigdoni — can 1)0 clearly deduced from un- 

' For Ihcsc. see Appendix IX. 



qiK'slioued passages iii aiick'nt I{al)l)iiiic writings. Only, as we niiglit 
expect, all is there indistinct, incoherent, unexi)laine(l. and from a 
much lower standpoint. At best, it is the lower stage of yet unful- 
tilled prophecy — the haze when the sun is about to rise, not the blaze 
when it has risen. Most painfully is this felt in connection with the 
one element on which the New Testament most insists. There is, 
indeed, in Rabbinic writings frequent reference to the sufferings, and 
even the death of the Messiah, and these are brought into connection 
with our sins — as how could it be otherwise in view of Isaiah liii. and 
other passages — and in one most remarkable comment* the Messiah 
is represented as willingly taking upon Himself all these sufierings, 
on condition that all Israel — the living, the dead, and those yet un- 
l)oi'n — should be saved, and that, in consequence of His work, God 
and Israel should be reconciled, and Satan cast into hell. But there 
is only the most indistinct reference to the removal- of sin -by the 
Messiah, in the sense of vicarious sufferings. 

In connection with what has been stated, one most important 
point must be kept in view. So far as their opinions can ])e gathered 
from their writings, the great doctrines of Original Sin, and of the sin- 
fulness of our whole nature, were not held by the ancient Rabbis.^ Of 
course, it is not meant that they denied the consequences of sin, either 
as concerned Adam himself, or his descendants; but the final result 
is far from that seriousness which attaches to the Fall in the New Testa- 
ment, where it is presented as the basis of the need of a Redeemer, 
Who, as the Second Adam, restored what the first had lost. The dif- 
ference is so fundamental as to render further explanation necessary.'^ 

The fall of Adam is ascribed to the envy of the Angels-^ — not the 
fallen ones, for none were fallen, till God cast them down in conse- 
quence of their seduction of man. The Angels, having in vain tried 
to prevent the creation of man, at last conspired to lead him into sin 
as the only means of his ruin — the task being undertaken by Sammael 
(and his Angels), who in many respects was superior to the other 
Angelic princes.'' The instrument employed was the serpent, of 
Avhosc original condition the strangest legends are told, prol)ably to 
make the Biblical narrative appear more rational." The details of the 
story of the Fall, as told by the Rabbis, need not be here repeated, 
save to indicate its consequences. The first of these was the with- 


' This is tlie view expressed l)y all 
Jewisli flo,i>matic \Yriters. See also 
M^eher, Altsyna,<i\ Tlieol. p. 217. 

- Coinp. oil tlie su])ieot. Ber. R. 12-1 (>. 

'■'■ In Ber. B., liowever. it lias seemed 

to me, as if sometimes a mystical and 
symliolical view of tlie iiistory of the 
Fall were insinuated— evil concuiiisceuce 
beina,' the occasion of it. 

■1 Yalkut on 
Is. ix. 1 

'' Pirq:' de 
K. EI. c. 13: 
Yalkut i. 
p. S c 

" Comp. 
Pirqe de R. 
El. and 
U.S. : also 
Ber. R. li> 




" Ber. R. 19, 
«liau, ij.37rt 

>> Beniidb. 
R. l:i 

'■ Vayylkra 
R. 27 

■' Ber. R. 16 
21, and 

f Ber. R. 5, 
12, 10; 
comp. also 
llidr. on 
and viil. 1, 
and Baba 
B. 17 a 

f Ber. R. 9 

s Bemldb. 
R. 19 

to Deut. 
xxxUi. 2; 
Hab. lii. 3 

'< \h. Zar. 


t Ab. Z. -y a 

drawal of tlic Shckliiiiiili Iroin cai'tli to the tir.<t lieaven, while i^ub- 
se([ueiit sins suecossively led to its further removal to the seventh 
heaven. This, however, can scarcely be considered a permanent 
sequel of sin, since the good deeds of seven righteous men, beginning 
with Abraham, lirought it again, in the time of Moses, to earth."- 
Six things Adam is said to have lost by his sin; but even these are 
to be restored to man by the Messiah.''' That tire i)hysical death of 
Adam was the consequence of his sin, is certainly taught. Other- 
wise he would have lived forever, like Enoch and Elijah.'' But 
although the fate which overtook Adam was to rest on all the world,'' 
nnd death came not only on our first father but on his descendants, 
and all creation lost its ]X'rfectness,''yet even these temporal sequences 
are not universally admitted. It rather seems taught, that death was 
intended to be the fate of all, or sent to show the folh' of men claiming 
Divine' worship, or to test Avhether piety was real,^ the more so that 
with death the weary struggle with our evil inclination ceased. 
It was needful to die when our work was done, that others might 
enter upon it. In each case death was the consequence of our own, 
not of Adam's sin.^ In fact, over these six — Abraham, Isaac, Jacol), 
Moses, Aaron, and Miriam — the Angel of Death had had no absolute 
power. Xay, there was a time Avhen all Israel were not only free 
from death, but like the Angels, and even higher than they. For, 
originall}^ God had offered the Law to all Gentile nations," but the}' 
had refused to sulnnit to it.' But when Israel took on themselves 
the Law at Mount Sinai, the description in Psalm Ixxxii. <5 applied 
literally to them. They would not have died, and Avere 'the sons of 
God." " But all this was lost by the sin of making the golden calf — 
altliough the Talmud marks that, if Israel had continued in that 
Angelic state, the nation would have ceased with that generation. - 
Thus there were two divergent opinions— the one ascribing death to 
personal, the other tracing it to Adam's guilt.' 

^ They are: the shininof splendour of 
his person, even his heels bein^ like suns ; 
his ^iffantic size, from east to west, from 
earth to heaven : the spontaneous splen- 
did products of the ground, and of all 
fruit-trees; an infinitely "greater measure 
of lisrht on the part of the lieavenly bod- 
ies: and. finally, endless duration of life 
(Ber. R. 12. ed. Warsh. ]). 24 h; Ber. Jl. 
21; Sanh. .'JS b; Chas;. 12 a; and for flieir 
restoration by the Messiah. Bcni. Ii. I?,). 

'^ inj^enious theoh)i!:ifal arti- 
fice the sin of the ijolden calf, and that of 
David are made matter for tlniid<sij:ivin^; 

the one as showing that, even if the whole 
people sinned. God was willinir to for- 
give: the other as proving, tluit God gra- 
ciously condescended to each individual 
sinner, and that to each the iloDr nf 
repentance was oj^en. 

■' In the Talmud (Shabb. on a and //) 
each view is supported in discussion, tlie 
one by a reference to Ezek. xviii. 20. tlie 
otlier to 'Eccles. i.\. 2 (com]), also Sii>hr('" 
on Deut. .xxxii. 49). The final conclu- 
sion, however, greatly- inclines towards 
the connection between death and the 
fall (see especially the clear statement in 

WHENCE THE srFFEi;iX(;s OF isi;aee? 1(j7 

When, however, we pass t'roiu tlic i»liysi('al to tlic moral sequences CHAP, 
of the fall, our Jewish authorities wholly fail us. They teach, that ^ 
man is created with two inclinations — that to c\il (tlie yetser Jia-ra), ' — ~~' — 
and that to good;-'' the first working in him IVom the beginning, the Targum 
latter coming gradually in the course of time.'' \'ct, so far from guilt Gi-n. u.'- 
attaching to the Yetser hd-ni, its existence is absolutely necessary, if !,.?i''''-f/-, 
the world is to continue." In fact, as the Talmud expressly teaches,* I'^ueaw' 
the evil desire or impulse was created by God Himself; while it is 55"',77i/'''' 
also asserted' that, on seeing the consequences, God actually repented ^"^ " 
having done so. This gives quite another character to sin, as due to ,, ^^j,.' Jj^, 
causes for which no blame attaches to man.' On the other hand, as 'Sukk.52a, 

....,, ,. 1 1 11 J • 1 . ,. , , and Yalkut 

it IS m the power ol each wholly to overcome sm, and to gam hie l)y n. p. u\u, 

study and works;*' as Israel at Mount Sinai had actually got rid of aJ;""j'pi. 

the Yetser ha-ra: and as there had been those, who Avere entirely ?^*'i"i"\r° 

righteous," — there scarcely remains any moral seciuence of Adam's fall -^ 

to be considered. iSimilarly, the Apocrypha are silent on the subject, Kidd. '.'mi, ' 

the only exception being the very strong language used in II. Esdras, amp'^ie!^ 

which dates after the Christian era.' ' cSH'" 

4. In the absence of felt need of deliverance from sin, avc can icomp. iv. 

understand, how Rabbinic tradition found no jdace for the Priestly ji,k^W.' 

office of the Messiah, and how even His claims to be the Prophet of e.sJKviaUy 
His people are almost entirely overshadowed by His apj^earance as 
their King and Deliverer. This, indeed, was the ever-present want, 
pressing the more heavily as Israel's national sufferings seemed almost 
inexi)licable, while they contrasted so sharply with the glory expected 

by the Rabbis. Whence fl/ sufferings /' From sin" — national sin: ^Men.n.n, 

the idolatry of former times; ' the prevalence of crimes and vices; the uiitt. i a 

dereliction of God's ordinances; " the neglect of instruction, of study, ■« om. 88 « 
and of ppoper practice of His Law; and, in later days, the love of 

money and party strife." But the seventy years' captivitii had ceased, "Jer. 

ivhii not the iiresent dispersion? Because hvpocris}^ had been added Yuma !)'«,' 

tiiKl many 

to all other Sins; " because there iiad not been proper repentance; '' ouipi- pas- 

• Yiima 9 l> 

Debar. R. 9, ed. Warsh., p. 20 «). Tliis Of course, the tirst two and tlio hu>t two ,,jp,. 

view is also supported by such passaijes chapters in our A])ocryplial H. F.sih'ns Y,,!uai.i 

in the Ai)0cryi)ha as Wisdom ii. '2o, 24; are later spurious a<ldltioiis of Clii-istiau 

iii. 1, &c. ; while, on the other hand, p]c- authorsliip. But in proof of the iiiHuencf 

clus. XV. 1 1-17 seems rather to point in a of the Christian teachiii,y on the writer of 

different direction. the Fourth Book of Esdras we may call 

1 There can be no question that, des- attention, besides the adoption of the 

pile its strong polemical tendency against doctrine of original sin, to the remarkable 

Christianity, the Fourtli Book of Esdras application to Israel of such N.T. exprcs- 

(II. Esdras in our Apocrypha), written at sions as the 'firstborn,' the 'only-begot- 

the close of the first century of our era, ten.' and the 'Well-beloved ' (IV. Esdras 

is deeply tinged with Christian doctrine. vi. .")S — in our Apocr. II. Esdras iv. 5S). 




Nidd. l;i h 
Yonia I'J l> 

>•■ For all 
comi). Ber. 
.".8 /; : 59 (I ; 
Sot. 48 a ; 
138 b : Baba 
B. 12 a, b 

'' Vayyikra 
E. 19 

fPe.siqta, ' 
ed. Buber, 
l>. 145 a, 
last lines 

p Mldr, on 

•> Peslqta 
148 (. 

' Chag. 13 b 

■t Shemoth 
E. 2. ed, 
■Warsli. p. 
7 li, lines 12 

™ Ber. 3 a : 
59 rt 

" Pesiqta 
119 6; 120 a 

liccaiuse of tlie liiiir-hoaitedncs.s of tlie Jewish proselytes; because of 
iiupropor inarriages, and other evil eustomsr' and becauf^c of the gro:<s 
dissoluteness of certain cities.'' The consequences appeared not onh' 
ill the i)olitical condition of Israel, ))ut in the land itself, in the 
absence of rain and dew, of fruitfulness and of ]^lenty; in the general 
disorder of society; the cessation of piety and of religious study; and 
the silence of prophecy.'' As significantly summed up, Israel ^vas 
without Priesthood, witliout law, without God." Xay, the Avorld it- 
self suflered in consequence of the destruction of the Temple. In a 
very remarkalile passage,'' where it is ex])laincd, that the seventy 
l)ullocks oflcred during the Feast of Tabernacles were for the nations 
of the Avorld. 1\. Jochanan deplores their fate, since while the Temple 
had stood the altar had atoned t\)v the Gentiles, but who was now to 
do so? The light, Avhich had shone from out the Temple windows 
into the world, had been extinguished.'' Indeed, but for the inter- 
cession of the Angels the world would now be destroyed.^ In the 
poetic language of the time, the heavens, sun, moon and stars, trees 
and mountains, even the Angels, mourned over the desolation of the 
Temple,'' and the very Angelic hosts had since been diminished.' 
But, though the Divine Presence had l)een withdrawn, it still 
lingered near His own: it had followed them in all their banish- 
ments; it had sutiered with them in all their sorrows.'- It is a toucliing 
legend, which represents the Shekhinah as still lingering over the 
western wall of the Temple" — the only one supposed to l)e still stand- 
ing.^ ^ay. in language still bolder, and wliicli cannot lie fully repro- 
duced, God Himself is represented as mourning o-ver Jerusalem and 
the Teiuple. He has not entered His Palace since then, and His hair 
is wet with the dew.* He weeps over His children and their desolate- 
ness,™ and displays in the heavens tokens of mourning, corresjionding 
to those which an earthly monarch would show." 

All this is to be gloriously set right. Avhen the Lord turneth tlie 
captivity of Zion, and the Messiah cometh. But luhen may He be 
expected, and what are the signs of His coming? Or perhaps the 
qnestiiui sliould thus be put: Why are the redemption of Israel 
and tlie coining of the Messiah so unaccountably delayed? It is here 

^ This is the Pesiqta. not that which is 
generally quoted either as Rahbathi or 

^ This iu very many Rabbinical pas- 
sages. Comp. Cas1elli',l\ Messia, \^. 17(!. 
note 4. 

2 In proof tliey appeal to such passages 

as 2 Chr. vii. Ifi: Ps. iii. -4; Cant. ii. 9, 
proving it even from the decree of Cyrus 
(Ezra i. :^.»4), in which (iod is spoken of 
as still ii! desolate Jerusalem. 

' The i)assage from Yalkut on Is. Ix. 1 
is (pioted in full in Ai)pendix IX. 


thai tlic Synagogue finds itself in presence of an insoinhlc mystery, chap. 
The explanations attenii)te(l are, confessedly, guesses, or rather at- v 

tempts to evade the issue. The only course left is, authoritatively ^— ^r^— ' 
to impose silence on all such inquiries — the silence, as they would put 
it, of implicit, moui-nful submission to the inexplicable, in faith that 
somehow, when least expected, deliverance would come; or, as we 
would put it, the silence of ever-recurring (lisappointmcnt and despair. 
Thus the grand hope of the Synagogue is, as it were, written in an 
epitai)h on a broken tombstone, to be repeated l)y the thousands who, 
for these long centuries, have washed the ruins of the Sanetuaiw with 
unavailing tears. 

6. 117/;/ delaiietJi the Jle.ssiah His votii'Difj? Since the l)riefand 
broken sunshine of the days of Ezra and Xehemiah, the sky over- 
head has ever grown darker, nor have even the terrible storms, which 
have burst over Israel, reft the canopy of cloud. The first captivity 
passed, why not the second? This is the painful question ever and 
again discussed by the Rabbis." Can they mean it seriously, that the » Jer. 
sins of the second, are more grievous than those which caused the ed. Kro't. p. 
first dispersion; or that they of the first captivity repented, but not parVsanh. 
they of the second? What constitutes this repentance which yet 
remains to be made? But the reasoning liecomes aljsolutely self-con- 
tradictory when, together with the assertion that, if Israel repented 
but one (lav, the Messiah would come," we are told, that Israel will •'Micir. ou 

• . . . Cant. V. •>, 

not repent till Elijah comes.'-' Besides, bold as the languau'e is, there eci. warsh. 

. . . . o . p. 25 a; 

IS truth in the expostulation, which the ]Midrash'' puts into the mouth sanh. 98 a 
of the congregation of Israel: '■ Lord of the world, itde])ends on Thee K^Enez^ls, 
that we repent.' Such truth, that, althoua'h at first the Divine replv '''"' 

\ .' ' ' . ' " '1 On Lam. 

IS a repetition of Zechar, i. 3, vet, when Israel reiterates the words, t. -n. ea. 

^ ■ T . ' J Warsh. vol. 

'Turn Thou us unto Thee, O Lord, and we shall be turned,' support- in. p. 77a 
ing them by Ps. Ixxxv. 4, the argument proves unaiisweral)le. 

Other conditions of Israel's deliverance are, indeed, mentioned. 
But we can scarcely regard the Synagogue as seriously making the 
coming of Messiah dependent on their realisation. Among the most 
touching of these is a l)eautiful ])assage (almost reminding us of Heb. 
xi.j, in which Israel's future deliverance is described as the reward of "-Tanch. on 

^' E.\. XV. 1, 

faith.'' Similarlv beautiful is the thouuiit,*^ that, when (lod redeems eii. 

.p. 1-6 '' 

Israel, it will lie amidst their weeping.-' r)Ut neitlier can this be fon.jor. 
regarded as the condition of Messiah's comiuii": nor vet such iicneral- 

'^ ' . ' -• Tanch. on 

ities as the observance of the Law, or of some siiecial commandments. f'"i- ^i^- -• 

' ed. Warsh. 

The very variety of suggestions '' ^ shows, how utterly unal)le the i, sann. 97 6 
1 The reader will tiiid tliese discusr^ioiis .suimiiarii^ed at tin* clo^e of Appendl.x IX. 


i;()()K Syiia<:i'()<i'U(' lelt to iiKiicatc any condition to Ijo fultiUed l)y Israel. 
11 8iicli va^u'ue statements, as that the salvation of Israel depended on 

^-— ^. ^ — tlie merits ol" the patriarchs, or on that of one of them, cannot hell) 
" sanh. '.18 rt us to a solution; and the long discussion in the Talnnur' leaves no 
doul)t, that the final and most sober opinion was, that the time of 
Messiah's coming depended not on repentance, nor any other con- 
dition, 1)ut on the mercy of (Jod, when the time fixed had arrived. 
But even so, we arc again thrown into doubt l)y the statement, that 
it might be cither hastened or retarded by Israel's bearing!^ 

In these circumstances, any attempt at determining tlie date of 
Messiah's coming would be even more liyi)othetical than such calcula- 
tions generally are.^ Uuesses on the subject could only be grounded 
on imaginary symbolisms. Of such we have exami)les in the Talmud.^ 
Thus, some fixed the date at 4000 years after the Creation — curiously 
enough, about the era of Christ — though Israel's sin had blotted out 
=' sanh. 97 b tiic wliolc past from the reckoning; others at 4201 from the Creation; '' 
others again expected it at the beginning, or end, of the eighty-fitth 
Jul)ilee — with this proviso, that it it would not take place cai'lier; 
and soon, through equally groundless conjectures, A comparatively 
late work si)eaks of five monarchies — Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, 
Rome and Ishmael. During the last of these God would hear the 
pirq.Tie cry of Isracl," and the Messiah come, after a terril)le war between 

K. KU6S. y*2 * 

•111 s 30 " Borne and Ishmael (the West and the Plast).'' But as the rule of these 
monarchies was to last altogether one day (=1000 years), less 
-comp. two-thirdsof an hour (1 hour:^83| years)," it would follow, that their 
EL 48 " ■ domination would last 944* years.* Again, according to Jewish 
tradition, the rule of Babylon had lasted TO, that of Medo-Persia .34, 
and that of Greece 180 years, leaving 660f years for Bonie and Ish- 
mael. Thus the date for the expected Advent of the Messiah would 
have been about 661 after the destruction of Jerusalem, or al)out the 
year 729 of the Christian era.* 

In the category of guesses we must also place such vague state- 
ments, as that the Messiah would come, when all were righteous, or 
all wicked ; or else nine months after the emi)ii-e of Rome had ex- 

1 See, on tlie whole subject, also De- from Saiili. 
bar. R. 2. * rinie de R. El. 2S. The reasoninnc 

- We iMit asi(l(>, as universally repu- by wliicli this dm-ation of the monarchies 

(bated, the opinion e.\i)ressed by one is derived from Ijament. i. 115 and Zech. 

Rabbi, that Israel's Messianic era was xiv. 7. is a very curious specimen of 

l)ast. the promises havini;; been fulfilled Rabbinic ary-umentation. 
in Kiuir Hezekiah (Sanh. OS h; !)!» n). •> Conii). Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. p. 277. 

•" See. in Apjiendix IX. the extracts 


tt'iidi'd over the whole world;'' or when all the souls, predestined to ciiaI'. 
inhabit bodies, had been oneartli. '' But as, after years of uni-elieved v 

sutferiuii's, the Synaii-oii-uo had to acknowledge that, one by one, all "- — ". — 
the terms liad passed, and as desi)air settled on the heart of Israel, it '■sanh.98(-' 
eanie to be generally thought, that the time of Messiah's Advent Ber.'K.'s^' 
eould not be known l)eforehand, '' and that speenlation on the subject >TarKuni 
was tlangerous, sinful, even damnable. The time of the end had. ,jon. on 
indeed, been revealed to two sons of Adam, Jacob and David; ])nt 
neither of them had been allowed to make it known. ■* In view of "Midrash 

(inP.s. XXXI. 

this, it can scarcelv be rcii'arded as more than a svmbolical, thouii'h eii. warsii. 
siii-niticant u'uess, when the future redemption of Israel is expected i«toi.-, 
on the Paschal Day, the 15th of Nisan. " bottom 

(). We now ai)p)'oach tliis most difficult and delicate question: ed.'^Bubpi-, 
What was the expectation of the ancient Synagogue, as regarded lopiitr."" 
the ^Nature, Person, and qualitications of the Messiah? In answer- shn-.^"^'""" 
ing it — not at present from the Old Testament, but from the views l^s!"!!.^' 
exi>ressed in Kabbinic literature, and, so far as we can gather from ^i^'j'^'i.-7a^' 
the Uospel-narratives, from tliose cherisiied by the contemjioraries of 
dirist — two inferences seem evident. First, the idea of a Divine Per- 
sonality, and of the nnion of the two Natures in the Messiah, seems 
to have been foreign to the Jewish auditory of Jesus of Nazareth, 
and even at first to His discii)les. Secondly, they appear to have 
regarded the Messiah as far above the ordinary hnman, royal, pro- 
})hetic, and even Angelic type, to such extent, that the boundary-line 
separating it front Divine Personality is of the nai-rowest, so that, 
Avhen the conviction of the reality of the jVIessianic manifestation in 
Jesus burst on their minds, this boundary-line was easily, almost 
naturally, overstei)ped, and those who would have .shrunk Irom fram- 
ing their belief in such dogmatic form, readily owned and worshiiiped 
Him as the Son of God. Nor need we wonder at this, even taking 
the highest view of Old Testament i)rophecy. For here also the 
j)rinciple applies, which underlies one of St. Paul's most wide-reaching 
utterances: 'We prophesy in ])art'^ (f/c yufpofg- 7rpo^7/rfZ'o/<fF). ' ficor.xiii. 
In the nature of it, all projjhecy in'esents bnt (lisjccfo, nienibra, and 
it almost seems, as if we had to take our stand in the prophet's valley 
of vision (Ezek. xxxvii.), Avaiting till, at the bidding of the Lord, 

' See Ajipeiidix IX. We would add. that tliei'c i.-< always a 

- Solitary opinions, however, place (he 'hereafter' of t'urtiier devcloiJHient iu 

future redemption in the month Tishrl the history of tiie individual believer, as 

(Taneh. on Ex. xii. :!7, ed. Warsh. p. St in that of the Chureii— urowiui;' hri^iUer 

I), line 2 from bottom). and briiiliter, witii iiu-reased si)iritual 

' See the tellinii; renuirks of Oelilcr in eommunieation and kn()wled<;-e, till at 

I[erzo[/'s IJeal-Eneykl., vol. ix. p. 417. last the perfect ii,i;ht is reaeiu'd. 



» Ps. Ixxli. 
'' Ps. ex. 
« Ps. Ixxii. 
"» Is. ix. 6 2 

CHAP, tho soattorod l)()n('s should ]«' j.tiiicd into a l)ody, to which the l)r('ath 
Tl ot'lho spirit wouUl give life. 

■^^'' — ' Thcise two iiitbreiiccs, derived li-oiu the (jrospel-nai-ratives, are in 
exact accordance with the whole line of ancient Jewish teaching. 
Begiiniing with the LXX. rendering of Genesis xlix. 10, and esjje- 
cially of jS"unil)ers xxiv. T, IT, we gather, that the Kingdom of the 
Messiah^ was higher than any that is earthly, and destined to sulxhie 
them all. But the rendering of Psalm Ixxii. .5, T; Psalm ex. 3: and 
especially of Isaiah ix. , carries us much farther. They convey the idea, 
that the existence of this Messiah was regarded as prcMiiundane 
(l)efore the moon, "■ l)efore tlie morning-star''), and etei-nal, ' and Hi.s 
Person and dignity as superior to that of men and Angels: 'the 
Angel of the Great Council, ' ** probably 'the Angel of the Face' — a 
view fully contirmed by the rendering of the Targum.'* The silence 
of the Apocryi)ha about the Person of the Messiah is so strange, as 
to be scarcely explained ])\ the consideration, that those books were 
composed Avhen the need of a Messiah for the deliverance of Israel 
was not painfully felt.* All the more striking are the -allusions in 
the Pseudepigraphic Writings, although these also do not carry iis 
l)eyond our two inferences. Thus, the third book of the Sil\vlline Oracles 
— which, with lew exceptions, ^ dates from more than a century and 
a half before Christ — presents a picture of Messianic times,\2:enerally 
admitted to have formed tlie basis of Virgil's description of the Golden 
Age, and of similar lieathen expectations. In these Oracles. 170 
years before Christ, the Messiah is • the King sod from ]ie<iven ' wlio 

^■tt.285,286 Avould 'judgc cvcry nnm in blood and splendour of tire. " Similarly, 
the vision of Messianic times oi)ens with a reference to ' the King 

Bv. 652 Whom God will send from the sun.^^ That a sui)erhunian King- 

e W. 652-807 

I No reasonaljle iloubt can be left on 
tlie niiiid, that the LXX. translators 
have liere the Messiah in view. 

- Tlie criticism of Mr. Driunmond on 
these ttiree passages (.Jewish Messiali, 
\)\i. 2!K). 2!)1) cannot be supported on 
critical ;:;roands. 

•■• Tliree, if not fonr. different render- 
insis of the Targum on Is. ix. 6 are possi- 
ble. But the viinimnm conveyed to my 
mind implies the iiremundane existence, 
the eternal continuance, and the super- 
Imman dii^nity <if the Messiah. (.See also 
the Tariium on Micah v. 2.| 

^ This is the view of (irimm. and more 
fully carried out by Oehler. The ar2;u- 
ment of Heiiirstenberj;, that the mention 
of such a Messiah was restrained from 

fear > i the heatlien, does not deserve 
serious refutation. 

^ These exceptions are, according to 
Friedlii'b (Die Sibyllin. Weissag.) vv. 
l-to. vv. 47-!)(; (datin«i from 40-31 be- 
fore, an<l vv. sls-,s2S. On the 
subject ii-enerally, see our previous re- 
marks in Book I. 

« Mr. Drummond defends (at pp. 274, 
275) Holtzmann's view, that the expres- 
sion ajiplies to .'^ininn tlie Maecabee, 
althoui^h on ]>. 2!)] he ariiMies on the op- 
liosite supiiosition that the text refers to 
the Messiah. It is dirticnit to under- 
.staml. how on readiiiir the whole jiassaire- 
the hypothesis of Iloltzmann could Ite 
entertained. While referrinj; to the 3rd 
Book of the Sib. Or., another point of 





>> fh. i.- 
xxxvi. and 

(loiii of eternal duration, such a.s this vision j)aints,' sli(»ul(l liave a 
su{)erliunuin King, seems ahiiost a necessary corollary.' 

Even more distinct are the statements in the so-called ' Book of 
Enoch. ' Critics are substantially agreed, that the oldest part of it '' 
dates from between 150 and 130 b.c.^ The part next in date is full 
of Messianic allusions; but, as a certain class of modern writers has 
ascribed to it a post-Christian date, and, however ungrounded,^ to 
Christian authorship, it may be better not to refer to it in the present 
argument, the more so as we have other testimony from the time of 
Herod. Not to speak, therefore, of such peculiar designations of the 
Messiah as ' the Woman's Son,'" 'the Son of Man,"" 'the Elect,' and • ixu. 5 
' the Just One,' we mark that the Messiah is oxi)ressly designated in xu"^^"^ 
the oldest porticm as 'the S(ni of God' ('I and My Son').'' That 
this implies, not, indeed, essential Sonship, but infinite superiority over 
all other servants of Clod, and rule over them, appears from the 
mystic description of the Messiah as ' the first of the [now changed] 
Avhite bulls,' ' the great Animal among them, having great and black 

m. 2; 
Ixii. 7 ; Ixix. 

considerable interest deserves notice. 
According to tiie tiieory which places 
tlie autliorship of Daniel in the time of 
Antiochus Ei)iijhanes — or say abont 165 
B.C. — the ' fourth kingdom ' of Daniel 
iiHist be the Grecian. But, on tlie other 
hand, such certainly was iiof the view 
entertained by Apocalypts of the year 
l(i5, since the" 3d Book of the Sib. Or., 
w/iic/i dates from jn-ecisdy that period, 
not only takes notice of the rising power 
of Rome, but anticipates the destruction 
of the Grecian Emi)ire by Rome, which 
in turn is to be vaniiuished by Israel 
(vv. 175-195; 520-544; (i:58-S07). This 
most important fact would require to be 
accounted for by the opponents of the 
authenticity of Daniel. 

• I have purposely omitted all refer- 
ences to controverted passages. But see 
Jjungen, D. Judenth. in Palest. pi).401 &c. 

- The next oldest portion, consisting 
of the so-called Similitudes (ch. x.xxvii.- 
Ixxi.), excepting what are termed ' the 
Noachic^ parts, dates from about the 
time of Herod the (ireat. 

■' HcJiilrer (Lehrb. d. Neutest. Zeitg. 
|)p. 534, 535) has, I think, conclusively 
shown that this portion of the Book of 
F]noch is of Jewish authorship, and jire- 
Christian date. If so, it were deeply 
interesting to follow its account of the 
Messiah. He appears by the side of the 
Ancient of Days, His face like the ap- 

pearance of a man, and yet so lovely, 
like that of one of the lioly Angels. This 
' Son of Man ' has, and with Him dwells, 
all righteousness; He reveals the treas- 
ures of all that is liidden, being chosen by 
the Lord, is sui)erior to all, and destined 
to subdue and destroy all the powers and 
kingdoms of wickedness (cli. xlvi.). Al- 
though only revealed at the last. His 
Name had been named before God, be- 
fore sun or stars were created. He is 
the start' on which the righteous lean, the 
light of nations, and the hope of all who 
mourn in spirit. All are to bow down 
before Him, and adore Him, and for this 
He was chosen and liidden with God be- 
fore the world was created, and will con- 
tinue before Him for ever (ch. xlviii.). 
This ' Elect One ' is to sit on the throne 
of glory, and dwell among His saints. 
Heaven and earth would be removed, 
and only the saints would abide on the 
renewed earth (ch. xlv.). He is mighty 
in all the secrets of righteousiu^ss, and 
unrighteousness would tiee as a shadow, 
because His glory lasteil from eternity to 
eternity, and His power from generation 
to generation (ch. xiix.). Then would the 
earth. Hades, and hell give up their dead, 
and Messiah, sitting on His throne, would 
select and own the just, and open u)) all 
secrets of wisdom, amidst the universal 
joy of ransomed earth (cii. li., Ixi., Ixii.). 




I' in Pa. xi. 

'1 xviii. 
= xvii. 5 
fy. 23 
g V. 35 
i> V. 36 

t vv. 42, 43 
>" V. 47 

"Xil. 32; 
xiii. 26,52: 
xiv. 9 

honi.s oil 1 1 is licad " '' — Whom ' all the beasts of the field aud all the 
fowls of heaven dread, and to Whom they cry at all times.' 

Still more explicit is that beautiful collection of eighteen Psalms, 
dating from about lialf a century before Christ, which bears the name 
of 'the Psalter of Solomon.' A chaste antici})ation of the Messianic 
Kingdom '' is followed by a full description of its need and its bless- 
ings," to which the concluding Psalm ''forms an apt epilogue. The 
King Who reigns is of the house of David.'' He is the Son of David, 
Who comes at the time known to God only, to reign over Israel. "^ 
He is a righteous King, taught of God.^ He is Christ tlie Lord 
(XpicTTog Kvpio?:,^ exactly as in the LXX. translation ofLamentations 
iv. 20). ^ He is 2yure from si7i,' which, qualities Him for ruling His 
people, and banishing sinners by His word.' ' Never in His days will 
He be infirm towards His God, since God renders Him strong in the 
Holy Ghost,' wise in counsel, Avith might and righteousness (' mighty 
in deed and word '). The blessing of the Lord being upon Him, He 
does not fail." ' This is the beauty of the King of Israel, Whom God 
hath chosen, to set Him over the house of Israel to rule it.'" Thus 
invincible, not by outward might, but in His God, He will bring His 
people the blessings of restoration to their tribal possessions, and (jf 
righteousness, but break in pieces His enemies, not by outward weapons, 
but by the word of His mouth; purify Jerusalem, and judge the 
nations, who will be subject to His rule, and behold and own His gloj-y." 
Manifestly, this is not an earthly Kingdom, nor yet an earthly King. 

If we now turn to works dating after the Christian era, we would 
naturally expect them, either simply to reproduce earlier opinions, or, 
from opposition to Christ, to present the Messiah in a less exalted 
manner.^ But since, strange to say, they even more strongly assert 
the high dignity of the Messiah, we are warranted in regarding this 
as the rooted belief of the Synagogue.- This estimate of the Messiah 
may be gathered from IV Esdras,"'* with which the kindred picture of 

' In illustration of this tomleiicy we 
may (iu<jte the follo\vinf>-, evidently i)oleni- 
icai saying, of R. Abbahu. ' If any man 
saith to thee. "I am God," he is a liar; 
"I am the Son of Man," he will at last 
repent of it; " I .iro up to heaven," hath 
he said, and shall lie not do it?' [or, 
he hath said, and shall not make it 
f?ood] (.Jer. Taan. ]). C>:y fi. line 7 from 
bottom). This R. Alibalm (27<)-P.2() of 
our era) seems to have laricely engaii-ed 
in controversy with .Fewish Cliristians. 
Thus lie sonu^ht to arirue aii'ainst the 

Soiiship of Christ, 1)y ci>iniiieiitin,i>', as 
follows, on Is. xliv. (i: ' " I am the " 
— liecause He has no father; '•! am the 
last" — because He has no Son; '-and 
lieside me there is no God " — 
He has no brother (equal)' (Shem. R. 29, 
ed. Warsh. vol. ii. p. 41 a, line 8 from bot- 

-' It is. to say the least, a iiity that Mr. 
Drummond should have imatcined that 
the f|uestion could be so easily settled 
on the premises which he presents. 

■■' The 4tii IJuok of Esdrasfin our Ajiocr. 



the Messiah iind His reigii iu the Apocalypse of B;n-uch ' may l)(' 
eompared. But even in strictly Rabbinic documents, the prentunduni', 
if not the eternal existence of the Messiah appears as matter of com- 
mon belief. Such is the view expressed in the Targum on Is. ix. 0, 
and in that on Micah v. 2. But the Midrash on Prov. viii. 9 '' ex- 
pressly mentions the Messiah among the seven things created before 
the world.' The passage is the more important, as it throws light on 
quite a series of others, in which the Name of the Messiah is said to 
have been created before the world. '^ Even if this were an ideal 
conception, it would prove the Messiah to be elevated above the ordi- 
nary conditions of humanity. But it means much more than this, 
since not only the existence of the Messiah long before His actual 
appearance, but His p>-emi^w(Za/ie state are clearly taught in other 
places. In the Talmud '^ it is not only implied, that the Messiah may 
already be among the living, but a strange story is related, according 
to which He had actually been born in the royal palace at Bethlehem, 
bore the name Menachem (Comforter), was discovered by one R. Judan 
through a peculiar device, but had been carried away by a stoiMii, 
Similarly, the Babylon Talmud represents Him as sitting at the 
gate of Imperial Rome."' In general, the idea of the Messiah's 
appearance and concealment is familiar to Jewish tradition. '^ But 
the Rabbis go much farther back, and declare that from the time of 
Judah's marriage,^ ' God busied Himself with creating the light of 
the Messiah,' it being significantly added that, 'before the first op- 
pressor [Pharaoh] was born, the final deliverer [Messiah, the son of 
David] was already born."' In another passage the Messiah is ex- 
pressly identified with A nani, ' and therefore represented as pre-existent 
long before his actual manifestation." The same inference may be 
drawn from His emphatic designation as the First."" Lastly, in Yalkut 
on Is. Ix., the words 'In Thy light shall we see light' (Ps. xxxvi. 9) are 

II. Esdras) dates from the end of the tirst 
century of our era — aud so does tlie 
Apocalypse of Baruch. 

1 These are: the Throne of Glory, 
Messiah the King, the Torah, (ideal) 
Israel, the Temple, repentance, and 

■^ In Pirqe de R. El. and the other 
authorities these seven things are: the 
Torah, Gehenna, Paradise, the Throne 
of Glory, the Temple, repentance, and 
the Name of the Messiah. 

3 In Ber. R. six things are mentioned: 
two actually created (the Torah and 
the Throne of Glory), and four which 

came into His Mind to create them (the 
Fathers, Israel, the Temple, and the 
Name of the Messiah). 

* In Tanch. seven things are enumer- 
ated (the six as in Ber. R., with the 
addition of repentance), ' aud some say: 
also Paradise aud Gehenna.' 

^ In that passage the time of Messiah's 
concealment is calculated at forty-li\(' 
days, from a comparison of Dan. xii. 1 1 
with V. 12. 

^ The comment on this passage is 
curiously mystical, but clearly imi^lies 
not only the pre-existence, but the super- 
human character of the Messiah. 


" ixx. y- 


I'Ed. LBinb. 
p. la 

'■ Pirqe de 
n. E. 3: 
xcUi. 1 : P.S. 
39 h ; Ber. 
E. 1: 

Tanch. on 
Nuiiib. vli. 
U, ed. 
vol. ii. p. 
56 t), at the 

<> Jer. Ber. 
ii. 4, p. 5 a 

■■Sanh. 98 a; 
conii". al.s() 
Targ. ou 
Ex. xii. 42; 
Pirqe de E. 
El. 30, and 
other pas- 

f See for 
Buber, p. 
49 6 i 

xxxviii. 1, 2 

!> Ber. R. 85, 
ed. Warsh. 
p. 151 b 

iu 1 Chr.iii. 

24 « 

'' Tanch. 

To edoth, 
14. ed. 
Warsh. p. 
37 6 

m Ber. R. 63, 
ed. Warsh. 
p. 114 '): 
B. 30, ed. 
W. vol. ill. 
p. 47 a; 
Pes. 3 a 




Yalkut ii. 

ed.W. vol. 
ii. p. n li : 
Tan I -li. Par. 
Tazrva, 8, 
ed.W. vol. 
ii. p. £0 a 

•^ Peslqta, 
ed. Buber, 
p. 49 '/ ; 

Ruth, Par.-), 
ed.W. p. 
43 // 

'I Sanh. 98 (! 

' Plrqe de 
R. El. 31, 
ed. Lemb. 
p. 38 a 

<■ Plrqe de 
K. El. u. s.. 
p. 39 a, 
f Beiiiid. 
R. IS, close 
of tbcPar. 
•• Ps. Ixxii. 

i According 
to the last 
clause of 
.Joel iii. 18 
(Midr. on 
Eccles. i. 9, 
ed. Warsh, 
vol. iv. 
p. 80 //I 

c.xpliiiiu'd as iiicauiiiii-, that this is the light of the Messiah, — the same 
which (iod had at the lirst pronounced to be very good, and whieli, 
Ijelore the world was created, He had hid beneath the throne of His 
glory for the Messiah and His age. When Satan asked for whom it 
was reserved, he was told that it was destined for Him Who would 
})ut him to shame, and destroy him. And when, at his request, he 
was shown the Messiah, he fell on his face and owned, that the 
Messiah would in the future cast him and the Gentiles into Gehenna.'* 
Whatever else may be inferred from it, this passage clearly implies not 
only the pre-existence, but the premundane existence of the Messiah.' 
But, indeed, it carries us much farther. For, a Messiah, pre- 
existent, in the I'resence of God, and destined to subdue Satan and 
cast him into hell, could not have been regarded as an ordinary man. 
It is indeed true that, as the history of Elijah, so that of the Messiah 
is throughout compared with that of Moses, the ' first ' with ' the last 
Redeemer.' As Moses was educated at the court of Pharaoh, so the 
Messiah dwells in Rome (or PJdom) among His enemies.'' Like Moses 
He comes, withdraws, and comes again." Like Moses He works 
deliverance. But here the analogy ceases, for, whereas the redemption 
by Moses was temporary and comparatively small, that of the Messiah 
would be eternal and absolute. All the marvels connected with 
Moses were to be intensified in the Messiah. The ass on which the 
Messiah would ride — and this humble estate was only caused by 
Israel's sin'^ — would be not only that on which Moses had come back 
to Egypt, but also that which Abraham had used when he went to 
offer up Isaac, and which had l)een specially created on the eve of the 
world's first Sabbath." Similarly, the horns of the ram caught in the 
thicket, which was offered instead of Isaac, were destined for blowing 
— the left one by the Almighty on Mount Sinai, the right and larger 
one by the Messiah, when He would gather the outcasts of Israel (Is. 
xxvii. 13).' Again, the 'rod' of the Messiah was that of Aaron, 
which had budded, ))lossomed, and burst into fruit; as also that on 
which Jacob had leaned, and w^hich, through Judah, had passed to all 
the kings of Israel, till the destruction of the Temple.*^ And so the 
principle that '■ the later Deliverer would l)o like the first ' was carried 
into every detail. As the first Deliverer brought doivn the Manna, so 
the Messiah ; ^ as the first Deliverer had made a spring of water to 
rise, so ivould the second.' 

' The whole of tlii.s very remarkable passage is given in Ajjpendix IX., in the 
notes on Is. x.w. 8; l.\. 1 ; l.xiv. 4; .Ter. .xxxi. 8. 


But evoii this is not all. Tlvdt the Messiah had, without any CIIAI'. 
instruction, attained to knowledge ol" God; ■' and that He had received, V 

dire(!tly from Ilini, all wisdom, knowledge, counsel, and grace,'' is "-^ — ' 

comparatively little, since the same was claimed for Al)raham, Job, ^^®^g^- 

and Hezekiah. But we ai-e told that, when God showed Moses all warah. 

■ p. 5o a 

his successors, the spirit of wisdom and knowledge in the Messiali 'Bemid. r. 
equalled that of all tlie others together.' The Messiah would be ' ,, . 

1 '^ '-■ \alkut on 

'greater tlian the Patriai'chs,' higher than Moses,' and even loftier ^""i>,,. 
than the ministering Angels:^ In view of this we can understand, ^^^'-J- 1'- 
how the Midrash on Psalm xxi. 3 should apply to the Messiah, in all ■iTancn.. 

Par Xol6- 

its literality, that 'God would set His own crown on His head,' and dottiu 
clothe Him with His 'honour and majesty.' It is onh^ consistent that 
the same Midrash should assign to the Messiah the Divine designations: 
%I(!liovali is a Man of War,' and 'Jehovah our Righteousness.'" Tehfii'ed 
One other quotation, from perhai)s the most spiritual Jewish ^^^^f^- 
commentary, must be added, reminding us of that outburst of 
adoring wonder which once greeted Jesus of Nazareth. The pas- 
sage first refers to the seven garments with v^^hich God successively 
robed Himself — the first of 'honour and glory,' at creation; "^ the fps. civ. i 
second of 'nmjesty,' at the Red Sea; ° the third of 'strength,' at pps. xcui. i 
the giving (jf the Law;'' the fourth 'white,' when He blotteth out ^ps. xcui. i 
the sins of Israel;' the fifth of 'zeal,' when He avengetli them of iDan. vu. 9 
their enemies;" the sixth of 'righteousness,' at the time when the ms. ux. it 
Messiah should be revealed; '" and the seventh ' red,' when He would »■!«. ux. \i 
take vengeance on Edom (Rome). " ' But,' continues the commentarj', "is. ixm. 
' the garment with which in the future He will clothe the Messiah, 
its splendour will extend from one end of the world to the other, as 
it is written: " ' 'As a bridegroom priestly in headgear. " And Israel are •> is. ixi. lo 
astounded at His light, and say: Blessed the hour in which the Messiah 
was created; blessed the womb whence He issued; blessed the genera- 
tion that sees Him; blessed the eye that is worthy to behold Him; be- 
cause the opening of His lips is blessing and peace, and His speech quiet- 
ing of the spirit. Glory and majesty are in His appearance (vesture), 
and confidence and tranquillity in His words; and on His tongue 
compassion and forgiveness; His prayer is a sweet-smelling odour, 
and His supplication holiness and purity. Happy Israel, what is 
reserved for vou! Thus it is written:'' "How manifold is Thy pPs. xxxi. 


goodness, which Thou hast reserved to them that fear Tliee." ' '^ Such , pesiqta. 
a King Messiah might well be represented as sitting at the Right pp. ^^s^ a^'/- 

' This is tiu! more iiotevvorthy as, ac- so ,2;reat as Moses, who was only inferior 
cording to SoUih 9 b, none in Israel was to the Aimi2;hty. 




•' Midr. on 
Ps. xviii.iiG, 
ed. War.Hli. 
p. 27 (/ 

* Midr. on 
p. W b 

« Ber. R. 2:i, 
ed Warsh. 
p. 45 h 

•> Gen. xix. 

'• Ber. R. 51 
ed. Warah. 
p. 9.5 a 

fBer. R. 2; 

and 8; 
R. U. ed. 
Warsh. vol. 
Hi. I), il '' 

? Midr. on 
i. 16, ed 
p. 64 fl, last 
line comp. 
p. 14K a : * 
Midr. on 
Ps.xxi. and 
the very 
sions in a 
versy with 
a Christian 
recorded in 
Sanh. a8 b 

Hand of (t(xI, while Al)raliain was oiil^ at His left:" nay, as throw- 
ing forth His Right Hand, while God stood up to war for Him." 

It is not without hesitation, that we make reference to Jewish 
alhisions to the miraculous birth of the Saviour. Yet there are two 
expressions, which convey the idea, if not of superhuman origin, yet 
of some great mystery attaching to His birth. The first occurs in 
connection with the birth of Seth. ' Rabbi Tanchuma said, in the 
name of Rabbi Samuel: I^vc had respect [had regard, looked for- 
ward] to that Seed which is to come from another place. And who 
is this? This is Messiah the King.'" The second appears in the 
narrative of the crime of Lot's daughters:'^ 'It is not written, ''that 
wx may preserve a son from our father," but "seed from our father."' 
This is that seed which is coming from another place. And who is 
this? This is the King Messiah.'^' 

That a superhuman character attached, if not to the Personality, 
yet to the Mission of the Messiah, appears from three passages, in 
which the, expression, ' The Spirit of the Lord moved upon the face 
of the deep,' is thus paraphrased: ' This is the Spirit of the King 
Messiah. "^'^ Whether this implies some activity of the Messiah in 
connection with creation,* or only that, from the first. His Mission 
was to have a bearing on all creation, it elevates His character and 
work above every other agency, human or Angelic. And, without 
pressing the argument, it is at least very remarkable that even the 
Ineffable Name JehovaJi is expressly attributed to the Messiah. « The 

1 I am, of course, aware that certain 
Rabbinists explain tlie expression ' Seed 
from another place,' as referrinfi to the 
descent of the Messiah from Ruth — a 
non-Israelite. But if this explanation 
could be offered in reference to the 
daughters of Lot, it is difficult to see its 
meaning in reference to Eve and the 
birth of Seth. The connection there with 
the words (Gen. iv. 25), 'God hath ap- 
pointed me another Seed,' would be the 
very loosest. 

'^ I am surprised, tliat CastelU (u. s. 
I). 207) should have contended, that the 
reading in Ber. R. 8 and Vay. R. 14 
should be ' the Spirit of Adam.' For (1) 
the attempted correction gives neitlier 
sense, nor proper meaning. (2) The 
passage Ber. R. 1 is not impugned; yet 
that passage is tiie basis of the otiier 
two. (3) Ber. R. 8 must read, 'The 
Spirit of God moved on the deej) — that 
is, the Si)irit of Messiah the King,' because 
the proof-passage is immediately added. 

'and the spirit of the Lord shall rest 
upon Him,' whicli is a Messianic passage; 
and because, only two lines before the 
impugned passage, we are told, that Gen. 
i. 2(i, Lst clause, refers to the 'spirit of the 
first man.' The latter remark applies 
also to Vayyikra R. 14, where the context 
equally forljids the proposed correction. 

•' It would be very interesting to com- 
l)are with this the statements of Philo as 
to the agency of ihe Logos in Creation. 
The subject is very well treated by Biehm 
(Lehrbegr. d. Hebr. Br. pp. 414-420). 
althougli I cannot agree w-ith all his con- 

* The whole of this passage, beginning 
at p. 147 h, is very curious and deeply in- 
teresting. It would lead too far to quote 
it, or other parallel passages which miglit 
be adduced. Tlie passage in the Midrasli 
on Lament, i. l(i is also extremely inter- 
esting. After tlie statement quoted in 
the text, there follows a discussion on 
the names of the Messiah, and then the 

I'RKI'AliKDNEHS FOi; ()\VNiN(; IIIM AS Till-: SON OF (lOD. 179 

fact bocuiiies the more sigiiiticaiit, when we recall thai one of the CHAP, 
most familiar names of the Mesf^iah was Anani — He Who cometh in V 

the clouds of heaven." ^ — -<- — 

In what has been stated, no reference has been made to the tinal ' 
conquests of Messiah, to His reign with all its wondei's, or to the 
subdual of all nations — in short, to what are commonly called 'the 
last things.' This will be treated in another connection. Nor is it 
contended that, whatever individuals may have expected, the Syna- 
gogue taught the doctrine of the Divine I'ersonality of the Messiah, 
as held by the Christian Church. On the other hand, the cumulative 
evidence just presented must leave on the mind at least this con- 
viction, that the Messiah expected was far above the conditions of the 
most exalted of God's servants, even His Angels; in short, so closely 
bordering on the Divine, that it was almost impossible to distinguish 
Him therefrom. In such circumstances, it only needed the personal 
conviction, that He, Who taught and wrought as none other, was 
really the Messiah, to kindle at His word into the adoring confession, 
that He was indeed 'the Son of the Living God.' And once that 
point reached, the mind, looking back through the teaching of the 
Synagogue, would, with increasing clearness, perceive that, however 
ill-understood in the past, this had been all along the sum of the 
whole Old Testament. Thus, we can understand alike the prepared- 
ness for, and yet the gradualness of conviction on this point; then, 
the increasing clearness with which it emerged in the consciousness 
of the disciples; and, finally, the unhesitating distinctness with which 
it was put forward in Ajiostolic teaching as the fundamental article 
of belief to the Church Catholic' 

curious story about tlie ^les^iah havuii;; tinal conchision, that tbe Messiah was 

already been born in Bothlelieni. truly the Son of God, while it has been 

1 It will be noticed, that the cuniula- our purpose simi)ly to state, what wis 

tive argument presented in the foreiiMiinn" the exjjectation of the (indent Si/iiii- 

pages follows closely tluit in the first gogne, not what it should have been ac- 

chapter of the lilpistle to tlie Hebrews; cording to the Old Testameut. 
only, that the latter carries it up to its 



(St. Matthew i. 25; St. Luke ii. 1-20.) 

BOOK Such then was ' the hope of the promise made of God unto the fathers,' 
II for which the twelve tribes, 'instantly serving- ((iod) night and day,' 

-— r ' longed — with such vividness, that they read it in almost every event 

and promise; with such earnestness, that it ever was the burden of their 
prayers; with such intensity, that nmny and long centuries of disap- 
pointment have not quenchetl it. Its light, comparatively dim in days 
of sunshine and calm, seemed to burn Indghtest in the dark and h)U('ly 
nights of suffering, as if each gust that swept over Israel only kindled 
it into fresh flame. 

To the (juestion, whether this hoi)c has ever been realised — or 
rather, whether One has appeared Whose claims to the Messiahship 
have stood the test of investigation and of time — impartial history 
can make only one answer. It points to Bethlehem and to Nazareth. 
If the claims of Jesus have been rejected by the Jewish Nation, He 
has at least, undoubtedly, fulfilled one partofthe Mission prophetically 
assigned to the Messiah. Whether or not He l)e the Lion of the 
tribe of Judah, to Him, assuredly, has 1)een the gathering of the 
nations, and the isles have waited for His law. Passing the narrow 
bounds of obscure Judasa, and breaking down the walls of national 
prejudice and isolation, He has made the sublimer teaching of the 
Old Testament the common j^ossession of the world, and founded a 
great Brotherhood, of which tlie God of Israel is the Father. He 
alone also has exhibited a life, in which absolutely no fault could be 
found; and promulgated a teaching, to which absolutely no exception 
can be taken. Admittedly, He was the One 'perfect Man — the ideal 
of humanity. His doctrine the one absolute teaching. The world 
has known none other, none equal. And the world has owned it, if 
not by the testimony of words, yet by the evidence of facts. Spring- 
ing from such a people; born, living, and dying in circumstances, and 
using means, the most unlikely of such residts — the Man of Nazareth 



lias, 1)} uuiver.sal coiisout, been the mightiest Factor in oui' world's CHAI'. 
history: alike politically, socially, intellectually, and morally. If VI 
He be not the Messiah, He has at least thus far done the Messiah's ^^ — r — 
work. If He be not the Messiah, there has at least ])een none other, 
before or after Him. If He be not the Messiah, the woi-ld has not, 
and never can have, a Messiah. 

To Bethlehem as the birthplace of Messiah, not only Old Testa- 
ment prediction,'' but the testimony of Rabbinic teaching-, unhesi- "Micauv. 2 
tatingly pointed. Yet nothing could be imagined more directly contrary 
to Jewisli thoughts and feelings — and hence nothing less likely to 
suggest itself to Jewish invention' — than the circumstances which, 
according to the Gospel-narrative, brought about the birth of the 
Messiah in Bethlehem. A counting of the people, or Census; and 
that Census taken at the bidding of a heathen Emi)eror, and 
executed by one so universally hated as Herod, wouhl represent the /«e 
plus ultra of all that was most repugnant to Jewish feeling. ' It the 
account of the circumstances, which brought Joseph and Mary to 
Bethlehem, has no basis in fact, but is a legend invented to locate 
the birth of the Nazarene in the royal City of David, it must be 
pronounced most clumsily devised. There is absolutely nothing to 
account for its origination — either from parallel events in the past, or 
from contemporary expectancy. Why then connect the birth of 
their Messiah with what was most repugnant to Israel, especially if, 
as the advocates of the legendary hypothesis contend, it did not 
occur at a time when any Jewish Census was taken, but ten years 

But if it be impossible rationally to account for any legendary 
origin of the narrative of Josei)h and Mary's journey to Bethlehem, 
the historical grounds, on which its accuracy has been impugned, are 
equally insufficient. They resolve themselves into this: that (beyond 
the Gospel-narrative) we have no solid evidence that Cyrenius was at 
that time occupying the needful official position in the East, to order 
such a registration for Herod to carry out. But even this feeble con- 
tention is by no means historically unassailable. ^ At any rate, there 

' The advocates of the mythical theory l)eii Jesu i. 2, p. 393) ; but all the more 
hav(i not answered, not even faced or comjilicated and inexplicable is the ori,i!;i- 
iuid(U'stood, what to us seems, on their nation of the leu'cnd, wliich accounts for 
hypothesis, an insuperable difficulty, the journey thitlier of Mary and Joseph, 
(irantina;, that Jewish expectancy would '■' In evidence of these feelin,<''s, we 
suffsest tlie birth of Jesus at Bethleliem. have the account of ,Josep/ii/s of the con- 
why invent such circumstances to tuing sequences of the taxation of Cyrenius 
Mary to Bethlehem? Keiit/ maylK' rift-ht (Ant. xviii. 1. 1. Couip. Acts v. 37). 
in saying: 'The belief in the birth at -^ The arguments on what may be called 
l?(^thlehem originated very simply (Le- the ortliodox side have, from difierent 





"Com p. 
Acts V. 37 

are two facts, which render any lii.^torical mistake by 8t. Luke on 
this point extremely difficnlt to believe. First, he was evidently 
aware of a Census under Cyrenius, ten years later;" secondly, what- 
ever rendering of St. Luke ii. 2 may be adopted, it will at least be 
admitted, that the intercalated sentence about Cyrenius was not 
necessary for the narrative, and that the writer must have intended 
thereby emphatically to mark a certain event. But an author would 
not be likely to call special attention to a fact, of which he had only 
indistinct knowledge; rather, if it must be mentioned, would he do 
so in the most indefinite terms. This presumption in favour of St. 
Luke's statement is strengthened by the consideration, that such an 
event as the taxing of Judaea must have been so easily ascertainable 
by him. 

We are, however, not left to the presumptive reasoning just set 
forth. That the Emperor Augustus made registers of the Roman 
Em])ire, and of sulyect and tributary states, is now generally ad- 
mitted. This registration — for the purpose of future taxation-; — 
would also embrace Palestine. Even if no actual order to that elTect 
had been issued during the lifetime of Herod, we can understand that 
he would deem it most expedient, both on account of his relations to 
the Emperor, and in view of the probable excitement which a heathen 
Census would cause in Palestine, to take steps for making a registra- 
tion, and that rather according to the Jewish than the Roman manner. 
This Census, then, arranged by Augustus, and taken by Herod in his 
own manner, was, according to St. Luke, ' first [really] carried out 
when Cyrenius was Governor of Syria,' some years after Herod's death 
and when Judaea had become a Roman province. ^ 

We are now prepared to follow the course of the Gospel-narrative. 
In consequence of 'the decree of Caesar Augustus,' Herod directed a 
general registration to be made after the Jewish, rather than the 
Roman, nmnner. Practically the two would, indeed, in this instance, 
be very similar. According to the Roman law, all country-people 
were to be registered in their ' own city ' — meaning thereby the town 
to which the village or place, where they were born, was attached. In 

])oints of view, been so often and well 
stated — latterly by Wieseler, Huschke, 
Zumpt, and Steinmeyer — and on tlie 
other side almost ad nauseam by ne.ijati ve 
critics of every school, that it seems un- 
necessary to CO asain over them. The 
reader will find the whole subject stated 
by Canon ('<>()k. whose views we sub- 
stantially adopt, in the 'Sjteaker's Com- 

mentary' (N.T. i. pp. 326-329). The 
reasoninfi of Mommsen (Res gestae D. 
Aug. pp. 17.5, 176) does not seem to me 
to affect the view taken in the text. 

1 For the textual explanation we again 
refer to Canon Cook, only we would 
mark, with Steinmeyer, that the meaning 
of the exi)re,ssior> kyEvEvo, in St. Luke 
ii. 2. is determined bv the similar use of 


SO doing, the 'house and lineage ' (the tiomen and cognomen) ofeaeh chap. 
were marked.' According to the Jewish mode of registration, the vi 

people would have been enrolled according to tribes (r\''::'z),famUiefi or ^~ — < 

clans (mnSw"::), and the Iio/isc of their fathers fniZN' n*2j. But as ' 
the ten tribes had not I'cturnod to Palestine, this could only take 
place to a very limited extent,-' while it would be easy for each to be 
registered in ' his own city.'- In the case of Jose})!! and Mary, vvliose 
descent from David was not only known, but where, for the sake of 
the unborn Messiah, it was most important that this should be distinctly 
noted, it was natural that, in accordance with Jewish law, they 
should have gone to Bethlehem. rerhajjs also, for many reasons 
which will readily suggest themselves, Joseph and Mary might be 
glad to leave Nazareth, and seek, ifp()ssil)le, a home in Bethlehem. 
Indeed, so strong was this feeling, that it afterwards recjuired special 
Divine direction to induce Joseph to relinquish this chosen place of 
residence, and to return into Galilee. '' In these circumstances, Marv, ^st. Matt. 

. . . . ' ■ 11. 22 

now the 'wife' of Joseph, though standing to him only m the actual 
relationship of ' betrothed,"' would, of course, accompany her husband ^st. Luke 
to Bethlehem. Irrespective of this, every feeling and hope in her 
must have prompted such a course, and there is no need to discuss 
whether llonian or Jewish 'Census-usage required her presence — a 
question which, if put, would have to be answered in the negative. 

The short winter's day was probably closing in,^ as the two travel- 
lers from Nazai'cth, liringing with them the few necessaries of a 
poor Eastern household, nearcd their journey's end. If we think of 
Jesus as the Messiah from heaven, the surroundings of outward 
poverty, so far from detracting, seem most congruous to His Divine 
character. Earthly splendor would here seem like tawdry tinsel, 
and the utmost simplicity like that clothing of the lilies, which far 
suri)assed all the glory of Solomon's court. But only in the East 
would the most absolute sinqilicity l)e possible, and yet neither it, 
nor the poverty from which it sprang, necessarily imi)ly even the 
slightest taint of social inferiority. The way had been long and 

it. in Acts xi. 28, where what was pre- ' eiiie Sache der Uniiionlichkeit.' 

tlictedissaidtoiiaveactually taken place ■* Tiiis, ol course, is only a conjtjclure; 

(iT'eVero) atthe time of CUuidius Ca'sar. but I call it • probalilc,' partly because 

' Comp. IIitsr//k(', Ueber d. z. Zeit d. one would naturally so arrauiic a. journey 

C{eb. .T. C. fjehalt. Census pp. 119, 120. of several days, to nudve its sta,i;es as 

Most critics have written very confusedly slow and easy as possible, and i)artly 

on this point. from the circumstance, that, on their ar- 

- The reader will now be able to ap- rival, they found the khan full, which 

predate the value of Keiin's objections would scarcely have been the case had 

ajjainst such a Census, as involving; a they reached Bethlehem early in the 

' wahre Volkswanderung ' (!), and being day. 


HOOK weary — at the very least, three days' journoy, whatever route had been 
II taken Iroiii Galih^e. Most i)r(^l)ahly it woidd be that so eoniiuonly 

'^ — . followed, Iroiii a desire to avoid Samaria, aloii.u' the eastern l)anks 

of the Jordan, and l)y the fords of Jericho.' Althou,n-h passing 
through one of the warmest parts of the country, the season of the 
year must, even in most favorable eireumstanees, have greatly 
increased tlie ditticulties of such a journey. A sense of rest and 
peace must, almost unconsciously, have crept over the travellers when 
at last they reached the rich tields that surrounded the ancient 
'House of Bread," and, i)assing through the valley which, like an 
amphitheatre, sweeps up to the twain heights along which Bethlehem 
stretches (2,704 feet a])()ve the sea), ascended through the terraced 
vineyards and gai-dens. Winter tliough it was, the green and silvei-y 
foliage of the olive might, even at that season, mingle with the pale 
pink of the almond — nature's ' early waker ' ^ — and with the darker 
coloring of the ojjening peach-buds. The chaste beauty and sweet 
quiet of the place would I'ccall memories of Boaz, of Jesse, and of 
David. All the more would such thoughts suggest themselves, from 
the contrast between the past and the present. For, as the travellers 
reached the heights of Bethlehem, and, indeed, long before, the 
most prominent object in view must have been the great castle which 
Herod had l)uilt, and called after his own name. Perched on the 
highest hill south-east of Bethlehem, it was, at the same time 

"^bs. Ant. magnificent palace, strongest fortress, and almost 'courtier-city. =■ 

xiv. 13. 9; .'^ . 

XV. 9. 4; With a sense of relief the travellers would turn from this, to 

War 1 13 

3; 21, io mark the undulating outlines of the highland wilderness of Judaea, 
till the horizon was bounded by the mountain-ridges of Tekoa. 
Through the break of the hills eastward the heavy UKjlten surface 
of the Sea of Judgment would ai)pear in view; westward wound 
the road to Hebron; behind them lay the valleys and hills which 
separated Bethlehem from Jerusalem, and concealed the Holy City. 

But for the present such thoughts would give way to the pressing 
necessity of finding shelter and rest. The little town of Bethlehem 
was crowded with those who had come from all the outlying district 
to register their names. Even if the strangers from ftir-off Galilee 
had been personally acquainted with any one in Bethlehem, who 
could have shown them hospitality, they would have found every 

' Comj). the account of the roads, inns, - The almond is called, in Hebrew, 

<tc. in the 'History of tiie.Jewisli Nation,' -;->'2;, 'the waker,' from the word 'to 
p. 275; and the cha])ter on Travellinic , i > t* • •♦ -i i +i, * 

in Palestine,' in 'Sketches of ^^« ^^'ff/ ^^ !' quite possible, that 
Social Life in the Davs of' '"''^Y "^ the earliest spnnir .flowers al- 

ready made tlie landscape briijht. 

St.Luke i. 


house fully occupied. The very inn was tilled, and the only availahlc ciiap. 
space was, where ordinarily the cattle were stabled.' Bearing in tnind vi 

the simple habits of the East, this scarcely implies, what it would — • ' 

in the West; and perhaps the seclusion and privacy from the noisy, 
chattci'inii: crowd, which thronged the khan, would l)e all the more 
welcome. Scanty as these particulars are, even thus much is 
gathered ratlier by inference than from the narrative itself. Thus 
early in this history does the absence of details, which painfully 
increases as we proceed, remind us, that the Gospels were not 
intended to furnish a biography of Jesus, nor even the materials for 
it; but had only this twofold object: that those who read them 
' might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God,' and that 
believing they 'might have life through His Name.''' The Christian "St. John 
heart and imagination, indeed, long to be able to localise the scene of comp." 
such surpassing importance, and linger with fond reverence over that 
Cave, which is now covered by Hhe Church of the Nativity.' It may 
be — nay, it seems likely — that this, to which the most venerable 
tradition points, was the sacred spot of the world's greatest event.* 
Butcertainty we have not. It is better, that it should be so. As to 
all that passed in the seclusion of that 'stable' — the circumstances 
of the 'Nativity,' even its exact time after the arrival of Mary (brief 
as it must'have been) — the Gospel-narrative is silent. This only is 
told, that then and there the Virgin-Mother ' brought forth her first- 
born Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a 
manger. ' Beyond this announcement of the bare fact, Holy Scripture, 
with indescribable appropriateness and delicacy, draws a veil over 
that most sacred mystery. Two impressions only are left on the 
mind: that of utmost earthly humility, in the surrounding circum- 

' Dr. (ietkie indeed 'feels sure' tliat term occurs in Aniuiaic form, in tJab- 

the KaraXvua wtis not an inn, but a binic writings, as n*"i"« or '':i-r=('rj-' 
guest-chamber, because the word is used ' ** • ' '■ ~ 

in that sense in St. Mark xiv. U, Lulce xxii. KoczaXvfia, an inn. Dditzsch, in his He- 

11. But this inference is critically un- brew N.T., uses the more common «V?):- 

tenable. The Greek word is of very wide Bazaars and markets were also held in 

application, and means (as Schleusner those hostelries; animals killed, and meat 

puts it) 'omnis locus quieti aptus.' In the sold there; also wine and cider; so that 

LXX. K-crrd/lt;//(nr is theeciuivaleut of not they were a much more public place of 

less than ./7?v Hebrew words, whicii have resort than might at first be imagined, 

widely difterent meanings. In the LXX. Comp. Herzfehl. Handelsgesch. \). :525. 
rendering of Ex. iv. 2i it is used for the - Perhaps the best anlheiiticated of all 

Hebrew "-j^j, which certainly cannot local traditions is that whicl) fixes on this 

mean a guest-chamber, but an inn. No c>ive "s tiu> i)!ace of the Nativity The 

one could imagine that, if private hospi- evidence in its favour is well given l)y Dr. 

tality had been extended to tiie Yirnin- Varmr in his • Lite of Ciirist. Dean 

Mother, she would hav(> lieen left in such Stanley, however, and others, have ques- 

circumstances in a stable. The same tioned it, 



BOOK stances; and that of iii\\ar(l rttness, in the contrast suggested by 
II them. Instinctively, re\'ercntly, we feel that it is well it should have 

^— ^,^-' been so. It best befits the birth of the Christ — if He be what the 
New Testament declares Him. 

On the other hand, the circumstances just noted afford the 
strongest indirect evidence of the truth of this narrative. For, if it 
were the outcome of Jewish imagination, where is the basis for it in 
contemporary expectation ? Would Jewish legend have ever presented 
its Messiah as born in a stable, to which chance circumstances had 
consigned His Mother ? The Avhole current of Jewish opinion would 
run in the contrary direction. The opponents of the authenticity of 
this narrative are bound to face this. Further, it may safely be 
asserted, that no Apocryphal or legendary narrative of such a 
(legendary) event would have been characterised by such scantiness, 
or rather absence, of details. F(jr, the two essential features, alike 
of legend and of tradition, are, that they ever seek to surround their 
heroes with a halo of glory, and that they attempt to supply details, 
which are otherwise wanting. And in both these respects a more 
sharply-marked contrast could scarcely be presented, than in the 

But as we pass from the sacred gloom of the cave out into the 
night, its sky all aglow with starry brightness, its loneliness is 
peopled, and its silence made vocal from heaven. There is nothing 
now to conceal, but much to reveal, though the manner of it would 
seem strangely incongruous to Jewish thinking. And yet Jewish 
tradition may here prove both illustrative and helpful. That the 
Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem,^ was a settled conviction. 
Equally so was the belief, that He was to be revealed from Migdal 

^ Targum Ecler, ' the tower of the flock. ' " This Migdal Eder was 7iot the watch- 

Pseudo- ' •111. 

jon.onGen. towcr for the Ordinary flocks which pastured on the barren sheep- 
ground beyond Bethlehem, but lay close to the town, on the road to 

bshek. vii. Jerusalem. A passage in the Mishnah '' leads to the conclusion, that 
the flocks, which pastured there, were destined for Temple-sacrifices,^ 
and, accordingly, that the shepherds, who watched over them, were 

1 In the curious story of Ilis l)ii'tli, re- 
lated hi the .Jer. Talmud (Bit. ii. ?>). He 
is said to iiave been born in ' the royiii 
castle of Bethlehem;' while in the paral- 
lel narrative in the Midr. on Lament, i. 
16, ed. W. p. 64 b) the somewhat myste- 
rious expression is us(h1 j^;^-," .n**^^- 
But we keep in view the Ifabbinic 
statement that, even if a castle falls 

down, it is still called a castle (Valkut, 
vol. ii. p. (iO A). 

- In fact the Mishnah (Baba K. vii. 7) 
expressly forbids the keopins: of flocks 
throu<i'hont the land of Israel, excei>t in 
the wildernesses — and the only flocks 
otherwise kept, would be those for the 
Temple-services (Baba K. 80 a). 



not ordinary shepherds. The latter were under the ban of Ral)l)inism, ' 
on account of their necessary isohition from religious ordinances, and 
their manner of life, which rcndei-ed strict legal ol)servance unlikely, 
if not absolutely impossible. The same Mishnic passage also leads us 
to infer, that these flocks lay out all the year rou ml, since they are spoken 
of as in the fields thirty days before the l'ass(jver — that is, in the month 
of February, when in Palestine the average rainfall is nearly greatest.* 
Thus, Jewish tradition in some dim manner aj^prehended the first 
revelation of the Messiah from that 3Iigdal E(lei\ where shepherds 
watched the Temple-flocks all the year round. Of the deep symbolic 
significance of such a coincidence, it is needless to speak. 

It was, then, on that 'wintry night' of the 25th of December,* 
that shepherds watched the flocks destined for sacrificial services, in 
the very place consecrated by tradition as that where the Messiah was 
to be first revealed. Of a sadden came the long-delayed, unthought- 
of announcement. Heaven and earth seemed to mingle, as suddenly 
an Angel stood before their dazzled eyes, while the outstreaming 
glory of the Lord seemed to enwrap them, as in a mantle of light.* 


1 This disposes of an inaiit (luotation 
(from Delitzscli) by Dr. Geikie. No one 
could inia,i!,iiie, that the Tulmudic pas- 
sages in (juestiun could apply to such 
shepherds as these. 

■^ The mean of 22 seasons in .Jerusalem 
amounted to 4-718 inches in December, 
5-479 in January, and 5-207 in February 
(see a very interesting paper by Dr. 
ChapHii in Quart. Stat, of Pal. Explor. 
Fund, January, 1883). For 1876-77 we 
have these startling figures: mean for 
December, -490; for January, 1-595; for 
February, 8-750 — and, similarly, in other 
years. And so we read: 'Good the year 
in whicli Tebheth (December) is without 
rain ' (Taau. 6 h). Tiiose who have copied 
Lightfoot's quotations about the flocks 
not lying out during the winter months 
ought, at least, to have known that the 
reference in the Talmudic passages is 
expresiily to the flocks which pastured 

in ' the wilderness ' (.ni^^^"^ p ibN*)- 

But even so, the statement, as so many 
others of the kind, is not accurate. For, 
in the Talmud two ojiinions are exjjressed. 
According to one, the ' Midbariyoth," or 
'animals of the wilderness,' aie those 
which go to the open at the Passover- 
time, and returu at the first rains (about 
November); while, on the other hand. 
Rabbi maintains, and, as it seems, more 
authoritatively, that the wilder ness-flocl-a 

remain in the open alike in the hottest 
days and in the rainy season — i.e. all the 
year round (Bezah 40 a). Comp. also 
Tosephta Bezah iv. 6. A somewhat dif- 
ferent explanation is given in Jer. Bezah 
6.3 b. 

^ There is no adequate reason for ques- 
tioning the historical accuracy of this 
date. The objections generally made 
rest on grounds, which seem to me his- 
torically untenable. The subject has been 
fully discussed in an article by Cas.^el in 
Herzog's Real. Ency. xvii. pp. 588-594. 
But a curious piece of evidence comes to 
us from a Jewish source. In the addition 
to the Megillath Taanith (ed. Warsh. p. 
20 a), the 9th Teliheth is marked as a fast 
day, and it is added, that the reason for 
this is not stated. Now, Jewish chron- 
ologists have fixed on tliat day as that 
of Christ's birth, and it is remarkable 
that, between the years 500 and 816 a.d. 
the 25th of December fell no less than 
twelve times on the 9th Teblietli. If 
the 9th Tebheth, or 25th December, was 
regarded as the birthday of Chi'ist, we 
can understand the concealment about 
it. Comp. Zuiiz, Ritus d. Synag. (4ottesd. 
p. 126. 

* In illustration we may here quote 
Shem. R. 2 (ed. W. vol. ii. ]). s a), where 
it is said tliat, wherever ^lichael appears, 
there also is the glory of the Shekhinah. 
In the same section we read, in reference 


IJOOK Sin-])ri80, :iwe, fear would l)e hushed into cahn and expectancy, as 
II Ironi the Angel they heard, that what they saw bo(UMl not jiid<:;nient. 

— ^' ' but ushered in to waiting Israel the great joy of those good tidings 

which he brought: that the long-promised Saviour, Messiah, Lord, 
was born in the City of David, and that they themselves might go 
and see, and recognize Him by the humbleness of the circumstances 
surrounding His Nativity. 

It was, as if attendant angels had only waited the signal. As, 
when the sacrifice was laid on the altar, the Temple-mnsic burst forth 
in three sections, each marked by the blast of the priests' silver 
ti-umjicts, as if each Psalm wore to be a Tris-Hagion; ' so, when the 
Herald-Angel had spoken, a multitude of heaven's host- stood fortli 
to hymn the good tidings he had brought. What they sang was but 
the reflex of what had been announced. It told in the language of 
praise the character, the meaning, the result, of what had taken place. 
Heaven took up the strain of 'glory'; earth echoed it as 'peace'; it 
fell on the ears and hearts of men as 'good i)leasure': 

(llory to God in the highest — 
And upon earth peace — 
Among men good pleasure ! * 

Only once before had the words of the Angels' hymn fallen upon mortal's 
ears, when, to Isaiah's rapt vision. Heaven's high Temple had opened, 
and. the glory of Jehovah swept its courts, almost breaking down the 
trembling posts that bore its boundary gates. Now the same glory en- 
\NTapt the shepherds on Bethlehem's plains. Then the Angels' hymn 

to the appearance in the bush, that, ' at maintains, that tlie birth of ]\Ioses re- 
lirst only one Anijel came.' who stood in mained unknown for tln-ee months, be- 
the burning bush, and after that the Shek- cause he was a child of seven months. 
Mnah came, and spoke to Moses from There are other legends aljout the sinless- 
out the bush. (It is a curious illustra- ness of Moses' father, and the maiden- 
tion of Acts ix. 7, that Moses alone is hood of his mother (at 103 years), which 
said in .Jewish tradition to have seen the remind us of Christian traditions, 
vision, but not the men who were with • According to tradition, the three 
him.) Wetstein gives an erroneous re- Idasts symbolically proclaimed the king- 
ference to a Talmudic statement, to the ilom of God, the in-ovidence of God, and 
eflfect that, at the l)irth of Moses, the the final judgment, 
room was tilled with heavenly light. - Curiously enough, the word crrpa- 
The statement really occurs ni Hotah \2 a; ridifi Hebraised in the same connection 
Shem. R. 1; Yalkut i. 51 c This must .-.^^ •..„ v.«--,..rx- See Yalkut on Ps. 
be the foundation of the Cliristian leg- , / ' i •• . T,>- i ^ .- n ^■^^^ \ 
,,,.,, . 1 • 1 rii • 4 xlv. (vol. u. p. lOo a, about the middle . 
end, that the cave, in which Clirist was •< t u i, •♦ I- i ♦ • i *i 
X, 4-u 1 -n 1 ] 1- 1 + I have unhesitatingly retained the 
born, was 1 led with heavenlv light. ,. f +i ^ ^ , m 
rj- -, . n T> v^- 1 i^„„ 1 K. +^1 reading of the fer^H.s rece/;/?/.s. The ar- 
Sinii ariv, the Romish legend about the t. ■ -,. t ax ■ ., .. 
-fT- ■ Vfl»i t f. 1-. n f iruments m its favor are sufncient y set 
Virgin-Mother not fee ng the pangs of 7 *i i r< r^ i ■ i • , n • r^r 
mat^rnitv is derived from the Jewish forth by Canon Cook in his ' Revised Ver- 
legend, which asserts the same of the Ji'" «* ^^^ ^"'^^ Three Gospels,' pp. 27- 
mother of Moses. The same authority " " 


had lioraldcd the iiiiiioiiiiccnicut of tlic Kiiiiidoin coniino:; now that CHAP. 
of tlio Kin<i- coiuc. Tlicu it had l)e('ii the 7V/.s-//r/r//o// ol" prophetic VI 
anticipation: nou' tliat of Evani^-clic fiiltihncnt. ^^.m^^-^m^ 

Tlic livnin liad ccayed; the liglit faded out of tlio sky; and the 
shepherds were alone. But the Anii-elic message remained with them; 
and the sign, which was to gui(h' tlicni to the Infant Christ, lighted 
their rapid way up the terraced height to where, at tlu; entering of 
Bethlehem, the lamp swinging over the hosteh-y directed them to the 
strangers of the house of David, wlu) had come from Nazareth. 
Though it seems as if, in the hour of her utmost need, the Virgin- 
Mother had not ])eeu ministered to by h)ving hands,' yet what had 
happened in the stable must soon have beeome known in the Khan. 
Perhaps friendly women were still passing to and fro on errands of 
mercy, when the shei)herds readied the ' stable." - There they Ibund, 
perliaps not wliat they had exiiected, but as they had been told. The 
iioly group only consisted of the hunil)le Virgin-Mother, the lowly 
carpenter of Nazareth, and the Babe laid in the manger. What 
further passed we know not, save that, having seen it for themselves, 
the shepherds told what had been spoken to them al)oiit this Child, to 
all around'' — in the 'stable,' in the tields, probably also in the Temple, 
to which they would liring their tioeks, thereby preparing the minds 
of a Simeon, of an Anna, and of all them that looked for salvation in 

And now the hush of wondering expectancy fell once more on all, 
who heard what was told by the shepherds — this time not only in the 
hill-country of JuiUra, but within the wider circle that embraced 
Bethlehem and the Holy City. And yet it seemed all so sudden, so 
strange. That on such slender thread, as the feeble throb of an 
Infant-life, the salvation of the worhl should hang — and no sjx'cial 
care watch over its safety, no better shelter l)e provided it than a 
' stable,' no other cradle than a manger! And still it is e\-er so. On 
what slender thread has the continued life of the Church often seemed 
to hang; on what feeble throlilnng that of evei-y child of (Jod — with 

1 This appears to me implied in tlie in lictlilclu'in. to iiKniire whether any 

emphatic statement, that Mary — as I child had been horn anionsi' their quests, 
.ijather, herself — ' wrapped Him in swad- ■' Tlie term 6iay yijjfii'l,a) inii)lies more 

dling clothes' (St. Luke ii. 7, 12). Othei'- than to -make known abroail.' Wahl 

wise the remark would seem needless \vw\vy!^\{ ■)(Hr<>citroqiien(irr(>':'>v\\\m^- 

and meaningless. ner: • <linil</<) aJu/Kid t/f uJiis //n/ofcscaf, 

^ It seems diflficult to understand how, sj)/ir;/o rKinorfin.' 
on Dr. Geikie's theory, the shepherds ' Tliis may have jJrepartMl not only 

could have found the Infant-Saviour. tliose who weicointMl .Icsus on His pre- 

since, manifestly, they could not during mentation in tlie Temple, but tilled many 

that night have roused every household others with expectiincy. 


1-M;()M ]5I-:TIiLKlllvM TO JORDAN. 

BOOK no \isil)l(' (Hit ward iiicaiis to ward off daii^'cr, uo lioiue of eoinfort, no 
II ie?;t of case. IJiit, • Lo, childicii aiv Je'hovali's heritagel" — and: 
-^.^^^ "80 givcth Jlc to His Ix'loved in his sleei)!'' 

' The fdllow iim rciiuu'kuble extriict 
from llie Jenisaleiii Tai'ijmii 011 Ex. xii. 
42 nuiy interest the reader: — 

•It is a iiiii'ht to be oljserveil and ex- 
alted. . . . Four iiiu'lits are tliere written 
ill the Booiv of Memorial. Niglit tir^t : 
when the Meinra of Jehovah was revealed 
upon the world for its creation; when 
the world was without form and void, 
and darkness was spread upon the face 
of the deep, and the Menira of Jehovah 
illuininated and made it li^ht; and He 
called it the tirst night. Niiz:ht second: 
when the Memra of Jehovah was revealed 
unto Abraham between the divided 
pieces; when Abraham was a hundred 
years, and Sarah was ninety years, and to 
confirm thereby that which the Scripture 
saith. — Alirahain a hundred years, can he 
bejret ? and Sarah, ninety years old, can 
she bear ? Was not our father Isaac 
thirty-seven years old at the time he was 
offered u| ion the altar".' Then the heavens 
were bowed down and broutilit low, and 

Isaac .saw their foundations, ami his eyes 
were blinded owin<!; to that sight: and 
He called it the second night. The third 
night: when the Memra of Jehovah was 
revealeil upon the Egyptians, at tile 
dividing of the night: His right hand 
slew the first-born of the Egyptians, and 
His right hand spared the first-born of 
Israel; to fulfil what the Scripture hatii 
said. Israel is My first-born well-beloved 
.son. And He called it the third night. 
Night the fourth ; when the end of the 
world will be accomplished, that it might 
be dissolved, the bands of wickedness 
destroyeil. and the iron yoke broken. 
Moses came forth from the midst of the 
desert, and the King Messiah from the 
midst of Rome. This one shall lead at 
the head of a Cloud, and that one shall 
lead at the head of a Cloud; and the 
Memra of Jehovah will lead between 
both, and they two shall come as one 
[('ni'Ii(iilit).' (For explan. .see vol. ii. 
p. 100. note.) 




(Si. I. like ii. 21-;iS.) 

Foremost auiougst those who. \voii(h'riii*i\ had heard what the shcji- CHAP, 
liei'ds tohl, wa;^ i^he whom most it eoueeriied, who hiid it iij) deepest VII 

in her lieart. and l)rou*2:ht to it treasured stores of memory. It was ' -.^^ 

tlie Mother of Jesus. These nuiny months, all eonneete*! witli this 
Child eould never have been far away trom her thou<i:lits. And now 
that He was hers, yet not hers — belon,ii:od, yet'did not seem to belong, 
to her — lie would be the more dear to her Mother-heart tor what 
made Him so near, and yet parted Him so far from liei-. And upon 
all His history seenu'd to lie sueh wondrous li.iilit. timt slie could 
only see the path behind, so far as she luul trodden it: while upon 
that on which she was to move, was sucli dazzlinii' briuhtness, that 
she could scarce look upon the i)resent, and dared not ,ua/.e towards 
tlie future. 

At tlie very outset of this history, and inereasin<i'ly in its course, 
the ({uestion meets us, how. if tlie Auii-elic message to the Virgin 
was a I'eality, and hei- motheiiiood so supernatural, she could liave 
been api)arently so ignorant of what was to come — nay, so often have 
even misunderstood if/ Strange, that she should have -pondered 
in her heai't " the shepherd's account: stranger, tiiat afterwards she 
should ha\'e wondered at His lingering in the Tenijjle among Israel's 
teaclu'rs: strangest, that, at the very tirst of His miracles, a mother'.s 
liind pride sliould ha\(' so harshly broken in u])on the I)i\ine melody 
of His work, by striking a keynote so dift'erent from that, to which 
His life had been set: or that afterwards, in the height of his activity, 
loving fears, if not doubts, should have ])rom])te(l her to iiiten-upt, 
what evidently she had not as yet comprehended in the fulness of its 
nu'aning. Might we not rather have expected, that the Virgin- 
Mother from the incejition of this Child's life would lia\-e under- 
stood, that He was truly the Son of (lody The (piestion, like so 
many others, requires only to be clearly stated, to find its emphatic 
answer. For. had it been so. His historv. His human life, of which 

J92 ¥]um bethi.p:iiem to .iokdan. 

BOOK every step is ol' such intiiiitc iiii[)()i-tan('(' to luaiikind, would iu)t have 
II l)een possible. Apart IVoui all thoughts (jt the deeper necessity, both 

^— — -r'-^ as regarded His Mission and the salvation of the world, of a true 
human develojjnient ofgradual consciousness and personal life, Christ 
could not, in any true sense, have been subject to His Parents, if 
they had fully understood that He was Divine; nor could He, in 
that case, have been watched, as He -grew in wisdom and in fav<»ui- 
with God and men." Such knowledge would have broken the 
bond of His Humanity to ours, by severing that which bound Him as 
a child to His mother. We could not have become His brethren, iuid 
He not been truly the Virgin's Son. The mystery of the Incarnation 
would have been needless and fruitless, had His hunmnity not been 
subject to all its right and ordinary conditions. And, applying the 
same principle more widely, wo can thus, in some measure, under- 
stand why the mystery of His Divinity had to be kept while He 
was on earth. Had it been otherwise, the thought of His Divinity 
Avould have proved so all-absorbing, as to render impossible that of 
His Humanity, with all its lessons. The Son of Go*! Most Higli. 
AVhom they worsliipi)e(l. could never have been the loving Man, with 
Whom they could hold such close converse. The bond which bound 
the .Master to His discii)les — the Son of Man to humanity — would 
have been dissolved; His teaching as a Man, the Incarnation, and 
the Tabernacling among men, in i)lace of the former Old Testament 
Revelation from heaven, would hav(! become wholly impossible. In 
short, one, and that the distinctive New Testament, element in our 
salvation would have been taken away. At the beginning of His life 
He would have, anticipated the lessons of its end — nay, not those of 
His Death only, l)ut of His Resurrection and Ascension, and of the 
coming of the Holy Ghost. 

In all this we have only been taking the sulyective, not the objec- 
tive, view ol the (}uestion; considered the earthward, not the heaven- 
ward, aspect of His life. The latter, though very real, lies beyond oui- 
present luu-izon. Not so the (juestion as to the development of the 
A^rgin-Mothers spiritual knowledge. Assuming her to have occupied, 
in the fullest sense, the standpoint of .Jewish Messianic expectancy, 
and renuMubei'ing, also, that she was so -highly favoured' of God, 
still, then; was not as yet anything, noi- could there be for many 
years, to lead her beyond what might be called the utmost height of 
Jewish belief. On tlu' conti'ary. theic was much connected with His 
true Humanity to keep her i)ack. For narrow as, to our retrospec- 
tive thinking, the boundary-lhie seems between .Jewish belief and that 


in tlic liypustatic uiii(Mi ol' the two Natures, the i)a,ssa<>,(' Iroin the CHAP, 
one to the other represented such tremendous mental revohition, as vn 
to imply direct Divine teaching.' An illusti-ative instance will ^— ^y^— 
pi-ove this better than argument. We read, in a commentary on the i'^icor. xii. 
opening words of Gen. xv. IS/' that when God made the covenant 1. Ber. r. it, 
with Abrani, He 'revealed to him both this Ola in (dispensation) p. hi?'^^ 
and the Olain to come,' which latter expression is correctly ex})lained 
as referring to the days of the Messiah. Jewisli tradition, there- 
fore, here asserts exactly what Jesus stated in these words: 'Your 
fathei' Abraham rejoiced to see My day: and he saw it, and was 
"•lad."'' Yet we know what storm (jf indignation the enunciation of "St. John 

^ ' viii. 06 

it called Ibrth among the Jews! 

Thus it was, that every event connected with the Messianic mani- 
festation of Jesus would come to the A'irgin-Mother as a fresh dis- 
covery and a new surprise. Each event, as it took place, stood iso- 
lated in her mind; not as part of a whole which she would anticipate, 
nor as only one link in a chain; Init as something quite by itself. She 
knew the beginning, and she knew the end; but she knew not the 
path which led from the one to the other; and each step in it was • 
a new revelation. Hence it was, that she so carefully treasured in 
her heart every new fact,'' piecing each to the other, till she could ■'st. Luke 

■^ ' ^ '^ ' u. 19, 51 

read from it the great mystery that He, Whom Incarnate she had 
l)orne, was, indeed, the Son of the living God. And as it was 
natural, so it was well that it should be so. For, thus only could she 
truly, because self-unconsciously, as a Jewish woman and mother, 
fulfll all the recpiirements of the Law, alike as regarded herself and 
her Child. 

The tirst of these was Circumcision, rei)resenting voluntary sub- 
jection to the conditions of the Law, and acceptance of the ol)li- 
gations, l)ut also of the i)rivileges, of the Covenant between God and 
Abraham and his seed. Any attemjjt to show the deep significance 
of such a rite in the case of Jesus, could only weaken the impression 
which the fact itself conveys. The ceremony took place, as in all 
ordinary circumstances, on the eighth day, when the Child received 
the Angel-given nanu' Jeshun (Jesus). Two other legal ordinances 
still remained to be ol)served. The firstborn son of every household 
was, according to the Law, to be ' redeemed ' of the priest at the price 
of tive shekels of the Sanctuary.'' Rabbinic casuistry here added "Numb. 
many needless, and even repulsive, details. The following, however, 
are of practical interest. The earliest period of presentation was 
Ihirty-one days after birth, so as to make the legal month quite 




» Beohor. 
viii. 7 

' Com p. 
Sifi-a. ed. 
Weiss, p. 59 
a and /; ; 
Idos, Yad 

Capp.. ed. 
Am«t., vol. 
lii. p. -i'lb 
a and li 

coinpleto. The cliihl iniisl, have breii tlie tii'.stl)(>rii of his mother 
(jiccordinii," to sonic writers, of his father also);' ncitlier father nor 
mother - must he of Le\itic (h'sceiit; and tJie eliihl must be free 
from all such bodily blemishes as would have disqualitied him for 
the priesthood — or, as it was expressed: 'the firstborn for the 
priesthood.' It was a thiiiii' much dreaded, that the child should die 
before his redemption; but if his father died in the interval, the 
child had to redecui himself wln-n of age. As the Rabbinic law^ 
expressly states, that the shekels were to be of * Tyrian weight,'" 
the value of the 'redemption money' would amount to about ten 
or twelve shillings. The redemption could l)e made from any 
priest, and attendance in the '■renii)le was not requisite. It was 
otherwise with the ' puritication ' of the mother.'' The Rabbinic 
law fixed this at forty-one days after the birth of a son, and eiglity- 
one after that of a daughter,^ so as to make the Riblical terms (piite 
comi)lete.' But it might take place any time later — notably, when 
attendance on any of the great feasts brought a family to Jerusalem. 
Thus, we read of cases when a mother would offer several sacrifices of 
purification at the same time.* Rut, indeed, the \\()man was not re- 
quired to be personally present at all, when her offering was i)resented, 
or, rather (as we shall see), prin'ided for — say, by the representatives 
of the laity, who daily took part in the services for the various dis- 
tricts from which they came. This also is specially ])rovided for in 
the Tulmud.^ lint mothers who were within convenient distance of 
the Temple, and esj)ecially the more earnest anunig them, would 
naturally attend personally in the Temple;'' and in such cases, when 
practicalile, the redemption of the firstl)orn, and the purification of 
his mother, would be combined. Such was undoubtedly the case with 
the Vir<>in-Mother and lier Son. 

' So LuikHuh. Jiid. Altcrtli. ]). (;21, and 
Buxtorf, Le.\. Tiilmud. p. Id!)!). But I 
am bound to .say, that this seems con- 
trary to the sayhi,ii;s of the Rabbis. 

■^ This disposes of the idea, that the 
Virgin-Motiier was of direct Aarouic or 
Levitic descent. 

' Archdeacon Farrar is mistaken in 
supposin;^, that the -thirty-three days' 
were counte<l -after the circumcision.' 
The idea must have arisen from a mis- 
understandin.i:; of the Enu'lisli version of 
Lev. xii. 4. There was no connection 
between the time of the circumcision of 
the child, and that of the puritication of 
his mother. In certain circumstances 
circumcision rni^iit have to be delaved 

for days — in case of sickness, till recov- 
ery. It is equally a mistake to suppose, 
that a Jewish mother ccuiid not leave 
the house till after the forty days of her 

+ Com]). Keritli. i. 7. 

'" Jer. Slieq. 50 h. 

^ Tliere is no ijround whatever for the 
oljjection wiiicli Ilablii ZoH"(Lebensalter, 
p. 112) raises a,i:;ainst the account of 8t. 
Luke. Jewisli documents only prove, 
that amotiier iieeil not personally attend 
in tlie Temple ; not that they did not do 
so, wlien attendance was possible. The 
contrary impression is conveyed to us 
Ijy Jewisli notices. 



P'oi- this twofold i)iir|)osc tlic Holy Fiiiiiil.v went up to tlic 'rciii])le, CHAP 
when the i)i-<'scrii)t'(l (hiys were (■oiii|)h't(^(l.' 'I'lic cercjiioiiy ;it thi' VII 
redciiii)tioii of a tii'sthoi-ii son was, ii<» doubt, more siuiplr than tliat ^■"*"~r~* 
at present in use. It consisted of tlie formal ])resentalion of the 
ehild to the jn-iest, aee()nii)anie(l by two short • benedictions " — the 
one for the law of redemption, the other foi- the .aift of a tirstl)orn 
son. after which the redemption money was jtaid.- Most solemn, as 
in such a place, and rememl)ering its symbolic siii'niticance as the 
ex])i-essi(Ui of (Jod's claini over each family in Israel, nnist this I'ite 
have been. 

As regards the rite at the puritieation of the motlier, the scantiness 
of information has led to serious misstatements. Any comi)arison 
with our modern 'churching' of woraeir' is ina])plical)h;', since the 
latter consists of thanksgiving, and the former primarily of a sin- 
ofiering for the Levitical defilement symbolically attaching to the 
beginning of life, and a burnt-otfering, that marked the restoration of 
connnunion with (Jod. besides, as already stated, the sacritice for 
purification might be brought in the absence of the mother. Similar 
mistakes prevail as to the rubric. It is not the case, as generall}'' 
stated, that the wonnin Avas si)rinkled with l)lood. and then pronounced 
clean by the priest, or that prayers were ottered on the occasion.* 
The service simply consisted of the statutory sacrifice. This was 
what, in ecclesiastical language. Avas termed an ottering o/c// rri/ored, 
that is, 'ascending and descending." according to the nu'ans (tf the 
oft'erer. The sin-offering Avas. in all cases, a turtle-dove or a young 
pigeon. But. Avhile the moi-e Avealthy bi-ought a land) foi- a 1)urnt- 
offering, the poor might substitute for it a turtle-dove, or a young 
pigeon.' The rubric directed that the neck of the sin-otfering Avas to 

' The exin'essioa rnv i<a^ja/jia/iov 
aur&}v cannot refer to tlie PurilU'iitimi 
of the Yirijin and /ler Bahc (Farrar), uor 
to that of the Viri!;in and Josepli (Meyer), 
because neither the Babe nor Joseph 
needed, nor were they inchided in, the 
])nrification. It can only refer to -their' 
(I.e. Die Jews') purification. But tliis 
does not inii)ly any Romish inferences 
{Sep}). Leben .Tesn. li. 1, p. 131) as to the 
superlnnnan condition or origin of the 
Bh'ssed A'iriiin : on tlie contrary, tlieotl'er- 
in<;- of tlie sin-otlerini;- i)oiiits in tlie other 

- Conip. the rubric and the prayers in 
Mahnoniile.s. Tad haCliaz. Hilch. Biccur. 
xi. 5. 

■■• So Dr. (ieikie. 

^ So Dr. Geikie, takinu; iiis account 
from Herzo(j's Real-Eucykl. The mis- 
take about the mother l)eing sprinkled 
with sacrificial blooil orighuited with 
Liii'ht foot (Hone Hebr. on St. Luke ii. 
22). Later writers have followed the 
lead. Tamid v. (!, quoted by Liijjhtfoot, 
refers only to the cleansin.ii; of tlie leper. 
The -prayers' supposed to be spoken, 
and tlie lu-onouncinii- clean by the priests, 
are the eiiilu'llisliiiients of later writers, 
ft)r wliich Li.nhtfoot is not resjionsible. 

5 Accordiiii? to Sifra (Par. Tazria. Per. 
iv. 3): -AVhenever the sin-oflerinc; is 
chaiii^ed. it i)recedes [as on ordinary oc- 
casions] the burnt-otlerinii-; but when 
the buriit-otrerinn' is chaiiiiied [as on thi.s 
occasion], it precedes the sin-ofl'erinii-." 




» Sebacli. 
vi. 5 

'' Comp. 
Kerith. i. 7 

Sheq. iv. 
* Sheq. v; 1 

' Toseplit. 
Sheq. iii. 2 

be broken, but the head not wholly severed; that some of the blood 
should be sprinkled at the south-western aiig-le of the altar,' below 
the red line,' which ran round the middle of the altar, ami that the 
rest should be jxmred (mt at the base of the altar. The whole of the 
tiesh belon<>-ed to the ])riests, and had to be eaten within the enclo- 
sure of the Sanctuary. The rubric for the burnt-oflering of a turtle-dove 
or a young pigeon was somewhat more intricate." The substitution 
of the latter for a young lamb was exi)ressly designated 'the poor's 
ottering.' And rightly so, since, while a lamb would probably cost 
about three shillings, the average value of a jjair of turtle-doves, for 
both the sin- and bnrnt-oftering, would be aliout eightpence,'^ and on 
one occasion fell so low as tAvopence. The Temple-price of the meat- 
and drink-ott'erings was lixed onee a month: and special officials in- 
structed the intending otterers, and i)rovided them with what was 
needed.' There was also a special ' superintendent of turtle-doves and 
pigeons,' rcijuired for certain purifications, and the holder of that office 
is mentioned with praise in the Mishnah." Much, indeed, depended 
upon his uprightness. For, at any rate as regarded those who brought 
the poor's offering, the purchasers of pigeons or turtle-doves would, as 
a rule, have to deal with him. In the Court of the Women there were 
thirteen trumpet-shaped chests for pecuniary contributions, called 
'trumpets."' Into the third of these they who brought the poor's 
offering, like the Virgin-Mother, were to drop the price of the sacri- 
fices which were needed for their purification.' As we infer," the 
superintending i)riest must have been stationed here, alike to inform 
the offerer of the price of the turtle-doves, and to see that all w^as in 
order. For, the offerer of the poor's ottering would not require to 
deal directly with the sacrificing i)riest. At a certain time in the 
day this third chest Avas opened, and half of its contents ap{)lied to 
l)urnt-, the other half to sin-offerings. Thus sacrifices were provided 
for a corresponding numl)er of those who were to ])e i)urified, without 
either shaming the poor, needlessly disclosing the character of im[)u- 
rity, or causing unnecessary l)ustle and work. Though this mode of 
procedure coidd, of course, not ))e obligatory, it would, no doubt, be 
that generally followed. 

We can now, in imagination. Ibllow the Virgin-Mother in the 

1 But tliis precise .si)ot was not niatter 
of absolute necessity (Seb. vi. 2). Direc- 
tions are given as to the manner in wiiicli 
tlie priest was to jierform the sacriticiul 

-' Kinnim i. 1. If tlie sin-ot1'(MiiiH,' was 

a four-footed animal, the blood was 
spi'inkled afxtre the red line. 

•' Comp. St. Matt. vi. 2. See • Tiie 
Temple and its Services,' &c. pp. 2(J, 27. 

+ Comp. Siiekal. vi. 5, the Connnen- 
taries. and Jer. Sliek. 50 h. 

Till'; \ilv'(;iX IN TIIK TKMI'I.K. I97 

Tciiii)lc.' Ik'i' cliiM liad been _iii\('ii uj) to \\\v Lord, and n'coivcd CIIAI". 
back tVoiu Him. She lia<l entered the Court of the AVomeii, pro))- Vii 
ably by the • Gate of the Women,'- on the north side, and deposited ^-^-^r — ' 
the priee of her sacrifices in Trumpet No. 3, which was close to the 
raised (hiis or gallery where tlie women worshipped, apart from the 
men. And now the sound of the organ, which announced through- 
out the vast Temple-buildings that the incense was about to Ijc 
kindled on the Golden Altar, summoned those who were to be puri- 
fied. The chief of the ministrant lay-representatives of Israel on 
duty (the so-called 'station-men') ranged those, who presented 
themselves before the Lord as offerers of special sacrifices, within 
the wickets on either side the great Nicanor Gate, at the top of the 
fifteen steps which led up from the Court of the Women to that of 
Isi'ael. Jt was, as if they were to be brought nearest to the Sanctuary; 
as if theirs were to be specially the ^jrayers ' that rose in the cloud 
of incense from the Golden Altar; as if for them specially the 
sacrifices were laid on the Altar of Burnt-oftering; as if theirs was 
a larger share of the benediction which, spoken by the lips of the 
priests, seemed like Jehovah's answer to the prayers of the people; 
theirs especially the expression of joy symbolised in the drink-oft'ering, . 
and the hymn of praise whose Tris-Hagion filled the Temple. From 
where they stood they could see it all,^ share in it, rejoice in it. And 
now the general service was over, and only those remained wdio In-ought 
special' sacrifices, or who lingered near them that had such, or whose 
•l(»ved al)ode was ever in the Temple. The purification-service, witli 
such unspoken prayer and ])i'aise as would bo the outcome of a 
grateful heart/ was soon ended, and they who liad shared in it were 
Levitically clean. Now all stain was i-emoved, and, as the Ijaw put 
it. they might again partake of sacred ofi'erings. 

X\\{\ in such sacred ofi'ering, better than any of which priest's 

' According to Dr. Geikie. • tlie (Jdld- tlie elevated idatlonii 011 wliicii tiicy cem- 

en Gate at the head of tlie loiii;- tliftlit of inoiily worshipped. 

stejjs that led to tlie valley of the Kedion ^ This is stated V>y tlie Kabhis to have 

opened into the Court of th(> Women.' been the oljject of the burnt-otteriiiii;. 

T^ut there was 110 Golden Gate, neitiier That snii-,2:ested for the sin-ollerinii- is too 

was there any tlinlit of steps into the ridiculous to iiieiitioii. The laiiiiiuiire 

valley of the Kedron. while between the used about the burnt-otterin.u,- reminds us 

Court of the AVonien and any outer ,e;ate of that in the exhortation in the otiieefor 

(such as coutd have led into Kedron), the 'Cliurchin<4- of AVomen": -that she 

the Court of the Gentiles and a colonnade miiiiit l)e stirred up to give thanks to 

must have intervened. Aliniyhty God, Who has delivei-ed her 

- Or else, -the ,i;;ate of the tirstlin.iis.' from the jiains and perils of childbirtli 

Coinp. iivnerally. 'The Temple, its Minis- (ni"^";* *"'2n!': n~*i~r'- '^^'''i^''' '■'^ matter 

try and .Services." of niiracie.' '(Coinp. llottiitijenis. Juris 

'■' This thev could not have done fr(U!\ llel)r. Leses, ed. Tiguri. p. 2:^8.) 


I5()()K liiiiiily liiid cNcr luirtukcii, \v;is the N'irji'iii-Mot licr iimncdiately to 
II share. Jt lias been observed, tliat by the side of evei-y liiiuiiliation 

^- — " . — eoiiiiected ^vitli the Hinnaiiity of the Messiah, the "ilory of His Divinity 
was also made to shine foi'th. Tlie coiiicideiiees are manifestly 
undesigned on the part of the ICvangelic writers, and henee all the 
more striking, 'riius, if he was born of the humble Maiden of- 
Xazareth, an Angel announced His birtli; if the Infant-Saviour was 
eradied in a manger, the shining liost of heaven liymned His Advent. 
And so afterwards — if He hungered and was temi)ted in the wiider- 
iiess, Angels ministered to Him, even as an Angel strengthened ilim 
in tlie agony of the garden. H' He submitted to baptism, the Voice 
and vision from heaven attested His Sonship; if enemies threatened. 
He could miraculously pass through them; if tlie Jews assailed, 
tliere was the Yoice of God to glorify Him; if He was nailed t(^ the 
cross, the sun craped his brightness, and earth quaked; if He was 
laid in the tomb. Angels kept its watches, and heralded His rising. 
And so, when now the Mother of Jesus, in lier hund^leness, could 
only bring the Spoor's ottering,' the witness to tlu' greatness of Him 
Whom she had borne was not wanting. A ' eucharistic otT'ering ' — so 
. to speak — was brought, the record of which is tlie more precious 
that Rahbinie writings make no allusion to the existence of the 
party, whose representatives we here meet. Yet they were the true 
outcome of the spirit of the Old Testament, and, as such, at this 
time, the special recipients of the ' Spirit ' of the Old Testament. 

The ' parents ' of Jesus had l)rought Him into the Temple for 
presentation and redemption, when they were met l)y one, vfhose 
venerable figure must have l)een Avell known in tiie city and the 
Sanctuary. Simeon combined the three characteristics of Old Testa- 
ment piety: ^Justice,' as regarded his relation and bearing to God 
and man; ^ '/ear of God,' '^ in opposition to the boastful self-right- 
eousness of Pharisaism; and, above all, longiua expectancij of the 
near fulfilment of the great promises, and that in their spin'tiKd 
import as * the (\)ns;olation of Israel.'^ The Holy Spirit was u])on 

1 Coinp. Josi'ji/ius, Ant. xii. 2. Ti. it is several times put into the inontli of 

- The expression, evXcx/iiji, unqiies- a .S'm«o» (Chaij. Iti b\ Mace. "Wy; Shev. 

tionably refers to ' fear of Clod.' Conip. 'Ma) — altliou;;;;h, of course, not the one 

Delitzsch.'HehY. Br. p)). I'.H. I!i2: and mentioned by St. Luke. The su2;p;estion, 

(h-imm, Claris N.T. p. isd li. that the latter was the son of the .ijreat 

■^ The e.x'iiression ;-;«;-• ■ ('((n.-^oiatioii." llillel and the father of Gamaliel, St. 

for the .ijreat ^[essiani(•l)((|)(' — whenoe the Paul's teacher, thonu'h not impossible as 

Messianic title of .l/f'/z^/r//^'//; —is of vei'y reii;ards time, is unsupported, thmii^h it 

frequent occurrence (so in the Tariiuni does seem stranjre that the Mishnah has 

on Tsaiah and .Jeremiah, and in many nothinij to say about him: ■ /o inscar 

Rabbinical passages). Curiciusly eiiouirh. hmn/sluKili.' 

Till-: S()N(; OF SIMKOX. ](»9 

liiiii: iiiid by that same Spiiit ' the ^i>,-racious Divine answer to his ciiaI". 
heart's hanging had been e(»ninuniieatod him. And now it was as vii 
had been promised him. Coming 'in the Spirit" into tlie 'IVmple. ^~ — ~r — ' 
jnst as His parents were bringing the Infant Jesus, lie took Him 
into his arms, and burst into rapt thanksgiving, ^'ow, iii(h'<'d, had 
(lod fnltilled His word. He was not to see death, till he had seen 
t he Lord's Christ. Xow did his Lord 'dismiss' him 'inpeaee'- — ■ 
release hinr' in blessed eomlbrt from Avork and watch — since he had 
actually seen that salvation,* so long preparing lV)r a wailing weary 
world: a glorious light, Whose rising would light up heathen dark- 
ness, and be the outshining glory around Israel's mission. \\]\\\ this 
Infant in his arms, it was as if he stood on the mountain-height of 
prophetic vision, and watched the golden beams of sunrise far away 
over the isles of the Gentiles, and then gathering their full glow 
over his own beloved land and people. There was nothing .Judaic — 
(piite the c(jntrary: only what was of the Old Testament — in what 
he tirst said." ^st. Luke 

But his unexpected appearance, the more unexpected deed and 
words, and that most unexpected form in which what was said of tlie 
Infant Christ was presented to their minds, tilled the hearts of His 
])arents with wonderment. And it was, as if their silent wonderment 
had been an unspoken question, to which the answer now came in 
words of blessing from the aged watcher. Mystic they seemed, yet 
])rophetic. But now it was the personal, or rather the Judaic, aspect 
which, in broken utterances, was set before the Virgin-Mother — as 
if the whole history of the Christ ui)on earth were passing in rapid 
vision befoi'e Simeon. That Infant, now again in the Virgin-Mother's 
arms: It was to l)e a stone of decision; a foundation and corner- 
stone,'' for fall or for uprising; a sign spoken against; the swoi'd of >. is. viii. i4 
deep ])ersonal sorrow would j^icMve the Mother's heai't; and so to the 

' The nuMition of the • Holy Spirit," a.s i)erished. On tlie other haml. ou tukiii,i;- 

speakiiii;; to individuals, is frequent in leave of a dead friend, we are to say 

Rabliinic writiniis. This, of course, does 'Go in peace,' according to Gen. xv. 1.5, 

not imply their 1)elief in the Personality and not 'Go to peace.' 
of the Holy Si)irit (com]). Bemidli. R. 15; '^ The expression, dTtoXvFiv.(ihsiiln^ri% 

20; Midr. on Ruth ii. !) ; Yalkut, vol. i. Jiherare. dcmiffcrc, is most ,iiTai>hic. It 

pji. 'I'll h and 2()o d). corresponds to the Hebrew ■^^r. which 

■^ The Talmud (Ber. last i)a.2;e) has a is also used of death; as in n'l^ard to 

curious conceit, to the efiect that, in tak- Simeon the Just, Menach. 10!) h: comp. 

ing leave of a person, one ought to say: Ber. 17 a\ Targuni on Cant. i. 7. 
'Go to peace,' not 'm peace ' (crrS ' Qodet seems to strain the meaning 

not ai'i't/*^^' ^^ former having been of (j(»r?7p2oz', when he renders it by the 

said by Jethro to Moses (Ex. iv. IS), on iu>uter of the adjective. It is fre(iueutly 

which lie prospered; the latter by David used in tli(> LXX. foi' nr'r*- 
to Absalom (2 Sam. xv. 9). on which he 




» Ber. K. 71, 
ed. Warsh. 
p. 131 h 
end: 99. 
p. 179 «, 
lines 1.3 and 
12 from 

tcri'iblo 011(1, wlicii the veil of extci-naii.siu wliicli liad so lono- covered 
the hearts of Israel's leaders would be rent, and the deep evil of their 
thoughts ' laid bare. Such, as regarded Israel, was the history of 
Jesus, from His Baptism to the Cross; and such is still the history 
of Jesus, as ever present to the heart of the believing, loving Church. 

Nor was Simeon's the only hymn of praise on that day. A 
special interest attaches to her who, coming that very moment, 
responded in ])rai.-^(' to God'^ for the pledge she saw of the near 
redemption. A kind of mystery seems to invest this Anna (ChannaJi). 
A widow, whose earl}^ desolateness had been followed by a long life 
of solitaiy mourning; one of those in Avhose home the tribal gene- 
alogy had been preserved.^ We infer from this, and from the fact 
that it was that of a tribe which liad not returned to Palestine, that 
hers was a family of some distinction. Curiously enough, the tribe 
of Asher alone is celebrated in tradition for the beauty of its women, 
and their fitness to be wedded to High-Priest or King.'' 

But Anna had better claim to distinction than family-descent, or 
long, faithful memory of brief home-joys. These many years she had 
spent in the Sanctuary/ and spent in fasting and prayer — jet not 
of that self-righteous, self-satisfied kind which was of the essence of 
popular religion. Nor, as to the Pharisees around, was it the 
Synagogue which was her constant and loved resort; but tlie Temple, 
with its symljolic and unsi)oken worshi]), which Rabbinic self-asser- 
tion and rationalism were rapidly superseding, and for whose services, 
indeed, Rabbinism could find no real basis. Nor yet were 'fasting 
and prayer' to her the all-in-all of religion, sufficient in themselves; 
sufficient also iK'fore God. Deepest in her soul was longing wait- 
ing for the 'redemption' promised, and now surely nigh. To her 
widowed heart tlie great hoi)e of Israel ai)peared not so niueh, as to 
Simeon, in the light of 'consolation.' as ratlier in that of •redemp- 
tion." The seemingly hopeless exile of liei- own tribe, the political 
state of Judaea, the condition — social, moral, and religious — of her 
own Jerusalem: all kindled in her, as in those who Avere like-minded, 
deep, earnest longing for the time of promised •redemption.' No 

' dia?iuyta/id~, <;eiienilly n.^ed in nn 
evil sense. 

•^ The verb dvijo/ioXoyfia^jai may 
mean respon.sive ])i'aise. or simply praise 
(""'"'■ ^vhicli in tliiscase, Iiowever, would 
equally be ' in resi)onse ' to that of Si- 
meon, whether responsive in form or not. 

■* The whole subject of 'iicnealoiries ' 
is briefly, but well treated by Iloinfmr- 
fjer. Real-Encykl., .section ii. pp. 2M1 Ac. 

It is a pity, that llnmhiirijcr so often 
treats his subjects from a .Juda,'0-apoIo- 
^■etic .standpoint. 

' It is scarcely necessary to discuss 
the curious suggestion, that Anna ac- 
tually Ured in the Temi)le. No one, of all a woman, i)ermanently re- 
sided in the Temple, though the High 
I'l'iest had cluunbers there. 

ANNA. 201 

place so suited to such au one as the Temple, with its services — the chap. 
only thing- free, pure, undefiled, and pointing forward and upward; "^"H 

no occupation so befitting as 'fasting and prayer.' And. blessed be ^— ^' ' 

(rod, there were others, perhaps many such, in Jerusalem. Though 
Rabbinic tradition ignored them, they were the salt which preserved 
the mass from festering corruption. To her as the representative, 
the example, friend, and adviser of such, was it granted as prophetess 
to recognise Him, Whose Advent had been the burden of Simeon's 
praise. And, day by day, to those who looked for redemption in 
Jerusalem, would she speak of Him Whom her eyes had seen, though 
it must be in whispers and with bated breath. For they were in the 
citv of Herod, and the stronsrhold of Pharisaism. 

202 FROM i;ktiili-:iii-:.m to jukdan. 



(.^t. Mutt. ii. l-l>i. I 

BOOK ^N'lTH the rresontation of the Iiilant Saviour in the Temple, and 
II His acknowledgment — not indeed by the leaders of Israel, but, charae- 

-^,-^*-^ teristicall}', ])y the representatives of those earnest men and women 
who looked for His Advent — the Prologue, if such it may be called, to 
the third Gospel closes. From whatever source its information was 
derived — perhaps, as has l)een suggested, its earlier jjortion from the 
Yirgin-Mother, the later from Anna; or else both alike from her, who 
with loving reverence and wonderment treasured it all in her henrt 
— its iimrvellous details could not have been told with greater sim- 
])lieity, Jior yet with more exquisitely delicate grace. ' On the other 
hand, the Prologue to the first Gospel, Avhile omitting these, records 
other incidents of the infancy of the Saviour. The ])lan of these 
narratives, or the sources whence they may originally have been de- 
' rived, may account for the omissions in either case. At first sight it 
may seem strange, that the cosmopolitan Gospel by St. Luke should 
have described what took place in the Temple, and the homage of 
the Jews, while the Gospel by St. Matthew, which was primarily 
intended for Hebrews, records only the homage of the Gentiles, and 
the circumstances Avhich led to the flight into Egypt. But of such 
seeming contrasts there are not a few in the Gospel-history — discords, 
which soon resolve themselves into glorious harmony. 

The story of the homage to the Infant Saviour l»y the M^^(Ji is 
told by St. Matthew, in language of which the brevity constitutes the 

' It is scarcely necessary to point out. have done so, ami pui'tly because tlie 

how evidential this is of the truthfulness only object served by i-epeatiii";;. what 

of the Gospel-narrative. In this respect must so deeply shock the Christian mind, 

also the so-called Apocryphal Gosjiels. would be to point the contrast between 

with their jn"oss and often repulsive th(> canonical and the Apocryi)hal Gos- 

le<rendary adornments, form a strikiim jiels. But tliis can. I think, be as well 

contrast. I have purposely abstained done by a sin^rle sentence, as by pages 

from reproducing any of these narra- of quotations, 
lives, partly because previous wi'iters 


llnMi; OK TIIK .\lA(;i. 


chid" (litliculty. Kvcii tlieir (h-si.uiiatioii is no! IVcc IVoiii ;iiiihi^iiitv. 
The term Mdiji is used in I he LXX., In JMiiln, .loscplius, and hy 
profane writei's, alike in an e\il and, so to s])eak, in a _ii'oo([ sense' — 
ill the loruier case as implyiiii;- the [)raeliee of iiia<iieal arts;' in the 
latter, as referring to those Eastern (especially Chaldee) priest-sages, 
whose researches, in great ineasure as yet mysterious and unknown 
to us, seem to have embraced much deei) knowledge, though not 
untinged with superstiti(»n. It is to these latter, that the Magi 
.spoken of by St. Matthew must have belonged. Their number — to 
whicli, liowe\er, no imi)ortaiice attaches — cannot ])e asc('rtaincd.^ 
Various suggestions have l)ecn made as to the country ol' • tlie East,' 
whence they came. At the period in question the sacerdotal caste 
of the Medcs and Persians was dispersed over various ])arts of the 
East,-' and the presence in those lands of a large Jewish <Ji((spora, 
through which they might, and iirobably would, gain knowledge of 
the great liope of Israel,* is sufficiently attested l)y Jewish history. 
The oldest opinion traces the Magi — though partially on insufficient 
grounds'' — to Arabia. And there is this in favor of it, that not 
only the closest intercourse existed bet^veen Palestine and Arabia, 
but that from about 120 B.c. to the sixth century of our era, the 
kings of Yemen {)rofessed the Jewish faith." For if. on the one 
hand, it seems unlikely, that Eastern Magi would spontaiieously 
connect a celestial phenomenon \\\X\\ the birth of a Jewish king, 


■ So also in 
Acts viii. 9; 
xiii. 6, 8 

' The evidence on tliis i)oint is fiir- 
nirflied by J. G. MiiUc)- in Herzog'f! Reiii- 
Enc, vol. viii. p. ()82. The whole subject 
of the visit of the Magi is treated witli 
the greatest ability and learning (as 
against Stranss) by Dr. Mill (-On the 
Mythical Interpretation of the Gospels,' 
part ii. pp. 27.3 iVc). 

-' They are variously stated as twelve 
(Aug. Chrysost. ) and three, the latter 
on account of the nuinl)er of the gifts. 
Other legends on the subject need not 
be repeated. 

■' Mill u. s.. p. 30:5. 

* There is no historical evidence that 
at the time of Clirist there was among 
the nations any widesi)read expeotanc\ 
of the Advent of a Messiah in Palestine. 
AVhere the knowledge of such a hope 
existed, it must have been entirely de- 
rived from Jewish sources. The allusions 
to it by Tncitvs (Hist. v. 18) and Siic- 
touiiis (Ves]). 4) are evidently derived 
from Josei)hus, and admittedly refer to 
the Flavian dynasty, and to a period 
seventy years or more after the Advent. 

of Christ. • The splendid vaticination in 
the Fourth Eclogue of Virgil, ' which Arch- 
deacon Farrar regards as among the ' un- 
conscious lU'ophecies of heathendom,' is 
confessedly derived from the Cuma^an 
Sibyl, and based on the Sil)ylline Oracles, 
bookiii. lines Ts4-7!)4 (ed. /•'/•/>-(///>'/(. p.Sfi; 
seeEinl. p. xx.\ix.|. Alnu)st the whole of 
book iii.. inclusive of these verses, is of 
Jewish authorship, and dates proljably 
from about 160 b.c. Archdeacon Farrar 
holds that, besides the ahore references, 
• there is ample proof, both in Jewish and 
Pagan writings, that a guilty and weary 
world was dimly expecting tJie advent of 
its Deliverer.' But he otters no evidence of 
it. either from Jewish or Pagan writings. 

'• Comp. MiU, u. s.. ]). 808, note (>(). 
The grovjids adduced by some are such 
references as to Is. viii. 4 ; Ps. Ixxii. 10, 
A'C. : and the character of the gifts. 

*^ Comp. the account of this Jewish 
nn)narchy in the -History of the Jewish 
Nation," pp. 07-71 : also li<'m())HVs\^vs. e. 
Gesch. d. Ausbreit.d. Judenth. pp.81 dire. ; 
and Jo«f, Gesch. d. Isr. vol. v. pp. 28(5 A-c. 


I500K evidence will, on the other hand, )je presented to connect the nu'iin- 
H ing attached to the ai)pearance of 'the star' at that [)articuhii- time 
^ — '•-'^'^ with Jewish expectancy of the Messiah, But we are anticipating. 

Shortly after the Prcsentaticm of tiie Infant Saviour in the 
Temple, certain Magi from the East arrived in Jerusalem Avith 
strange tidings. They had seen at its 'rising' 'a sidereal appear- 
ance,^ which they regarded as betokening the birth of the Messiah 
King of the Jews, in the sense which at the time attached to that 
. designation. Accordingly, they had come to Jerusalem to pay 
homage ^ to Him, probably not because they imagined He must be 
born in the Jewish capital* but because they would naturally expect 
there to obtain authentic information, ' where ' He might be found. 
In their simplicity of heart, the Magi addressed themselves in the 
first place to the official head of the nation. The rumor of such an 
inquiry, and by such persons, would rapidly spread throughout the 
city. But it produced on King Herod, and in the capital, a far dil- 
ferent impression from the feeling of the Magi. Unscrupulously 
cruel as Herod had always proved, even the slightest suspicion of 
danger to his rule — the bare possibility of the Advent of One, Who 
had such claims upon the allegiance of Israel, and Who, if acknow- 
ledged, would evoke the most intense movement on their part — must 
have struck terror to his heart. Not that he could believe the 
tidings, though a dread of their possibility might creep over a nature 
such as Herod's; but the bare thought of a Pretender, with such 
claims, w^ould till him with suspicion, apprehension, and impotent 
rage. Nor is it difficult to understand, that the whole city should, 
although on diflerent grounds, have shared the ' trouble ' of the 
king. It was certainly not, as some have suggested, from appre- 
hension of 'the woes' which, according to popular notions, were to 
accompany the Advent of Messiah. Throughout the history of Christ 
the absence of such ' woes ' was never made a ground of objection to 

' Tliis Ls the correct reiulerin^, and seem most inconi!;ruou.-<, but an an ecuiiva- 

not, as in A.V., 'in the East." the latter 1)p- lent of the Hebrew n'n.Twn- "^■'^ >" (i*^^i- 

ino;exi)ressed Ijy the phu'al of ai'crroA//, xix. 1. So often in the LXX. and t»y 

in V. 1, while in vv. 2 and '.) the word is ))rofane writers (comp. Srlilciisner. u. s.. 

used in tlie siti>;'ular. t. ii. pp. 74!), 750. and Vorsfjux. De 

•^ Srlih^usiier lias aljundantly i)roved Hebraismis N.T. pp. (i37-(i41). 

that the word dariyj, thonuh ])rimarily * This is the view generally, but as I 

meaninj? a f^tiir. is also used of constella- think erroneously, entertained. Any Jew 

tions, meteors, and comets — in short, has would have told them, that the Messiah 

the widest ai)i)lication: ' omne designare, was not to be born in Jerusalem. Be- 

(luod aliiiuem splendorem habet et emit- sides, the ((uestion of the Magi implies 

tit ■ (Ee.\. in N.T.. t. i. pp. SitO, 31)11. their ignorance of the -where' of the 

•' Not, as in the A.V.. 'to worship,' Messiah. 
which at this stage of the history would 



His Messianic claims; and this, Ijecause these ' woes' were not asso- 
ciated with the first Advent of the Messiah, but with His final mani- 
testation in power. And between these two periods a more or less 
long interval was supposed to intervene, during which the Messiah 
would ])c ' hidden,' either in the literal sense, or perhaps as to His 
power, or else in both respects.^ This enables us to understand the 
question of the disciples, as to the sign of His coming and the end of 
the world, and the answer of the Master/ But the people of Jeru- 
salem had far other reason to fear. They knew only too well the 
character of Herod, and what the consequences woidd be to them, or 
to any one who might be suspected, however unjustly, of sympathy 
with any claimant to the royal throne of David. ^ 

Herod took immediate measures, characterised by his usual cun- 
ning. He called together all the High-Priests — past and present — 
and all the learned Rabbis,^ and, without committing himself as to 
whether the Messiah was already born, or only expected,* simply pro- 
pounded to them the question of His birthplace. This would show 
him where Jewish expectancy looked for the appearance of his rival, 
and thus enable him to watch alike that place and the people gen- 
erally, while it might possibly bring to light the feelings of the leaders 
of Israel. At the same time he took care diligently to inquire the 
precise time, when the sidereal appearance had first attracted the 
attention of the Magi." This would enable him to judge, how far 
back he would have to make his own inquiries, since the birth of the 
Pretender might be made to synchronise with the earliest appear- 
ance of the sidereal phenomenon. So long as any one lived, who was 
born in Bethlehem between the earliest appearance of this ' star ' 
and the time of the arrival of the Magi, he was not safe. The sub- 
sequent conduct of Herod" shows, that the Magi must have told him, 
that their earliest observation of the sidereal phenomenon had taken 
place two years before their arrival in Jerusalem. 

The assembled authorities of Israel could only return one answer 


» As re- 
ported in 
St. Matt, 
xxiv. 3-29 

b St. Matt, 
ii. 7 

1 Christian writers on these subjects 
have generally conjoined the so-called 
' woes of the Messiah ' with His tirst 
a])iiearance. It seems not to have 
occurred to them, that, if such had been 
the .Jewish expectation, a preliminary 
objection would have lain against the 
claims of Jesus from their absence. 

2 Their feelings on this matter would 
be represented, mufatis mutaiidis, by 
the expressions in the Sanhedrin, re- 
corded in St. John xi. 47-50. 

^ Both Meyer and "Weiss have shown, 
that tfiis was not a meeting of the San- 
hedrin. if. indeed, that body had anj'- 
tliing more than a shadowy existence 
during the reign of Herod. 

* The question i)roiiounded by Herod 
fv. 4), ' where Christ should be born,' is 
l)ut neither in the iiast nor in the future, 
but in the prcsi^ut tense. In other words, 
he laid before them a rase — a theological 
l)roblem — but not a fact, either past or 




' Jer. Ber. 
i. i, p. 5 <( 

1' St. Matt. 
u. 6 

to the c|,iiestion submitted by Herod. As shown by the rendering of 
the Targum Jonathan, the prediction in Micah v. 2 was at the time 
universally understood as pointing to Bethlehem, as the birthplace 
of the Messiah. That such was the general expectation, appears 
from the Talmud," where, in an imaginary conversation between an 
Arab and a Jew, Bethlehem is authoritatively named as Messiah's 
birthplace. St. Matthew reproduces the prophetic utterance of 
Micah, exactly as such quotations were popularly made at that time. 
It will be remembered that, Hebrew being a dead language so far as 
the people were concerned, the Holy Scriptures were always trans- 
lated into the popular dialect, the person so doing being designated 
Methurgeinan {dragoman) or interpreter. These .renderings, which 
at the time of St. Matthew were not yet allowed to be written down, 
formed the precedent for, if not the basis of, our later Targum. In 
short, at that time each one Targumed for himself, and these Tar- 
gumim (as our existing one on the Prophets shows) were neither 
literal versions,^ nor yet paraphrases, but something l)etween them, 
a sort of interpreting translation. That, when Targuming, the New 
Testament writers should in preference make use of such a well- 
known and widely-spread version as the Translation of the LXX. 
needs no explanation. That they did not confine themselves to it, 
but, when it seemed necessary, literally or Targumically rendered a 
verse, appears from the actual quotations in the New Testament. 
Such Targuming of the Old Testament was entirely in accordance 
with the then universal method of setting Holy Scripture before a 
popular audience. It is needless to remark, that the New Testament 
writers would Targum as Christians. These remarks apply not only 
to the case under immediate consideration,'' but generally to the 
quotations from the Old Testament in the New.^ 

1 In point of fact, the Talmud ex- instead of "'.?'"N^-' as in o}(r Hebrew 
pressly lays it down, tliat ' whosoever 
targums a verse in its closely literal form 
[without due re;u;ard to its meaning], is a 
liar.' (Kidd. 49 a; comp. on the subject 
Deutsch's 'Literary Remains,' p. 327). 

^ The general principle, that St.' Mat- 
thew rendered Mic. v. 2 farr/Hmically, 
would, it seems, cover all the differences 
between his quotation and the Hebrew 
text. But it may be worth while, in this 
instance at least, to examine the differ- 
ences in detail. Two of them are trivial, 
viz., 'Bethlehem, land of Juda,' instead 
of 'Ephratah;' 'princes' instead of 
'thousands,' though St. Matthew may, 

^JO-siYW^, have pointed *i;rX5 ('princes'), 


text. Perhaps he rendered the word 
more correctly than we do, since -"l^N 

means not only a ' thousand ' but also a 
part of a tribe (Is. Ix. 22), a clan, or 
Beth Ahh fJudg. vi. 15); comp. also 
Numb. i. Ifi; x. 4, 36; Deut. xxxiii. 17; 
Josh. xxii. 21. 30 ; 1 Sam. x. 19 ; xxiii. 23 ; 
in which case the personification of these 
'thousands' (=our 'hundreds') by their 
chieftains or ' i)rinces ' would be a very 
apt Targumic rendering. Two other of 
the divergences are more inijiortant, viz., 
(1) ' Art not the least,' instead of ' though 
thou be little.' But the Hel)rew words 
have also been otherwise rendered: in 


The further conduct of Herod was in keeping with his plans, CHAP. 
He sent fur the Magi — for various reasons, secretly. After ascertain- viii 

ing the precise time, when they had first observed the 'star,' he ^— '^ ' 

directed them to Bethlehem, with the request to inform him when 
they had found the Child ; on pretence, that he was equally desirous 
with them to pay Him homage. As they left Jerusalem ^ for the 
goal of their pilgrimage, to their surprise and joy, the 'star,' which 
had attracted their attention at its ' rising, ' ^ and which, as seems 
implied in the narrative, they had not seen of late, once more 
appeared on the horizon, and seemed to move before them, till \ it 
stood over where the young child was ' — that is, of course, over 
Bethlehem, not over any special house in it. Whether at a turn of 
the road, close to Bethlehem, they lost sight of it, or they no longer 
heeded its position, since it had seemed to go before them to the goal 
that had been pointed out — for, surely, they needed not the star to 
guide them to Bethlehem — or whether the celestial phenomenon 
now disappeared, is neither stated in the Gospel-narrative, nor is in- 
deed of any importance. SuflBcient for them, and for us: they had 
been authoritatively directed to Bethlehem; as they had set out for it, 
the sidereal i)henomcnon had once more appeared; and it had seemed 
to go before them, till it actually stood over Bethlehem. And, since 
in ancient times such extraordinary ' guidance ' by a '■ star ' was 
matter of belief and expectancy,^ the Magi would, from their stand- 
point, regard it as the fullest contirmation that they had been rightly 
directed to Bethlehem — and ' they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.' 
It could not be difficult to learn in Bethlehem, where the Infant, 
around Whose Birth marvels had gathered, might be found. It 
appears that the temporary shelter of the '■ stable ' had been ex- 
changed by the Holy Family for the more permanent abode of a 
Miouse; "^ and there the Magi found the Infant-Saviour with His "v. ii 
Mother. With exquisite tact and reverence the narrative attempts 

the Syriac interrogath-'clij ('art thou divergence in the latter part of the verse, 

little?'), which suggests tiie rendering of it may be best here sini])ly to give for 

St. Matthew; and in the Arabic just as comparison the rendering of the passage 

by St. Matthew (vide PocotV.-, Porta Mosis, in the Targum Jonathan: ' Out of thee 

Notpe, c. ii. ; but Pocock does not give shall come forth before Me Messiah to 

the Targum accurately). Credner in- exercise rule over Israel.' 

geniously suggested, that the rendering ^ Not necessarily by night, as most 

of St. Matthew may have been caused writers suppose. 

by a Targumic rendering of the Hebrew ^ So correctly, and not 'in the East,' 

T^J?^ by n*rT2 ; but he does not seem to as in A.V. 

, '' \. 1 .,.-,.. ,, . , =* Proof of this is abundantlv furnished 

have noticed, that this IS the rtc^?m< ren- i,„ ti- y / ■ x^,,,. t^^* i ; .>.> ol-.^^^A 

1 . . ., rn T ii, by netsteiit, Nov. lest. t. i. pp. 24/ and 

denng in the Targum Jon. on the pass- 24Q • 

age. As for the second and more serious 


BOOK not the faintest description of the scene. It is as if tiie sacred writer 
11 had fully entered into the spirit of St, Paul, ' Yea, though we have 
^- — --, — ' known Christ after the liesh, 3 et now henceforth know we Him no 
"2Cor. V inore."" And thus it should ever be. It is the great fact of the 
manifestation of Christ — not its outward surroundings, however pre- 
cious or touching they might be in connection with any ordinary 
earthly being — to which our gaze nmst be directed. The externals 
may, indeed, attract our sensuous nature; but they detract from the 
unmatched glory of the great supersensuous Reality.^ Around the 
Person of the God-Man. in the hour when the homage of the heathen 
world was first offered Him, we need not, and want not, the drapery 
of outward circumstances. That scene is best realized, not by de- 
scription, but by silently joining in the silent homage and the silent 
offerings of 'the wise men from the East.' 

Before proceeding further, we must ask ourselves two questions: 
AVhat relationship does this narrative bear to Jewish expectancy? 
and. Is there any astronomical confirmation of this account? Besides 
their intrinsic interest, the answer to the first question will deter- 
mine, whether any legendary basis could be assigned to the narrative; 
while on the second will depend, whether the account can be truth- 
fully charged with an accommodation on the part of God to the 
superstitions and errors of astrology. For, if the whole was extra- 
natural, and the sidereal appearance specially produced in order to 
meet the astrological views of the Magi, it would not be a sutlicient 
answer to the difficulty, ' that great catastrophes and unusual plie- 
nomena in nature have synchronised in a remarkable manner with 
great events in human history. ' ^ On the other hand, if the sidereal 
appearance was not of supernatural origin, and would equally have 
taken place whether or not there had been Magi to direct to Beth- 
lehem, the difficulty is not only entirely removed, but tlie narrative 
affords another instance, alike of the condescension of God to the 
lower standpoint of the Magi, and of His wisdom and goodness in 
the combination of circumstances. 

As regards the question of Jewish expectancy, sufficient has been 
said in the preceding pages, to show that Rabbinism looked for a 
very difierent kind and manner of the world's homage to the Messiah 

1 In this seems lo lie tlie stron^cest to us the spiritual, nor .vet tluis tliat the 

condemnation of Romish and Romanis- deepest and holiest inijiressionsare^made. 

ing tendencies, that they ever seek to True religion is ever ohjcctivistic, 'sensu- 

present — or, perhaps, rather obtrude — ous snirjectiristic. 
the external circumstances. It is not ^ Archdeacon Farrar. 

thus tluit the Gospel most fully presents 


than that of a few Magi, guided hy a star to His Infant-Home. chap. 
Indeed, so far from serving as historical basis for the origin of such a viii 

* legend, ' a more gross caricature of Jewish Messianic anticipation ^- — ~^r — ' 
could scarcely be imagined. Similarly futile would it l)e to seek a 

background for this narrative in Balaam's prediction * since it is in- ='Numb. 

. . , . xxiv. 17 

credible that any one could have understood it as referring to a brief 
sidereal apparition to a few Magi, in order to bring them to look for 
the Messiah.^ Nor can it be represented as intended to fulfil the 
prophecy of Isaiah/"' that ' they shall bring gold and incense, and mx. eiast 
they shall show forth the praises of the Lord.' For, supi)Osing this 
figurative language to have been grossly literaliscd,^ what would be- 
come of the other part of that prophecy,* which must, of course, 
have been treated in the same manner; not to speak of the fact, that 
the whole evidently refers not to the Messiah (least of all in His In- 
fancy), but to Jerusalem in her latter-day glory. Thus, we fail to 
perceive any historical basis for a legendary origin of St. Matthew's 
narrative, either in the Old Testament or, still less, in Jewish tradi- 
tion. And we are warranted in asking: If the account be not true, 
what rational explanation can be given of its origin, since its invention 
would never have occurred to any contemporary Jew? 

But this is not all. There seems, indeed, no logical connection 
between this astrological interpretation of the Magi, and any supposed 
practice of astrology among the Jews. Yet, strange to say, writers 
have largely insisted on this.^ The charge is, to say the least, grossly 
exaggerated. That Jewish — as other Eastern — impostors pretended 
to astrological knowledge, and that such investigations may have been 
secretly carried on by certain Jewish students, is readily admitted. 

' Strauss (Lebeu Jesu, i. pp. 224-249) daries,' the 'flocks of Kedar and the rams 

finds a legendary basis for the Evangelic of Nebaioth ' (v. 7), and 'the isles,' and 

account in Numb. xxiv. 17, and also a])- ' the ships of Tarshish ' (v. 9). 
peals to the legendary stories of profane '' The subject of Jewish astrology is 

writers about stars appearing at the birth well treated by Dr. Hamburger, both in 

of great men. the tirst and second volumes of his Real- 

'^ Keim (Jesu von Nazara, i. 2, p. 377) Encykl. The ablest summary, though 

drops the appeal to legends of profane brief, is that in Dr. Gideon Brecker's 

writers, ascribes only a secondary influ- book, ' Das Transcendentale im Talmud.' 

ence to Numb. xxiv. 17, and lays the (r/Vd>'er is, as usually, one-sided, and not 

main stress of 'the legend' on Is. Ix. — always trustworthy in his translations. A 

with what success the reader may judge. curious brochure by Kabbi T/ai// (Der 

•* Can it be imagined that any person Talmud, od. das Prinzi]) d. planet. Einfl.) 

would invent such a 'legend' on the is one of the boldest attempts at special 

strengtli of Is. Ix. 6 ? On the otiier liand, i)leading, to the ignoration of palpable 

if the event really took place, it is easy facts on the other side. Ha nsra f //' s d'lc- 

to understand how Cliristian symbolism ta on this subject are, as on many others, 

would — (liough uncritically — have seen assertions unsupported by historical evi- 

an adumbration of it in that prophecy. deuce. 

* The ' multitude of camels and drome- 


FI{(>^r i!i':TiTT>KiTr:M to Jordan. 



" Deb. K. 8 

'' Comp. 
Shabb. 75 a 

•■ See for ex. 
Jns. War 
vi. ."). 3 

'1 Shabb. 

' Moed K. 
16 (t 

t^ Shabb. 145 
h: 146 a 
103 ft 

!■ Moed K. 
2K a 

' Comp. 
Baba K. 
2 ft : Shabb. 
121 ft 

k Ned. 39 ft 

But tlic languaf>;c ol'disapijroval in wliicli these i)ursuits are rclerred to 
— such as that knowh'dgc of the Law is not Ibund witli astrologers" — 
and the emphatic statement, that he who learned even one thing from 
a Mage deserved death, show what views were autlioritatively held."^ 
Of course, the Jews (or many of them), like most ancients, believed 
in the influence of the planets upon the destiny of man." But it was 
a princii)le strongly expressed, and frequently illustrated in the Tal- 
mud, that such planetary influence did not extend to Israel.'' It must 
be admitted, that this was not always consistently carried out; and 
there were Rabbis who computed a man's future from the constellation 
(the Ilazzal), either of the day, or the hour, under which he was born." 
It was supposed, that some persons had a star of their own,^andthe 
(representative) stars of all proselytes were said to have been present 
at Mount Sinai. Accordingly, they also, like Israel, had lost the 
defilement of the serpent (sin).^ One Rabbi even had it, that success, 
wisdom, the duration of life, and a posterity, depended upon the con- 
stellation." Such views were carried out till they merged in a kind 
of fatalism,* or else in the idea of a ' natal affinity,' by which persons 
born under the same constellation were thought to stand in sympathetic 
rajyport.^ The further statement, that conjunctions of the planets^ 

1 I cannot, however, see that Buxtorf 
charges so many Rahbis with giving 
themselves to astrology as Dr. Geikie 
imputes to him — nor how Hidithol'lt can 
be quoted as corroborating tlie Chinese 
record of tlie appearance of a new star 
in 750 (see the passage in tlie Cosmos, 
Engl, transl. vol. i. pp. 92, 93). 

^ Jewish astronomy distinguishes the 
seven planets (called ' wandering stars ') ; 
the twelve signs of the Zodiac, Mnzzaloth 
(Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, 
Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Cap- 
ricornus, Aquarius, Pisces) — arranged by 
astrologers into four trigons : that of fire 
(1, 5, 9); of earth (2, 6,l0); of air (.3, 7, 
11); and of water (4, 8, 12); and the 
stars. The Kabbalistic book Raziel (dat- 
ing from the eleventh century) arranges 
them into three quadrons. The comets, 
wliich are called arrows or star-rods, 
proved a great difficulty to students. The 
planets (in their order) were: Shnhha- 
Ihiii (the Sabbatic, Saturn) ; Tsedeq 
(righteousness, Jupiter); Maadim (the 
red, blood-coloured. Mars); Chammah 
(the Sun); Nor/ah (splendour, Venus); 
CnkhiiJ)h (the star. Mercury); Lebhnnah 
(the .Moon). Kabbalistic works depict our 
system as a ciirle, the lower arc consist- 

ing of Oceanos, and the upper tilled by 
the sphere of the earth ; next comes that 
of the surrounding atmosi)here ; then suc- 
cessively the seven semicircles of the 
l)lanets, each fitting on the other — to use 
the Kabbalistic illustration — like the suc- 
cessive layers in an onion (see Sepher 
Raziel, ed. Lemb. 1873, pj). 9 b, 10 a). 
Day and night were divided each into 
twelve hours (from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., and 
from 6 P.M. to 6 a.m.^. Each hour was 
under the influence of successive planets : 
tluis, Sundaij, 7 a.m., the Sun; 8 a.m., 
Venus; 9 a.m., Mercury; 10 a.m., Moon; 
11 a.m., Saturn; 12 a.m., Jupiter, and so 
on. Similarly, we have for Monday, 7 
A.M., the Moon. <tc. ; for Tuesdaji. 7 a.m., 
Mars; for Wednesday, 7 a.m.. Mercury; 
for Thursday, 7 a.m., Jupiter; for Friday, 
7 A.M., Venus; and for Sado-day, 7 a.m., 
Saturn. Most important were the Tequ- 
phnth, in wliich tlie Sun entered respec- 
tively Aries (Tek. Xisan, spring-equinox, 
' harvest '), Cancer (Tek. Tammuz, sum- 
mer solstice, ' warmth'), Libra (Tek. Tish- 
ri, autumn-equinox, seed-time), Capri- 
cornus (Tek. Tehlieth, winter-solstice, 
'cold'). Comp. Targ. Pseudo-.Ion. on 
Gen. viii. 22. From one Tequphah to 
the other were 91 days 7| hours. By a 


affected the products of the earth "■ is scarcely astrological ; nor per- 
haps this, that an eclipse of the sun betokened evil to the nations, an 
eclipse of the moon to Israel, because the former calculated time by 
the sun, the latter by the moon. 

But there is one illustrative Jewish statement wliich, though not 
astrological, is of the greatest importance, although it seems to have 
been hitherto overlooked. Since the ai)pearance of Munter'n well 
known tractate on the Star of the Magi,^ writers have endeavoured 
to show, that Jewish expectancy of a Messiah was connected with a 
peculiar sidereal conjunction, such as that which occurred two years 
before the birth of our Lord,'' and this on the ground of a quotation ^in 747 

. , ; 1 A.u.c, or 

from the well-known Jewish commentator Abarbanel (or rather Abra- tb.c. 
hanel)." In his Commentarv on Daniel that Rabbi laid it down, ■= Born 1437. 

• • ' 1 , -1 n • T»- died 1508 

that the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation risccs 
betokened not only the most important events, but referred especially 
to Israel (for which he gives live mystic reasons). He further argues 
that, as that conjunction had taken place three years before the birth 
of Moses, which heralded the first deliverance of Israel, so it would 
also precede the birth of the Messiah, and the final deliverance of 
Israel. But the argument fails, not only because Abarbanel's calcu- 
lations are inconclusive and even erroneous,'^ but because it is mani- 
festly unfair to infer the state of Jewish belief at the time of Christ 
from a haphazard astrological conceit of a Rabbi of the fifteenth cen- 
tury. There is, however, testimony which seems to us not only reliable, 
but embodies most ancient Jewish tradition. It is contained in one 
of the smaller MidrasJdm, of which a collection has lately been pub- 
lished.* On account of its importance, one quotation at least from it 
should be made in full. The so-called Messiah-Haggadah {Aggadoth 
MasMach) opens as follows: M star shall come out of Jacob. There is 
a Boraita in the name of the Rabbis : The heptad in which the Son of 
David Cometh — in the first year, there will not l)e sufficient nourish- 

beautiful figure the sundust is called ' fil- the uiitrustworthhiess of such a testi- 
ino;s of the day' (as the word tvana — mony, it is necessary to study tlie liistory 
that wliicli falls off from the sun wheel as of the astronomical and astrolojiical pur- 
it turns (Yonui20 h). suits of the Jews durinu' Ihat period, of 

1 ' Der Stern derWeisen,' Copenha,2;en, which a masterly summary is iiiven in 
1827. The tractate, though so frequently Steiuschneider's History of Jewish Liter- 
quoted, seems scarcely to have been sutti- ature {Ersch u. Gruber, Encykl. vol. 
ciently studied, most writers havino- xxvii.). Comp. also Sachs, Relig. Poes. 
apparently rather read the references to d. Juden in Spanien, pp. 2.S0 .fee. 
it in Meier's Handb. d. Math. u. techn. -^ By Dr. Jellinek, in a work in six 
Chronol. Mi^/er's work contains much parts, entitled 'Beth lux-Midrash,' Leipz. 
that is interesting and important. and Vienna, 1853-1878. 

^ To form an adequate conception of 


BOOK nicnt; in the second year the arrows of famine are hiiinched; in the 
n </iir(Z, a great famine; in the fourth, neither famine nor plenty; in the 
'^•^-^r — ' fifth, great abundance, and the Star shall shine forth, from the East, 
and this is the Star of the Messiah. And it will ^^hinc from the East- 
for fifteen days, and if it be prolonged, it will be for the good of Israel; 
in the sixth, sayings (voices), and announcements (hearings); in the 
seventh, wars, and at the close of the seventh the Messiah is to be 
expected.' A similar statement occurs at the close of a collection of 
three Midrashim — respectively entitled, 'The Book of Elijah,' 'Chap- 
ters about the Messiah,' and 'The Mysteries of II. Simon, the son oi" 
»jeiiinek, Jochai ' " — whcrc we read that a Star in the East was to appear two 
Mi.irash, years before the birth of the Messiah. The statement is almost 
8 ' ' equally remarkable, whether it represents a tradition previous to tlie 

birth of Jesus, or originated after that event. But two years before 
the birth of Christ, which, as we have calculated, took place in 
December 749 a.u.c, or 5 before the Christian era, brings us to the 
year 747 a.u.c, or 7 before Christ, in which such a Star should ap- 
pear in the East.^ 

Did such a Star, then, really appear in the East seven years before 
the Christian era? Astronomically speaking, and without any refer- 
ence to controversy, there can be no doubt that tlie most remarkable 
conjunction of planets — that of Jupiter and Saturn in the constella- 
tion of Pisces, which occurs only once in 800 years — (ZicZ take place no 
less than three times in the year 747 a. u. c. , or two years before the birth 
of Christ (in May, October and December). This conjunction is ad- 
mitted by all astronomers. It was not only extraordinary, but 
presented the most brilliant spectacle in the night-sky, such as could 
not but attract the attention of all who watched the sidereal heavens, 
but especially of those who busied themselves with astrology. In the 
year following, that is, in 748 a.u.c, another planet. Mars, joined 
this conjunction. The merit of first discovering these facts — of which 
it is unnecessary here to present the literary history ^ — belongs to the 

1 It would, of course, be possible to would have been emphasized, instead of 

argue, that the Evangelic account arose being, as now, rather matter of inference, 

from this Jewish tradition about the ^ The chief writers on the subject have 

appearance of a star two years 1)efore the been : Munter{\\.^.],Idder (u.s.)-and H7e- 

blrtli of the Messiah. But it has been .s-i^/^z-fCln-onol. Synopsed. 4 Evang.('lS43), 

already shown, that the liypothesis of a and again in Ilerznrfs Real-Enc. vol. xxi. 

Jewish legendary origin is utterly un- j). 544, and finally in his Beitr. z. Wiird. d. 

tenable. Besides, if St. Matthew ii. had Ev. 1S(;9). In our own country, writers 

been derived from this tradition, the nar- have, since the appearance of Professor 

rative would have l)een quite difierently PritcharcVs axi. (' Star of the Wise Men') 

shai)ed, and more especially the two in Dr. Sviith's Bilde Diet. vol. iii., gener- 

years' interval between the rising of the ally given up the astronomical argument, 

star and- che Advent of the Messiah without, however, clearly indicating 


great Kepler,"- who, accordingly, i)lace<l the Nativity of Christ in the CHAP, 
year 748 a.u.c. This date, however, is not only well nigh inipos- viii 
sible; but it has also been shown that such a conjunction would, for ' — ^i' — ' 
various reasons, not answer the requirements of the Evan<i:('lical narra- " oesteiia 
tive, so far as the guidance to Bethlehem is concerned. But it does fully irag®, i6u6 
account for the attention of the Magi being aroused, and — even if they 
had not possessed knowledge of the Jewish expectancy above described 
—for their making inquiry of all around, and certainly, among others, 
of the Jews. Here we leave the domain of the certain, and enter 
upon that of the %)robaMe. Kepler, who was led to the discovery by 
observing a similar conjunction in 1603-4, also noticed, that when 
the three planets came into conjunction, a new, extraordinary, bril- 
liant, and peculiarly colored evanescent star was visible between Ju- 
piter and Saturn, and he suggested that a similar star had appeared 
under the same circumstances in the conjunction preceding the Nati- 
vity. Of this, of course, there is not, and cannot be, absolute certainty. 
But, if so, this would be ' the star ' of the Magi, ' in its rising. ' There 
is yet another remarkable statement, which, however, must also be 
assigned only to the domain of the i^robable. In the astronomical tables 
of the Chinese — to whose general trustworthiness so high an authority 
as Humboldt bears testimony ^' — the appearance of an evanescent star •= cosmos. 
was noted. Pingre and others have designated it as a comet, and cal- 
culated its first appearance in February 750 a.u.c, which is just 
the time when the Magi would, in all probability, leave Jerusalem 
for Bethlehem, since this must have preceded the death of Herod, 
which took place in March 750. Moreover, it has been astronomically 
ascertained, that such a sidereal apparition would be visible to those 
who left Jerusalem, and that it would point — almost seem to go before 
— in the direction of, and stand over, Bethlehem.^ Such, impartially 
stated, are the facts of the case — and here the subject must, in the 
present state of our information, be left.^ 

Only two things are recorded of this visit of the Magi to Beth- 
lehem: their humblest Eastern homage, and their offerings.^ Viewed 

whether tliey reijanl the star as a mirac- tion of the narrative in St. ^fatthew. 

vlous <inidance. I do not, of course, ^ By the astronomer. Dr. (loldsehmidt. 

presume to enter on an astronomical dis- (See Wieseler, Chron. Syn. ]). 72.) 

eussion with Professor Pritcliard; hut as '^ A somewhat difl'erent view is ])re- 

his reasonini; i)roceeds on the idea that sented in the laborious and learned 

the planetary conjunction of 747 A.u.c, is edition of the New Testament liy Mr. 

regarded as 'the Star of the Ma^i,' his Brown McCIeUan (vol. i. pp. 400-402). 

arguments do not apply either to the ^ Our A.V. curiously translates in v. 

view jn-esented in the text nor even to 11, 'treasures,' instead of 'treasury- 

that of W'ieseler. Besides. I must ciis^i'd cases.' The exjiression is exactly the 

myself a.ijainst accepting his interprela- same as in Dent, xxviii. 12, for which the 


BOOK iis gifts, the incense and the myrrh would, indeed, have been strangely 
II inai)propriate. But their offerings were evidently intended as speci- 
^^ — -r — ' mens of the products of their country, and tlieir presentation was, 
even as in our own days, expressive of the homage of their country to 
the new-found King. In this sense, then, the Magi may truly be 
regarded as the representatives of the Gentile world; their homage 
as the first and typical acknowledgment of Christ by those who 
hitherto had been ' far off; ' and their offerings as symbolic of the 
world's tribute. This deeper significance the ancient Church has 
rightly apprehended, though, perhaps, mistaking its grounds. Its 
symbolism^ twining, like the convolvulus, around the Divine Plant, has 
traced in the gold the emblem of His Royalty; in the myrrh, of 
His Humanity, and that in the fullest evidence of it, in His burying; 
and in the incense, that of His Divinity.' 

As always in the history of Christ, so here also, glory and suffer- 
ing appear in juxtaposition. It could not be, that these Magi should 
become the innocent instruments of Herod's murderous designs; nor 
yet that the Infant-Saviour should fall a victim to the tyrant. Warned 
of God in a dream, the ' wise men ' returned ' into their own country 
another way; ' and, warned by the angel of the Lord in a dream, the 
Holy Family sought temporary shelter in Egypt. Baffled in the hope 
of attaining his object tlirough the Magi, the reckless tyrant sought 
to secure it l:)y an indiscriminate slaughter of all the children in 
Bethlehem and its immediate neighborhood, from two years and 
under. True, considering the population of Bethlehem, their number 
could only have ])een small, probably twenty at most.'- But the 
deed was none the less atrocious; and these infants may justly be 
regarded as the ' protomartyrs, ' the first witnesses, of Christ, 'the 
blossom of martyrdom ' (' fiores martyrum,' as Prudentius calls them). 
The slaughter was entirely in accordance with the character and 
former measures of Herod. ^ Xor do we wonder, that it remained 
unrecorded by Josephus, since on other occasions also he has omitted 

LXX. use the same words as the Evan- ^ So Archdeacon Farrar rightly com- 

gelist. The exi)ression is also used in putes it. 

this sense in the Apocr. and b.v profane ^ An illustrative instance of the ruth- 
writers. Corap. Wetstein and Meyer ad less destruction of whole families on 
locum. Jewish tradition also expresses suspicion that his crown was in danger, 
the expectancy that the nations of the occurs in Ant. xv. 8. 4. But the sugges- 
world would offer gifts unto the Messiah, tion that Bagoas had suffered at the 
(Comp. Pes. 118 h\ Ber. R. 78.) hands of Herod for Messianic predictions 
' So not only in ancient hymns (h\ is entirely an invention of Keim. (Schen- 
Sedidins, Juvenciis. and ChnLdian), but kel, Bibel Lex., vol. iii. p. 37. Comp. 
by the Fathers and later writers. (Comp. Ant. xvli. 2. 4.) 
Sepp, Leben Jesu, ii. 1, pp. 102, 103.) 


events wiiich to U8 seem iiiipoi'tunt.' The murder ol" a lew infants in CIIAP. 
an insignitieant village might appt-ar searcely worth notiee in a reign Viii 
stained by so mueh bloodshed. Besides, he had, perha])s, a special ^— ^r — ^ 
motive for this silence. Josephus always carefully sui)i)resses, so 
far as possible, all that refers to the Christ'' — i)rol)al)ly not only in 
accordance with his own religious views, but because mention of a 
Christ might have been dangerous, certainly would liave been in- 
convenient, in a work written l)y an intense self-seeker, mainly for 
readers in Rome. 

Of two passages in his own Old Testament Scriptures the Evan- 
gelist sees a fulfilment in these events. The flight into P^gypt is to 
him the fulfilment of this expression by Hosea, ' Out of P^gypt have 
I called My Son.'=' In the murder of 'the Innocents,' he sees the "Hos. xi. i 
fulfilment of Rachel's lament" (who died and was buried in Ramah)^ 'Jer. xxxi 
over her children, the men of Benjamin, when the exiles to Babylon 
met in Ramah, " and there was bitter wailing at the prospect ofi)art- 'Jer. xi. i 
ing for hopeless captivity, and yet bitterer lament, as they who might 
have encumbered the onward nmrch were pitilessly slaughtered. 
Those who have attentively followed the course of Jewish thinking, 
and marked how the ancient Synagogue, and that rightly, read the 
Old Testament in its unity, as ever pointing to the Messiah as the 
fulfilment of Israel's history, will not wonder at, Init fully accord 
with, St. Matthew's retrospective view. The words of Hosea were 
in the highest sense ' fulfilled ' in the flight to, and return of, the 
Saviour from Egypt.* To an inspired writer, nay, to a true Jewish 
reader of the Old Testament, the fjuestion in regard to any prophecy 
could not be: What did the jy^ophet — but, What did the prophecy 
— mean? And this could only be unfolded in the course of Israel's 
history. Similarly, those who ever saw in the past the prototyi)e of 
the future, and recognised in events, not only the principle, but the 
ver}^ features, of that which was to come, could not fail to perceive, 
in the bitter wail of the mothers of Bethlehem over their slaughtered 
childi'en, the full realisation of the prophetic description of the scene 

1 There are, in Josephus' history of '^ See the evidence for it summarized 

Herod, besides omissions, inconsisten- in ' Sl^etches of Jewish Social Life iu the 

cies of narrative, sucii as about the exe- Days of Christ,' i). (JO. 

cutionof Mariamnie (Ant. XV. 3, 5-9 itc. ; * In point of fact the ancient Syna- 

comi). War i. 22. 3, 4), and of chronoloijy ,c;ogue did actually apply to the Messiah 

(as War i. 18. 2, comp. v. 9. 4; Ant. xiv. Ex. iv. 22, on which the words of Hosea 

16. 2, comp. XV. 1. 2, and others.) are based. See the Midrash on Ps. ii. 7. 

^ Comp. on article on Josephus in The quotation is given in full in our 

Smith and Wace's Diet, of Christian remarks on Ps. ii. 7 in Appendix IX. 



BOOK enacted in Jeremiah's days. Had not the propliet himself heard, in 
n the lament oi' the captives to Babylon, the echoes of Rachel's voice in 

— r- — ' the past? In neither one nor the other case had the utterances of the 
prophets (Hosea and Jeremiah) hecn predictions: they ware prophetic. 
In neither one nor the other case was the 'fulfilment' literal: it was 
Scriptural, and that in the truest Old Testament sense. 




(St. Matt. ii. 19-23; St. Luke ii. 39, 40.) 

The stay of the Holy Family in Egypt must have been of brief chap. 
duration. The cup of Herod's misdeeds, but also of his misery, was IX 
full. During the whole latter part of his life, the dread of a rival ^-^ — -.^-- 
to the throne had haunted him, and he had sacrificed thousands, 
among them those nearest and dearest to him, to lay that ghost. ^ And 
still the tyrant was not at rest. A more terrible scene is not pre- 
sented in history than that of the closing days of Herod. Tormented 
by nameless fears; ever and again a prey to vain remorse, when he 
would frantically call for his passionately-loved, murdered wife 
Mariamme, and her sons; even making attempts on his own life; 
the delirium of tyranny, the passion for blood, drove him to the verge 
of madness. The most loathsome disease, such as can scarcely be 
described, had fastened on his body,^ and his sufferings were at times 
agonizing. By the advice of his physicians, he had himself carried 
to the baths of Callirhoe (east of the Jordan^, trying all remedies 
with the determination of one who will do hard battle for life. It 
was in vain. The namelessly horrible distemper, which had seized the 
old man of seventy, held him fast in its grasp, and, so to speak, 
played death on the living. He knew it, that his hour was come, 
and had himself conveyed back to his palace under the palm-trees 
of Jericho. They had known it also in Jerusalem, and, even before 
the last stage of his disease, two of the most honored and loved 
Rabbis — Judas and Matthias — had headed the wild band, Avhich would 
sweep away all traces of Herod's idolatrous rule. They began by 
pidling down the immense golden eagle, which hung over the great 
gate of the Temple. The two ringleaders, and forty of their followers, 

^ And yet Keim speaks of his Iloch- test. Zeit2;esch. ])]). 197, 19S. 

herzigkeit and natiirlicher Edelsinn! '^ See tlie liori-ihk' (l(\'^crii)tioM of his 

(Leben Jesu, i. L ji. 184.) A much living death in Jos. Ant. xvii. (i. 5. 
truer estimate is that of Schiirer, Neu- 



HOOK iillowcd tlu'inselves to be taken l)y Herod's guards. A mock public 
II ti'ial ill tlie theatn; at Jericho Ibllowcd. Herod, carried out on a 

— -, ' couch, was both accuser and judge. The zealots, who had made 

noble answer to tlie tyrant, were Inirnt alive; and tlie High-Priest, 
wlio was suspected of connivance, deposed. 

After that the end came rapidly. On his return from C'allirhoe, 
feeling his death ai)proaching, the King had summoned the noblest 
of Israel througliout the land of Jericho, and shut them up in the 
Hippodrome, with orders to his sister to have them slain immediately 
upon his death, in the grim hope that the joy of the people at his 
decease would thus be changed into mourning. Five days before 
his death one ray of jmssing joy lighted his couch. Terrible to say, 
it was caused by a letter from Augustus allowing Herod to execute 
his son Antipater — the false accuser and real murderer of his half- 
brothers Alexander and Aristobulus. The death of the wretched 
prince was hastened by his attempt to bribe the jailer, as the noise 
in the palace, caused by an attempted suicide of Herod, led him to 
suppose his father was actually dead. And now the terrible drama 
was hastening to a close. The fresh access of rage shortened the 
life which was already running out. Five days more, and the terror 
of Judaea lay dead. He had reigned thirty-seven years — thirty-four 
since his concpiest of Jerusalem. Soon tlie rule for which he had so 
long plotted, striven, and stained himself A\ith untold crimes, passed 
from his descendants. A century more, and the whole race of Herod 
had been swept away. 

We pass by the -empty pageant and barbaric splendor of his 
burying in the Castle of Herodium, close to Bethlehem. The events 
of the last few weeks formed a lurid back-ground to the murder of 
' the Innocents. ' As we have reckoned it, the visit of the Magi took 
place in February 750 a.u.c. On the 12th of March the Ral)bis and 
their adherents suffered. On the following night (or rather early 
morning) there was a lunar eclipse; the execution of Antipater pre- 
ceded tlie death of his father by five days, and the latter occurred 
from seven to fourteen days before the Passover, which in 750 took 
place on the 12th of April. ^ 

1 See the calculation in >Fie,seZe?-'sSyn- repeated statement of Joseplms that 

opse, pp. 56 and 444. The ' Dissertatio Herod died close upon the Passover 

de Herode Mao;no, by -/• A. van der Chijs should have sufficed to show the impossi- 

(Leyden. 1855), is very clear and accu- bility of that hypothesis. Indeed, there 

rate. Dr. Gelkie adopts the manifest is scarcely any historical date on which 

mistake of Caspar!, that Herod died in competent writers are more a^jreed than 

January, 753, and holds that the Holy that of Herod's death. See Schurer, 

Family spent three years in Egypt. The Neutest. Zeitg., pp. 222, 223. 


It need scarcely be said, that Salome (Herod's sister) and her chap. 
Iiiisl)aiid were too wise to execute Herod's direction in regard to the IX 
noble Jews shut up in the Hippodrome. Their liberation, and the ^- — ~^r — ' 
death of Herod, were marked by the leaders of the people as joyous 
events in the so-called MegiUath Taanith, or Roll of Fasts, although 
the date is not exactly marked.'' Henceforth this was to be a Yom «Meg.Taan 
Tobh (feast-day), on which mourning was interdicted.' ira*l/,; 

Herod had three times l)efore changed his testament. By the 
first will Antipater, the successful calumniator of Alexander and 
Aristobulus, had been appointed his successor, while the latter two 
were named kings, though we know not of what districts. '' After the >■ Jos.war 

i. lit}. 5 

execution of the two sons of Mariamme, Antipater was named king, 
and, in case of his death, Herod, the son of Mariamme II. AVhen the 
treachery of Antipater was proved, Herod made a third will, in which 
Antipas (the Herod Antipas of the New Testament) was named his 
successor." But a few days before his death he made yet another >=jo»-. Ant. 

^ -^ . xvli. 6. 1 ; 

disposition, by which Archelaus, the elder brother of Antipas (both war 1.32.7 
sons of Malthake, a Samaritan), was appointed king; Antipas tetrarch 
of Galilee and Peraea; and Pliilip (the son of Cleopatra, of Jerusa- 
lem '), tetrarch of the territory east of the Jordan.^ These testaments 
retlected the varying phases of suspicion and family-hatred through 
which Herod had passed. Although the Emperor seems to have 
authorised him to appoint his successor,'^ Herod wisely made his dis- •; jos.war 
l)Ositioii dependent on the approval of Augustus." But the latter was , ^nt. xvii 
not by any means to be taken for granted. Archelaus had, indeed, ^" ^ 
been immediately proclaimed King by the army; but he prudently 
declined the title, till it had been confirmed by the Emperor. The 
night of his father's death, and those that followed, were character- 
istically spent by Archelaus in rioting with his friends.*' But the g^^^-g^J"- 
people of Jerusalem were not easily satisfied. At first liberal prom- 
ises of amnesty and reforms had assuaged the populace.*'' But the ^Ant. xvu. 
indin-nation excited bv the late murder of the Rabl)is soon burst 

' Tlie Mecjillath Taanitli itself, or ' Roll Gnitz (Gescli. vol. iii. p. 427) andDeren- 

of Fasts.' does not mention tlie death of hnnrg (pp. 101, 16-1) have reirarded the 

Herod. But the commentator adds to the 1st of Shebhat as really that of Herod's 

dates 7th Kislfv (yox.) aw] 2n(\ iS/ieb/inf death. But this is imi)ossil)le; and we 

(Jan.), l)oth manifestly incorrect, the know enough of the historical inaccuracy 

notice that Herod had died— on the 2nd of the Rabbis not to attach any serious 

Shebhat, Jannai also — at the same time importance to their precise dates, 

tellini; a story about the incarceration '^ Herod had married no less than ten 

and liberation of ' seventy of the PJlders times. See his genealoijical table, 

of Israel,' evidently a modification of -^ Bataneea, Trachonitis, Auranitis, and 

Josei)hus' account of what passed in the Paulas. 
Hiprodrome of Jericho. Accordiuiily, 



9. 1-3 

BOOK into ;i stoi'in of lainciitation, and thou of rebellion, which Arehelaus 
H silenced by the slauii-hter of not less than three thousand, and that 
— -r — ' within the sacred precincts of the Temple itself.^ 
Ant.xvii. Other and more serious difficulties awaited him in Rome, whither 

he Avent in company with his mother, his aunt Salome, and other 
relatives. These, however, presently deserted him to espouse the 
claims of Antipas, who likewise appeared before Augustus to plead 
for the royal succession, assigned to him in a former testament. The 
Herodian family, while intriguing and clamouring each on his own 
account, were, for reasons easily understood, agreed that they would 
rather not have a king at all, but be under the suzerainty of Rome; 
though, if king there must be, they preferred Antiinis to Arehelaus. 
Meanwhile, fresh troubles broke out in Palestine, which were suppressed 
by fii'e, sword, and crucifixions. And now two other deputations 
arrived in the Imperial City. Philip, the step-brother of Arehelaus, to 
whom the latter had left the administration of his kingdom, came to 
"Ant. xvii. look after his own interests, as well as to supijort Arehelaus.'' ^ At the 

11. 1; War . ' . . , ^ 

ii. 6. 1 same time, a Jewish deputation ot filty, Irom Palestine, accompanied 

by eight thousand Roman Jews, clamoured for the deposition of the 
entire Herodian race, on account of their crimes,^ and the incorpora- 
tion of Palestine with Syria — no doubt in hope of the same semi- 
independence under their own authorities, enjoyed by their fellow- 
religionists in the Grecian cities. Augustus decided to confirm the 
last testament of Herod, with certain slight modifications, of which 
the most important was that Arehelaus should bear the title of 
Ethnarch, which, if he deserved it, would l)y-and-by be exchanged 
for that of King. His dominions were to be Judsea, Idumasa, and 
Samaria, with a revenue of 600 talents' (about 230, 000?. to 240, 000?). 
It is needless to follow the fortunes of the new Ethnarch. He began 
his rule by crushing all resistance by the wholesale slaughter of his 
opponents. Of the High-Priestly office he disposed after the manner 
of his father. But he far surpassed him in cruelty, oppression, 
luxury, the grossest egotism, and the lowest sensuality, and that, 
without possessing the talent or the energy of Herod.* His brief 
reign ceased in the year 6 of our era, when the Emperor banished 
him, on account of his crimes, to Gaul. 

^ I cannot conceive on what ground ^ The revenues of Antipas were 200 

Keim (both in SchenJipVs Bibel Lex, and talents, and tliose of Philip 100 talents, 

in his ' Jesu von Nazara') speaks of him * This is admitted even by Brann 

as a i)retender to tlie throne. (Solme d. Ilerodes, ]). 8). Despite its 

^ This nia.y have been the liistOrical pretentiousness, this tractate is un- 

basis of the parable of our Lord in St. trustworthy, being written in a party 

Luke xix. 12-27. sijirit (Jewish). 



It must have been soon alter llie aecession of Archelaus,^ but 
before tidings of it had aetuallj reached Joseph in Egypt, that the 
Holy Family returned to Palestine. The first intention of Joseph 
seems to have been to settle in Bethlehem, where he had lived since 
the birth of Jesus. Obvious reasons would incline him to choose this, 
and, if possible, to avoid Nazareth as the place of his residence. His 
trade, even had he been unknown in Bethlehem, would have easily 
supplied the modest wants of his household. But when, on reaching 
Palestine, he learned who the successor of Herod was, and also, no 
doubt, in what manner he had inaugurated his reign, common prudence 
would have dictated the withdrawal of the Infant-Saviour from the 
dominions of Archelaus. But it needed Divine direction to determine 
his return to Nazareth.^ 

Of the many years spent in Nazareth, during which Jesus passed 
from infancy to childhood, from childhood to youth, and from youth to 
manhood, the Evangelic narrative has left us but briefest notice. Of 
His childhood: that ^He grew and waxed strong in spirit, filled with 
wisdom, and the grace of God was- upon Him;'" of His youth: 
besides the account of His questioning the Rabbis in the Temple, the 
year before he attained Jewish majority — that 'He was subject to 
His parents,' and that 'He increased in wisdom and in stature, and in 
favour with God and man.' Considering what loving care watched 
over Jewish child-life, tenderly mjjrking by not fewer than eight 
designations the various stages of its development,^ and the deep 
interest naturally attaching to the early life of the Messiah, that 
silence, in contrast to the almost blasphemous absurdities of the 
Apocryphal Gospels, teaches us once more, and most impressively, that 
the Gospels furnish a history of the Saviour, not a biography of Jesus 
of Nazareth. 

St. Matthew, indeed, summarises the whole outward history of 



' We gather this from the expression, 
'When he heard that Archelaus did 
reigu.' Evidently Joseph had not heard 
who was Herod's successor, when he left 
Egypt. Archdeacon Farrar suggests, that 
the expression 'reigned' (' as a king, 
f3a(TiXevet — St. Alatt. ii. 22) refers to 
the period before Augustus had changed 
his title from ' King ' to Etiniarch. But 
this can scarcely l)e jiressed, the word 
being used of other rule than that of a 
kinff, not only in the New Testament 
and in the Apocryi)ha, Init by Josephus, 
and even by classical writers. 

^ The language of St. Matthew (ii. 22, 
23) seems to imply express Divine direc- 

tion not to enter the territory of Judjea. 
In that case he would travel along the 
coast-line till he passed into Galilee. 
The impression left is, that the settle- 
ment at Nazareth whs not of his own 

■^ Yeled, the newborn babe, as in Is. 
ix. 6 ; Yoneq, the suckling, Is. xi. 8 ; OM, 
the suckling beginning to ask for food. 
Lam. iv. 4; (iamu), the weaned child. 
Is. xxviii. 9; Taph, the child clinging to 
its mother, Jer. xl. 7; Elem, a child 
becoming tirm; Naar, the lad, literally, 
'one who shakes himself free;' and 
Bachur, the riiwned one. (See ' Sketches 
of Jewish Soeial Life,' pp. 103, 104.) 

» St. Luke 
il. iu 




» In accord- 
ance with 
Jer. xxili. 
5; xxxiii. 
15 ; and es- 
Zech ili. 18 

b So in Ber. 
R. 76 

the life in Nazareth in one sentence. Henceforth Jesus would stand 
out betbrc the Jews of His time — and, as we know, of all times ' — 
by the distinctive designation: 'of Nazareth/ *-!i*: (iVbtsri), ^a^oj- 
paios, ' the Nazarene.' In the mind of a Palestinian a peculiar signi- 
ficance would attach to the by-Name of the Messiah, especially in its 
connection with the general teaching of prophetic Scripture. And 
here we must remember, that St. Matthew primarily addressed his 
Gospel to Palestinian readers, and that it is the Jewish presentation 
of the Messiah as meeting Jewish expectancy. In this there is 
nothing derogatory to the character of the Gospel, no accommodation 
in the sense of adaptation, since Jesus was not only the Saviour of the 
world, but especially also the King of the Jews, and we are now con- 
sidering how He would stand out before the Jewish mind. On one 
point all were agreed: His Name was Notsri (of Nazareth). St. 
Matthew proceeds to point out, how entirely this accorded with 
prophetic Scripture — not, indeed, with any single prediction, but with 
the wliole language of the prophets. From this ^ the Jcavs derived 
not fewer than eight designations or Names by which the Messiah Avas 
to be called. The most prominent among them was that of TsemacJij 
or 'Branch.' " We call it the most prominent, not only because it is 
based upon the clearest Scrijiture-testimony, l)ut because it evidently 
occupied the foremost rank in Jewish thinking, being embodied in 
this earliest portion of their daily liturgy: ' The Branch of David, Thy 
Servant, speedily make to shoot forth, and His Horn exalt Thou Ijy 
Thy Salvation. . . . Blessed art Thou Jehovah, Who causeth to spring 
forth (literally: to branch forth) the Horn of Salvation' (1.5th Eulogy). 
Now, what is expressed by the word Tsemaeh is also conveyed by the 
term iVefeer, 'Branch,' in such passages as Isaiah xi. 1, which was 
likewise applied to the Messiah.^ Thus, starting from Isaiah x\.\,Netser 
being equivalent to Tsemaeh, Jesus would, as Notsri or Ben Netser.^'* 
bear in popular parlance, and that on the ground of prophetic Scrip- 
tures, the exact equivalent of the best-known designation of the 
Messiah.^ The more significant this, that it was not a self-chosen 
nor man-given name, but arose, in the providence of God. from what 
otherwise might have been called the accident of His residence. We 

1 This is still the common, alniost uni- 
versal, designation of Christ among the 

^ Comp. ch. iv. of this book. 

^ See Appendix IX. 

* Comp. Buxtorf, Lexicon Tahn. p. 
1383. . • 

^ All this becomes more evident by De- 
litzsch's ingenious suggestion fZeitschr. 
fiir luther. Theol. 187(5. part iii. ]). 
402). that the real meaning, though nf)t 
the literal rendering, of the words of St. 
Matthew, would be I'ir "i." "2 — • for 
Nezer ['branch"] is His Xame.' 


admit tliat this is a Jewish view; but then this (iospel /.s the Jewish CHAP, 
view of the Jewish Messiali. IX 

But, taking this Jewish title in its Jewish significaiiee, it has also ~ — -r — 
a deei)er meaning, and that not only to Jews, but to all men. The 
idea of Christ as the Divinely plaeed ' Braneh ' (symbolised by His 
Divinely-appointed early residence), small and desi)ised in its forth- 
shooting, or then visible appearance (like Nazareth and the Nazarenes), 
but destined to grow as the Branch sprung out of Jesse's roots, is 
most marvellously true to the whole history of the Christ, alike as 
sketched ' ]\y the prophets,' and as exhibited in reality. And thus to 
us all, Jews or Gentiles, the Divine guidance to Nazareth and the 
name Nazarene present the truest fulfilment of the prophecies of His 

Greater contrast could scarcely be imagined than between the in- 
tricate scholastic studies of the Juda^ans, and the active pursuits that 
engaged men in Galilee. It was a common saying: ' If a person 
wishes to be rich, let him go north; if he wants to be wise, let him 
come south ' — and to Judgea, accordingly, flocked, from ploughshare 
and workshop, whoever w^ished to become ' learned in the Law. ' The 
very neighbourhood of the Gentile world, the contact with the great 
commercial centres close by, and the constant intercourse with foreign- 
ers, who passed through Galilee along one of the world's great high- 
ways, would render the narrow exclusiveness of the Southerners 
impossible. Galilee was to Judaism ' the Court of the Gentiles ' — the 
Rabbinic Schools of Judaea its innermost Sanctuary. The natural 
disposition of the people, even the soil and climate of Galilee, were 
not favourable to the all-engrossing passion for Rabbinic study. In 
Judaea all seemed to invite to retrospection and introspection; to favour 
habits of solitary thought and study, till it kindled into fanaticism. 
Mile l)y mile as you travelled southwards, memories of the past would 
crowd around, and thoughts of the future would rise within. Avoiding 
the great towns as the centres of hated heathenism, the traveller 
would meet few foreigners, but everywhere encounter those gaunt 
representatives of what was regarded as the superlative excellency of 
his religion. These were the embodiment of Jewish piety and 
asceticism, the possessors and expounders of the mysteries of his faith, 
the fountain-head of wisdom, who were not only sure of heaven 
themselves, but knew its secrets, and were its very aristocracy; men 
who could tell him all about his own religion, practised its most 
minute injunctions, and could interin-ot every stroke and letter of the 
Law — nay, whose it actually was to ' loose and to bind,' to ju-onounce 


BOOK an action lawful or unlawful, and to ' remit or retain sins, ' by declaring 
n n iiKin liable to, or free from, cxjnatory sacrifices, or else punishment 

' -. — ^ in this or the next world. ISo Hindoo fanatic would more humbly 

bend Ix'lbre lirahiiiiu saints, nor devout Romanist more venerate the 
mcudx'rs of a holy fraternity, than the Jew his great Rabbis.^ 
Reason, duty, and precept, alike bound him to reverence them, as he 
rc^•erenced the God Whose interpreters, representatives, deputies, 
intimate companions, almost colleagues in the heavenly Sanhedrin, 
they were. And all around, even nature itself, might seem to foster 
such tendencies. Even at that time Judaea was comparatively desolate, 
barren, grey. The decaying cities of ancient renown; the lone high- 
land scenery; the bare, rugged hills; the rocky terraces from which 
only artificial culture could woo a return; the wide solitary plains, 
deep glens, limestone heights — with distant glorious Jerusalem ever 
in tlie far background, would all favour solitary thought and religious 

It was quite otherwise in Galilee. The smiling landscape of 
Lower Galilee invited the easy labour of the agriculturist. Even the 
highlands of Upper Galilee '^ were not, like those of Judgea, sombre, 
lonely, enthusiasm-killing, but gloriously grand, free, fresh, and 
bracing. A more beautiful country — hill, dale, and lake — could 
scarcely be imagined than Galilee Proper. It was here that Asher 
had 'dipped his foot in oil.' According to the Rabbis, it was easier 
to rear a forest of olive-trees in Galilee than one child in Judaea. 
Corn grew in abundance; the wine, though not so plentiful as the oil, 
was rich and generous. Proverbially, all fruit grew in perfection, 
and altogether the cost of living was about one-fifth that in Judgea. 
And then, what a teeming, busy population ! Making every allowance 
for exaggeration, we cannot wholly ignore the account of Josephus 
about the 240 towns and villages of Galilee, each with not less than 
15,000 inhabitants. In the centres of industry all then known trades 
were busily carried on; the husbandman pursued his happy toil on 

' One of the most absurdly curious On the south it was bounded by Samaria 
illustrations of this is the following: — Mount Carmel on the Western, and the 
' He who blows his nose in the presence district of Scythopolis on the eastern 
of his Riil)bi is wortliy of death ' (Erub. side, being here landmarks; while the 
1)1) r/, line 11 from bottom). Ih^ diet inn Jordan and the Lake of Oennesaret 
is supported by an alteration in the formed tlie general eastern boundary- 
reading of Prov. viii. ."56. line.' (Sketctiesof Jewish Soc. Life, p. 33.) 

'•* Galilee covered the ancient posses- Ii was divided into rp]ier and Lower 

sions of Issachar, Zebulun, Naphtali, and Galilee — the former beginning ' where 

Asher. ' In the time of Christ it stretched sycomores (not our sycamores) cease to 

northwards to the possessions of Tyre on grow.' Fishing in the Lake of Galilee 

the ono side, and to Syria on the other. was free to all (Baba K. 81 b). 



genial soil, while by the Lake of Gennesaret, with its unrivalled 
beauty, its rich villages, and lovely retreats, the flsherman j)lied his 
healthy avocation. By those waters, overarched by a deep blue sky, 
spangled with the brilliancy of innumerable stars, a man might feel 
constrained by nature itself to meditate and pray ; he would not be 
likely to indulge in a morbid fanaticism. 

Assuredly, in its then condition, Galilee was not the home of 
Rabbinism, though that of generous spirits., of warm, impulsive 
hearts, of intense nationalism, of simple manners, and of earnest 
piety. Of course, there would be a reverse side to the picture. Such 
a race would be excitable, passionate, violent. The Talmud accuses 
them of being quarrelsome," but admits that they cared more for 
honour than for money. The great ideal teacher of Palestinian 
schools was Akiba, and one of his most outspoken opponents a 
Galilean, Rabbi Josd. ^ In religious observances their practice was 
simpler; as regarded canon-law they often took independent views. 


' cantan- 
kerous' (?), 
Ned. 48 a 

b Siphre on 
Numb. X. 
19, ed. 

and generally followed the interpretations of those who, in opposition mann, 4 a. 
to Akiba, inclined to the more mild and rational — we had almost 
said, the more human — application of traditionalism.^ The Talmud 
mentions several points in which the practice of tlie Galileans differed 
from that of Judaea — all either in the direction of more practical earnest- 
ness,^ or of alleviation of Rabbinic rigorism.^ On the other hand, 
they were looked down upon as neglecting traditionalism, unable to 
rise to its speculative heights, and preferring the attractions of the 
Haggadah to the logical subtleties of the Halakhah.* There was a 
general contempt in Rabbinic circles for all that was Galilean, 
Although the Judsean or Jerusalem dialect was far from pure,^ the 
people of Galilee were especially blamed for neglecting the study of 
their language, charged with errors in grammar, and especially with 
absurd malpronunciation, sometimes leading to ridiculous mistakes.® 

1 Of which Jochaiian, the son of Niiri, 
may here be regarded as the exponent. 

■■^ As in the relation between bride- 
groom and bride, the cessation of work 
the day before the Passover, &c. 

•^ As in regard to animals lawful to be 
eaten, vows, &c. 

* The doctrinal, or rather Halakhic, 
differences between Galilee and Jud;ea 
are partially noted by Lightfoot (Ghro- 
nogr. Matth. praem. Ixxxvi.), and by 
Hamburger (Real-Enc! i. p. 395). 

^ See Deiitsch's Remains, p. .358. 

'" The differences of ])roiiunciation and 
language are indicated by Lightfoot (u. s. 

Ixxxvii.), and by Deutsch (u. s. pp. 357, 
358). Several instances of ridiculous 
mistakes arising from it are recorded. 
Thus, a woman cooked for her husband 
two lentils (*ni"'w) instead of two feet 
(of an aninuil, *Srw), as desired {Nedar, 
66 h). On another occasion a woman 
malpronounced ' Come, I will give thee 
milk,' into 'Companion, butter devour 
thee!' (Erub. 53 b). In the same con- 
nection otlier similar stories are told. 
Comp. also Neultauer, Geogr. du Tal- 
mud, p. 184, G. de Rossi, della lingua, 
prop, di Cristo, Dissert. I. passim. 




" Erub. 5:{ h 

'■ St. Luke 
ii. 40 

•(Jaliloau — Fool!' was so common an expression, that a learned lady 
turned with it upon so great a man as R. Jos^, the Galilean, because 
he hail used two needless words in asking her the road to Lydda. "^ 
Indeed, this R. Jose had considerable prejudices to overcome, before 
his remarkable talents and learning were fully acknowledged.^ 

Among such a people, and in that country, Jesus spent by far the 
longest part of His life upon earth. Generally, this period may 
be described as that of His true and full Human Development — 
physical, intellectual, spiritual — of outward submission to man, and 
inward submission to God, with the attendant results of ' wisdom, ' 
'favour,' and 'grace.' Necessary, therefore, as this period was, if 
the Christ was to be Tkue Man, it cannot be said that it was lost, 
even so far as His Work as Saviour was concerned. It was more than 
the preparation for that work; it w^as the commencement of it: 
subjectively (and passively), the self-abnegation of humiliation in His 
willing submission: and objectively (and actively), the fulfilment of 
all righteousness through it. But into this 'mystery of piety' 
we may only look afar otf — simply remarking, that it almost needed 
for us also these thirty years of Human Life, that the overpowering 
thought of His Divinity might not overshadow that of His Humanity. 
But if He was subject to such conditions, they must, in the nature 
of things, have afi'ected His development. It is therefore not pre- 
sumption when, without breaking the silence of Holy Scripture, we 
follow the various stages of the Nazareth life, as each is, so to speak, 
initialled Ijy the brief but emphatic summaries of the third Gospel. 
• In regard to the Child-Life,^ we read: 'And the Child grew, 
and waxed strong in spirit,* being filled with wisdom, and the grace 
of God was upon Him. ' ^ This marks, so to speak, the lowest rung 
in the ladder. Having entered upon life as the Divine Infant, He 
began it as the Human Child, subject to all its conditions, yet perfect 
in them. 

These conditions were, indeed, for that time, the happiest conceiv- 
able, and such as only centuries of Old Testament life-training could 
have made them. The Gentile world here presented terrible contrast, 

^ Gelpke, Jugendgesch, des Herrn, 
has, at least m our daj's, little value 
beyond its title. 

* The words ' iu spirit ' are of doubt- 
ful authority. But their omission can be 
of no consequence, since the 'waxing 
strong' evidently refers to the mental 
development, as the subsequent clause 

1 The Rabbi asked: What road leads 
to Lydda ? — using /onr words. The 
woman pointed out that, since it was 
not lawful to multiply speech with a 
woman, he should have asked: Whither 
to Lijdda ? — in two words. 

2 in fact, only four great Galilean 
Rabbis are mentioned. The Galileans 
are said to have inclined towards mysti- 
cal ( Kabbalistic ?) pursuits. 


alike in regard to the relation of parents and eliildren, and the CHAP, 
character and moral object of their upbringing. Education l)egins l^ 
in the home, and there were not homes like those in Israel; it is ^— ^r^^ 
imparted by influence and example, before it comes by teaching; it 
is acquired by what is seen and heard, before it is laboriously learned 
from books; its real object becomes instinctively felt, before its 
goal is consciously sought. What Jewish fathers and mothers were; 
what they felt towards their children; and with what reverence, 
affection, and care the latter returned what they had received, is 
known to every reader of the Old Testament. The relationship of 
father has its highest sanction and embodiment in that of God 
towards Israel; the tenderness and care of a mother in that of the 
watchfulness and pity of the Lord over His people. The semi-Divine 
relationship between children and parents appears in the location, the 
far more than outward duties which it implies in the wording, of the 
Fifth Commandment. No punishment more prompt than that of its 
breach;'' no description more terribly realistic than that of the ven- j^.f^*- -'^^'• 
geance which overtakes such sin."* ^■pxov.s.xa. 

From the first days of its existence, a religious atmosphere sur- 
rounded the child of Jewish parents. Admitted in the number of 
God's chosen people by the deeply significant rite of circumcision, 
when its name was first spoken in the accents of prayer,^ it was 
henceforth separated unto God. Whether or not it accepted the 
privileges and obligations implied in this dedication, they came to 
him directly from God, as much as the circumstances of his birth. 
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of Israel, the God 
of the promises, claimed him, with all of blessing which this conveyed, 
and of responsibility which resulted from it. And the first Avish 
expressed for liim was that, 'as he had been joined to the covenant,' 
so it might also be to him in regard to the ' Torah ' (Law), to *the 
Chuppah' (the marriage-baldachino), and 'to good works;' in other 
words, that he might live 'godly, soberly, and righteously in this 
present Avorld ' — a holy, happy, and God-devoted life. And what 
this was, could not for a moment be in doubt. Putting aside the 
overlying Rabbinic interpretations, the ideal of life was presented to 
the mind of the Jew in a hundred different forms — in none perhaps 
more popularly than in the W(n'ds, ' These are the things of which 
a man enjoys the fruit in this world, but their possession continueth 
for the next: to honour father and mother, pious works, ])eacemaking 

^ See the notice of these rites at the eircuincisioii of John the Baptist, in ch. iv. of 
this Book. 


BOOK between man and man, and the study of tlie Law, whicli isc(j[uivalent 
II to them all.' " This devotion to the Law was, indeed, to the Jew the all 

^- — ^.^ ' in all — the sum of intelleetual pursuits, the aim of life. What better 

»poahi. 1 tiiin<»: could a father seek for his child than this inestimable boon? 
Tlic first education was necessarily the mother's.^ Even the 
Talmud owns this, when, among the memorable sayings of the sages, 
it records one of the School of Rabbi Jannai, to the eft'ect that know- 
ledge of the Law may be looked for in those, who have sucked it in 

" Ber. 63 h at their mother's breast." And what the true mothers in Israel were, 
is known not only from instances in the Old Testament, from the 
praise of woman in the Book of Proverbs, and from the sayings of 
the son of Sirach (Ecclus. iii.^), but from the Jewish women of the 
New Testament.* If, according to a somewhat curious traditional 
principle, women were dispensed from all such positive obligations as 
were incumbent at fixed periods of time (such as putting on phylac- 
teries), other religious duties devolved exclusively upon them. The 
Sabbath meal, the kindling of the Sabbath lamp, and the setting 
apart a portion of the dough from the bread for the household, — 
these are but instances, with which every ' Taph, ' as he clung to 
his mother's skirts, must have been familiar. Even before he could 
follow her in such religious household duties,' his eyes must have 
been attracted by the Mezuzah attached to the door-post, as the name 

••On which of the Most High on the outside of the little folded parchment" was 4-9 " 

and xi. 13- revcrcntlv touched by each who came or went, and then the fingers 

21 were ./ ./ ; ■- 

Inscribed kisscd that had come m contact with the Holy Name.'' Indeed, the 

\v%'.u^' *^iity of the 3l€zuzah was incumbent on women also, and one can 

Me^'iiLLS; imagine it to have been in the heathen-home of Lois and Eunice 

MoedK. 111. -j^ ^j^^ far-off 'dispersion,' where Timothy would first learn to 

wonder at, then to understand, its meaning. And what lessons for 

the past and for the present might not be connected with it ! In 

popular opinion it was the syml)ol of the Divine guard over Israel's 

homes, the visible emblem of this joyous hymn: 'The Lord shall 

preserve thy going out and coming in, from this time forth, and even 

• Ps. cxxi. 8 for evermore. ^ " 

There could not be national history, nor even romance, to compare 
with that by which a Jewish mother might hold her child entranced. 

^ Comp. ' Sketches of .Jewish Social ^ Besides tlie holy women who are 

Life,' pp. 86-l()0, the literature there named in the Gospels, we would refer to 

quoted: D»sc//rt^, Schulgesetzgebung d. the mothers of Zebedee's children and 

alten Isr. ; and Dr. Marcus, Paedagog. d. of Mark, to Dorcas, Lj'dia, Lois, Eunice, 

Isr. Volkes. Priscilla, St. John's 'elect lady,' and 

^ The counterpart is in Ecclus. xxx. others. 


And it was liis own history — that of his trilio, chin, i)oi']iaps family; CHAP. 
of tho past, indeed, but yet of 'the present, and still more of the IX 
glorious future. Long before he could go to school, or even Syna- ^-^r — ' 
gogue, the private and united prayers and the domestic rites, whether 
of the weekly Sabbath or of festive seasons, would indelibly impress 
themselves upon his mind. In mid-winter there was the festive 
illumination in each home. In most houses, the first night only one 
candle was lit, the next two, and so on to the eighth day; and the child 
would learn that this was symbolic, and commemorative of the Dedi- 
cation of the Temple^ its purgation, and the restoration of its services 
by the lion-hearted Judas the Maccabec. Next came, in earliest 
spring, the merry time of Purim, the Feast of Esther and of Israel's 
deliverance through her, with its good cheer and boisterous enjoy- 
ments.^ Although the Passover might call the rest of the family to 
Jerusalem, the rigid exclusion of all leaven during the whole week 
could not pass without its impressions. Then, after the Feast of 
Weeks, came bright summer. But its golden harvest and its rich 
fruits would remind of the early dedication of the first and best to 
the Lord, and of those solemn processions in which it was carried up 
to Jerusalem. As autumn seared the leaves, the Feast of the New 
Year spoke of the casting up of man's accounts in the great Book of 
Judgment, and the fixing of destiny for good or for evil. Then 
followed the Fast of the Day of Atonement, with its tremendous 
solemnities, the memory of which could never fade from mind or 
imagination; and, last of all, in the week of the Feast of Tabernacles, 
there were the strange leafy booths in which they lived and joyed, 
keeping their harvest-thanksgiving; and praying and longing for the 
better harvest of a renewed world. 

But it was not only through sight and hearing that, from its very 
inception, life in Israel became religious. There was also from the first 
positive teaching, of which the commencement would necessarily de- 
volve on the mother. It needed not the extravagant lauckitions, nor the 
promises held out by the Rabbis, to incite Jewish women to this duty. 
If they were true to their descent, it would come almost naturally to 
them. Scripture set before them a continuous succession of noble 
Hebrew mothers. How well they followed their example, we learn 
from the instance of her, whose son, the child of a Gentile father, 
and reared far away, where there was not even a Synagogue to sustain 
religious life, had 'from an infant' known the Holy Scriptures,' and 

1 Some of its customs almost remind - The word ^/3£'0o; has no other mean- 

us of our 5th of November. ine; than that of ' infant ' or ' babe.' 




» 2 Tim. iii. 
1.') ; 1. 5 
'• riiih. 
Legat. <i(l 
16. 31 

'■ ./0.S-. Ag. 
Apion ii. ivl 

'1 Jo<. Ag. 
Apion il.'26; 
fomp. 1. 8. 
12: ii. 27 

Kidd, 29 a 

f Sanh. 99 b 
e Kidd, 30 a 

•> Meg. 6 b 

' Sot. 22 a 
i< Slice. 42 a 

" Ps. cxiii. 

» Baba B. 
21 (( : Keth. 
50 a 

tliat in tlicii- lire-moiildin.u- intlucnco.^ It was, indeed, no idle boast 
tliat the Jews 'were Ironi their swaddling-elothes . . . trained to 
recognise God as tlieir Father, and as the Maker of the world; 'that, 
' having been tanght the knowledge (of the laws) from earliest youth, 
they bore in their souls the image of the commandments;'^' that 'from 
their earliest consciousness they learned the laws, so as to have them, 
as it were, engraven upon the soul;'" and that they were 'brought 
up in learning,' 'exercised in the laws,' 'and made acquainted with 
the acts of their predecessors in order to tlieir imitation of them."* 

But while the earliest religious teaching would, of necessity, come 
from the lips of the mother, it was the father who was 'bound to 
teach his son. ' ' To impart to the child knowledge of the Torah 
conferred as great spiritual distinction, as if a man had received the 
Law itself on Mount Horeb/ Every other engagement, even the 
necessary meal, should give place to this paramount duty; ^ nor should 
it be forgotten that, wiiile here real labour was necessary, it would 
never prove fruitless.'' That man was of the profane vulgar (an Am 
Jia-arets), who had sons, but failed to bring them up in knowledge of 
the Law\' Directly the child learned to speak, his religious instruc- 
tion was to begin ^ — no doubt, with such verses of Holy Scripture as 
composed thatpartof the Jewish liturgy, which answers to our Creed.' 
Then would follow other passages from the Bible, short prayers, and 
select sayings of the sages. Special attention was given to the culture 
of the memory, since forgetfulness might prove as fatal in its conse- 
ciuences as ignorance or neglect of the Law.™ Very early the child 
must have been taught what might be called his birthday-text — some 
verse of Scripture beginning, or ending with, or at least containing, 
the same letters as his Hebrew name. This guardian-promise the child 
would insert in its daily prayers.^ The earliest hymns taught would 
be the Psalms for the days of the week, or festive Psalms, such as the 
Hallel," or those connected with the festive pilgrimages to Zion. 

The regular instruction commenced with the fifth or sixth year 
(according to strength), when every child was sent to school." There 
can be no reasonable doubt that at that time such schools existed 
throughout the land. We find references to them at almost every 
period; indeed, the existence of higher schools and Academies would 
not have been possible without such primary instruction. Two Rabbis 

1 The Shema. 

2 Com]). ' .Sketcbo.5 of .Te\vi.sli Social 
Life,' 1)]). lo!) &c. Tiie enigmatic mode 
of woniin.i!; and writing was very com- 
mon. Tlui.-<, the year is marked by a 

verse, generally from Scripture, which 
contains the letters that give the numer- 
ical value of the year. These letters are 
indicated by marks above them. 

119 b 
Sanh. 17 // 


of Jerusalem, specially distinguished and beloved on account of their CHAP. 
educational labours, were among tlie last victims of Herod's cruelt}." IX 

Later on, tradition ascribes to Joshua the son of (landa the introduc- ^^^r — ' 

tion of schools in every town, and the compulsory education in them " -^".s- Ant. 

. "^ xvii. 6. 2 

of all children above the age of six." Such was the transcendent i. BabaB. 
merit attaching to this act, that it seemed to blot out the guilt of the ^^ " 
purchase for him of the High-Priestly oflQce by his wife Martha, shortly 
before the commencement of the great Jewish war."^ To pass over "Vebam. 
the fabulous number of schools supposed to have existed in Jerusalem, is a 
tradition had it that, despite of this, the City only fell because of the 
neglect of the education of children.'' It was even deemed unlawful ^^shabb. 
to live in a place where there was no school.'' Such a city deserved 
to be either destroyed or excommunicated.'' fshabb.u.s. 

It would lead too far to give details about the appointment of, 
and provision for, teachers, the arrangements of the schools, the method 
of teaching, or the subjects of study, the more so as many of these 
regulations date from a period later than that under review. Suffice 
it that, from the teaching of the alphabet or of writing, onwards to 
the farthest limit of instruction in the most advanced Academies of 
tlie Rabbis, all is marked by extreme care, wisdom, accuracy, and a 
moral and religious purpose as the ultimate object. For a long time it 
was not uncommon to teach in the open air; ^ but this must have been ?shabb. 
chiefly in connection with theological discussions, and the instruc- MoeciK.iea 
tion of youths. But the children were gathered in the Synagogues, 
or in School-houses,^ where at first they either stood, teacher and 
pupils alike, or else sat on the ground in a semicircle, facing the 
teacher, as it were, literally to carry into practice the prophetic say- 
ing: ' Thine eyes shall see thy teachers. "> The introduction of benches hjg. xxx.20 
or chairs was of later date; l)ut the principle was always the same, 
that in respect of accommodation there was no distinction between 
teacher and taught.^ Thus, encircled by his pupils, as l)y a crown of 
glory (to use the language of Maiinonides), the teacher — generally the 
Chazzan, or Officer of the Synagogue' — should impart to them the i For ex- 
precious knowledge of the Law, with constant adaptation to their capa- stTabb! 11 a 
city, with unwearied patience, intense earnestness, strictness tempered 
by kindness, but, above all, with the highest object of their training 
ever in view. To keep children from all contact with vice; to train them 

1 He was succeeded by Matthias, the of Ischoli, with its various derivations, 

son of Theophiios, under whose Pontiti- evidently from the Greek crxoXi), sc/wla. 
cate the war against Rome began. •* Tiie proof-passages from tlit^ Talmud 

'^ Among the names by wliicli tlie are collated by Dr. Mdrrus (Pa:'dagog. 

schools are designated there is also that d. Isr. Volkes, ii. pp. 10, 17). 


BOOK tt) liciitloncss. cvoii when l)ittercst \\i-(iii.ii" had been received; to show 
11 sill ill its repulsiveness, rather than to terrify ])\ its consequences; 

"— ~Y-"*-^ to train to strict truthfuhiess; to avoid all that might lead to dis- 
agreeable or indelicate thoughts; and to do all this without showing 
partiality, without cither undue severity, or laxity of discipline, 
with judicious increase of study and work, with careful attention to 
thoroughness in acquiring knowledge — all tliis and more constituted 
the ideal set before the teacher, and made his office of such high 
esteem in Israel. 

Roughly classifying the subjects of study, it was held, that, up to 
ten years of age, the Bible exclusively should be the text-book; from 
ten to fifteen, the Mishnah, or traditional law; after that age, the 
student should enter on those theological discussions which occupied 

»At). V. 21 time and attention in the higher Academies of the Rabbis." Not 
that this progression would always be made. For, if after three, or, 
at most, five years of tuition — that is, after having fairly entered on 
Mishnic studies — the child had not shown decided aptitude, little 
hope was to be entertained of his future. The study of the Bible 
commenced with that of the Book of Leviticus.' Thence it passed 
to the other parts of the Pentateuch; then to the Prophets; and, 
finally, to the Hagiographa. What now constitutes the Gemara or 
Talmud was taught in the Academies, to which access could not be 
gained till after the age of fifteen. Care was taken not to send a 
child too early to school, nor to overwork him when there. For this 
purpose the school-hours were fixed, and attendance shortened during 
the summer-months. 

The teaching in school would, of course, be greatly aided by the 
services of the Synagogue, and the deeper influences of home-life. 
We know that, even in the troublous times which preceded the rising 
of the Maccabees, the possession of parts or the whole of the Old 
Testament (whether in the original or the LXX. rendering) was so 
common, that during the great persecutions a regular search was 
made throughout the land for every copy of the Holy Scriptures, and 

l;_i Ma.-c. 1. those puuishcd who possessed them.'' After the triumph of the Macca- 

'.Aw.Aiit.xii. bees, these copies of the Bible would, of course, be greatly multi- 

5. 4 , 

plied. And, although perhaps only the wealthy could have purchased 

^ ^?/^■».'7^■^^sf Academic. Dissert p. 335) and sacrifices pure, it is fitting that the 

curiously suggests, that tiiis was done to pure should busy themselves with the 

teach a child its guilt and the need of pure. The obvious reason seems, that 

justification. The Rabbinical interi)re- Leviticus treated of the ordinances with 

tation ( N'ayyikra R. 7) is at least equally which every Jew ought to have been 

far-fetched: that, us children are pure acquainted. 


a MS. of the whole Old Testainout in Hebrew, yet some portion or chap. 
portions of the AVord of God, in the original, would form the most IX 

cherished treasure of every pious houselKjld. Besides, a school for ^ — ^( 

Bible-study was attached to every academv,^ in which coi)ies of the :.^.^}'- ^I'^s- 

Holy Scripture would be kept. From anxious care to preserve the 

integrity of the text, it was deemed unlawful to make copies of small 

portions of a book of Scripture.^ But exception was made of certain 

sections which Avere copied for the instruction of children. Among 

them, the history of the Creation to tliat of the. Flood; Lev. i.-ix. ; 

and Numb. i.-x. 35, are sijccially mentioned." bsopher. v. 

' ' •' _ 9, p. 25 6; 

It was in such circumstances, and under such influences, that the giu eoa; 

' " Jer. Meg. 

early years of Jesus passed. To go beyond this, and to attempt lifting 1^ «; tos. 
the veil which lies over His Child-History, would not only be pre- 
sumptuous," but involve us in anachronisms. Fain would we know 
it, whether the Child Jesus frequented the Synagogue School; who 
was His teacher, and who those who sat beside Him on the ground, 
earnestly gazing on the face of Him Who repeated the sacrificial ordi- 
nances in the Book of Leviticus, that were all to be fulfilled in Him. 
But it is all ' a mystery of Godliness.' We do not even know quite 
certainly whether the school-system had, at that time, extended to far- 
off Nazareth; nor whether the order and method which have been 
described were universally observed at that time. In all probability, 
however, there was such a school in Nazareth, and, if so, the Child- 
Saviour would conform to the general practice of attendance. We 
may thus, still with deepest reverence, think of Him as learning His 
earliest earthly lesson from the Book of Lex^iticus. Learned Rabbis 
there were not in Nazareth — either then or afterwards.^ He would 
attend the services of the Synagogue, where Moses and the prophets 

1 Herzfehl ( jesch. d. Y. Isr. iii. p. 267, specimens of th!^ ' quietffossip ' a number 
note) strangely misquotes and misinter- of Rabbinic quotations from the German 
prets tills matter. Comp. Dr. MMer, translation in D»A-es' 'Rabbinische Blu- 
Massecb. Sofer. p. 75. menlese.' To this it is siirticient answer: 

2 The most painful. instances of these 1. There were no such leai'ued Rabins in 
are the legendary accounts of the early Nazareth. 2. If there had been, they 

■ history of Christ in the Apocryi)hal would not have been visitors in the house 

Gospels (well collated by Keim, i. 2, pp. of Joseph. 3. If tliey had been visitors 

413^68, pnssi))i). But later writers are there, they would not have spoken what 

unfortunately not wholly free from the Dr. Geikie quotes from Dukes, since some 

charge. of the extracts are from medianal books, 

■* I must here protest against the in- and only one a proverbial expression, 

troduction of imaginary ' Evening Scenes 4. Even if they had so spoken, it would 

in Nazareth,' when, according to Dr. at least have been in the words which 

Geikie, ' friends or neighbours of Joseph's Dukes has translated, without the changes 

circle would meet for an hour's quiet and additions which Dr. Geikie has in- 

gossip.' Dr. Geikie here introduces as troduced in some instances. 





■'St. Luke 
iv. 16 

'> St. Matt. 

V. 18 

c St. Luke 
xvl. 17 

were read, and, as afterwards by Himself,'' occasional addresses 
delivered.' That -His was pre-eminently a pious home in the highest 
sense, it seems almost irreverent to say. From His intimate familiarity 
with Holy Scripture, in its every detail, we may be allowed to infer 
that the home of Nazareth, however humble, possessed a precious 
coi)y of the Sacred Volume in its entirety. At any rate, we know 
that from earliest childhood it must have formed the meat and drink 
of the Grod-Man. The words of the Lord, as recorded by St. Matthew " 
and St. Luke," also imply that the Holy Scriptures which He read 
were in the original Hebrew, and that they were written in the square, 
or Assyrian, characters.^ Indeed, as the Pharisees and Sadducees 
always appealed to the Scriptures in the original, Jesus could not have 
met them on any other ground, and it was this which gave such point to 
His frequent expostulations with them: ' Have ye not read?' 

But far other thoughts than theirs gathered around His study of 
the Old Testament Scriptures. When comparing their long discus- 
sions on the letter and law of Scripture with His references to the 
Word of God, it seems as if it were quite another book which was 
handled. As we gaze into the vast glory of meaning which He opens 
to us; follow the shining track of heavenward living to which He 
points; behold the lines of symbol, type, and prediction converging 
in the grand unity of that Kingdom which became reality in Him; 
or listen as, alternately, some question of His seems to rive the darkness, 
as with flash of sudden light, or some sweet promise of old to lull 
the storm, some earnest lesson to quiet the tossing waves — we catch 
faint, it may be far-off, glimpses of how, in that early Child-life, when 
the Holy Scriptures were His special study. He must have read them, 
and what thoughts must have been kindled by their light. And 
thus ])etter than before can we understand it: ' And the Child grew, 
and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom, and the grace of God 
was upon Him.' 

1 See Book III., the chapter on 'Tlie 
Synagoo;ue of Nazareth.' 

2 This may be gathered even from such 

an expression as ' One iota, or one little 
hook,' — not 'tittle ' as in the A.V. 





(St. Luke ii. 41-52.) 

Once only is the great silence, which lies on the history of Christ's chap. 
early life, broken. It is to record what took place on His tirst visit to X 
the Temple, What this meant, even to an ordinary devout Jew, may ^— ^r-^ 
easily be imagined. Where life and religion were so intertwined, 
and both in such organic connection with the Temple and the people 
of Israel, every thoughtful Israelite must have felt as if his real life 
were not in what was around, but ran up into the grand unity of the 
people of God, and were compassed by the halo of its sanctity. To him 
it would be true in the deepest sense, that, so to speak, each Israelite 
was born in Zion, as, assuredly, all the well-springs of his life were 
there." It was, therefore, not merely the natural eagerness to see the ^Ps.ixsxvn. 
City of their God and of their fathers, glorious Jerusalem; nor yet the 
lawful enthusiasm, national or religious, which would kindle at the 
thought of ' our feet ' standing within those gates, through which 
priests, prophets, and kings had passed; but far deeper feelings which 
would make glad, when it was said: 'Let us go into the house of 
Jehovah.' They were not ruins to which precious memories clung, 
nor did the great hope seem to lie afar off, behind the evening-mist. 
But 'glorious things were spoken of Zion, the City of God' — in the 
past, and in the near future ' the thrones of David ' were to be set 
within her walls, and amidst her palaces." "Ps. 

In strict law, personal observance of the ordinances, and hence at- 
tendance on the feasts at Jerusalem, devolved on a youth only when 
he was of age, that is, at thirteen years. Then he became what was 
called 'a son of the Commandment,' or 'of the Torah.'" But, as a 
matter of fact, the legal age was in this respect anticipated by two 
years, or at least by one.'* It was in accordance with this custom, that,^ 

• Comp. also .l/r^//«o?i«fe, Hilkh.Cliac;. went to tlic Tem])le because He was 'a 
ii. The common statement, tliat Jesus Son of the Commandment,' is obviously 



BOOK on the lirst Piisclia after Jcf^us had passed His twell'th year, His 
II Parents took Him with them in the ' company ' oi' the Nazarenes to 

" ■> ' Jerusalem. The text seems to indicate, that it was their wont ' to go 

up to the Temple; and we mark that, although women were not bound 
j^ jor Kicui. to make such personal appearance," Mary gladly availed herself of 
what seems to have been the direction of Hillel (followed also by 
other religious women, mentioned in Rabbinic writings), to go up to 
the solemn services of the Sanctuary. Politically, times had changed. 
i>From4 Tiic wcak and wicked rule of Archelaus had lasted only nine years," 

B.C.to6A.D. . nil • 1 • 1 T • 1 T 

when, m consequence oi the charges against him, he was banished to 
Gaul. Juda?a, Samaria and Idumcea were now incorporated into the 
Roman province of Syria, under its Governor, or Legate. The special 
administration of that part of Palestine was, however, entrusted to a 
Procurator^ whose ordinary residence w^as at Cffisarea. It will be 
remembered, that the Jews themselves had desired some such arrange- 
ment, in the vain hope that, freed from the tyranny of the Herodians, 
they might enjoy the semi-independence of their brethren in the 
Grecian cities. But they found it otherwise. Their privileges were 
not secured to them; their religious feelings and prejudices were 
constantly, though perhaps not intentionally, outraged;^ and their 
Sanhedrin shorn of its real power, though the Romans would probably 
not interfere in what might be regarded as purely religious questions. 
Indeed, the very presence of the Roman power in Jerusalem was a 
constant ofience, and must necessarily have issued in a life and death 
struggle. One of the first measures of the new Legate of Syria, 
'^6-ii(?) p. Sulpicius Quirinius," after confiscating the ill-gotten wealth of 
Archelaus, was to order a census in Palestine, with the view of fixing 
d Acts V. 37; tlic taxatiou of the country.** The popular excitement which this 
xviii.°.'i called forth was due, probably, not so much to opposition on principle,^ 
as to this, that the census was regarded as the badge of servitude, and 

erroneous. All the more remarkable, But what rendered Rome so obnoxious 
on the other hand, is St. Lulve's accurate to Palestine was the cidtus of the Em- 
knowledge of Jewish customs, and all peror, as the symbol and imijersonation 
themoreantitheticto the mythical theorj' of Imperial Rome. On this c»//?/.s Rome 
the circumstance, that he places this re- • insistetl in all countries, not perhaps so 
markable event in the twelfth year of much on religious grounds as on i)oliti- 
Jesus' life, and not when He became ' a cal, as being tlie exi)ression of loyalty to 
Sou of the Law.' the empire. But in Judica this cidtus 

^ We take as the more correct reading necessarily met resistance to the death, 

that which puts the participle in the jire- (Comp. Schneckpnlmrger, Neutest. Zeit- 

sent tense {}i'), and not in gesch. pp. 40-61.) 

the aorist. ■' This view, for whicli there is no 

'■^ The Romans were tolerant of the historic foundation, is urged by tliose 

religion of all sul)ject nations — except- whose interest it is to deny the possi- 

ing only Gaul and Carthage. This for bility of a census during the reign of 

reasons which cannot here be discussed. Herod. 


ineoiiij)alil)I(' with the 'I'heocratic cluiractor of Israel.' Had a census 
been considered absulntely contrary to tlie Law, the leadinjj;- Kahbis 
wouhl never have submitted to it;- nor wouhl the popular resistance 
to the measure of (i^uirinius have been quelled by the representations 
of the Ilio'h-Priest Joazar. IJut, althou.ti'h through his inliiicnce the 
census was allowed to be taken, the i)oi)ular agitation was not sup- 
pressed. Indeed, that movement formed part of the history of the 
time, and not only afl'ected political and religious parties in the land, 
but must have been presented to the mind of Jesus Himself, since, 
as will be shown, it had a representative within His own family circle. 

This accession of Herod, misnamed the Great, marked a period in 
Jewish history, which closed with the war of despair against Rome 
and the flames of Jerusalem and the Temple. It gave rise to the 
appearance of what Josephus, despite his misrepresentation of them, 
rightl}^ calls a fourth party — besides the Pharisees, Sadducees, and 
Essenes — that of the Nationalists:' A deeper and more independent "Ant.xvm. 
view of the history of the times would, perhaps, lead us to regard the 
whole country as ranged either with or against that party. As after- 
wards expressed in its purest and simplest form, their watchword was, 
negatively, to call no human being their absolute \ov(\-,^' positively, i>Ant.xviii. 
that God alone was to lead as absolute Lord." It was, in fact, a revival 
of the Maccabean movement, perhaps more fully in its national than 
in its religious aspect, although the two could scarcely be separated 
in Israel, and their motto almost reads like that which according to 
some, furnished the letters whence the name Maccabee '^ was composed : ^22*: '' 
Jii C'amochah /jaelim Jehovah, 'Who like Thee among the gods, 
Jehovah? '" It is characteristic of the times and religious tendencies, 'Ex. xv. n 
that their followers were no more called, as before, Assideans or Clia- 
sidim, '■ the pious,' but Zealots {^f^Xajrai), or by the Hebrew equivalent 
Qannaim (Canana^ans, not ^Canaanites,' as in A.Y.) The real home 
of that party was not Judsea nor Jerusalem, but Galilee. 

Quite other, and indeed antagonistic, tendencies prevailed in the 
stronghold of the Herodians, Sadducees, and Pharisees. Of the latter 
only a small portion had any real symjiathy with the national move- 
ment. Each party followed its own direction. The Essenes, absorbed 
in theosophic speculations, not untinged with Eastern mysticism, with- 
drew from all contact with the world, and practiced an ascetic life. 
With them, whatever individuals may have felt, no such movement 
could have originated; nor yet with the Herodians or Boethusians, who 

' That these were the sole grouiuis of Jos. Ant. xviii. 1. 1. 6. 
resistance to the census, appears from - As unquestional)ly tlioy did. 

c u. s. and 
Jew. War 
vii. 10. 1 




•' Judy. xi. 

'• Ant. xiv. 
9. 2-5 

■; Sanh. 19 a 

d yoma 39 b 

(■(»inl)in('(l strictly Pharisaic views with llcrodian political partisau- 
sliij); nor yet with the Sadducces; nor, finally, with what constituted 
the groat bulk of the Eabbinist party, the School of Ilillel. But the 
brave, free Hio-hlanders of Galilee, and of the region across their 
glorious lake, seemed to have inherited the spirit of Jephthah,* and- 
to have treasured as their ideal — alas! often wrongly apprehended — 
their own Elijah, as, descending in wild, shaggy garb from the moun- 
tains of Gilead, he did battle against all the might of Ahab and 
Jezebel. Their enthusiasm could not be kindled ])y the logical 
subtleties of the Schools, but their hearts burned within them for their 
God, their land, their people, their religion, and their freedom. 

It was in Galilee, accordingly, that such wild, irregular resistance 
to Herod at the outset of his career, as could be offered, was organised 
by guerilla bands, which traversed the country, and owned one Ezekias 
as their leader. Although Josephus calls them ' robbers, ' a far ditferent 
estimate of them obtained in Jerusalem, where, as we remember, the 
Sanhedrin summoned Herod to answer for the execution of Esckias. 
What followed is told in substantially the same manner, though with 
dirterence of form' and, sometimes, nomenclature, by Josephus,'' and 
in the Talmud.' The story has already been related in another 
connection. Suffice it that, after the accession of Herod, the Sanhe- 
drin became a shadow of itself. It was packed with Sadducees and 
Priests of the King's nomination, and with Doctors of the canon-law, 
whose only aim was to pursue in peace their subtleties; who had not, 
and, from their contempt of the people, could not have, any real 
sympathy with national aspirations; and whose ideal heavenly King- 
dom was a miraculous, heaven-instituted, absolute rule of Rabbis. 
Accordingly, the national movement, as it afterwards developed, 
received neither the sympathy nor the support of leading Rabbis. 
Perhaps the most gross manifestation of this was exhibited, shortly 
before the taking of Jerusalem, b^' R. Jochanan ben Saccai, the most 
renowned among its teachers. Almost unmoved he had witnessed the 
portent of the opening of the Temple-doors by an unseen Hand, 
which, by an interpretation of Zech. xi. 1, was popularly regarded as 
betokening its speedy destruction.'' ^ There is cynicism, as well as 
want of sympathy, in the story recorded by tradition, that when, in 
the straits of famine during the siege, Jochanan saw people eagerly 

1 The Tahiiud i.s never to be trusted 
as to historical details. Often it seems 
purposely to alter, when it intends the 
experienced student to read between 
the lines, while at other times it presents 

a story in what may be called an alle- 
gorical form. 

2 The designation ' Lebanon ' is often 
applied in Talnnulic writings to the 



feasting: on soup made from straw, ho scouted the idea of sueli a 
garrison resisting Vespasian and immediate! y resolved to leave the 
city/ In fact,we have distinct evidence that R. Jochanan had, as leader 
of the School of Hillel, used all his influence, although in vain, to 
persuade the people to submission to Rome." 

We can understand it, how this school had taken so little interest 
in anything purely national. Generally only one side of the charac- 
ter of Hillel has heen presented by writers, and even this in greatly 
exaggerated language. His much lauded gentleness, peacefulness, 
and charity were rather negative than positive qualities. He was a 
philosophic, whose real interest lay in a far other direction 
than that of sympathy with the people — and whose motto seemed, 
indeed, to imply, ' We, the sages, are the people of God ; but this people, 
who know not the Law, are cursed.' " Afar deeper feeling, and intense, 
though misguided earnestness pervaded the School of Shammai. It 
was in the minority, but it sympathised with the aspirations of the 
people. It was not philosophic nor eclectic, but intensely national. It 
opposed all approach to, and by, strangers; it dealt harshly with pros- 
elytes,*^ even the most distinguished (such as Akylas or Onkelos);'' it 
passed, by first murdering a number of Hillelites who had come to the 
deliberative assembly, eighteen decrees, of which the object was to 
prevent all intercourse with Gentiles;^ and it furnished leaders or 
supporters of the national movement. 

We have marked the rise of the Nationalist party in Galilee at the 
time of Herod's first appearance on the scene, and learned how 


" Midr. R. 
on Lament. 
i. 5 ; ed. 
Warali. vol. 
ill. p. GO a 

* Ab. de K. 
Nathan 4 

• Comp. Ab. 

E Ber. K. 70 

1 This celebrated meetin<j;. of wliicli, 
however, but t'cant aiifl incoherent no- 
tices are left us (Sliabb. i. 7 and specially 
in the Jer. Talmud on thepassaeie p. 3 c, 
d; and .Shald). 17 a\ Tos. Sha'bb. i. 2), 
took jtlace in the house of Chananyah, 
ben Chizqiyah, ben Garon, anotedShani- 
maite. On arriving, many of the Hillel- 
ites were killed in the lower room, and 
then a majority of Shammaites carried the 
so-called eighteen decrees. The first 
twelve forbade the purchase of the most 
necessary articles of diet from Gentiles; 
the next five forbade the learninn- of their 
lanp;uap:e, declared their testimony in- 
valid, and their offerings unlawful, and 
interdicted all intercourse with them ; 
while the last referred to first fruits. It 
was on the ground of these decrees that 
the hitherto customary burnt-ofl'ering for 
the Emperor was intermitted, which was 
really a declaration of war against Rome. 
Tlie date of tlicse decrees was probably 
about four years before the destruction 

of the Temple (See Griitz, Gesch. d. Juden, 
vol. iii. i)p. 41)4-502). These decrees were 
carried by the infiuence of R. Eleazar, 
son of Chanaiiyali the High-Priest, a very 
wealthy man, whose fatlier and brother 
belonged to tlie opposite or peace party. 
It was on the i)roposal of this strict 
Shammaite tliat the ottering for the 
Emi^eror was intermitted {Jos. Jew. "War 
ii. 17. 2, 8). Indeed, it is impossible to 
over-estimate the influence of these 
Shammaite decrees on the great war 
with Rome. Eleazar, though opi)osedto 
the extreme party, one of whose cl)iefs lie 
took and killed, was one of the leaders of 
the national party in the war (War ii. 
17. 9, 10). There is, however, some con- 
fusion about various persons who bore 
the same name. It is impossible in this 
place to mention the various Shammaites 
who took jtart in the last Jewish war. 
Suflice it to indicate the tendency of tliat 


BOOK mercilessly lie tried to suppress it: iirst, ])y the execution of Ezeklas 
II and his adherents, and afterwards, when he became King of Judaea, by 

"^ — ".^ — -" the slaughter of the Sanhedrists. The consequence of this unspar- 
ing severity was to give Rabbiuism a different direction. The School 
of Hillel which henceforth commanded the majority, were men of no 
political colour, theological theorists, self-seeking Jurists, vain rather 
than ambitious. The minority, represented by tlie School of Sham- 
mai, were Nationalists. Defective and even false as both tendencies 
were, there was certainly more hope, as regarded the Kingdom of 
God, of the Nationalists than of the Sophists and Jurists. It was, of 
course, the policy of Herod to suppress all national aspirations. No 
one understood the meaning of Jewish Nationalism so Avell as he; no one 
ever opposed it so systematically. There was internal fitness, so to 
speak, in his attempt to kill the King of the Jews among the infants 
of Bethlehem. The murder of the Sanhedrists, with the consequent 
new anti-Messianic tendency of Rabbinism, was one measure in that 
direction; the various appointments which Herod made to the High- 
Priesthood another. And yet it was not easy, even in those times, 
to deprive the Pontificate of its power and influence. The High- 
Priest was still the representative of the religious life of the people, 
and he acted on all occasions, when the question under discussion was 
not one exclusively of subtle canon-law, as the President of the San- 
hedrin, in which, indeed, the members of his family had evidently 

"Actsiv. 6 seat and vote."^ The four families ^ from which, with few exceptions, 
the High-Priest — however often changed — were chosen, al)sorbed the 
wealth, and commanded the influence, of a state-endowed establish- 
ment, in its worst times. It was, therefore, of the utmost importance 
to make wise choice of the High-Priest. With the exception of the 
brief tenure by Aristobulus, the last of the Maccabees — whose ap- 
pointment, too soon followed by his murder, was at the time a neces- 
sity — all the Ilerodian High-Priests were non-Palestinians. A keener 
t>low than this could not have been dealt at Nationalism. 

The same contempt for the High-Priesthood characterised the 
brief reign of Archelaus. On his death-bed, Herod had appointed to 
the Pontificate Joazar, a son of Boethos, the wealthy Alexandrian 
priest, whose daughter, Mariamme II., he had married. The Boethu- 
sian family, allied to Herod, formed a party — the Herodians — who 
combined strict Pharisaic views with devotion to the reigning family.'^ 
Joazar took the popular part against Archelaus, on his accession. 

' See the list of Ilij^li-Priests in Ap- tliaii four Tli^li-Priosts during tlie period 
pendix V[. between the reitrn of Ilerod and that of 

^ The Boethusians furnished no fewer Aicrippa I. (41 a.d.). 


For this he was (lei)riv('(l of his diii'iiity in lavoui- ol' iiiiotlici- son of CHAP. 
Boethos, Elcazar by name. But tlie mood of Arciiehius was lickle X 
— perhaps he was distrustful of the family of Boethos. At any rate, ^^ — r — ' 
Eleazar had to give place to Jesus, the son of Sie, an otherwise un- 
known individual. At the time of the taxing of (^uirinius we find 
Joazar again in office,* apparently restored to it by the multitude, "Ant. xvui. 
wliich, having taken matters into its own hands at the change of 
government, recalled one who had formerly favoured national aspira- 
tions.'' It is thus that we explain his influence with the people, in lAnt. xvui. 

• 2 1 

persuading them to submit to the Roman taxation. 

But if Joazar had succeeded with the unthinking populace, he 
failed to conciliate the more advanced of his own party, and, as the 
event proved, the Roman authorities also, whose favour he had 
hoped to gain. It will be remembered, that the Nationalist party 
— or ' Zealots, ' as they were afterwards called — first ai)peared in 
those guerilla-bands which traversed Galilee under the leadership 
of Ezekias, whom Herod executed. But the National party was 
not destroyed, only held in check, during his iron reign. It was 
once more the family of Ezekias that headed the movement. 
During the civil war wliich followed the accession of Archelaus, or 
rather was carried on wliile he was pleading his cause in Rome, the 
standard of the Nationalists was again raised in Galilee. Judas, 
the son of Ezekias, took possession of the city of Sepphoris, and 
armed his followers from the royal arsenal there. At that time, as 
we know, the High-Priest Joazar sympathised, at least indirectly, 
with the Nationalists. The rising, which indeed was general through- 
out Palestine, was suppressed by fire and sword, and the sons of 
Herod were enabled to enter on their possessions. But when, after the 
deposition of Archelaus, Joazar persuaded the people to submit to 
the taxing of Quirinius, Judas was not disposed to tbllow what he 
regarded as the treacherous lead of the Pontiff'. In conjunction 
with a Shanimaite Ra1)bi, Sadduk, he raised again the standard of 
revolt, although once more imsuccessfully." How the Hillelites looked -lAnt. xvm. 
upon this movement, we gather even from the slighting allusion of 
Gamaliel.'* The family of Ezekias furnished other martyrs to the ''Actsv. y/ 
National cause. The two sons of Judas died for it on the cross in 
46 A.D." Yet a third son, Manahem, who, from the commeiK ement ■ Ant. xx. 
of the war against Rome, was one of the leaders of the most fanatical 
Nationalists, the Sicarii — the Jacobins of the party, as they have 
been aptly designated — died under unspeakable sutferings,'' while a f.jewisn^ 
fourth member of the family, Eleazar, was the leader of Israel's gandti 


liooK forlorn hope, and iiohly (lie<l at Ma.sada, in the clu.smg drama of the 

If Jewi.-^h war of indc'i)cMuk'nc('/' Of t^ucli stutf were the Galilean 

^ . Zealots made. But we have to take this intense Nationalist tendency 

"Jewish j^i^y [y^iQ account in the history of Jesus, the more so that at least 

War, VII. 7-y '' ' 

one of His disciples, and he a member of His family, had at one time 
belonged to the party. Only the Kingdom of which Jesus was the 
King was, as He Himself said, not of this world, and of far ditl'erent 
conception from that for which the Nationalists longed. 

At the time when Jesus went up to the feast, Quirinius was, as 
already stated, Governor of Syria. The taxing and the rising ot 
Judas were alike past; and the Roman Governor, dissatisfied with the 
trimming of Joazar, and distrustful of him, had appointed in his 
stead Ananos, the sou of Seth, the Annas of infauKjus memory in the 
New Testament. With brief interruption, he or his son held the 
Pontitical office till, under the Procuratorship of Pilate, Caiaphas, the 
son-in-law of Annas, succeeded to that dignity. It has already been 
stated that, subject to the Roman Governors of Syria, the rule of 
Palestine devolved on Procurators, of whom Coponius was the first. 
'■9-12A.D. Of him and his immediate successors — Marcus Ambivius," Annius 
12-15 A.D. Rufus,' and Valerius Gratus,'* we know little. They were, indeed, 
guilty of the most grievous fiscal oj^pressions, but they seem to have 
respected, so far as was in them, the religious feelings of the Jews. 
We know, that they even removed the image of the Emperor from 
the standards of the Roman soldiers before marching them into 
Jerusalem, so as to avoid the appearance of a ciiltus of the Caesars. 
It was reserved for Pontius Pilate to force this hated emblem on the 
Jews, and otherwise to set their most sacred feelings at defiance. But 
we may notice, even at this stage, with what critical periods in Jewish 
history the public appearance of Christ synchronised. His first visit 
to the Temple followed upon the Roman possession of Judsea, the 
taxing, and the national rising, as also the institution of Annas to 
the High-Priesthood. And the commencement of His public Min- 
istry was contemporaneous Avith the accession of Pilate, and the 
institution of Caiaphas. Whether viewed subjectively or objectively, 
these things also have a deep bearing upon the history of the Christ. 

It w^as, as we reckon it, in spring a.d. 9, that Jesus for the first 
time went up to the Paschal Feast in Jerusalem. Coponius would 
be there as the Procurator; and Annas ruled in the Temple as High- 
Priest, when He appeared among its doctors. But fai- other than 
political thoughts must have occupied the mind of Christ. Indeed, 
for a time a brief calm had fallen ui)on the land. There was nothing 

^ 15-26 A.D. 

b A.V. 

' Degrees ' 
Ps. cxx.- 


to provoke active resistance, and the party of the Zealots, altliough chap. 
existing,' and striking deeper root in the hearts of the people, was, for ^ 

the time, rather what Josephus called it, ' the philosophical party ' — ^-'^^ 

their minds busy with an ideal, which their hands were not yet pre- 
paring to make a reality. And so, when, according to ancient wont," i^xx^i":i9 
the festive company from Nazareth, soon swelled by other festive bands, 
went up to Jerusalem, chanting by the way those ' Psalms of Ascent ' '' 
to the accompaniment of the flute, they might implicitly yield them- 
selves to the s])iritual thoughts kindled by such words. 

When the pilgrims' feet stood within the gates of Jerusalem, there 
could have been no difficulty in finding hospitality, however crowded 
the City may have been on such occasions ^ — the more so when we 
remember the extreme simplicity of Eastern manners and wants, and 
the abundance of provisions which the many sacrifices of the season 
would supply. But on this subject, also, the Evangelic narrative keeps 
silence. Glorious as a view of Jerusalem must have seemed to a child 
coming to it for the first time from the retirement of a Galilean village, 
we must bear in mind, that He AVho now looked upon it was not an 
ordinary Child. Nor are we, perhaps, mistaken in the idea that the 
sight of its frrandeur would, as on another occasion," awaken in Him 'St. Liike 

^ ^- ' , _ ' . xix. -11 

not so much feelings of admiration, which might have been akin to 
those of pride, as of sadness, though He may as yet have been scarcely 
conscious of its deeper reason. But the one all-engrossing thought 
would be of the Temple. This, his first visit to its halls, seems also 
to have called out the first outspoken — and may we not infer, the first 
conscious — thought of that Temple as the House of His Father, and 
with it the first conscious impulse of his Mission and Being. Here also 
it would be the higher meaning, rather than the structure and ap- 
pearance, of the Temple, that would absorb the mind. And yet there 
was sufficient, even in the latter, to kindle enthusiasm. As the pil- 
grim ascended the Mount, croste<l by that symmetrically proportioned 
building, which could hold within its gigantic girdle not fewer than 
210,000 persons, his wonder might well increase at every step. The 
IVIount itself seemed like an island, abruptly rising from out deep 
valleys, surrounded by a sea of walls, palaces, streets, and houses, and 
crowned by a mass of snowy marble and glittering gold, rising terrace 
ui)on terrace. Altogether it measured a square of aI)out 1,000 feet, 
or, to give a more exact equivalent of the measurements furnished by 

1 It seems, however, that tlie Feast of tliaii that of the Passover (conip. Acts ii. 
Pentecost would see even more i)il,ii"i'inis 9-11). 
— at least from a distance — in Jerusalem, 




a Jns. War 
vi. a. 2 

<> Sanh. xi.2 

<■ St. John 
ii. 14; St. 
Matt. xxi. 
12: .Jerus. 
Chag. p. 78 
a: com p. 
Neh. xiii. 4 

the Rabbis, 927 feet. At its north-western aniilc, and connected with 
it, frowned the Castle of Antonia, held hy the Roman garrison. The 
lofty walls were pierced by massive gates — the unnscd gate (Tedi) on 
the north; the Susa Gate on the east, which opened on the archet! 
roadway to the Mount of Olives; ^ the two so-called ' Huldah ' (prob- 
ably, 'weasel') gates, which led by tunnels^ from the priest-suburb 
Ophel into the outer Court; and, finally, four gates on the west. 

Within the gates ran all around covered double colonnades, with 
here and there benches for those who resorted thither for prayer or 
for conference. The most magnificent of those was the southern, or 
twofold double colonnade, Avith a wide space between; the most vener- 
able, the ancient 'Solomon's Porch,' or eastern colonnade. Entering 
from the Xystus bridge, and under the tower of John,'' one would pass 
along the southern colonnade (over the tunnel of the Huldah-gates) 
to its eastern extremity, over which another tower rose, probably 
' the pinnacle ' of the history of the Temptation. From this height 
yawned the Kedron valley 450 feet beneath. From that lofty pin- 
nacle the priest each morning watched and announced tlie earliest 
streak of day. Passing along the eastern colonnade, or Solomon's 
Porch, we would, if the description of the Rabbis is trustworthy, have 
reached the Susa Gate, the carved representation of that city over the 
gateway reminding us of the Eastern Dispersion. Here the standard 
measures of the Temple are said to have been kept; and here, also, 
we have to locate the first or lowest of the three Sanhedrins, which, 
according to the Mishnah," held their meetings in the Temple; the 
second, or intermediate Court of Appeal, being in the 'Court of the 
Priests' (probably close to the Xicanor Gate); and the highest, that 
of the Great Sanhedrin, at one time in the ' Hall of Hewn Square 
Stones ' (LisJilrith Tia-Gazith.) 

Passing out of these ' colonnades,' or ' porches,' you entered the 
'Court of the Gentiles,' or what the Rabbis called 'the Mount of the 
House,' which was widest on the west side, and more and more narrow 
respectively on the east, the south, and the north. This was called 
the Chol^ or ' profane ' place to which Gentiles had access. Here must 
have been the market for the sale of sacrificial animals, the tables of 
the money-changers, and])laces for the sale of other needful articles."* 

1 So accordins; to the Rabbis ; Josephn.s 
does not mention it. In iieneral. tlie ac- 
count here given is according; to the Rab- 

- These tunnels were divided by colon- 
nades respectively into three and into 
two, tJK' double colonnade beini;; prob- 

ably used by the priests, since its place 
of exit was close to the entrance into the 
Court of the Priests. 

''• The question what was sold in this 
' market ') and itsrelation to • the ])azaar' 
of the family of Annas (the ('iKtinnjnth 
hcnrii Chitnnii) will be discussed in a 
later part. 


Advancing within this Court, you reached a low In-eust-wall (the Sorefj), chap. 
which marked tlie space beyond which no (ientih', nor Levitically un- X 

clean person, might i)rocced — tal)lcts,l)ca]'inginserii)tions to tliat effect, ^^ r — - 

warning them off. Thirteen openings admitted into tlie inner ])art of 
the Court. Tlience fourteen steps led uj) to the Chel or Terrace, which 
was bounded by the wall of the Temple-buildings in the stricter sense. 
A flight of steps led uj) to the massive, splendid gates. The two on 
the west side seem to have been of no importance, so far as the wor- 
shii)j)ers were concerned, and probal)ly intended for the use of work- 
men. North and south were four gates.' J3ut the most s})]endid 
gate was that to the east, termed 'the Beautiful.'" "Acts in. 2 

Entering by the latter, you came into the Court of the Women, so 
called because the women occupied in it two elevated and separated 
galleries, which, however, filled only part of the Court. Fifteen steps 
led up to the UpjxT Court, which was bounded by a wall, and where 
was the celebrated Nicanor Gate, covered with Corinthian brass. 
Here the Levites, who conducted the musical part of the service, 
were placed. In the Court of the A^'omen were the Treasury and the 
thirteen ' Trumpets, ' wlule at each corner were chambers or halls, 
destined for various purposes. Similarly, beyond the fifteen steps, 
there were rej)Ositories for the musical instruments. The Upper 
Coui't was divided into two parts by a boundary — the narrow part 
forming the Court of Israel, and the wider that of the Priests, in 
which were tlie great Altar and the Laver. 

The Sanctuary itself was on a higher terrace than the Court of the 
Priests. Twelve steps led up to its Porch, which extended beyond it 
on either side (north and south). Here, in separate chambers, all 
that was necessary for the sacrificial service was kept. On two 
marble tables near the entrance the old shewbread which was taken 
out, and the new that was brought in, were respectively placed. The 
Porch was adorned l)y votive presents, conspicuous among them a 
massive golden vine. A two-leaved gate opened into the Sanctuary 
itself, which was divided into two parts. The Holy Place had the 
Golden Candlestick (south), the Table of Shewbread (north), and the 
Golden Altar of Incense between them. A heavy double veil con- 
cealed the entrance to the Host Holy Place, which in the second 

' The question as to then- names and ^rave doubts as to tlieir historical trust- 

arrauu'ement is not without difficulty. worthiness. It seems to me that the 

The subject is fully treated in 'The I{al)bis always ^ive rather tluMV/f^r/Mluin 

Temple and its Services.' Althou<i;]i I {\w real — what, accordinii- to their theoi-y, 

have followed in the text tlie arraiin'e- sliould have been. I'ather than wliat ac- 

ments of the Rabbis, I must express my tually was. 




» So aocord- 
iiiK to the 
Com p. Hoff'- 
mann, Abh. 
11. d. pent. 
Ges. i)p. 
6.-), 66 

'' St Luke 
ii. 43 

'l\'iiii)lc was empty, iiothing being there but tlie ])iece of rock, called 
the Ebliea Shethiijah, or Fotiiidatiou Stone, wliich, according- to tradi- 
tion, covered the nioutli of the pit, ami on which, it was thought, the 
world was founded. Nor does all this convey an adequate idea of the 
vastness of the Temple-buildings. For all around the Sanctuary and 
each of the Courts were various chambers and out-buildings, which 
served ditferent purposes connected with the Services of the Temple.^ 
In some part of this Temple, ^sitting in the midst of the Doctors,^ 
both hearing them and asking them questions,' we must look for the 
Child Jesus on the third and the two following days of the Feast on 
wliich He first visited the Sanctuary. Only on the two first days of 
the Feast of Passover was personal attendance in the Temple necessar}^ 
With the third day commenced the so-called half-holydays, when it 
was lawful to return to one's home'' — a provision of which, no doul)t, 
many availed themselves. Indeed, there was really nothing of special 
interest to detain the pilgrims. For, the Passover had been eaten, the 
festive sacrifice ('or CJiagirjaJt) offered, and the first ripe barley reaped 
and brought to the Temple, and waved as the Omer of first fiour before 
the Lord. Hence, in view of the w^ell-known Rabbinic provision, the 
expression in the Gospel-narrative concerning the ' Parents ' of Jesus, 
'when they had fulfilled the days,'" cannot necessarily imply that 
Joseph and the Mother of Jesus had remained in Jerusalem during 
the whole Paschal week.^ On the other hand, the circumstances 
connected with the presence of Jesus in the Temple render this sup- 
position impossible. For, Jesus could not have been found among the 
Doctors after the close of the Feast. The first question here is as to 
the locality in the Temple, where the scene has to be laid. It has, 
indeed, been commonly supposed that there was a Synagogue in the 
Temple; but of this there is, to say the least, no historical evidence.* 
But even if such had existed, the worship and addresses of the Syna- 
gogue would not have offered any opportunity for the questioning on 
the part of Jesus which the narrative implies. Still more groundless 
is the idea that there was in the Temple sometliing like a Beth ha- 

' For a full description, I must refer to 
'The Temple, its Ministry and Services at 
the time of Jesus Christ.' Some repeti- 
tiou of what iiad been alluded to in pre- 
vious chapters has been unavoidal)le in 
the present description of tlie Temi)Ie. 

2 Although comparatively few really 
great authorities in Jewish Canon Law 
lived at that time, more than a dozj^n 
names could be given of Rabbis cele- 
brated in Jewish Utarature, who must 

have been His contemporaries at one or 
another period of His life. 

^ In fact, an attentive consideration of 
what in the tractate Moed K. (comp. also 
Chag. 17 h\ is declared to be lawful oc- 
cupation during the half-holydays, leads 
us to infer that a very large i)roportion 
must have returned to their homes. 

^ For a full discussion of this impor- 
tant question, see Appendix X. : ' The 
Supposed Temple-Synagogue. ' 



Midrash, or theological Academy, not to speak of tlie circum,stance 
that a child of twelve would not, at any time, have i)eeii allowed to 
take part in its discussions. But there were occasions on Avhicli the 
Temple becanu' virtually, thoujih not lormally, a Beth ha-3IiclrasJi. For 
we read in the Talmud,'' that the mem1)crs of the Temple-Sanhedrin, 
who on ordinary days sat as a Court of Appeal, from tlie close of the 
Morning- to the time of the Evening-Sacrifice, were wont on Sabbaths 
•dwd feast-days to come out upon 'the Terrace ' of the Temple, and 
there to teach. In such poi)ular instruction the utmost latitude of 
questioning would be given. It is in this audience, which sat on 
the ground, surrounding and mingling with the Doctors — and hence 
during, not after the Feast — that wc must seek the Child Jesus. 

But we have yet to show that tlie presence and questioning of a 
Child of that age did not necessarily imi)]y anything so extraordinary, 
as to convey the idea of supernaturalness to those Doctors or others 
in the audience. Jewish tradition gives other instances of pre- 
cocious and sti-angely advanced students. Besides, scientific theo- 
logical learning would not be necessary to take part in such po^ndar 
discussions. If we may judge from later arrangements, not only 
in Babylon, l)ut in Palestine, there were two kinds of public lectures, 
and two kinds of students. The first, or more scientific class, 
was designated Kallah (literally, bride), and its attendants Beney- 
Kallah (children of the bride). These lectures were delivered in 
the last month of summer (Flul), before the Feast of the New 
Year, and in the last winter month (Adar), immediately before the 
Feast of Passover. They implied consideral)le prei)aration on the 
part of the lecturing Rabbis, and at least some Talmudic knowledge 
on the pai't of the attendants. On the other hand, there were 
Students of the Court (Chatsatsta, and in Babylon Tarbitsa), who 
during ordinary lectures sat sej^arated from the regular students 
by a kind of hedge, outside, as it were in the Court, some of. wlu^m 
seem to have been ignorant even of the Bible. The lectures 
addressed to such a general audience would, of course, be of a very 
different character.'' 

But if there was nothing so unprecedented as to render His 
Presence and questioning marvellous, yet all who heard Him ' were 
amazed ' at His ' combinative insight ' ' and ' discerning answers. ' ^ 

* Comp. Jer. 
Ber. iv. p. 7 
(/.and other 

^ The expression m'^'frr/^meansorio;!- 
nally cnnctirfitts, and (as HcJdeusner 
ri<i"htly i»nt.s it) intelligetitia in the sense 
of i)ers])ifat'ia qua res probe coicnita' suD- 
tiliter ae Oiliffenter a se invlceni dis- 

cernnntur. The LXX. render by it no 
less than eiylit dltlerent Hebrew terms. 

- Tlie primary meanini;- of the verb, 
from which the word is derived, is secer- 
no, disferno. 




■' Jcr. Pes. 
vi. 1; Pes. 
66 a 

b St. Matt. 
XXil. 42-45 

I' Jos. Ant. 
sv. 8. 5 

■' Maas. Sh. 
V. 2 

We scarcely venture to in(|uire towards what His questioning had 
])een directed. Judging by what we know of such discussions, Ave 
infer that they may have been connected with the Paschal solemni- 
ties. Grave Paschal questions did arise. Indeed, the great Hillel 
obtained his rank as chief when he proved to the assembled Doctors 
that the Passover might be offered even on the Sabbath." Many 
other questions might arise on the subject of the Passover. Or did 
the Child Jesus — as afterwards, in connection with the Messianic teach- 
ing " — lead up by His questions to the deeper meaning of the Paschal 
solemnities, as it was to be unfolded, when Himself w^as offered up, 
' the Lamb of God, Which taketh away the sin of the world ' ? 

Other questions also almost force themselves on the mind — most 
notably this: whether on the occasion of this His tirst visit to the 
Temple, the Yirgin-Mother had told her Son the history of His 
Infancy, and of what had happened when, for the first time. He had 
been brought to the Temple. It would almost seem so, if we might 
judge from the contrast between the Virgiji-Mother's complaint 
about the search of His father and of her, and His own emphatic 
appeal to the business of His Father. But most surprising — truly 
wonderful it must have seemed to Joseph, and even to the Mother of 
Jesus, that the meek, quiet Child should have been found in such 
company, and so engaged. It must have been quite other than what, 
from His past, they would have expected; or they would not have 
taken it for granted, when they left Jerusalem, that He was among 
their kinsfolk and acquaintance, perhaps mingling with the children. 
Nor yet would they, in such case, after they missed Him at the first 
night's halt — at Sicliem,'^ if the direct road north, through Samaria,^ 
was taken (or, according to the Mishnah, at Akrabah") — have so 
anxiously sought Him by the way,^ and in Jerusalem; nor yet Avould 
they have been ' amazed ' when they found Him in the assembly of 
the Doctors. The reply of Jesus to the half-reproachful, half-relieved 
expostulation of them who had sought Him ' sorrowing ' these three 
days,^ sets clearly these three things before us. He had been so 
entirely absorbed by the awakening thought of His Being and 
Mission, however kindled, as to be not only neglectful, but forgetful 
of all around. Xay, it even seemed to Him impossible to under- 
stand how they could have sought Him, and not known where He 

' According to Jer. Ab. Z. 44 J, the 
soil, the fountains, the houses, and the 
roads of Samaria were ' clean.' 

■^ This is implied in the use of the 
present participle. 

•■' The first day would be that of miss- 
ing Him. the second that of the return, 
and the third that of the search in Jeru- 



had lingered. Scvohdlij: MC may venture to ^a}-, tliat lie now niAl'. 
i-ealised that this was emphatically His Father's House. And, X 

thirdly: so far as wc can judge, it was then and there that, for the ~ r — - 

tirst time, He felt the strong and irresistible impulse — that Divine 
necessity of His Being — to be ' about His Father's business. ' ^ We 
all, when first awakening to si)iritual consciousness — or, perhaps, 
when for the first time taking part in the feast of the Lord's House 
— may, and, learning from His example, should, make this the hour 
<jf decision, in which heart and life shall be wholly consecrated to 
the ' business ' of our Father. But there was far more than this in 
the bearing of Christ on this occasion. That forgetfulness of .His 
Child-life was a sacrifice — a sacrifice of self; that entire absorjjtion 
in His Father's business, without a thought of self, either in the 
gratification of curiosity, the acquisition of knowledge, or personal 
ambition — a consecration of Himself unto God. It was the first 
manifestation of His passive and active obedience to the Will of 
God. Even at this stage, it was the forth-bursting of the inmost 
meaning of His Life: 'My meat is to do the Will of Him that sent 
Me, and to finish His work.' And yet this awakening of the Christ- 
consciousness on His first visit to the Temple, partial, and perhaps 
even temporary, as it may have been, seems itself like the morning- 
dawn, which from the pinnacle of the Tem]ile the Priest watched, 
ere he summoned his waiting brethren beneath to ofler the early 

From what we have already learned of this History, we do not 
wonder that the answer of Jesus came to His parents as a fresh 
surprise. For, we can only understand what we perceive in its 
totality. But here each fresh manifestation came as something 
separate and new — not as part of a whole; and therefore as a sur- 
prise, of wdiich the i)urport and meaning could not be understood, 
except in its organic connection and as a whole. And for the true 
human development of the God-]\Lan, what was the natural was also 
the needful process, even as it was best for the learning of Mary 
herself, and for the future reception of His teaching. These three 

' The expression sv roT? rov Ttarpo? (2) It seems unaccountable how the word 

//Of may be equally rendered, or rather 'house' could have been left out iu the 

supplemented, by ' in My Father's house. ' Greek renderinir of the Aramjean words of 

and ' about My Father's business.' The Christ — but quite natural, if the word to 

former is adopted by most modern com- be supplemented was 'things' or -busi- 

mentators. But (1) it does not accord ness.' (3) A reference to the Temple as 

with the word that must be supplemented His Father's hniise C(tnld not have seemed 

in the two analoicous passages in tlio so stran,e;e on tlie lii)s of Jesus — nor, in- 

LXX. . Neither in Esth. vii. 9, nor in deed, of any .Tewi.-<li child— as to till 

Ecclus. xlii. 10, is it strictly ' the /lOK.^e.' Jusepli and Mary with astonishment. 



BOOK sul).<i(liai'y reasons may once more l)c indicated liei'e in e.\i)laiiati(ju of 
n the Yirsiin-Mother's seemiug iguorauce of her kSoii"s true character: 

- — -: — ' the necessary gradualness of such a revelation; the necessary de- 
velopment of His own consciousness; and the fact, that Jesus could 
not have been subject to His Parents, nor had true and proper human 
training, if they had clearly known that He was the essential Son of God. 
A further, though to us it seems a downward step, was His quiet, 
immediate, unquestioning return to Nazareth with His Parents, and 
His willing submission^ to them while there. It was self-denial, 
self-sacrifice, self-consecration to His Mission, with all that it im- 
plied. It was not self-exinanition but self-submission, all the more 
glorious in proportion to the greatness of that Self. This constant 
contrast before her eyes only deepened in the heart of Mary the ever- 
present impression of ' all those matters,'^ of which she was the most 
cognisant. She was learning to spell out the word Messiah, as each 
of ' those matters ' taught her one fresh letter in it, and she looked at 
them all in the light of the Nazareth-Sun, 

With His return to Nazareth began Jesus' Life of youth and 
early manhood, witli all of inward and outward development, of 

jt. Luke heavenly and earthly approbation which it carried.'' Whether or 
not He went to Jerusalem on recurring Feasts, we know not, and 
need not inquire. For only once during that period — on His first 
visit to the Temple, and in the awakening of His Youth-Life — 
could there have been such outward forth-bursting of His real 
Being and Mission. Other influences were at their silent work to 
weld His inward and outward development, and to determine the 
manner of His later Manifesting of Himself. We assume that 
the School-education of Jesus must have ceased soon after His 
return to Nazareth. Henceforth the Nazareth-influences on the Life 
and Thinking of Jesus may be grouped — and progressively as He 
advanced from youth to manhood — under these particulars: Home, 
Nature, and Prevailing Ideas. 

1. Home. Jewish Home-Life, especially in the country, was of 
the simplest. Even in luxurious Alexandria it seems often to have 
been such, alike as regarded the furnishing of the house, and the 
provisions of the table.' The morning and midday meal must have 
been of the plainest, and even the larger evening meal of the 

The voluntariness of His submission equivalent to the Hebrew C*".^m~""3= 
nplied by the present part. mid. oj 
- Tlie Authorised Version renders • sav- 

ihp'"Sl?'^ ^''' ^^^ ^''''^''* ^^'^' '"''^' "^^ ^" ^''^■^^ ^'""-•'- ^t- Luke uses the 

word ~Z~ in that sense in i. 65: ii. 15, 

. „,n ^T*i,- 1 +v • • 1 1 19,51; Acts V. .32: x. 37; xiii. 42.* 

ings. But I thmk the expression ,s clearly 3 Comp.Philo in Flacc.ed. Fcf. p.977 &c 



.simplost, ill tho lioiiio at Nazareth. Only tho Sabbath and festivals, 
whether domestic or public, brought what of the best lay within 
reach. But Nazareth w^as not the city of the wealthy or influential, 
and such festive evening-entertainments, with elaborate ceremonious- 
ness of reception, arranging of guests according to rank, and rich 
si)read of board, would l)ut rarely, if ever, be witnessed in those 
quiet homes. The same simplicity would prevail in dress and 
numners.^ But close and loving were the l)on(ls which drew 
together tho members of a family, and deep the; iutiuence which 
they exercised on each other. We cannot here discuss the vexed 
question whether ' the brothers and sisters ' of Jesus were such in 
the real sense, or step-brothers and sisters, or else cousins, though 
it seems to us as if the primary meaning of the terms would scarcely 
have l)ecn called in question, but for a theory of false asceticism, and 
an undervaluing of the sanctity of the married estate.'' But, what- 
ever the precise relationship between Jesus and these ' brothers and 
sisters, ' it must, on any theory, have been of the closest, and exercised 
its influence upon Him.^ 

Passing over Joses or Joseph, of whoso history we know next to 
nothing, we have suflicient materials to ena])le us to form some judg- 
ment of what must have l^oon tho tendencies and thoughts of two of 
His brothers James and Jude^ before they were heart and soul followers 
of the Messiah, and of His cousin Simon.'^ If we might venture on a 
general characterisation, avo would infer from the Epistle of St. James, 
that his religious views had originally been cast in the mould of Sham- 
med. Certainly, there is nothing of tho Hillelite direction about it, but 
all to remind us of the earnestness, directness, vigour, and rigour of 
Shammai. Of Simon we know that he had belonged to the National- 
ist party, since he is expressly so designated {Zelotes,^' Canana'an)." 
Lastly, there are in tho Epistle of St. Judo, one undoubted, and 
another ])robable reference to two of those (Pseudepigraphic) Apoca- 
lyptic l)o()ks, which at that time marked one deeply interesting phase 
of the Messianic outlook of Israel.'' We have thus within the narrow 
circle of Christ's Family-Life — not to speak of anj' intercourse witli tho 
sons of Zebedee, who probably were also His cousins* — the three most 

" Comp. 
St. Matt. 1. 
24:; St. Luke 
il. 7 : St. 
Matt. xil. 
46; xiii. 5"). 
56; St. Mark 
m. 31; vi. 
3; Acts i. 
U; 1 Cor. 
ix. 5; Gal.i. 

1 For details as to dres.s, food, and 
manners in Palestine, I must refer to 
other ])arts of this book. 

" The question of the real relationship 
of Glirist to His ' brothers ' has been so 
often discussed in the various Cycloiia?- 
dias that it seems unnecessary iiere to 
enter ui)on the matter in detail. See 
also Br. Liijliffoofs Dissertation in his 
Comment, ou Galat. pp. 282-2U1. 

-' I regard this Simon (Zelotes) as the 
son of Clopas (brother of Joseph, the 
Virgin's husband) and of Mary. For 
the reasons of this view, see Book ni. 
ch. xvii. and Book V. ch. xv. 

* On the maternal side. 'We read St. 
John xix. 25 as indicating fonr women — 
His Mother's sister being Salome, accord- 
ing to St. Mark xv. 40. 

>> St. Luke 
vl. 15; 
Acts 1. 13 

' St. Mark 
lii. 18 

■I St. Judf- 
XV. 14, 1.") to 
the V)0(ik <it 
Enoch, anil 
V. SI prob- 
alily to the 
of Moses 




» Comp. 
St. Matt. 

Xlii. fi.); 

St. John Tl. 

hopeful and pur(3 Jcwisli tendencies, Ijrouicht into constant contact 
with Jesus: in Pharisaism, the teaching of Slianiniai; tlien, the 
Nationalist ideal; and. finally, the hoi)e of a glorious Messianic future. 
To these there should prol)a])ly l)e added, at least knowledge of the 
lonely preparation of His kinsman John, who, though certainly not an 
Essene, had, from the necessity of his- calling, much in his outward 
bearing that was akin to them. 

But we are anticipating. From what are, necessarily, only sugges- 
tions, we turn again to what is certain in connection witli His Family- 
Life and its influences. From St. IVIark vi. 3, we may infer with great 
prolnibility, though not with absolute certainty,'' that He had adopted 
the ti-ade of Joseph. Among the Jews the contempt for manual 
labour, which was one of the painfu' characteristics of heathenism, 
did not exist. On the contrary, it was deemed a religious duty, 
frequently and most earnestly insisted upon, to learn some trade, 
provided it did not minister to luxury, nor tend to lead away fi'om 
I' Comp. personal ol)servance of the Law.'' There was not such separation 
Kidd. 29"6i between rich and poor as with us, and while Avealth might confer 
social distinction, the absence of it in no way implied social inferiority. 
Nor could it be otherwise where wants were so few, life was so simple, 
and its highest aim so ever present to tlie mind. 

We have already spoken of the religious intiuences in the family, 
so blessedly difierent from that neglect, exposure, and even murder of 
children among the heathen, or their education by slaves, who cor- 
rupted the mind from its earliest opening.^ The love of parents to 
children, appearing even in the curse which was felt to attach to 
childlessness; the reverence towards parents, as a duty higher than 
any of outward observance; and the love of brethren, which Jesus had 
learned in His home, form, so to speak, the natural basis of many of 
the teachings of Jesus. They give us also an insight into the family- 
life of Nazareth. And yet there is nothing sombre nor morose about it ; 
and even the joyous games of children, as well as festive gatherings 
of families, find their record in the Avords and the life of Christ. This 
also is characteristic of His past. And so are His deep sympathy 
with all sorrow and suffering, and His love for the family circle, as 
evidenced in the home of Lazarus. That He spoke Hebrew, and used 

1 See the chapter on 'Trades and 
Tradesmen,' in the 'Sketches of Jewish 
Social Life.' 

2 Comp. this subject in Bollinger. 'Hei- 
denthuin u. Jndenthum.' in regard to tlie 

• Greeks, p. 692 ; in regard to the Romans. 
pp. 716-722; in regard to education and 

its abominations, pp. 72.3-726. Nothing 
can cast a more lurid light on the need 
for Christianity, if the world was not to 
perish of uttter rottenness, than a study 
of ancient Hellas and Rome, as presented 
])V Dullir.ger in his admirable work. 


and quoted tlic Scriptures in the original, has already been shown, 
although, no doubt, He understood Greek, possibly also Latin. 

Secondhj: Nature and Every-duy Life. The most superlicia 
perusal ol'tlie teaching of Christ must convince how deeply sympathetic 
He was with nature, and how keenly observant of man. Here there 
is no contrast between love of the country and the hal)its of city life; 
the two are found side by side. On His lonely walks He must have 
had an eye for the beauty of the lilies of the field, and thought of it, 
how the birds of the air received their food from an Unseen Hand, 
and with what maternal atfection the hen gathered her chickens 
under her wing. He had watched the sower or the vinedresser as he 
went forth to his labour, and read the teaching of the tares which 
sprang up among the wheat. To Him the vocation of the shepherd 
must have been full of meaning, as he led, and fed, and watched his 
flock, spoke to his sheep with well-known voice, brought them to the 
fold, or followed, and tenderly carried back, those that had strayed, 
ever ready to defend them, even at the cost of his own life. Nay, He 
even seems to have watched the hal)its of the fox in its secret lair. 
But he also equally knew the joys, the sorrows, the wants and 
sufferings of the busy multitude. The play in the market, the 
marriage processions, the funeral rites, the wrongs of injustice and 
oppression, the urgent harshness of the creditor, the bonds and 
prison of the debtor, the palaces and luxury of princes and courtiers, 
the self-indulgence of the rich, the avarice of the covetous, the 
exactions of the tax-gatherer, and the oppression of the widow by 
unjust judges, had all made an indelible impression on His mind. 
And yet this evil world was not one which He hated, and from which 
He would withdraw Himself with His disciples, though ever and 
again He felt the need of periods of meditation and prayer. On the 
contrary, while He confronted all the evil in it. He would fain pervade 
the mass with the new leaven; not cast it away, but renew it. He 
recognised the good and the hopeful, even in those who seemed most 
lost. He quenched not the dimly burning flax, nor brake the 
bruised reed. It was not contempt of the world, but sadness over 
it; not condemnation of man, but drawing him to His Heavenly 
Father; not despising of the little and the poor, whether outwardly or 
inwardly such, but encouragement and adoption of them — together 
with keen insight into the real under the mask of the apparent, and 
withering denunciation and unsparing exposure of all that was evil, 
mean, and unreal, wherever it might appear. Such were some of the 
results gathered from His past life, as presented in His teaching. 

Thirdly: Of the prevailing ideas around, with which He was 



BOOK brought in contact, some liave already l)ecn mentioned. Surely, the 
n earnestness of His Shammaite brother, if such we may venture to 

— -^r^^ designate him ; the idea of the Kingdom suggested by the Nationalists, 
only in its purest and most spiritual form, as not of this world, 
and as truly realising the sovereignty of God in the individual, who- 
ever he might be; even the dreamy thoughts of the prophetic litera- 
ture of those times, which sought to reatl the mysteries of the coming 
Kingdom; as well as the i)rophet-like asceticism of His forerunner 
and kinsman, formed at least so many points of contact for His 
teaching. Thus, Christ was in sympathy Avith all the highest ten- 
dencies of His people and time. Above all, there was His intimate 
converse with the Scriptures of the Old Testament. If, in the Syna- 
gogue, He saw much to show the hollowness, self-seeking, pride, and 
literalism which a mere external observance of the Law fostered, He 
would ever turn from wdiat man or devils said to what He read, 
to what was 'written.' Not one dot or hook of it could fall to the 
ground — all must be established and fultilled. The Law of Moses in 
all its bearings, the utterances of the prophets — Isaiah, Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Micah, Zechariah, Malachi — and the hopes 
and consolations of the Psalms, were all to Him literally true, and cast 
their light upon the building which Moses had reared. It was all one, 
a grand unity; not an aggregation of ditferent parts, but the unfolding 
of a livin*'; organism. Chicfest of all, it was the thought of the 
Messianic bearing of all Scripture to its unity, the idea of the King- 
dom of God and the King of Zion, which was the life and light of all. 
Beyond this, into the mystery of His inner converse with God, 
the unfolding of His spiritual receptiveness, and the increasing 
communication from above, we dare not enter. Even what His bodily 
appearance nmy have been, w^e scarcely venture to imagine.' It could 
not but be that His outer man in some measure bodied forth His 
' Inner Being.' Yet Ave dread gathering around our thoughts of Him 
the artificial tlowers of legend." What His manner and mode of re- 
ceiving and dealing with men were, we can portray to ourseh^es from His 
life. And so it is best to remain content with the simple account of the 
Evangelic narrative: * Jesus increased in favour Avith God and Man.' 

1 Even the poetic conception of tiie Gieseler. Kircliengescli. i. ]ip. 85, 80. 
painter can only furnish his own ideal, '•* Of these there are, alas! only too 
ami that of one special mood. Speakin<i; many. The reader interested in the 
as one who has no claim to knowledfre of matter will find a ijood summary in Ki'im, 
art, only one picture of Christ ever really i. 2, pp. 4(50^08. One of the few note- 
impressed me. It was that of an ' Ecce worthy remarks recorded is this descrip- 
Homc,' by Carlo Dolci. in the Pitti Gal- tion of Christ, in the spurious Epistle 
lery at Florence. For an account of of Lentxliis. ' AVho was never seen to 
the early pictorial representations, comp. lan;j;h, but often to weep.' 




(St. Matthew iii. 1-12; St. Mark i. 2-8; St. Luke iii. 1-18.) 

There is something grand, even awful, in tlie almost absolute silence CHAP, 
which lies upon the thirty years between the Birth and the first ^I 
Messianic Manifestation of Jesus. In a narrative like that of the '-^^f-^ 
Gospels, this must have been designed; and, if so, aflbrds presump- 
tive evidence of the authenticity of what follows, and is intended to 
teach, that what had preceded concerned only the inner History of 
Jesus, and the preparation of the Christ. At last that solemn silence 
was broken by an appearance, a proclamation, a rite, and a ministry 
as startling as that of Elijah had been. In many respects, indeed, 
the two messengers and their times bore singular likeness. It was 
to a society secure, prosperous, and luxurious, yet in imminent danger 
of perishing from hidden, festering disease; and to a religious com- 
munity which presented the appearance of hopeless perversion, and yet 
contained the germs of a possible regeneration, that both Elijah and 
John the Baptist came. Both suddenly appeared to threaten terrible 
judgment, but also to open unthought-of possibilities of good. And, 
as if to deepen still more the impression of this contrast, both ap- 
peared in a manner unexpected, and even antithetic to the hal)its of 
their contemporaries. John came suddenly out of the wilderness of 
Judaea, as Elijah from the wilds of Gilead; John bore the same strange 
ascetic appearance as his predecessor; the message of John was the 
counterpart of that of Elijah; his baptism that of Elijah's novel rite 
on Mount Carmel. And, as if to make complete the parallelism, with 
all of memory and hope which it awakened, even tlie more minute 
details surrounding the life of Elijah found their counterpart in that 
of John. Yet history never repeats itself. It fulfils in its develop- 
ment that of which it gave indication at its commencement. Thus, 


BOOK the liistory of John the Bai)tist was the lulllhnent of that of f]lijah 
n in 'the fuhiess of time.' 
>- — y- — ' For, alike in the Roman worhl and in I'alestine, tlie time had 
fully come; not, indeed, in the sense of any special expectancy, but 
of absolute need. The reign of Augustus marked, not only the 
climax, but the crisis, of Roman history. Whatever of good or of 
evil the ancient world contained, had become fully ri})e. As regarded 
politics, philosophy, religion, and society, the utmost limits had been 
reached.^ Beyond them lay, as only alternatives, ruin or regeneration. 
It was felt that the boundaries of the Empire could be no further 
extended, and that henceforth the highest aim must be to preserve 
what had l)een conquered. The destinies of Rome were in the hands 
of one man, who was at the same time general-in-chief of a standing 
army of about three hundred and forty thousand men, head of a 
Senate (now sunk into a mere court for registering the commands of 
Caesar), and High-Priest of a religion, of Avhich the highest expression 
was the apotheosis of the State in the person of the Emperor. Thus, 
all power within, without, and above lay in his hands. AVithin the city, 
which in one short reign was transformed from brick into marble, were, 
side by side, the most abject misery and almost boundless luxury. Of 
a population of about two millions, well-nigh one half were slaves; and, 
of the rest, the greater part either freedmen and their descendants, 
or foreigners. Each class contril)uted its share to the common decay. 
Slavery was not even what we know it, but a seething mass of cruelty 
and oppression on the one side, and of cunning and corruption on the 
other. More than any other cause, it contributed to the ruin of Roman 
society. The freedmen, who had very often acquired their liberty 
by the most disreputable courses, and had prospered in them, com- 
bined in shameless manner the vices of the free with the vilcness of 
the slave. The foreigners— especially Greeks and Syrians— who crowded 
the city, poisoned the springs of its life by the corruption which they 
brought. The free citizens were idle, dissipated, sunken; their chief 
thoughts of the theatre and the arena; and they were mostly sup- 
ported at the public cost. While, even in the time of Augustus, 
more than two hundred thousand persons were thus maintained by 
the State, what of the old Roman stock remained was rapidly decaying, 
partly from corruption, but chiefly from the increasing cessation of mar- 
riage, and the nameless abominations of what remained of family-life. 

' Instead of detailed quotations I Sittengeschlchte Roms, and to DbUin- 
wonlil liere {renorally refer to works on r/prii exhaustive work, Heidenthum and 
Roman hiritory,esi)eclallyto Friedldnder's Judeuthum. 


The state of tlie provinces was in every respect more favourable. CHAP. 
But it was the settled policy of the Empire, which only too surely XI 
succeeded, to destroy all separate nationalities, or rather to absorb ^— -^r-*-^ 
and to Grecianise all. The only real resistance came from the Jews. 
Their tenacity was religious, and, even in its extreme of intolerant 
exclusiveness, served a most important Providential purpose. And 
so Rome became to all the centre of attraction, but also of fast-spread- 
ing destructive corruption. Yet this unity also, and the common 
bond of the Greek language, served another important Providential 
purpose. So did, in another direction, the conscious despair of any 
possible internal reformation. This, indeed, seemed the last word 
of all the institutions in the Roman world: It is not in me! Reli- 
gion, philosophy, and society had passed through every stage, to that 
of despair. Without tracing the various phases of ancient thought, 
it may be generally said that, in Rome at least, the issue lay between 
Stoicism and Epicureanism. The one flattered its pride, the other 
gratified its sensuality; the one was in accordance with the 
original national character, the other with its later decay and cor- 
ruption. Both ultimately led to atheism and despair — the one, by 
turning all higher aspirations self-Avard, the other, by quenching 
them in the enjoyment of the moment; the one, by making the ex- 
tinction of all feeling and self-deification, the other, the indulgence 
of every passion and the worship of matter, its ideal. 

That, under such conditions, all real belief in a personal con 
tinuance after death must have ceased among the educated classes, 
needs not demonstration. If the older Stoics held that, after death, 
the soul would continue for some time a separate existence — in the 
case of sages till the general destruction of the world by fire, it was 
the doctrine of most of their successors that, immediately after death, 
the soul returned into ' the world-soul ' of which it was part. But 
even this hope was beset by so many doubts and misgivings, as to 
make it practically without influence or comfort. Cicero was the 
only one who, following Plato, defended the immortality of the soul, 
Aviiile the Peripatetics denied the existence of a soul, and leading 
Stoics at least its continuance after death. But even Cicero writes 
as one overwhelmed by doubts. With his contemporaries this doul)t 
deepened into absolute despair, the only comfort lying in present 
indulgence of the passions. Even among the Greeks, who were most 
tenacious of belief in the non-extinction of the individual, the prac- 
tical upshot was the same. The only healthier tendency, however 
mixed with error, came from the Xeo-Platonic School, Avhicli accord- 


I!()()K iii.u'ly olfcrcd a point of contact between ancient i:)hilosophy and the 
II new faith. 

"■ (^"^^ In such circumstances, anything like real religion was manifestly 

impossible. Rome tolerated, and, indeed, incorporated, all national 
rites. But among the populace religion had degenerated into abject 
superstition. In the East, much of it consisted of the vilest rites; 
while, among the philosophers, all religions were considered equally 
false or equally true — the outcome of ignorance, or else the uncon- 
scious moditications of some one fundamental thought. The only 
religion on which the State insisted was the deification and worship 
of the Emperor.^ These apotheoses attained almost incredible de- 
velopment. Soon not only the Emperors, but their wives, paramours, 
children, and the creatures of their vilest lusts, were deified; nay, 
any private person might attain that distinction, if the survivors 
possessed suflicient means. ^ Mingled with all this was an increasing 
amount of superstition — by which term some understood the worship 
of foreign gods, the most part the existence of fear in religion. The 
ancient Roman religion had long given place to foreign rites, the 
more mysterious and unintelligible the more enticing. It was thus 
that Judaism made its converts in Rome; its chief recommendation 
with many being its contrast to the old, and the unknown possibili- 
ties which its seemingly incredible doctrines opened. Among the 
most repulsive symptoms of the general religious decay may be 
reckoned prayers for the death of a rich relative, or even for the 
satisfaction of unnatural lusts, along with horrible blasphemies when 
such prayers remained unanswered. We may here contrast the spirit 
of the Old and New Testaments with such sentiments as this, on the 
tomb of a child: 'To the unjust gods who robbed me of life;' or on 
that of a girl of twenty : ' I lift my hands against the god who took 
me away, innocent as I am. ' 

It would be unsavoury to describe how far the worsliip of in- 
decency was carried; how public morals were corrupted by the 
mimic representations of everything that was vile, and even by the 
]iandering of a corrupt art. The personation of gods, oracles, 
divination, dreams, astrology, magic, necromancy, and theurgy,^ all 

1 The oiil.v thorough resistance to this ^ One of tlie most painful, and to tlie 

■worship came from hated Jud«a, and, we Christian almost incredible, manifesta- 

may add, from Britain {BbUimjer, p. Gil), tions of relip;ious decay was the unblush- 

'' From tlie time of Ca-sar to that of ins; manner in which the priests practised 

Diocletian, fifty-three such ajiotheoses imposture upon the i)eople. Numerous 

took idace, including those of fifteen wo- and terrible instances of this could be 

men belonging to the Imperial families, given. The evidence of this is not only 


contributed to the general decay. It has been ri<i-htly said, that the CHAP. 
idea of conscience, as we understand it, was unknown to heathenism. ^'I 
Absohite right did not exist. Might was right. The social relations ^— ^( ' 
exhil)ited, if possible, even deeper corruption. The sanctity of mar- 
riage had ceased. Female dissipation and the general dissoluteness 
led at last to an almost entire cessation of nmrriage. Abortion, and 
the exposure and murder of newly-born children, were common and 
tolerated; unnatural vices, which even the greatest philosophers prac- 
tised, if not advocated, attained proportions which defy description. 
But among these sad signs of the times three must be specially 
mentioned: the treatment of slaves; the bearing towards the poor; 
and public amusements. The slave was entirely uni)rotected; males 
and females were exposed to nameless cruelties, compared to which 
death by being thrown to the wild beasts, or fighting in the arena, 
might seem absolute relief. Sick or old slaves were cast out to 
perish from want. But what the influence of the slaves must have 
been on the free population, and especially ui)on the young — whose 
tutors they generally were — may readily l)e imagined. The heart- 
lessness towards the poor who. crowded the city is another well-known 
feature of ancient Roman society. Of course, there was neither 
hospitals, nor provision for the poor; charity and brotherly love in 
their every manifestation are purely Old and New Testament ideas. 
But even the l)estowal of the snudlest alms on tlie needy was regarded 
as very questionable; best, not to attbrd them the means of i)rotracting 
a useless existence. Lastly, the account which Seneca has to give 
of what occupied and amused the idle multitude — for all manual 
labour, except agriculture, was looked upon with utmost contempt 
— horrified even himself. And so the only -escajje which remained 
for the pliiloso]iher, the satiated, or the miserable, seemed the i)Ower 
of self-destruction! What is worse, the noblest spirits of the time 
felt, that the state of things was utterly hopeless. Society could 
not reform itself; philosophy and religion had nothing to ofler: they 
had been tried and found wanting. Seneca longed tor some hand 
from without to lift up from the mire of desj)air; Cicero pictured 
the enthusiasm which would greet the embodiment of true virtue, 
should it ever appear on earth; Tacitus declared lunnan life one 

derived from the Fathers. T)nt a work lias practised. (Comp. ' The rneumaties of 

l)een preserved in which formal iiistruc- Hero,' translated l)y 7:;. lloof/rro/y.) The 

tions are ,s;iven. how temples and altars worst was, that this kind of imposture 

are to lie constructed in order to produce on tlie i,<;-noranti)oi»nlace was openly ap- 

false miracles, and by what m(>ans im- i)roved by the educated. {Dollinger, p. 

postures of this kind nuiy be successfully 647.) 



BOOK great farce, and expressed his conviction that the Roman world laj 
^I nnder some terrible curse. All around, despair, conscious need, and 
— >" — ' unconscious longing. Can greater contrast he inuigined, than the 
proclannition of a coming Kingdom of God amid such a world; oi 
clearer evidence be afforded of the reality of this Divine message, 
than that it came to seek and to save that which was thus lost? One 
synchronism, as remarkable as that of the Star in the East and the 
Birth of the Messiah, here claims the reverent attention of the student 
of history. On the 19th of December a.d. G9, the R(nnan Capitol, 
with its ancient sanctuaries, was set on fire. Eight months later, 
on the 9th of Ab a.d. 70, the Temple of Jerusalem was given to the 
flames. It is not a coincidence but a conjunction, for upon the ruins 
of heathenism and of apostate Judaism was the Church of Christ to 
be reared. 

A silence, even more complete than that concerning the early life 
of Jesus, rests on the thirty years and more, which intervened between 
the l)irth and the open tbrthshowing ^ of John in his character as 
Forerunner of the Messiah. Only his outward and inward develop- 
ment, and his ])eing 'in the deserts,'" are brielly indicated.'' The 
latter, assuredly, not in order to learn from the Essenes,^ but to 
attain really, in lonely fellowship with God, what they sought extern- 
ally. It is characteristic that, while Jesus could go straight from 
the home and workshop of Nazareth to the Baptism of Jordan, His 
Forerunner recjuired so long and peculiar preparation: characteristic 
of the difference of their Persons and Mission, characteristic also of 
the greatness of the work to be inaugurated. St. Luke furnishes 
precise notices of the time of the Baptist's public appearance — not 
merely to fix the exact chronology, which woidd not have required 
so many details, ])ut for a higher pur^DOse. For, they indicate, more 
clearly than the most elaborate discussion, the fitness of the moment 
for the Advent of 'the Kingdom of Heaven.' For the first time 
since the Ba])ylonish Captivity, the foreigner, the Cliief of the hated 
Roman Empire — according to the Rabbis, the fourth beast of Daniel's 
bAb.zar.2 6 visiou *" — was absolutc and undisputed master of Judaea; and the 

" St. Luke 1 

1 This seems the full meanin.s: of the 
■word, St. Luke i. 80. Comp. Acts i. 2i 
(in tlie A.V. 'shew '). 

•^ The plural indicates that St. John 
was not always in the same 'wilder- 
ness.' The plural form in re<i;ard to the 
' wildernesses which are in tlie land of 
Israel,' is common in Raljbinic writinfjs 
(comp. Baba K. vii. 7 and the Gemaras 

on the i)as3a^e). On the fulfilment by 
the Baptist of Ls. xl. 3. see the di-scussion 
of that i)assage in Ap})endlx XL 

^ Godet has, in a few forcible sentences, 
traced what may be called not merely 
the ditference. but the contrast between 
the teachinir and aims of the Essenes and 
those of John. 



chief religious office divided between two, equally unworthy of its CHAP, 
functions. And it deserves, at least, notice, that of the Rulers XI 

mentioned by St. Luke, Pilate entered on his office" only shortly ' — ~r — 

before the public ap])earance of John, and that they ail continued "P>'>habiy 

. . . "^ about 

till after the Crucitixion of Christ. There was thus, so to speak, a Ea.stor, 26 
continuity of these powers during the whole Messianic period. 

As regards Palestine, the ancient kingdom of Herod was now 
divided into four parts, Judasa being under the direct administration 
of Rome, two other tetrarchies under the rule of Herod's sons (Herod 
Antipas and Philip), while the small principality of Abilene was 
governed by Lysanias.^ Of the latter no details can be furnished, 
nor are they necessary in this history. It is otherwise as regards the 
sont; of Herod, and especially the character of the' Roman government 
at that time. 

Herod Antipas, whose rule extended over fortj^-three years, 
reigned over Galilee and Persea — the districts which were respec- 
tively the principal sphere of the Ministry of Jesus and of John the 
Baptist. Like his brother Archelaus, Herod Antii)as possessed in an 
even aggravated form most of the vices, without any of the greater 
qualities, of his father. Of deeper religious feelings or convictions 
he was entirely destitute, though his conscience occasionally misgave, 
if it did not restrain, him. The inherent weakness of his character 
left him in the absolute control of his wife, to the final ruin of his for- 
tunes. He was covetous, avaricious, luxurious, and utterly dissipated; 
suspicious, and with a good deal of that fox-cunning which, especially 
in the East, often forms the sum total of state-craft. Like his father, 
he indulged a taste for building — always taking care to i)ropitiate 
Rome by dedicating all to the Emperor.- The most extensive of his 
undertakings was the building, in 22 a.d., of the city of Tiberias, at 
the upper end of the Lake of Galilee. The site was under the 
disadvantage of having formerly been a burying-place, which, as 
implying Lcvitical uncleanness, for some time deterred i)ious Jews 
from settling there. Nevertheless, it rose in great magiiiticence from 
among the reeds which had but lately covered the neighbourhood 
(the ensigns armorial of the city were 'reeds'). Herod Antipas made 
it his residence, and built there a strong castle and a i)alace of 

1 Till quite lately, those who iini)u<i"ii 
the veracity of the Cfospels — Siraitss, and 
even Kenn — have pointed to this notice 
of Lysanias as an instance of the unhis- 
torical character of St. Luke's Gospel. 
But it is now admitted on all h?.nds that 

the notice of St. Luke is strictly correct; 
and that, besides the other Lysanias. one 
of the same name had rei^yiied over 
Abilene at the time of Christ. Comp. 
Wi^seler, Beitr. i)p. 196-204. ■AudSc/iilrer 
in Eiehm's Handworterl), p. !)81. 




a PUlo, 

ed. Frcf., 
Leg. 1015 

c.Sm/'<. Tiber. 

4 Philn, U.S. 

« Jnx. Ant. 
xvlii. 3. 1, 2 

fSt. Luke 
xili. 1 

e Ant. xviii. 

h Philo.lieg. 

unrivalled splendour. The city, which was peopled cliiefly by ad- 
venturers, was mainly Grecian, and adorned with an amphitheatre, 
of which the ruins can still be traced. 

A happier account can be given of Philip, the son of Herod the 
Great and Cleoi)atra of Jerusalem. He was undoubtedly the best 
of Herod's sons. He showed, indeed, the same abject submission as 
the rest of his family to the Roman Emperor, after whom he named 
the city of Csesarea Philippi, which he built at the sources of the 
Jordan; just as he changed the name of Bethsaida, a village of which 
he made an opulent city, into Julias, after the daughter of Augustus. 
But he was a moderate and just ruler, and his reign of thirty-seven 
years contrasted favourably with that of his kinsmen. The land was 
quiet and prosperous, and the people contented and hapj^y. 

As regards the Roman rule, matters had greatly changed for the 
worse since the mild sway of Augustus, under which, in the language 
of Philo, no one throughout the Empire dared to molest the Jews." 
The only innovations to which Israel had then to submit were, the 
daily sacrifices for the Emperor and the Roman people, offerings on 
festive days, prayers for them in the Synagogues, and such partici- 
l)ation in national joy or sorrow as their religion allowed.'' 

It was far other when Tiberius succeeded to the Empire, and 
Judasa was a province. Merciless harshness characterised the ad- 
ministration of Palestine; while the Emperor himself was bitterly 
hostile to Judaism and the Jews, and that although, personally, 
openly careless of all religion. "= Under his reign the persecution 
of the Roman Jews occurred, and Palestine suffered almost to the 
verge of endurance. The first Procurator whom Tiberius appointed 
over Judasa, changed the occupancy of the High-Priesthood four 
times, till he found in Caiaphas a sufficiently submissive instrument 
of Roman tyranny. The exactions, and the reckless disregard of all 
Jewish feelings and interests, might have been characterised as 
reaching the extreme limit, if worse had not followed when Pontius 
Pilate succeeded to the procuratorshij). Yenality, violence, robbery, 
persecutions, wanton malicious insults, judicial murders without 
even the formality of a legal process, and cruelty — such are the 
charges brought against his administration.'' If former governors 
had, to some extent, respected the religious scruples of the Jews, 
Pilate set them purposely at defiance; and this not only once, but 
again and again, in Jerusalem,"^ in Galilee,-' and even in Samaria,*^ 
until the Emperor himself interposed.'' 

Such, then, was the political condition of flic land, Avhen Jolm 



appeared to preach the near Advent of a Kingdom with wliich 
Israel associated all that was happy and glorious, even beyond the 
dreams of the religious enthusiast. And equally loud was the call 
for help in reference to those who held chief spiritual rule over the 
people. St. Luke significantly joins together, as the highest religious 
authority in the land, the names of Annas and Caiaphas.^ The 
former had been appointed by Quirinius, After holding the Pontifi- 
cate for nine years, he was deposed, and succeeded by others, of 
whom the fourth was his son-in-law Caiaphas. The character of the 
High-Priests during the whole of that period is described in the 
Talmud " in terrible language. And although there is no evidence 
that ' the house of Annas ' ^ was guilty of the same gross self- 
indulgence, violence," luxury, and even public indecency," as some of 
their successors, they are included in the woes pronounced on the 
corrupt leaders of the priesthood, whom the Sanctuary is represented 
as bidding depart from the sacred precincts, which their presence 
defiled."* It deserves notice, that the special sin with which the 
house of Annas is charged is that of ' whispering ' — or hissing like 
vipers — which seems to refer ^ to private influence on the judges 
in their administration of justice, whereby ' morals w^ere corrupted, 
judgment perverted, and the Shekhinah withdrawn from Israel. ' ' 
In illustration of this, we recall the terrorism which prevented San- 
hedrists from taking the part of Jesus, ^ and especially the violence 
which seems to have determined the final action of the Sanhedrin,-'^ 
against which not only such men as Mcodemus and Joseph of Ari- 
mathaea, but even a Gamaliel, would feel themselves powerless. But 
although the expression ' High-Priest ' appears somctiuics to have 
been used in a general sense, as designating the sons of the High- 
Priests, and even the principal members of their families," there could, 


1 Tlie Procurators were Imperial fin- 
ancial officers, witii absohite i)ower of 
{government in smaller territories. The 
office was generally in tlie hands of tlie 
Roman knights, which chietly consisted 
of financial men, banl\ers. ciiief imltii- 
cans, etc. The order of knighthood had 
sunk to a low state, and the exactions of 
such a rule, especially in Jud.Ta, can bet- 
ter be imagined than described. Com)), 
on the whole subject, Frfed/auder, Sit- 
tengesch. Rom, vol. i. p. 2GS S:c. 

'^ Annas, either Chdnan (pn), or else 
Ghana or Chanva, a common name. Pro- 
fessor Delitzsch has rightly shown that 
the Hebrew equivalent for Caiaphas is 
not Ket/pJia (N'p^r) =Peter, but luojapha 

(J^-^'r*' or perhai)S rather — according to 

the reading Kai(!)aZ — Xy^p Kaiplia, or 

Kaiphah. The name occurs in the Mishnah 
as Kayaph [so, and not A'(/;>/(, correctly] 
(Parah iii. 5). Professor Delitzsch does 
not venture to exi)lain its meaning. 
Would it be too bold to suggest a deriva- 
tion from N'Cp, and the meaning to be: 
He who is ' at the top ' ? 

3 If we may take a statement in the 
Talmud, where the same word occurs, as 
a commentai-y. 

* I do not, however, feel sure that the 
word 'high-priests' in this passage should 
be closely i)ressed. It is just one of those 
instances in wliich it would suit Josephus 

•> Jos. Ant. 
XX. 8. 8 

I' Yoma 35 6 

'' Pes. U.S. 

<■ Tos. Set. 

f St. John 
Til. 50-52 

e St. John 
xl. 47-50 

Vos. Jewish 
War vl. 2.2 




» St. .John 
xi. 49 

I- St. 
xviii. 13 

: 779 A.TT.C. 

■' St. Luke 
iii. 3 

' St. 

•John i. 

' '2 Kings i. 

ol' course, be only ouc actual High-Priest. The conjunction of the 
two names of Annas and Caiaphas ^ probably indicates that, although 
Annas was deprived of the Pontificate, he still continued to preside 
over the Sanhedrin — a conclusion not only borne out by Acts iv. 6, 
wliere Annas appears as the actual President, and I)}' the terms in 
which Caiaphas is spoken of, as merely * one of them,' ^ but by the part 
which Annas took in the final condemnation of Jesus.'' 

Such a combination (jf political and religious distress, surely, con- 
stituted the time of Israel's utmost need. As yet, no attempt had been 
made by the people to right themselves by armed force. In these cir- 
cumstances, the cry that the Kingdom of Heaven was near at hand, 
and the call to preparation for it, must have awakened echoes through- 
out the land, and startled the most careless and unbelievings It 
was, according to St. Luke's exact statement, in the fifteenth year of 
the reign of Tiberius Ceesar — reckoning, as provincials would do,^ 
from his co-regency with Augustus (which commenced two years 
before his sole reign), in the year 26 a. d." According to our former 
computation, Jesus would then be in His thirtieth year.^ The scene 
of John's first public appearance was in 'the wilderness of Jiidsea,' 
that is, the wild, desolate district around the mouth of the Jordan. 
We know not whether John baptized in this place,* nor yet how long 
he continued there; but we are expressh^ told, that his stay was not 
confined to that locality.** Soon afterwards we find him at Bethabara," 
which is farther up the stream. The outward appearance and the 
habits of the Messenger corresponded to the character and object of 
his Mission. jS"either his dress nor his food was that of the Essenes; ^ 
and the former, at least, like that of Elijah,*^ whose mission he was 
now to ' fulfil.' 

to give such a graudiose title to those 
■who joined the Romans. 

' This only in St. Luke. 

^Wieseler has, I think, satisfactorily es- 
tablished this. Conip. Beitr. pp. 191-194. 

^ St. Luke speaks of Christ being 
'about thirty years old' at the time of 
His baptism. If John began His ])ublic 
ministry in the autumn, and some months 
elapsed before Jesus was baptized, our 
Lord would have just i)as3ed His thirtieth 
year when He ai)i)eared at Bethabara. 
We have i)ositive evidence that the ex- 
pression ' about ' before a numeral meant 
either a little more or a little less tiian 
that exact number. See Midr. on Ruth i. 
4 ed. Warsh. p. 39 f>. 

* Here tradition, tliough evidently 
falsely, locates the Baptism of .Jesusu 

^ In reference not only to this point, 
but in general, I would refer to Bishop 
Light/oofs masterly essay on the Es- 
senes in his Appendix to his Commen- 
tary on Colossians (especially here, pp. 
388, 400). It is a remarkable confirma- 
tion of the fact that, if John had been 
an Essene, his food could not have been 
' locusts ' that the Gospel of the Ebion- 
ites. who, like the Essenes, abstained 
from animal food, omits the mention of 
the 'locusts,' of St. Matt. iii. 4. (see Mr. 
Nicholson''s ' The Gospel of the He- 
brews,' pp. 34. 35). But jM'oof positive 
is derived from Jer. Nedar. 40 h, where, 
in case of a vow of abstinence from 
flesh, fish and locusts are interdicted. 

•* Our A.Y. wrongly translates ' a hairy 
man,' instead of a man with a hairy 


This was evinced alike by what he preached, and l)y the new CHAP. 
symbolic rite, IVoni wiiich he derived the name of ' Baptist.' The XI 
grand burden of his message was: the announcement of tlie ^- — -v^— ^ 
approach of 'the Kingdom of Heaven,' and the needed preparation 
of his hearers for that Kingdom. The latter he sought, positively, 
by admonition, and negatively, by warnings, while he directed all 
to the Coming One, in Whom that Kingdom would become, so 
to speak, individualised. Thus, from the first, it was ' tlie good 
news of the Kingdom,' to which all else in J-ohn's })reaching was 
but subsidiary. 

Concerning this ' Kingdom of Heaven, ' which was the great mes- 
sage of John, and the great work of Christ Himself,' we may here 
say, that it is the whole Old Testament sublimated., and the whole 
^ew Testament realised. The idea of it did not lie hidden in 
the Old, to be opened up in the New Testament — as did the mystery 
of its realisation.'' But this rule of heaven and Kingship of >Kom. xvi. 

25, 2C; 

Jehovah was the very substance of the Old Testament; the object Eph. 1.9; 

. . . . Col. i. 26, 27 

of the calling and mission of Israel ; the meaning of all its 
ordinances, whether civil or religious; ^ the underlying idea of all 
its institutions.^ It explained alike the history of the people, the 
dealings of God with them, and the prospects opened up by the 
prophets. Without it the Old Testament could not be understood; 
it gave perpetuity to its teaching, and dignity to its representations. 
This constituted alike the real contrast between Israel and the 
nations of antiquity, and Israel's real title to distinction. Thus tlie 
whole Old Testament was the preparatory presentation of the rule 
of heaven and of the Kingship of its Lord. 

But preparatory not only in the sense of typical, but also in that 
of inchoative. Even the twofold hindrance — internal and external — 
which '■ the Kingdom ' encountered, indicated this. The former arose 
from the resistance of Israel to their King; the latter from the oi)i)o- 
sition of the surrounding kingdoms of this world. All the more 
intense became the longing through thousands of years, that these 

(camel's luiir) raiment.' This seems after- designates as the • treibenden Gedani<en 

wards to have become the distinctive des Alten Testamentes' — those of the 

dressof the prophets (comp. Zech. xiii. 4). Kingdom and the King. A Kingdom of 

1 Keim beautifully designates it: 7)r?.s- God without a King: a Theocracy with- 

LiebIi)/{/sirorf Jesii. out tlie rule of God; a i)erpetual Davidie 

^ If, indeed, in the preliminary dispen- Kingdom without a ' Son of David ' — 

sation these two can be well sejiarated. these are tnitinomies (to borrow the 

•'' I confess myself utterly unable to term of Knnt) of which neither tlie Old 

understand, how anyone writing a His- Testament, tlio Apocryjiha, the Pseud- 

tory of the Jewish Church can apiiar- epigrai)hic writings, nor Rabbiuism were 

ently eliminate from it what even Keim guilty. 



BOOK hindrances might be swept away by the Advent of the promised 
H Messiah, Who would permanently establish (by His spirit) the right 

^^ r-"^ relationship between the King and His Kingdom, by bringing in an 

everlasting righteousness, and also cast down existing barriers, by 
calling the kingdoms of this world to be the Kingdom of our God. 
This would, indeed, be the Advent of the Kingdom of God, such as 
''xiv. 91 had been the glowing hope held out by Zcchariah,'' the glorious 
1 Tii. i3,u^ vision beheld by Daniel.'' Three ideas especially did this Kingdom of 
{jfod m\\)\y : univei^sality, heavenliness, uml permanency. Wide as God's 
domain Avuuld l)e His Dominion; holy, as heaven in contrast to earth, 
and God to man, would be his character; and triumphantly lasting 
its continuance. Such was the teaching of the Old Testament, and 
the groat hope of Israel. It scarcely needs mental compass, only 
moral and spiritual capacity, to see its matchless grandeur, in con- 
trast with even the highest aspirations of heathenism, and the 
blanched ideas of modern culture. 

How imperfectly Israel understood this Kingdom, our previous in- 
vestigations have shown. In trutli, the men of that period possessed 
only the term — as it were, the form. What explained its meaning, 
filled, and fulfilled it, came once more I'rom heaven. Rabbinism and 
Alexandrianism kept alive the thought of it; and in their own way 
filled the soul with its longing — just as the distress in Church and 
State carried the need of it to every heart with the keenness 
of anguish. As throughout tliis history, the foriii was of that 
time; tlie substance and the spirit were of Him Whose coming 
was the Advent of that Kingdom. Perhaps the nearest approach 
to it lay in the higher aspirations of the Nationalist party, only 
that it sought their realisation, not spiritually, l)ut outwardly. 
Taking the sword, it perished by the sword. It was probably to 
this that both Pilate and Jesus referred in that memorable question: 
'Art Thou then a King? ' to which our Lord, unfolding the deepest 
meaning of His mission, replied: 'My Kingdom is not of this 
world: if ^ly Kingdom were of this world, then would My servants 

■: St. John tight.'" 

According to the Rabbinic views of the time, the terms ' King- 
dom,' 'Kingdom of heaven,'" and 'Kingdom of God ' (in the Targum 

1 ' And the Lord shall be King over given Him dominion, and glory, and a 

all the earth: in that day shall there be kingdom, that all peoi)le, nations, and 

one Lord, and His Name one.' languages, should serve Him : His domin- 

^ ' I saw in the night visions, and, ion is an everlasting dominion, which 

behold, One like the Son of Man came shall not pass away, and His kingdom 

with the clouds of heaven, and came to that which shall not be destroyed.' 

the Ancient of Days, and they brought •' Occasionally we find, instead of 

Him near before Him. And there was Malkhuth Shumai/im ('Kingdom of 



on Micah iv. T ' Kingdom of Jehovah ' ), were equivalent. In fact, 
the word ' heaven ' was very often used instead of 'God, 'so as to 
avoid unduly- familiarising the ear with the Sacred Name.^ Tliis, 
l)r()l)ably, accounts for the exclusive use of the expression 'Kingdom 
of Heaven' in the Gospel by St. Matthew.^ And the term did imply 
a contrast to earth, as the expression ' the Kingdom of God ' did to 
tliis world. The consciousness of its contrast to earth or the world 
was distinctly expressed in Rabbinic writings.'' 

This 'Kingdom of Heaven,' or 'of God,' must, however, be dis- 
tinguished troni such terms as 'the Kingdom of the Messiah ' {Mal- 
Kiiutha duneshicha^'), 'the future age (world) of the Messiah' (Alma 
deathey dimesJdcha " ), 'the days of the Messiah,' 'the age to come ' 
{•scpculum futmvim, the AtJtid labho^ — both this and the previous 
expression''), 'the end of days,'" and 'the end of the extremity of 
days ' So2)h Eqebh Yomaija^). This is the more important, since the 
' Kingdom of Heaven ' has so often been confounded with the period 
of its triumphant manifestation in 'the days,' or in 'the Kingdom, 
of the Messiah.' Between the Advent and the final manifestation of 
'the Kingdom,' Jewish expectancy i)laced a temporary obscuration 
of the Messiah.* Xot His first appearance, but His triumphant 
manifestation, Avas to be preceded by the so-called ' sorrows of the 
Messiah' (the ChebJdey shel Masliiach), 'the tribulations of the latter 

A review of many passages on the subject shows that, in the 
Jewish mind the expression ' Kingtlom of Heaven ' referred, not so 
much to any particular period, as in general to the Fade of God — as 
acknowledged, manifested, and eventually perfected. Very often it 
is the equivalent for personal acknowledgment of God: the taking 
upon oneself of the 'yoke' of 'the Kingdom,' or of the command- 
ments — the former preceding and conditioning the latter. ^ Accord- 


Heaven'), Mal/i/iuf/ia dii-^r/ii/fi {^King,- 
(lom of the tirniament '), as In Ber. 58 a, 
Shel)liu. 35 b. But in the former passa,2:e, 
at least, it seems to ajiply rather to God's 
Providential government than to His 
moral reign. 

1 The Talmud (Shehhn. 35 h) analyses 
the various i)asfeages of Scripture in 
whicli it is used in a sacred and in the 
common sense. 

^ In St. Mattliew the expression occurs 
thirty-two times; six times that of ' the 
Kimrdom; ' five times that of ' Kingdom 
of God.' 

■^ The distinction between tlie O/mn 

hal)ba (the world to come), and the Athid 
labho (the age to come), is important. It 
will be more fully referred to by-and- 
by. In the meantime, suffice it, that th(> 
Athid I(d)Jio is the more specific designa- 
tion of Messianic times. The two terms 
are expressly distinguished, for example, 
in Meclillta (ed. IT7^/.s.s'), p. "4 a, lines 
2. 3. 

* This will be more fully explained 
and shown in the sequel. For tiie pres- 
ent we refer only to Yalkut, vol. ii. p. 75 
(7, and the Mldr. on Ruth ii. 14. 

■'' The wliole subject is ^ully treated in 
Book y. eh. vi. 

1 As in 
35 b ; Ber. 
R. 9, ed. 
Warsh, pp. 
19 6, 20 a 

•> As In the 
Targuni on 
Ps. siv. 7, 
and on Is. 
Hil. 10 

'■ As in 
Targum on 
1 Kings iv. 
33 (V. 13) 

d For ex 
ami)le, in 
Ber. R. 88, 
ed. Warsh. 
p. 157 a 

' Targ. 
Jon, on Ex. 
Xl. 9, 11 

f Jer. Targ. 
on Gen. iii. 
15; Jer. and 
Jon. Targ 
on Numb. 
xxiv. 14 

? So ex- 
pressly in 
p. V.-) a: 
vol. ii. p. 
14 a, last 




' For ex- 
ample, Ber. 
IJ I', U b ; 
Ber. li. 5; 
and the 
story of 
Aklba thus 
taking up- 
on himself 
the yoke of 
the Law in 
the hour of 
his martyr- 
Ber, 61 h 

c So often, 
Slphrc- p. 
14-i '', li:3 b 
1 Ber, K, 98 

<■ Yalkut, 
vol,ii,p.iy a 

f Midr. on 

1 Sam, ii, 
1'2: Midr.on 
Eccl. i. 18 

2 In Yalkut 
ii. p, 178 a 

i Midr. on 1 
Comf), also 
cxlvii. 1 

inglj, tlic Mishnah " gives this as the reason why, in the collection 
of Scripture passages which forms the prayer called ^ Shema,' '^ the 
couicssion, Dent. vi. 4&c., precedes the admonition, Dent. xi. 18 &c., 
because a man takes upon himself first the yoke of the Kingdom of 
Heaven, and afterw^ards that of the commandments. And in this 
sense, the repetition of this Shema, as the personal acknowledgment 
of the Rule of Jehovah, is itself often designated as ' taking upon 
oneself the Kingdom of Heaven.'" Similarly, the putting on of 
phylacteries, and the washing of hands, are also described as taking 
upon oneself the yoke of the Kingdom of God.^ To give other 
instances: Israel is said to have taken up the yoke of the Kingdom 
of God at Mount Sinai;" the children of Jacol) at their last inter- 
view with their father;'^ and Isaiah on his call to the prophetic 
office,'' where it is also noted that this nnist be done willingly and 
gladly. On the other hand, the sons of Eli and the sons of Ahab are 
said to have cast off the Kingdom of Heaven. "^ While thus the 
acknowledgment of the Rule of God, both in profession and practice, 
was considered to constitute the Kingdom of God, its full manifesta- 
tion was expected only in the time of the Advent of Messiah. Thus 
in the Targum on Isaiah xl. 9, the words ' Behold your God!' are 
paraphrased: 'The Kingdom of your God is revealed.' Similarly, ^ 
we read: 'When the time approaches that the Kingdom of Heaven 
shall be manifested, then shall be fulfilled that "the Lord shall be 
King over all the earth. """^ On the other hand, the unbelief of 
Israel would appear in that they would reject these three things: the 
Kingdom of Heaven, the Kingdom of the House of David, and the 
buiMing of the Temple, according to the prediction in Hos. iii. 5.' 
It follows that, after the period of unbelief, the Messianic deliverances 
and blessings of the ' Athid Labho,' or future age, were expected. 
But the final completion of all still remained for the '01am Ilabba,' 
or world to come. And that there is a distinction between the time 
of the Messiah and this ' world to come ' is frequently indicatetl in 
Rabbinic writings.'' 

^ The Shema, whicli was repeated twice 
every day, was re,i>;arded as distinctive of 
Jewish in-ofessioii (Ber. iii. 3). 

- In Ber. 14 b. last line, and \b n, 
first line, there is a shocking; definition 
of what constitutes the Kingdom of 
Heaven in its comjileteness. For the 
sake of those who would derive Christi- 
anity from Rabbinism, I would have 
quoted it, but am restrained by its pro- 

^ The same passage is similarly re- 
ferred to in the Midr. on Song. ii. 12, 
where the words 'the time of the singing 
has come,' areparaphra.sed; 'the time of 
the Kingdom of Heaven that it shall be 
manifested, hath come ' (in B. Martini 
Pugio Fidei, p. 782). 

* As in Shabb. 6.3 rr, where at least 
three differences between them are men- 
tioned. For. while all ]irophecy i)ointed 
to the days of the Messiah, concerning 



As "wc pass Iroin the Jewish ideas of tlie time to the teaching of 
the New Testament, we feel that while there is comjjlete change of 
S2)irit, the form in which the idea of the Kingdom of Heaven is pre- 
sented is suhstantially similai'. Accordingly, we must dismiss the 
notion that the expression refers to the Church, whether visible 
(according to the Roman Catholic view) or invisible (according to 
certain Protestant writers)/ ' The Kingdom of God,' or Kingly Rule 
of God, is an objective fact. The visil)le Church can only be the sub- 
jective attempt at its outward realisation, of which the invisil)le Church 
is the true counterpart. When Christ says,'' that ' except a man be 
horn from above, he cannot see the Kingdom of God,' He teaches, in 
opposition to the Ral)l)inic representation of how 'the Kingdom' was 
taken up, that a man cannot even comprehend that glorious idea of 
the Reign of God, and of becoming, by conscious self-surrender, one 
of His subjects, except he be first born from above. Similarly, the 
meaning of Christ's further teaching on this subject ''seems to be that, 
except a man be born of water (profession, with baptism^ as its 

» St. John 
Hi. 3 

the world to come we are told (Ls. Ixiv. -t) 
that 'eye hath not seen, ttc.'; m the 
days of the Messiah weapons would be 
borne, but not in the world to come; and 
while Is. xxiv. 21 applied to the days of 
the Messiah, the seemingly contradictory 
passage. Is. xxx. 26, referred to the 
world to come. In Targum Pseudo-Jon- 
athan on Exod. xvii. IG, we read of three 
generations: that of this world, that of 
the Messiah, and that of the world to 
come (Aram: Alma deathey=o/'r/»z hab- 
ba). Comi). Ar. 13 6, and Midr. on Ps. 
Ixxxi. 2 (3 in A.V.), ed. WavKh. p. 63 a, 
where the harp of the Sanctuary is de- 
scribed as of seven strings (according to 
Ps. cxix. 164); in the days of the Messiah 
as of eight strings (according to the in- 
scription of Ps. xii.); and in the world to 
come (here Athid hibho) as of ten 
sti'ings (according to Ps. xcii. 3). The 
reftn-ences of Gfrbrer (Jahrh. d. Heils, 
vol. ii. )). 213) contain, as not unfre- 
{piently, mistakes. I may here say that 
FJienferdius carries the argument about 
tlie Olrt7n habba, as distinguished from 
the days of the Messiah, beyond what I 
believe to be established. See his Dis- 
sertation in Me)ische)>, Nov. Test. pp. 
1116 Ac. 

' It is difficult to conceive, how the 
idea of the identity of the Kingdom 
of God with the Gliurch could have origi- 
nated. Such parables as those about 

the Sower, and about the Net (St. Matt, 
xiii. 3-9; 47, 48), and such admonitions 
as those of Christ to His disciples in St. 
Matt. xix. 12; vi. 33; and vi. 10, are ut- 
terly inconsistent with it. 

^ The passage which seems to me most 
fully to explain the import of baptism, in 
its subjective bearing, is 1 Peter, iii. 21, 
which I would thus render : ' which (water) 
also, as the antitype, nowsavesyou, n-en 
baptism; not the putting away of the 
filth of the flesh, but the inquiry (the 
searching, -perhaps the entreaty), for a 
good conscience towards God. through 
the resurrection of Christ.' It is in this 
sense that baiitism is designated in Tit. 
iii. 5, as the 'washing,' or 'bath of re- 
generation,' the baptized person step- 
ping out of the waters of Ijaptism with 
this openly spoken new search after a 
good conscience towards God; and in 
this sense also that bai)tism — not the act 
of baptizing, nor yet that of being l)ap- 
tized — saves us, but this through the Re- 
surrection of Christ. And this leads us 
up to the objective aspect of baptism. 
This consists in the promise and the gift 
on the part of the Risen Saviour. Who, by 
and with His Holy Spirit, is ever present 
with his Church. These renuu'ks leave, 
of course, aside the question of Infant- 
Baptism, which rests on another and, in 
my view most solid basis. 


BOOK symbol) and tlio Spirit, he cannot really enter into tlie fellowship of 
n that Kingdom. 

'^ — v— ^ In fart, an analysis of 119 passages in the New Testament where 
the expression ' Kingdom ' occurs, shows that it means the o'ule of 
God] ^ which was manifested in and through Christ; ^ is apparent in 
' tJie Church) * gradually develops amidst hindrances;^ is triumpliant 
at the second coming of Christ'" ('the end'); and, finally, 2Je''fected in 
the world to come.^ Thus viewed, the announcement of John of the 
near Advent of this Kingdom had deepest meaning, although, as so 
often in the case of prophetism, the stages intervening between the 
Advent of the Christ and the triumph of that Kingdom seem to have 
been hidden from the preacher. He came to call Israel to submit to 
the Reign of God, about to be manifested in Christ. Hence, on the 
one hand, he called them to repentance — a '■ change of mind ' — with 
all that this implied; and, on tlie other, pointed them to the Christ, 
in the exaltation of His Person and Office. Or rather, the two com- 
bined might be summed up in the call: 'Change your mind' — repent, 
wliich implies, not only a turning from the past, but a turning to the 
Christ in newness of mind.'' And thus the symbolic action by which 
this ]n'eaching was accompanied might be designated ' the baptism of 

Tlie account given by St. Luke bears, on the face of it, that it was 

aiii. 18 a summary, not only of the first, but of all John's preaching.'' The 
very presence of his hearers at this call to, and l)aptism of, repentance, 
gave point to his words. Did they who, notwithstanding their 

1 111 tliis view the expression occurs sages: St. Matt. xi. 12; xiii. 11, 19, 24, 

thirty-four times, viz. :. St. Matt. vi. 33 ; 31, 33, 44, 45, 47, .52 ; xviii. 23 ; xx. 1 ; xxii. 

xii. 28; xiii. 38; xix. 24; xxi. 31; St. 2; xxv. 1, 14; St. Marie iv. 11, 26, 30; 

Mark i. 14; x. 15, 23, 24, 25; xii. 34; St. Luke viii. 10; ix. 62; xiii. 18, 20; 

St. Luke i. 33; iv. 43; ix. 11; x. 9, 11; Acts i. 3; Rev. i. 9. 
xi. 20; xii. 31; xvii. 20, 21; xviii. 17, 24, ^ As in the followiiis; twelve passages: 

25, 29; St. John iii. 3; Acts i. 3; viii. St. Mark xvi. 28; St. Mark ix. 1; xv."43; 

12; XX. 25; xxviii. 31; Rom. xiv. 17; St. Luke ix. 27; xix. 11; xxi. 31; xxii. 

1 Cor. iv. 20; Col. iv. 11; 1 Tliess. ii. 12; 16, 18; Acts i. 3; 2 Tim. iv. 1; Heb. xii. 

Rev. i. 9. 28; Rev. i. 9. 

^ As in the following seventeen pas- " As in the following thirty-one i)as- 

sages, viz.: St. Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17, 23; sages: St. Matt. v. 19, 20; vii. 21; viii. 

V. 3, 10; ix. 35; x. 7; St. Mark i. 15; 11; xiii. 43; xviii. 3; xxv. 34; xxvi. 29; 

xi. 10; St. Luke viii. 1; ix. 2; xvi. 16; St. Mark ix. 47; x. 14; xiv. 25; St Luke 

xix. 12, 15; Acts i. 3; xxviii. 23; Rev. vi. 20; xii. 32; xiii. 2s, 29; xiv. 15; xviii. 

1. 9. 16; xxii. 29; Acts i. 3; xiv. 22; 1 Cor. 

■^ As in the following eleven passages: vi. 9, 10; xv. 24, 50; Gal. v. 21; Eph. v. 

St. Matt. xi. 11; xiii. 41; xvi. 19; xviii. 5; 2 Thess. i. 5; St. James ii. 5; 2 Peter 

1; xxi. 43; xxiii. 13; St. Luke vii. 28; i. 11; Rev. i. 9; xii. 10. 
St. John iii. 5; Acts i. 3; Col. i. 13; Rev. " The term ' repentance ' includes 

i. 9. faith ia Christ, as in St. Luke xxiv. 47; 

* As in the following twenty-four pas- Acts v. 31. 



sins,' lived in such security of carelessness and self-rigliteousness, really 
understand and fear the final consequences of resistance to the coming- 
' Kingdom ' ? If so, theirs must be a repentance not only in ])i"o- 
fession, but of heart and mind, such as would yield fruit, both good 
and visible. Or else did they imagine that, according to the common 
notion of the time, the vials of Avrath were to be poured out only 
on the Gentiles,^ while they, as Abraham's children, were sure of 
escape— in the words of the Talmud, that' 'the night ' (Is. xxi. 
12) was * only to the nations of the world, but the morning to 
Israel ' ? '^ 

For, no principle was more fully established in the popular convic- 
tion, than that all Israel had })art in the world to come (Sanh.x. 1), 
and this, specifically, because of their connection with Abraham. 
This appears not only from the New Testament,'' from Philo, and 
Josephus, but from many Rabbinic passages. ' The merits of the 
Fathers,' is one of the commonest phrases in the mouth of the Rabbis.* 
Abraham was represented as sitting at the gate of Gehenna, to deliver 
any Israelite* who otherwise might have been consigned to its terrors." 
In fact, by their descent from Abraham, all the children of Israel were 
nobles,*^ infinitely higher than any proselytes. ' What,' exclaims the 
Talmud, ' shall the born Israelite stand upon the earth, and the 
proselyte be in heaven?'^ In fact, the ships on the sea were pre- 
served through the merit of Abraham- the rain descended on account 
of if For his sake alone had Moses been allowed to ascend into 
heaven, and to receive the Law; for his sake the sin of the golden 
calf had been forgiven;^ his righteousness had on many occasions 
been the support of Israel's cause;'' Daniel had been heard for the 
sake of Abraham;' nay, his merit availed even for the wicked.''^ In 
its extravagance the Midrash thus apostrophises Abraham: 'If thy 


1 I cannot, with Schbttgen and others, 
regard the expression ' generation of vi- 
pers ' as an allusion to the tilthy legend 
about the children of Eve and the ser- 
pent, but believe that it refers to such 
passages as Ps. Iviii. 4. 

'■^ In proof that such was the common 
view, I shall here refer to only a few 
passages, and these exclusively from the 
Targumini : Jer. Targ. on Gen. xlix. 1 1 ; 
Targ. on Is. xi. 4; Targ. on Amos ix. 11 ; 
Targ. on Nah. i. 6 ; on Zech. x. 3, 4. See 
also Ab. Z. 2 5, Yalkut i. p. 64 a; also 
56 b (where it is shown how i)lagues 
exactly corresponding to those of Egypt 

were to come upon Rome). 

•^ 'Everything comes to Israel on ac- 
count of the merits of the fathers ' (Siphre 
on Deut. p. 108 b). In the same category 
we place the extraordinary attempts to 
show that the sins of Biblical jjersonages 
were not sins at all, as in Shabb. 55 />, and 
the idea of Israel's merits as works of 
supererogation (as in Baba B. 10 a). 

* I will not mention the profane device 
by which apostate and wicked Jews are at 
that time to be converted into non-Jews. 

* Professor Wilusche quotes an inapt 
passage from Shabb. 89 b, but ignores, or 
is ignorant of, the evidence above given. 

° Jer. Taan. 
64 a 

'' St. John 
viii. 33, 39, 

•^Ber. K. 48; 
com p. 
Midr. on 
Ps. yi 1: 
Pirk d. R. 
Ellew. e. •.:•.» : 
Sheni. K. 19 
Yalkut i. \>. 
23 6 

vu. 1 ; Baba 
K. 91 a 

<■ Jer. Chag. 
76 a 

fBer E. 39 

? Shem R. 

'• Vas-ylkra 
K. 36 

> Ber. 7 6 
k Shabb. 
55 a; com p. 
Beer, Leben 
Abr. p. 88 




" Ber. R. ed. 
p. 80 h, par. 

'' Perhaps 
with refer- 
ence to Is. 
ii. 1, 2 

■• For ex. 
•Jer. Taan. 
64 a 

cliildron were even (morally) dead liodies, without bloodvessels or 
bones, thy merit would avail for them ! ' '' 

But if such had been the inner thoughts of his hearers, John 
warned them, that God was able of those stones that strewed the 
river-bank to raise up children unto Abraham;"' or, reverting to his 
former illustration of ' fruits meet for repentance,' that the i^roclama- 
tion of the Kingdom was, at the same time, the laying of the axe to 
the root of every tree that bore not fruit. Then making application 
of it, in answer to the specific inquiry of various classes, the preacher 
gave them such practical advice as applied to the well-known sins of 
their past; ^ yet in this also not going beyond the merely negative, 
or preparatory element of 'repentance.' The positive, and all-im- 
portant aspect of it, was to be presented by the Christ. It was only 
natural that the hearers wondered whether John himself was the 
Christ, since he thus urged repentance. For this was so closely con- 
nected in their thoughts with the Advent of the Messiah, that it was 
said, ' If Israel repented but one day, the Son of David would im- 
mediately come.'" But here John pointed them to the difterence 
])etween himself and his work, and the Person and Mission of the 
Christ. In deepest reverence he declared himself not worthy to do 
Him the service of a slave or of a disciple.^ His Baptism would not 
be of preparatory repentance and with water, but the Divine Baptism 
in* the Holy Spirit and fire ^ — in the Spirit Who sanctified, and the 
Divine Light which purified,^ and so eflectively qualified for the 

1 Lightfoot aptly points out a play on 
the words ' chiUlreu ' — bnnim — and 
'stones' — abhanim. Both words are 
derived from bana, to build, which is 
al.-^o used by the Rabbis in a moral 
sense like our own ' upbuildino;,' and in 
that of the ffift or adoption of children. ■ 
it is not necessary, indeed almost detracts 
from the <reneral impression, to see in 
the stones an allusion to the Gentiles. 

■^ Thus the view that charity delivered 
from Gehenna was very commonly en- 
tertained (see, for example. Baba B. 
10 a). Similarly, it was the main charge 
against the publicaus that they exacted 
more than their due (see, for example, 
Baba K. 11.3^^). The Greek oipajvi ov, or 
wage of the soldiers, has its Rabbinic 
eciuivalent of Afsinyn (a similar word 
also in the Syriac). 

^ Volkmar is mistaken in regarding 
this as the duty of the house-porter 
towards arriving guests. It is exi)ressly 
mentioned as one of the characteristic 

duties of slaves in Pes. 4 a ; Jer Kidd. 
i. 3 ; Kidd. 22 b. In Kethub. 96 n it is 
described as also the duty of a disciiile 
towards his teacher. In Mechilta on Ex. 
xxi. 2 (ed. Weiss, p. S2 a) it is qualified 
as only lawful for a teacher so to employ 
his discii)le, while, lastly, in Pesiqta x. 
it is described as the common practice. 

* Godet aptly calls attention to the 
use of the prei)osition in here, while as 
regards the baptism of water no prepo- 
sition is used, as denoting merely an 

^ The same writer points out that the 
want of the preposition before 'fire' 
shows that it cannot refer to the fire of 
judgment, but must be a further enlarge- 
ment of the word 'Spirit.' Probably it 
denotes the negative or purgative effect 
of this baptism, as the word ' holy ' 
indicates its positive and sanctifying 

* The expression ' baptism of fire ' 
was certainly not unknown to the Jews. 


' Kingdom.' Andthore was still another contrast. Jolm'swasbutprc- CHAP, 
paring work, the Christ's that of final decision; after it came the ^l 
harvest. His was the harvest, and His the garner ; His also the fan, with " — ~y — -^ 
which He would sift the wlieat from the straw and chaff — the one to 
be garnered, the other burned with fire uncxtinguislied and inextin- 
guisha])le.^ Thus early in the history of the Kingdom of God was it 
indicated, that alike that which would prove useless straw and the 
good corn were inseparably connected in God's harvest-field till the 
reaping time ; that both belonged to Him ; and that the final separa- 
tion would only come at the last, and by His own Hand. 

What John preached, that he also symbolised by a rite which, 
though not in itself, yet in its application, was wiiolly new. Hitherto 
the Law had it, that those who had contracted Levitical defilement 
were to immerse before oflering sacrifice. Again, it was prescribed 
that such Gentiles as became 'proselytes of righteousness,' or 'pro- 
selytes of the Covenant ' [Gerey hatstsedeq or Gerey liabherith), were to 
be admitted to full participation in the privileges of Israel by the 
threefold rites of circumcision, baptism,^ and sacrifice — the immersion 
being, as it were, the acknowledgment and symbolic removal of 
moral defilement, corresponding to that of Levitical uncleanncss. But 
never before had it been proposed that Israel should undergo a 
' baptism of repentance, ' although there are indications of a deeper 
insight into the meaning of Levitical baptisms.* Was it intended, 

In Sauh. 39 a (last lines) we read of an passages, and not Telilten (Mei/er), nor 

immersion of God in tire, based on Is. even as Professor Delitzsch renders it in 

Ixvi. 15. An immersion or baptism of his Hebrew N.T. : J/r;/,s\ The three terms 

lire is proved from Numb. xxxi. 23. are, however, combined in a curiously 

More apt, perhaps, as illustration is the illustrative parable (Ber. R. 83), referring 

statement, Jer. Sot. 22 d, that the Torah to the destruction of Rome and the pres- ■ 

(the Law) its parchment was white fire, ervatiou of Israel, when the gi-ain refers 

the writing black tire, itself fire mixed the straw, stubble, and chart', in their 

with fire, hewn out of fire, and given by dispute for whose sake the field existed, 

fire, according to Deut. xxxiii. 2. to tlie time when the owner would gather 

1 This is the meaning of da/Searu?. the corn into his barn, but burn the 

The word occurs only in St. Matt. iii. 12; straw, stubble, and chaft". 
St. Luke iii. 17 ; St. Mark ix. 43, 45 (?), '^ For a full discussion of the question 

but frequently in the classics. The ques- of the baptism of proselytes, see Appen- 

tion of ' eternal punishment ' will be dis- dix XII. 

cussed in another place. The simile of ^ The following very significant i)as- 

the fan and the garner is derived from sage may here be quoted : 'A man who is 

the Eastern practice of threshing out the guilty of sin, and makes confession, and 

corn in the open by means of oxen, after does not turn from it. to whom is he 

which, what of the straw had been tram- like? To a man who has in his hand a 

1)1(m1 under foot (not merely the chaff, as defiling reptile, who, even if he immerses 

in the A.V.) was burned. This use of in all the waters of tlie Avorld. his bap- 

the straw for tire is referred to in the tism avails him nothing ; but let him 

Mishnah, as in Shabb. iii. 1 ; Par. iv. 3. cast it from his hand, and if he immerses 

But in tliat case the Hebrew equivalent in only forty seah of water, immediately 

for it is rp (Qash) — as in the above his bai)tism avails him,' On the same 




» Comp. 
(ien. XXXV. 

'• Ex. six. 
10, 14 

that the hearers of John sliouhl ^ive this as evidence of their re- 
pentance, that, like i)ersons defiled, they sought purification, and, like 
strangers, tliey sought admission among the people who took on them- 
selves the Rule of God? These two ideas would, indeed, have made 
it truly a ' baptism of repentance.' But it seems difficult to suppose, 
that the people would have been prepared for such admissions; or, at 
least, that there should have been no record of the mode in which a 
change so deeply spiritual w^as brought about. May it not rather 
have been that as, when the first Covenant was made, Moses was 
directed to prepare Israel l)y symbolic baptism of their persons * and 
their garments,'' so the initiation of the new Covenant, by which the 
people were to enter into the Kingdom of God, was preceded by 
another general symbolic baptism of those who would be the true 
Israel, and receive, or take on themselves, the Law from God?^ In 
that case the rite would have acquii-ed not only a new significance, 
but be deeply and truly the answer to John's call. In such case also, 
no special explanation would have been needed on the part of the 
Baptist, nor yet such spiritual insiglit on that of the people as w^e can 
scarcely suppose them to have possessed at that stage. Lastly, in 
that case nothing could have been more suitable, nor more solemn, 
than Israel in waiting for the Messiah and the Rule of God, preparing 
as their fathers had done at the foot of Mount Sinai. ^ 

paije of the Talmud there are some very 
apt and beautiful remarks on the subject 
of repentance (Taaii. 16 a, towards the 

1 It is remarkable, that Maimonides 
traces even the practice of baptizing 
proselytes to Ex. xix. 10, 14 (Hilc. 
Issiirey Biah xiii. 3; Yad haCh. vol. ii. \). 
142 h). He also gives reasons for the 
'baptism ' of Israel before entering into 
covenant with God. In Kerith, 9 « 
' the ba])tism ' of Israel is proved from 
Ex. xxiv. 5, since every sprinkling of 
blood was supposed to be preceded by 
immersion. In Siphre on Numb, (ed. 

Weiss, p. 30 b) we are also distinctly 
told of 'baptism' as one of the three 
things by which Israel was admitted into 
the Covenant. 

2 This may help us, even at this stage, 
to understand why our Lord, in the ful- 
filment of all righteousness, submitted 
to baptism. It seems also to exi^lain 
why, after the coming of Clu-ist, the bap- 
tism of .lohn was alike unavailing and 
even meaningless (Acts xix. 3-5). Lastly, 
it also shows how he that is least in the 
Kingdom of God is really greater than 
John himself (St. Luke vii. 28). 



(St. Matt. iii. 13-17; St. Mark i. 7-11; St. Luke iii. 21-28; St. John i. 32-34.) 

The more wo think of it, the better do we seem to understand how that CHAP. 
' Voice crying in the wilderness : Repent ! for the Kingdom of Ilcavcn Xll 
is at hanil, ' awakened echoes throughout the land, and brought from '^—-^^ — 
city, village, and hamlet strangest hearers. For once, every distinc- 
tion was levelled. Pharisee and Sadducee, outcast pul)lican and 
semi-heathen soldier, met here as on common ground. Their bond 
of union was the common ' hope of Israel ' — the only hope that re- 
mained: that of ' the Kingdom.' The long winter of disappointment 
had not destroyed, nor the storms of suffering swept away, nor yet 
could any plant of spurious growth overshadow, what had struck its 
roots so deep in the soil of Israel's heart. 

That Kingdom had been the last word of the Old Testament. As 
the thoughtful Israelite, whether Eastern or Western,^ viewed even 
the central part of his worship in sacrifices, and remembered that his 
own Scriptures had spoken of them in terms which pointed to some- 
thing l)eyon(l their offering, ■' he must have felt that ' the blood oflndls 
and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, ' could 

1 It may be said that the fundamental and in view of the cessation of sacrifices 

tendency of Rabbinism was anti-sacriti- in tlie ' Athid-labho ' (Vay, u. s. ; Tanch. 

cial, as regarded the value of sacrifices on Par. Shemini). Soon, prayer or study 

in commending the ofi'erer to God. After were put even above sacrifices (Ber. 

the destruction of the Temple it was, of 32 b; Men. 110 a), and an isolated teacher 

course, the task of Rabbinism to show went so far as to regard the introduc- 

that sacrifices had no intrinsic import- tion of sacrificial worship as merely in- 

ance, and that their place was taken by tended to preserve Israel from conform- 

prayer, i)enitence, and good works. So ing to heathen worship (Vayyikra R. 22, 

agauist objoctors on the ground of Jer. u. s. p. 34 i'^, close). On the otlier hand, 

xxxiii. 18 — but see tlie answer in Yalkut individuals seemed to have ofi'ered sac- 

on the i)assage (vol. ii. p. 67 a, towards rifices even after the destruction of the 

the end) dogmatically (Bab. B. 10 b; Temple (Eduy. viii. 6; Mechilta on Ex. 

Vayyikra R. 7, ed. Wars/i. vol. iii. p. xviii. 27, ed. Weiss, \). 08 b). 
12 a): 'he that doeth repentance, it is - Comp. 1 Sam. xv. 22; Ps. xl. 6-8; 

imputed to him as if he went up to Jeru- li. 7, 17; Is. i. 11-13; Jer. vii. 22,23; 

salem, built the Temi^le and altar, and Amos v. 21, 22; Ecclus. vii. 9; xxxiv. 

wrought all the sacrifices in the Law'; 18, 10; xxxv. 1, 7. 


BOOK only 'sanctify to tlic purity iug of the flesh;' that, indeed, tlie whole 
II body of ceremonial and ritual ordinances ' could not make him that 
■^-^■^f^-^ (lid the service perfect as pertaining to the conscience. ' They were only 
' the shadow of good things to come; ' of ' a new ' and ' better cove- 
nant, established upon better promises.' ' It was otherwise with the 
thought of the Kingdom. Each successive link in the chain of pro- 
phecy bound Israel anew to this hope, and each seemed only more 
firmly welded than the other. And when the voice of prophecy had 
ceased, the sweetness of its melody still held the people spell-bound, even 
when broken in the wild fantasies of Apocalyptic literature. Yet that 
' root of Jesse,' whence this Kingdom was to spring, was buried deep 
under ground, as the remains of ancient Jerusalem are now under 
the desolations of nmny generations. Egyptian, Syrian, Greek, and 
Roman had trodden it under foot; the Maccabees had come and gone, 
and it was not in them; the Herodian kingdom had risen and fallen; 
Pharisaism, with its learning, had overshadowed thoughts of the 
priesthood andof prophetism; but the hope of that Davidic Kingdom, 
of which there was not a single trace orrepresentativ^e left, was even 
stronger than before. So closely has it been intertwined with the 
very life of the nation, that, to all believing Israelites, this hope has 
through the long night of ages, been like that eternal lamp which 
burns in the darkness of the Synagogue, in front of the heavy veil 
that shrines the Sanctuary, which holds and conceals the precious rolls 
of the Law and the Prophets. 

This great expectancy would be strung to utmost tension during 
the pressure of outward circumstances more hopeless than any 
hitherto experienced. Witness here the ready credence which im- 
postors found, whose promises and schemes were of the wildest 
character; witness the repeated attempts at risings, which oidy 
despair could have prompted; witness, also, the last terrible war 
against Rome, and, despite the horrors of its end, the rebellion of 
Bar-Kokhabh, the false Messiah. And now the cry had been suddenly 
raised: ' The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand! ' It was heard in the 
wilderness of Judaea, within a few hours' distance from Jerusalem. 
No wonder Pharisee and Sadducee flocked to the spot. How many 
of them came to inquire, how many remained to be baptized, or how 
many went away disappointed in their hopes of 'the Kingdom,' we 
know not.^ But they would not see anything in the messenger that 

1 Ilebr. ix. 13, 9; x. 1; viii. 6, 13. hriefes, 1867). 
On this subject we refer to tlie classical ■^ Ancient commentators supposed that 

worlv of /i'ie/<??i (Lehrbe,n"ri tides Ilebriler- they came from liostile motives; later 


could have given their expectations a rude shock. His was not a call CHAP. 
to armed resistance, but to rei)entauce, such as all knew and felt must XH 
l)recede the Kingdom. The hojjc which he held out was not of *— ^r — ' 
earthly possessions, but of purity. There was nothing negative or 
controversial in what he spoke; nothing to excite prejudice or passion. 
His appearance would connnand respect, and his character was in 
accordance with his appearance. Not rich nor yet IMiarisaic garb 
with wide 7^s/^.s/f//,M)()iind with many-coloured or even priestly girdle, 
out the old prophet's poor raiment held in by a leathern girdle. Not 
luxurious life, but one of meanest fare.^ And then, all in tlie man was 
true and real. ^ Not a reed shaken l)y the wind, ' but unbentlingly firm 
in deep and settled conviction; not ambitious nor self-seeking, l)ut 
most humble in his self-estimate, discarding all claim ])ut that of 
lowliest service, and pointing away from himself to Him Who was to 
come, and Whom as 3'et he did not even know. Above all, there was 
the deepest earnestness, the most utter disregard of nmn, the most 
firm belief in what he announced. For himself he sought nothing; 
for them he had only one absorbing thought: The Kingdom was at 
liaud, the King was coming — let them prepare! 

Such entire absorption in his mission, which leaves us in ignorance 
of even the details of his later activity, must have given force to his 
message.^ And still the voice, everywhere proclaiming the samemes- 

writers that curiosity i)ronii)te(l tliem. then eleven times witli a double knot 
Neither of these views is admissible, nor (11 numerically = "*: ) and lastly, thir- 
does St. Luke vii. 30 implj', that all the teen fanes (13 numerically = ~nN; or, al- 
Pliarisees who come to him rejected his together "ns "'"", Je/toni/i One). Auain, 
baptism. it is pointed out that as Tsitsith is 
1 Comp. St. Matt, xxiii. 5. T\\e Tsitsith numerically equal to 600 ( n'^'i'l this, 
{plural, Tsitsii/ot/t), or borders (corners, with the eiii;ht threads and live knots, 
'wings') of the garments, or rather the gives the number (513, which is that of 
fringes fastened to them. The observ- the Commandments. At present the 
ance was based on Numb. xv. 38-41, Tsitsith are worn as a special under- 
and tlie Jewish practice of it is indicated garment (the r^'Z12 r2";N) or on the 
not only in the N.T. (u. s., comp. also Tallith or prayer-mantle, but anciently 
St. Matt. ix. 20; xiv. 36) but in the Tar- they seem to have been worn on the 
gumini on Numb. xv. 3S, 3!) (comp. also outer garment itself. In Bemidbar R. 
Targ. Pseudo-Jon. on Numb. xvi. 1, 2, 17. end (ed. Warsh, vol. iv. p. 69 a), the 
where the peculiar colour of the Tsitsith blue is represented as emblematic of the 
is represented as the cause of the con- sky, and the latter as of the throne of 
troversy between Moses and Korah. But God (Ex. xxiv. 10). Hence to look upon 
see the version of this story in Jer. Sanh. the Tsitsith was like looking at the throne 
X. p. 27 'Z, end). The Tls^y^/Z/Mvere orig- of glory (.ScZ/wrrr is mistaken in sup- 
inally directed to be of white threads, iiosing that the tractate Tsitsitli in the 
with one thread of deep blue in eacli Septem Libri Talmud, par. pji. 22. 23. con- 
fringe. According to tradition, each of tains much information on tlie subject), 
these white fringes is to consist of - Such certainly was John the Bap- 
eight threads, one of them wound round tist's. Some locusts were lawful to be 
the others: first, seven times with a eaten. Lev. xi. 22. Comj). Terum. 59 «; 
double knot: then eight times with a and, on the various species. Chull. 65. 
double knot (7 -|- 8 numerically^ "*); ^ Deeply as we appreciate the beaut.y 




BOOK sage, travelled upward, along the winding Jordan which cleft the land 
II of promise. It was probably the autumn of the year 779 (a. u.c), 

-^r^i^ which, it may be noted, was a Sabbatic year.^ Released from busi- 
ness and agriculture, the multitudes flocked around him as he passed 
on his Mission. Rapidly the tidings spread from town and village to 
distant homestead, still swelling the numbers that hastened to the 
banks of the sacred river. He had now reached what seems to have 
been the most northern point of his Mission-journey,^ Betli-Ahara 
(' the house of passage,' or ' of shipping ') — according to the ancient 
reading, Bethany ('the house of shipping') — one of the best known 
St. joiini. fords across the Jordan into Persea.* Here he baptized." The ford 
was little more than twenty miles from Kazareth. But long before 
John had reached that spot, tidings of his word and work must 
have come even into the retirement of Jesus' Home-Life. 

It was now, as we take it, the early winter of the year 780.* 
Jesus had waited those months. Although there seems not to have 
been any personal acquaintance between Jesus and John — and how 
could there be, when their spheres lay so widely apart? — each must 
have heard and known of the other. Thirty years of silence weaken 
most human impressions — or, if they deepen, the enthusiasm that had 
accompanied them passes away. Yet, when the two met, and per- 
haps had brief conversation, each bore himself in accordance with 
his previous history. With John it was deepest, reverent humility — 
even to the verge of misunderstanding his special Mission, and 
work of initiation and preparation for the Kingdom. He had heard 
of Him before by the hearing of the ear, and when now he saw Him, 

of Keim's renisirks about tlie character ^ It is one of the merits of Lieut, 
and views of .John, we feel ooly the more Conder to have ideiitifiert~the site of 
that sucli a man could not have talven the Beth-Abara. The word i)robably means 
public position nor made such public pro- ' the house of passage ' (fords), but may 
clamation of the Kingdom as at hand, also mean 'the house of shipping,' the 
without a direct and objective call to word Abarah in Hebrew meaning ' ferry- 
it from God. The treatment of John's boat,' 2 Sam. xix. 18. The reading 
earlier history by Keim is, of course, Bef/iqiua instead of BetJudiarn seems 
without historical basis. undoubtedly the original one, only the 

' The year from Tishri (autumn) 779 word must not be derived (as by Mr. 

to Tishri. 780 was a Sabbatic year. Conder, whose exi)lanations and com- 

Comp. the evidence in Wieseler, Syn- ments are often untenable), from the 

opse d. Evang. pp. 204, 205. province linUinea, but explained as 

■^ We read of three places where John Beth-Oniyah, the 'house of shipping.' 

baptized: 'the wilderness of Jud«a ' — (See Liicke, Comment, ii. d. Evang. 

probably the traditional site near Jericho; Job. i. pp. 392. .393.) 

.^non, near Salim, on the boundary * Considerable probability attaches to 

between Samaria and Judaea (Condn-'s the tradition of the Basilideans, that our 

Handbook of the Bible, p. 320); and Lord's Baptism took place on the 6th or 

Beth-Abara, the modern Abarah, ' one of 10th of January. (See Bp. EUicotfs 

the main Jordan fords, a little north of Histor. Lect. on the Life of our Lord 

Beisan ' (u. s.). Jesus Christ, p. 105, note 2. 



that look of (luict dignity, of tlic majesty of unsullied purity in the CHAP. 
only Unfallen, Unsinning Man, made him forget even the express Xll 
command of God, which had sent him from his solitude to preach and ^- — ^r — ' 
Ijaptize, and that very sign which had been given him by Avhich to 
recognise the Messiah/ ^ In that Presence it only became to him a ^st. johni. 
question of the more '■ worthy ' to the misunderstanding of the 
nature of his special calling. 

But Jesus, as He had not made haste, so was He not capal)le of 
misunderstanding. To Him it was ' the fulfilling of all righteousness.' 
From earliest ages it has been a question why Jesus went to be 
baptized. The heretical Gospels put into the mouth of the Virgin- 
Mother an invitation to go to that baptism, to which Jesus is 
supposed to have replied by pointing to His own sinlessness, except 
it might be on the score of ignorance, in regard to a limitation of 
knowledge.^ Objections lie to most of the explanations offered by 
modern writers. They include a bold denial of the fact of Jesus' 
Baptism; the profane suggestion of collusion between John and 
Jesus; or such suppositions, as that of His personal sinfulness, of 
His coming as the Representative of a guilty race, or as the bearer of 
the sins of others, or of acting in solidarity with His people — or else 
to separate Himself from the sins of Israel; of His surrendering 
Himself thereby unto death for man; of His purpose to do honour to 
tlie baptism of John; or thus to elicit a token of His Messiahship; 
or to bind Himself to the observance of the Law; or in this manner 
to commence His Messianic Work ; or to consecrate Himself solemnly 
to it; or, lastly, to receive the spiritual qualification for it.^ To these 
and similar views must be added the latest conceit of Eenan,* who 
arranges a scene between Jesus, who comes with some disciples, and 
John, when Jesus is content for a time to grow in the shadow of 
John, and to submit to a rite which was evidently so generally 
acknowledged. But the most reverent of these explanations involve 
a twofold mistake. They represent the Baptism of John as one of 
repentance, and they imply an ulterior motive in the coming of 
Christ to the banks of Jordan. But, as already shown, the Baptism 
of John was in itself only a consecration to, and preparatory 

1 Tlie superticuil objection on the sup- theories. Tlie views of Godef come 

l)ose(l discreiiancy between St. Matthew nearest to wbat we regard as the true 

iii. 14 and St. John i. 33 has been well exi^lanation. 

put aside b.y Bp. EUicott (u. s. p. 107, ^ I must here, once for all, exi)ress my 

note). astonishment tliat a book so frivolous 

- Conip. Nicholson, Gospel according and fantastic in its treatment of the Life 

to tiie Hebrews, \)\). 38, 92, 93. of Jesus, and so super-licial and often 

•' It would occupy too much space to inaccurate, should have excited so much 

give tlie names of the authors of these public attention. 


BOOK initiation loi-, the new Covenant of tlie Kingdom. As applied to 
II sinful men, it was indeed necessarily a 'baptism of repentance; ' but 
"^^-"v^"^ not as applied to the sinless Jesus. Had it primarily and always 
been a 'bai)tism of repentance,' He could not have submitted to it. 

Again, and most important of all, we must not seek for any 
ulterior motive in the coming of Jesus to this Baptism. He had no 
ulterior uiotive of any kind: it was an act of simple submissive 
obedience on the part of the Perfect One — and submissive obedience 
has no motive beyond itself. It asks no reasons; it cherishes no 
ulterior purpose. And thus it was ' the/?/ffilment of all righteousness. ' 
And it was in perfect harmony with all His previous life. Our dif- 
ficulty here lies — if we are unbelievers, in thinking simply of the 
Humanity of the Man of ]S"azareth; if we are believers, in making 
abstraction of his Divinity. But thus much, at least, all must 
concede, that the Gospels always present Him as the God-Man, in an 
inseparable mystical union of the two natures, and that they present 
to us the even more mysterious idea of His Self-exinanition, of the 
voluntary obscuration of His Divinity, as part of His Humiliation. 
Placing ourselves on this standpoint — Avliich is, at any rate, that of 
the Evangelic narrative— we may arrive at a more correct view cf 
this great event. It seems as if, in the Divine Self-exinanition, ap- 
parently necessarily connected with the perfect human development 
of Jes'is, some corresponding outward event were ever the occasion of 
a fresh advance in the Messianic consciousness and work. The first 
event of that kind had been his appearance in the Temple. These 
two things then stood out vividly before Him — not in the ordinary 
human, but in the Messianic sense: that the Temple was the House of 
His Father, and that to be busy about it was His Life-work. With 
this He returned to Nazareth, and in willing subjection to His 
Parents fulfilled all righteousness. And still, as He grew in years, in 
wisdom, and in favour with God and Man, this thought — rather this 
burning consciousness, was the inmost spring of His Life. What this 
business specially was, He knew not yet, and waited to learn; the 
hoio and the ioheti of His life-consecration. He left unasked and 
unanswered in the still waiting for Him. And in this also we see 
the Sinless, the Perfect One, 

When tidings of J('lin"s Baptism reached His home, there could 
l)e no haste on His part. Even with knowledge of all that concerned 
Joim's rehition to Him, there was in the 'fulfilment of all righteous- 
ness' quiet waiting. The one question with Him was, as He after- 
wards put it: 'The Baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or 


of men?' (St, Matt. xxi. 25). That question once answered, there chap. 
could be no longer doubt nor hesitation. He went — not for any Xll 
ulterior purpose, nor from any other motive than that it was of God. ^— ^r^^-^ 
He went voluntarily, because it was such — and because ' it became 
Ilim' in so doing 'to fulfil all righteousness.' There is this great 
difference between His going to that Baptism, and afterwards into 
the wilderness: in the former case. His act was of preconceived 
purpose; in the latter it was not so, but 'He was driven' — without 
l)revious purpose to that effect — under the constraining power ' of the 
Spirit,' without premeditation and resolve of it; without even know- 
ledge of its object. In the one case He was active, in the other 
passive; in the one case He fulfilled righteousness, in the other His 
righteousness was tried. But as, on His first visit to the Temple, 
this consciousness about His Life-business came to Him in His Father's 
House, ripening slowly and fully those long years of quiet submission 
and growing wisdom and grace at Nazareth, so at His Baptism, with 
the accompanying descent of the Holy Ghost, His abiding in Him, 
and the heard testimony from His Father, the knowledge came to 
Him, and, in and with ^ that knowledge, the qualification for the busi- 
ness of His Father's House. In that hour He learned the when, and 
in part the hoiv, of His Life-business; the latter to be still farther, and 
from another aspect, seen in the wilderness, then in His life, in His 
suffering, and, finally, in His death. In man the subjective and the 
objective, alike intellectually and morally, are ever separate; in God 
they are one. What He is, that He wills. And in the God-Man 
also we must not separate the subjective and the objective. The 
consciousness of the when and the hoiv of His Life-business was 
necessarily accompanied, while He prayed, by the descent, and the 
abiding in Him, of the Holy Ghost, and b}^ the testifying Voice from 
heaven. His inner knowledge was real qualification — the forth- 
bursting of His Power; and it was inseparably accompanied by 
outward qualification, in what took place at His Baptisnu But the 
first step to all was His voluntary descent to Jordan, and in it the 
fulfilling of all righteousness. His previous life had been that of the 
Perfect Ideal Israelite — believing, unquestioning, submissive — in pre- 
paration for that which, in His thirteenth year, He liad learned as its 
business. The Baptism of Christ was the last act of His private life; 
and, emerging from its waters in prayer, He learned: ichen His 
business was to commence, and hoiv it would be done. 

^ But the latter must be tiriiily upheld. 

iii. 21. 


I5()<)K That one outstanding thought, then, 'I must be about My 

'I Father's business,' vvliich had been the principle of His Xazaretli 

- — (^ — ' life, had come to full ripeness when He knew that the cry, ' The 
Kingdom of Heaven is at hand,' was from God. The first great 
question was now answered. His Father's business was the King- 
dom of Heaven. It only remained for Him Ho be about it,' and in 
this determination He went to submit to its initiatory rite of 13ai^- 
tism. We have, as we understand it, distinct evidence — even if it 
were not otherwise necessary to suppose this — that ' all the people 
St. Luke had i)e('n ])aptized,' " when Jesus came to John. Alone the two met 
— probal)ly for the first time in their lives. Over that which passed 
between them Holy Scripture has laid the veil of reverent silence, 
save as regards the beginning and the outcome of their meeting, 
which it was necessary for us to know. When Jesus came, John 
kncAv Him not. And even when He knew Him, that was not enough. 
Not remembrance of what he had heard and of juist transactions, nor 
the overwhelming power of that spotless Purity and Majesty of will- 
ing submission, were sufficient. For so great a witness as that which 
John was to bear, a present and visible demonstration from heaven 
was to ])e given. Not that God sent the Spirit-Dove, or heaven 
uttered its voice, for the purpose of giving this as a sign to John. 
These vuanifestations were necessary in themselves, and, we might 
say, would have taken place quite irrespective of the Baptist. But, 
while necessary in themselves, they were also to be a sign to John. 
And this may perhaps explain why one Gospel (that of St. John) 
seems to describe the scene as enacted before the Baptist, whilst 
others (St. Matthew and St. Mark) tell it as if only visible to Jesus.' 
The one bears reference to ' the record,' the other to the deeper and 
absolutely necessary fact which underlay < the record.' And, beyond 
this, it may help us to perceive at least one aspect of what to man is 
the miraculous: as in itself the higher Necessary, with casual and 
secondary manifestation to man. 

We can understand how what he knew of Jesus, and what he 
now saw and heard, must have overwhelmed John with the sense of 
Christ's transcendentally higher dignity, and led him to hesitate 
about, if not to refuse, administering to Him the rite of Baptism.'^ 
Not because it was ' the baptism of repentance,' but because he stood 

' The account by St. Luke seems to me thus met. 
to incluile both. The common objection ^ Theexpre.ssionSzfK-ojAufj'fSt. Matt, 
on the score of the supposed divergence iii. U: 'John forbade Him'jimiilies earn- 
between St. John and the Synoptists is est resistance (comp. Meyer ad locum). 


ill the presence of Iliiu ' the latchct of Whose shoes ' he was 'not chap. 
wortliy to k)osc.' Had he not so felt, the narrative wouhl not have Xll 
been psychologically true; and, had it not been recorded, there ■— — v-^-^ 
would have been serious difficulty to our reception of it. And yet, 
withal, in so ' forbidding ' Him, and even suggesting his own baptism 
by Jesus, John forgot and misunderstood his mission. John himself 
was never to be baptized; he only held open the door of the new 
Kingdom; himself entered it not, and he that was least in that 
Kingdom was greater than he. Such lowliest place on earth seems 
ever conjoined with greatest work for God. Yet this misunder- 
standing and suggestion on the part of John might almost be 
regarded as a temptation to Christ. Not, perhaps. His first, nor yet 
this His first victory, since the ' sorrow ' of His Parents about His 
absence from them when in the Temple must to the absolute sub- 
missiveness of Jesus have been a temptation to turn aside from His 
path, all the more felt in the tenderness of His years, and the inex- 
perience of a first public appearance. He then overcame by the 
clear consciousness of His Life-business, which could not be contra- 
vened by any apparent call of duty, however specious. And He now 
overcame by falling back upon the simi)le and clear principle which 
had brought him to Jordan: 'It becometh us to fulfil all righteous- 
ness.' Thus, simply putting aside, without argument, the objection 
of the Baptist, He followed the Hand that pointed Him to the open 
door of 'the Kingdom.' 

Jesus stepped out of the baptismal waters 'praying.'* One MSt. Luke 
prayer, the only one which He taught His disciples, recurs to our 
minds. ^ We must here individualise and emphasise in their special 
application its opening sentences: ' Our Father Which art in heaven, 
hallowed be Thy Name! Thy Kingdom come! Thy will be done in 
earth, as it is in heaven! ' The first thought and the first petition had 
been the conscious ontcome of the Temple-visit, ripened during the 
long years at Nazareth. The others were now the full expression of 
His submission to Baptism. He knew His Mission; He had con- 
secrated Himself to it in His Baptism; ' Father Which art in heaven, 
hallowed be Thy Name. ' The unlimited petition for the doing of 
God's Will on earth with the same absoluteness as in heaven, ivas 
His self-consecration: the prayer of His Baptism, as the other was its 

1 It seems to me that the ])rayer which prayer has, of course, no ajiplication to 
the Lord tauajht His disciples must liave Him, but is His aiiplication of the doc- 
had its root in, and talven its start from, trine of the Kingdom to our state and 
His own inner Life. At the same time it wants, 
is adapted to our wants. Much in that 

iii. 21 


BOOK confession. And the ' Iiallo\v('(l ))e Thy Name ' was the eulogy, because 
il the ripened and experimental principle of His Life. How this Will, 

^-^■"^Y connected with 'the Kingdom,' was to be done l)y Him, and ivJwn, 

He was to learn after His lJai)tism. But strange, that the petition 
wliicli followed those which must have been on the lii)S of Jesus in 
that hour should have been the subject of thc^r.s-^ temptation or assault 
by the Enemy; strange also, that the other two temptations should 
have rolled back the force of the assault upon the two great ex- 
Ijeriences He had gained, and which formed the burden of the 
petitions, 'Thy Kingdom come; Hallowed be Thy Name.' Was it 
then so, that all the assaults which Jesus bore only concerned and 
tested the reality of a past and already attained experience, save 
those last in the Garden and on the Cross, which were ' sufierings ' 
by which He ' was.' made perfect'? 

But, as we have already seen, sucli inward forth-bursting of 
Messianic consciousness could not l)e separated from objective qualifi- 
cation for, and testimony to it. As the })rayer of Jesus winged 
heavenwards. His solemn response to the call of the Kingdom — ' Here 
am I ; ' ' Lo, I come to do Thy Will ' — the answer came, which at the 
same time was also the predicted sign to the Baptist. Heaven seemed 
cleft, and in bodily shape like a dove, the Holy Ghost descended 
on ^ Jesus, remaining on him. It was as if, symbolically, in the 
1 St. Pet. words of St. Peter," that Baptism had been a new flood, and He Who 
now emerged from it, the Noah — or rest, and comtbrt-ln-inger — Who 
took into His Ark the dove bearing the olive-branch, indicative of a 
new life. Here, at these waters, was the Kingdom, into which Jesus 
had entered in the fulfilment of all righteousness; and from them he 
emerged as its Heaven-designated, Heaven-qualified, and Heaven- 
proclaimed King. As such he had received the fulness of the Spirit 
for His Messianic Work — a fulness abiding in Him — that out of it 
we might receive, and grace for grace. As such also the voice from 
Heaven proclaimed it, to Him and to John: 'Thou art ("this is') 
My Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased.' Tlic ratification of 
the great Davidic promise, the announcement of the fulfilment of its 
predictive import in Psalm ii.'^ was God's solemn declaration of Jesus 

1 Whether or not we adopt the reading come help. It paraphrases : 'Beloved as 
£/5 avTov in St. Mark i. 10, the remnin- a son to his fatlier art Thou to Me.' Keim 
inrj of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus is re,i:;ar(lri the words, ' Thou art my beloved 
clearly expressed in St. John i. 32. Son,' ifec, as a mixture of Is. xlii. 1 and 

2 liere the Tarjz;um on Ps. ii. 7, which Ps. ii. 7. I cannot agree with this view, 
is evidently intended to Aveaisen the thouijh this history is the fulfilment of 
Messianic interpretation, gives us wel- tl)e priMliction in Isaiali. 

lii. 21 


as tlio Mcssiali, Ills i)ii])li(i proeJamatioR of it, and the Ijeginiiiiig of CHAP. 
Jesus' Messiauie work. And so the Baptist understood it, when he ^n 
' bare reeord ' that He was ' the Son of God. ' " " — ~^. ' 

Quite intelligible as all this is, it is certainly miraculous; not, ^stJ"ii'U. 
indeed, in the sense of conti'avention of the Laws of Nature (illogical 
as that phrase is), but in that of having nothing analogous in our 
present knowledge and experience. But would we not have expected 
the sui^ra-empirical, the directly heavenly, to attend such an event — 
that i^, if the narrative itself bo true, and Jesus what the Gospels 
re})re8ent llini? To reject, therefore, the narrative because of its 
supra-enii)irical accompaniment seems, after all, a sad inversion of 
reasoning, and begging the question. But, to go a step further: 
if there be no reality in the narrative, whence the invention of the 
legendi' It certainly had no basis in contemporary Jewish teaching; 
and, equally certainly, it would not have spontaneously occurred to 
Jewish minds. Nowhere in Rabbinic writings do we find any hint 
of a Baptism of the Messiah, nor of a descent upon llim of the 
Spirit in the form of a dove. Rather would such views seem, 
a priori, repugnant to Jewish thinking. An attempt has, however, 
been made in the direction of identifying two traits in this 
narrative with Rabbinic notices. The ' Voice from heaven' has been 
reprcHcnted as the 'Bath-Qol,' or ' Daughter- Voice, ' of which we read 
in Rabbinic writings, as bringing heaven's testimony or decision 
to perplexed or hardly bestead Rabbis. And it has been further as- 
serted, that among the Jews ' the dove ' was regarded as the emblem 
of the Spirit. In taking notice of these assertions some warmth of 
language may be forgiven. 

We make bold to maintain that no. one, who has impartially ex- 
amined the matter,^ could find any real analogy between the so-called 
llath-Qol, and the ' Voice from heaven' of which record is made in the 
New Testament. However opinions might differ, on one thing all 
were agreed: the Batli-Qol had come after the voice of prophecy and 
the Holy Ghost had ceased in Israel," and, so to speak, had taken, '. jer. sot. 
their place. ^ But at the Baptism of Jesus the descent of the Holy Yoma'gfc; 

1 Dr. Wilnsche's Rabbinic notes on translation and profane misinterpretation 

tlic P>iith-(,)ol (Neue Beitr. pp. 22, 23) are of the words ' She lias been more ri<>;h- 

lakcn IVoni Hamburger's Real-Eucyivl. teons' (Gea. xxxviii. 2()) occur (Jer. 

(Abtli. ii. i)p. 92 etc.)." Sot. ix. 7), at all bears out this suiiges- 

- IhtmhKrr/er, indeed maintains, on tion. It is quite untenable in view of 

the iiTOuiul of Mace. 23 6, that occasionally the distinct statements (Jer. Sot. ix. 14; 

it was identified with tlie Holy Spirit. Sot. 48 b; and Sanh. 11 a), that after the 

But carefully read, neither this passaii-e, cessation of the Holy Spirit the Bath- 

uor the other, in which the same mis- Qol took His place. 

Sotah 38 a\ 
48 /( ; Sanh. 
11 a 




Ghost ivas accompanied by the Voire froin Heaven. Even on this 
ti'i-oiind, therefore, it could nut luive been the Rabbinic Bath-Qol. 
J) lit, further, this ' Daughter- Voice ' was regarded rather as the echo of, 
than as the Voice of God itself^ (Toseph. Sanh, xi. 1). The occasions 
on which this ' Daughter-Voice ' was supposed to have been heard are 
so various and sometimes so shocking, both to common and to moral 
sense, that a comparison with the Gospels is wholly out of the question. 
And here it also deserves notice, that references to this Bath-Qol 
increase the farther we remove from the age of Christ.^ 

We have reserved to the last the consideration of the statement, 
that among the Jews the Holy Spirit was presented under the symbol 
of a dove. It is admitted, that there is no support for this idea 
either in the Old Testament or in the writings of Philo {Lticke, 
Evang. Joli. i. pp. 425, 426); that, indeed, such animal symbolism of 
the Divine is foreign to the Old Testament. But all the more 
confident appeal is made to Rabbinic writings. The suggestion was, 
apparently, first made by Wetstein.'' It is dwelt npon with much 
confidence by Gfrorer^ and others, as evidence of the mythical origin 
I'jahrh. of the Gospels;^ it is repeated by WUnsche, and even reproduced by 
vof.u.^plisa writers who, had they known the real state of matters, would not 

' Nov. Test, 
i. p. 268. 

' Comp. on the subject Pinner in his 
Introduction to tlie tractate Beralviioth. 

'•^ In the Targum Onkelos it is not at 
all mentioned." In the Targum Pseudo- 
Jon, it occurs four times (Gen. xxxviii. 
2(j; Numlj. xxi. G; Deut. xxviii. 15; 
xxxiv. 5), and four times in the Targum 
on the Hagiographa (twice in Ecclesi- 
astes, once in Lamentations, and once in 
Esther). In Meclillta and Sii)hra it does 
not occur at all, and in 8iphre only once, 
in the absurd legend that the Bath-Qol 
was heard a distance of twelve times 
twelve miles proclaiming the death of 
Moses (ed. Friedmann, p. U!) b). In the 
Mishnah it is only twice mentioned (Yeb. 
xvi. 6, where the sound of a Bath-Qol is 
supposed to be sufficient attestation of a 
man's death to enable his wife to marry 
again; and in Abhoth vi. 2, where it is 
impossible to uiulerstand the language 
otherwise tlian figuratively). In the Jeru- 
salem Talmud tlie Bath-Qol is referred 
to twenty times, and in llie Babylon 
Talmud sixty-nine times. Sometinu's tlie 
Bath-Qol gives sentence in favour of a 
poimlar Rabbi, sometimes it attempts to 
decide controversies, or bears witness; 
or else it is said every day to proclaim : 
Such an one's daughter is destined for 

such an one (Moed Kat. 18 h\ Sot. 2 a; 
Sanh. 22 a). Occasionally it utters 
curious or profane interiu-etations of 
Scripture (as in Yoma 22 b\ Sot. 10 i'/), 
or silly legends, as in regard to the 
insect Yattush which was to torture Titus 
(Gitt. 56 6), or as warning against a 
place where a hatchet had fallen into the 
water, descending for seven years v.ithout 
reaching tlie bottom. Indeed, so strong 
became the feeling against this super- 
stition, that the more rational Rabbis 
protested against any appeal to the Bath- 
Qol (Baba Metsia59"6). 

^ The force of Gfrbrer's attacks upon 
the Gospels lies in his cumulative at- 
temjjts to prove that the individual 
miraculous facts recorded in the Gospels 
are based ujion Jewish notions. It is, 
therefore, necessary to examine each of 
them sei)arately, and such examination, 
if careful and conscientious, shows that 
his ([notations are often untrustworthy, 
and ills conclusions fallacies. None the 
less taking are they to those who are 
imperfectly acquainted with Rabbinic 
literature. Wiinsche's Talmiidic and 
Midrashic Notes on the N.T. (Gottingen, 
lS78j are also too often misleading. 



have lent their authority to it. Of tlie two passages l3y whidi this 
strange liyi)othesis is supported, that in the Targuui on Cant. ii. 12 
may at onec be dismissed, as dating considerably after the close of 
the Talmud. There remains, therefore, only the one passage in the 
Talmud,' which is generally thus quoted: ' The Spirit of God moved 
on the face of the waters, like a dove.' '' That this quotation is 
incomi)lete, omitting the most important part, is only a light charge 
against it. For, if fulh' made, it would only the more clearly be 
seen to be inapplicable. The passage (Chag. 15 a) treats of the 
supposed distance between 'the upper and the lower waters,' which 
is stated to amount to only three llngerbreadths. This is proved 
by a reference to Gen. i. 2, where the Spirit of God is said to In-ood 
over the face of the waters, 'just as a dove broodeth over her young 
without touching them.' It will be noticed, that the comparison 
is not between the Spirit and the dove, but between the closeness ^^ith 
which a dove broods over her young without touching them, and 
the supposed proximity of the Spirit to the lower waters without 
touching them.' But, if any doubt could still exist, it would be 
removed by the fact that in a parallel passage,'' the expression used 
is not 'dove' but 'that bird.' Thus much for this oft-misquoted 
passage. But we go farther, and assert, that the dove was not the 
symbol of the Holy Spirit, but that of Israel. As such it is so 
nnivcrsally adopted as to have become almost historical.'* If, there- 
fore. Rabbinic illustration of the descent of the Holy Spirit with the 
visi])le appearance of a dove must be sought for, it would lie in the 
acknowledgment of Jesus as the ideal typical Israelite, the Repre- 
sentative of His People. 

The lengthened details, which have been necessar^'for the exposure 
of the mythical theory, will not have been without use, if they carry 
to the mind the conviction that this history had no basis in existing 
Jewish belief. Its origin cannot, therefore, be rationally accounted 
for — except by the answer which Jesus, when He came to Jordan, 
gave to that grand fundamental question: ' The Baptism of John, 
whence was it? From Heaven, or of men?"" 


" Cliag. 15 a 

^ Farrar, 
Life of 
Christ, i, 
p. 117 

1 The sayinj; in Cliaa;. 15 a is of Ben 
Soma, who is described in Rabbinic lit- 
erature as tainted with Christian views, 
and whose belief in the i)ossibilit}' of the 
supernatural birth of the Messiah is so 

coarsely satirised in the Talmud. Eabbi 
Loin (Lebensalter. p. 58) suggests that 
in Ben Soma's tigure of the dove there 
may have been a Christian reminiscence. 

■ Ber. R. 2 

^ Comp. the 
loiiK ill us- • 
tratiiiiis iu 
the Hidr. 
on Sons i. 
15: Sanh. 
95 (I : Ber. 
E. oil; 
Yalkiit on 
Ps. Iv. 7. 
and other 

« St. Matt. 
xxi. 25 

-Booh HI. 



n: ^DT immi^r x'^'i:: nnx n":p,-i ?r I'm::; Ni'i^s nnxr c^p?o :i3 

c'Din:D ':;?vr:^"i c^n^::: ■'i:ri rr,i-iD diid 

' Tn every passage of Scripture where tliou findest the Majesty of God, thou also 
findest close by His Condescensiou (Humility). So it is writteu down in the Law 
[Deut. X. 17, followed by verse 18], repeated in the Prophets [Is. Ivii. 15], and 
reiterated in the Hagiographa [Ps. Ixviii. 4, followed by verse 5].' — Megill. 31 a. 



(St. Matt. iv. 1-11; St. Mark i. 12, 13; St. Luke iv. 1-13.) 

The proclamation and inauguration of the ' Kingdom of Heaven ' at CHAP. 
such a time, and under such circumstances, was one of the great ^ 
antitheses of history. With reverence be it said, it is only God Who ^-^^.^^ 
would thus begin His Kingdom, A similar, even greater antithesis, 
was the commencement of the Ministry of Christ. From the Jordan 
to the wilderness with its wild beasts; from the devout acknowledg- 
ment of the Baptist, the consecration and filial prayer of Jesus, the 
descent of the Holy Spirit, and the heard testimony of Heaven, to 
the utter forsakenness, the felt want and weakness of Jesus, and the 
assaults of the Devil — no contrast more startling could be conceived. 
And yet, as we think of it, what followed upon the Baptism, and that 
it so followed, was necessary, as regarded the Person of Jesus, His 
Work, and that which was to result from it. 

Psychologically, and as regarded the Work of Jesus, even reverent 
negative Critics ^ have perceived its higher need. That at His 
consecration to the Kingship of the Kingdom, Jesus should have 
become clearly conscious of all that it implied in a world of sin; 
that the Divine method by which that Kingdom should be estab- 
lished, should have been clearly brought out, and its reality tested; 
and that the King, as Representative and Founder of the Kingdom, 
should have encountered and defeated the representative, founder, 
and holder of the opposite power, ' the prince of this world ' — these 
arc thoughts which must arise in everyone who believes in any Mis- 
sion of the Chi'ist. Yet this only as, after the events, we have 
learned to know the character of that Mission, not as we might have 
preconceived it. We can understand, how a Life and Work such as 

' No otiiev terms would correctly de- Strauss, or tlie picturesque inaccuracies 

scribe tlie book of Keim to which I spe- of a Hausratii, no serious student need be 

cially refer. How widely it differs, not told. Perhaps on that ground it is only 

only from the sujierticial trivialities of a the more dangerous. 
Reuan, but from the stale arguments of 


BOOK thill of Jesus, would commence with ' the Temptation,' but none other 
in lluin His. Judaism never conceived such an idea; because it never 

^- — ^. ' conceived a Messiah like Jesus. It is quite true that long previous 

Biblical teaching, and even the psychological necessity of the case, 
must have pointed to temptation and victory as the condition of 
spiritual greatness. It could not have been otherwise in a world 
hostile to God, nor yet in man, whose conscious choice determines his 
position. No crown of victory without previous contest, and that 
proportionately to its brightness; no moral ideal without personal 
attainment and probation. The patriarchs had been tried and proved ; 
so had Moses, and all the heroes of faith in Israel. And Rabbinic 
legend, enlarging upon the Biblical narratives, has much to tell of the 
original envy of the Angels; of the assaults of Satan upon Abraham, 
when about to oifer up Isaac; of attempted resistance by the Angels 
to Israel's reception of the Law; and of the final vain endeavour of 
Satan to take away the soul of Moses. ^ Foolish, repulsive, and even 
blasphemous as some of these legends are, thus much at least clearly 
stood out, that spiritual trials must precede spiritual elevation. In 
their own language: 'The Holy One, blessed be His Name, does not 
elevate a man to dignity till He has first tried and searched him; and 
a Bemidb. if hc stauds in temptation, then He raises him to dignity. ' ^ 
warsh. vol. Thus far as regards man. But in reference to the Messiah there 
unJ's 5 and is uot a hint of any temptation or assault by Satan. It is of such 
tom""^ ° importance to mark this clearly at the outset of this wonderful history, 
that proof must be ofiered even at this stage. In whatever manner 
negative critics may seek to account for the introduction of Christ's 
Temptation at the commencement of His Ministry, it cannot have 
been derived from Jewish legend. The ' mythical ' interpretation 
of the Gospel-narratives breaks down in this almost more manifestly 
than in any other instance.^ So far from any idea obtaining that 
Satan was to assault the Messiah, in a well-known passage, which 
''Yaikuton has been previously quoted,'' the Arch-enemy is represented as 
vol. li. p. 56 overwhelmed and falling on his face at sight of Him, and owning 

1 On the temptations of Abraham see esi)ecially the truly horrible story of the 
Book of .Jubilees, ch. xvii. ; Sanh. 89 b death of Moses in liebarR. 11 (ed. Wars/i. 
(and ditlerently but not less blasphe- iii. p. 22 a and //). But I am not aware 
mously in Pirke de R. Elies. .31) ; Pirke de of any temptation of Moses by Satan. 
R. Elies. 26, 31, .32 (where also about ^ fhus Gfrdrer can only hope that 
Satan's temptation of Sarah, who dies in some Jewish parallelism may yet be dis- 
consecpience of his tidings); Ab. de R. N. covered (!); while Keim suggests, of 
33; Ber. R. 32, 56; Yalkut. i. c. 98, p. 28 course without a tittle of evidence, ad- 
1i; and Tanchuma, where the story is ^- ditions by the early Jewish Christians, 
lated with most repulsive details. As to But irhence MvXwhy these imaginary ad- 
Moses, see for example Sliablj. 89 r/; and ditions? 


his complete defeat.' On another point in this history we lind tlie CHAP. 
same inversion of thought current in Jewish legend. In the Com- l 
mentary just referred to," the placing of Messiah on the pinnacle of ^ — -r — ' 
the Temple, so far from being of Satanic temptation, is said to mark " "• »• «c)i- '^ 
the hour of deliverance, of Messianic proclamation, and of Gentile 
voluntary submission. ' Our Rabbis give this tradition: In the hour 
when King Messiah cometh, He standeth upon the roof of the Sanc- 
tuary, and proclaims to Israel, saying. Ye poor (suffering), the time 
of your redemption draweth nigh. And if ye believe, rejoice in My 

Light, which is risen upon you Is. Ix. 1 upon you only 

.... Is. Ix. 2 In that hour will the Holy One, blessed be His 

Name, make the Light of the Messiah and of Israel to shine forth; 
and all shall come to the Light of the King Messiah and of Israel, 

as it is written Is. Ix. 3 And they shall come and lick 

the dust from under the feet of the King Messiah, as it is written, 

Is. xlix. 23 And all shall come and fall on their faces before 

Messiah and before Israel, and say. We will be servants to Him and 
to Israel. And every one in Israel shall have 2,800 servants,^ as it 
is written, Zech. viii. 23.' One more quotation from the same 
Commentary:'' 'In that hour, the Holy One, blessed be His Name, >>\x.b. 
exalts the Messiah to the heaven of heavens, and spreads over Him therdown 
of the splendour of His glory because of the nations of the world, 
because of the wicked Persians. They say to Him, Ephraim, Messiah, 
our Righteousness, execute judgment upon them, and do to them 
what Thy soul desireth.' 

In another respect these quotations are important. They show 
that such ideas were, indeed, present to the Jewish mind, but in a 
sense opposite to the Gospel-narratives. In other words, they were 
regarded as the rightful manifestation of Messiah's dignity; whereas 
in the Evangelic record they are presented as the suggestions of 
Satan, and the Temptation of Christ. Thus the Messiah of Judaism 
is the Anti-Christ of the Gospels. But if the narrative cannot be 
traced to Rabbinic legend, may it not be an adaptation of an Old 
Testament narrative, such as the account of the forty days' fast of 
Moses on the mount, or of Elijah in the wilderness? Viewing the 
Old Testament in its unity, aiul the Messiah as the apex in the 
column of its history, we admit — or rather, we must expect — 

1 Keim (Jesu von Naz. i. b, p. 564) '^ The number is thus reached : as there 

seems not to have perused the whole are seventu nations, and feu of eaoii are 

passaft'e, and, quoting it at second-liand, to tal<e hold on each of l\w four corners 

has misapplied it. The passage (Yalkut of a Jew's garment, we have 70 x 10 x 4 

on Is. Ix. 1) has been given before. ^2,800. 


BOOK throughout points of correspondence between Moses, Elijah, and the 
III Messiah. In fact, these may be described as marking the three 

^ — ~Y — ' stages in the history of the Covenant. Moses was its giver, Elijah 
its restorer, the Messiah its renewer and perfectcr. And as such they 
all had, in a sense, a similar outward consecration for their work. 
But that neither Moses nor Elijah was assailed by the Devil, consti- 
tutes not the only, though a vital, difference between the fast of Moses 
and Elijah, and that of Jesus. Moses fasted in the middle, Elijah at 
the end, Jesus at the beginning of His ministry. Moses fasted in 
the Presence of God;^ Elijah alone; Jesus assaulted by the Devil. 
Moses had been called up by God; Elijah had gone forth in the 
bitterness of his own spirit; Jesus was driven by the Spirit. Moses 
failed after his forty days' fast, when in indignation he cast the Tables 
of the Law from him; Elijah failed before his forty days' fast; Jesus 
was assailed for forty days and endured the trial. Moses was 
angry against Israel; Elijah despaired of Israel; Jesus overcame for 

Nor must we forget that to each the trial came not only in his 
human, but in his representative capacity — as giver, restorer, or 
perfecter of the Covenant. When Moses and Elijah failed, it was 
not only as individuals, but as giving or restoring the Covenant. 
And when Jesus conquered, it was not only as the Unfallen and 
Perfect Man, but as the Messiah. His Temptation and Victory have 
therefore a twofold aspect: the general human and the Messianic, 
and these two are closely connected. Hence we draw also this happy 
inference: in whatever Jesus overcame, we can overcome. Each 
victory which He has gained secures its fruits for us who are His 
disciples (and this alike objectively and subjectively). We walk in 
His foot-prints; we can ascend by the rock-hewn steps which His 
Agony has cut. He is the perfect man; and as each temptation 
marks a human assault (assault on humanity), so it also marks a 
human victory (of humanity). But He is also the Messiah; and 
alike the assault and the victory were of the Messiah. Thus, each 
victory of 'humanity becomes a victory for humanity; and so is ful- 
filled, in this respect also, that ancient hymn of royal victory, 'Thou 
hast ascended on high; Thou hast led captivity captive; Thou hast 
received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that Jehovah God 

a Pa ixviii. iiiiu-ht dwcll auiong them.' " ^ 


1 Tlie Rabbis have it, that a man must the Mount he lived of ' the bread of the 
accommodate liimseif to tlie ways of the Torali ' (Shem. R. 47). 
place where he is. Wiieii Moses was on - Tlie (luotation in Eph. iv. S resem- 


But even so, there arc other considerations necessarily preliminary CHAP, 
to the study of one of the most important parts in the life of Christ. I 

They concern these two questions, so closely connected that they can "-^f ' 

scarcely be kept quite apart: Is the Evangelic narrative to be re- 
garded as the account of a real and outward event ? And if so, how 
was it possible — or, in what sense can it be asserted — that Jesus 
Christ, set before us as the Son of God, was ^ tempted of the Devil ' ? 
All subsidiary questions run up into these two. 

As regards the reality and outwardness of the temptation of Jesus, 
several suggestions may be set aside as unnatural, and ex post facto 
attempts to remove a felt difficulty. Renans frivolous conceit 
scarcely deserves serious notice, that Jesus went into the wilderness 
in order to imitate the Baptist and others, since such solitude was at 
the time regarded as a necessary preparation for great things. We 
equally dismiss as more reverent, but not better grounded, such sug- 
gestions as that an interview there with the deputies of the Sanhedrin, 
or with a Priest, or with a Pharisee, formed the historical basis of the 
Satanic Temptation; or that it was a vision, a dream, the reflection 
of the ideas of the time; or that it was a parabolic form in which 
Jesus afterwards presented to His disciples His conception of the 
Kingdom, and how they were to preach it.' Of all such explanations 
it may be said, that the narrative does not warrant them, and that 
they would probably never have been suggested, if their authors had 
been able simply to accept the Evangelic history. But if so it 
would have been both better and Aviser wholly to reject (as some have 
done) the authenticity of this, as of the whole early history of the Life 
of Christ, rather than transform what, if true, is so unspeakably 
grand into a series of modern platitudes. And yet (as Keim has felt) 
it seems impossible to deny, that such a transaction at the beginning 
of Christ's Messianic Ministry is not only credible, but almost a 
necessity; and that such a transaction must have assumed the form 
of a contest with Satan. Besides, throughout the Gospels there is not 
only allusion to this first great conflict (so that it does not belong only to 
the early history of Christ's Life), but constant reference to the power 
of Satan in the world, as a kingdom opposed to that of God, and of 
which the Devil is the King.^ And the reality of such a kingdom of 
evil no earnest mind would call in question, nor would it pronounce cl^ 

bles the rendering of the Targum (see vidual writers who have broached these 

Delitzsch Comm. ii^ d. Psalter, vol. i. p. and other equally untenable hypotheses. 

503). '•-' The former notably in St. Jtatt. xii. 

1 We refrain from no.niing the indi- 25-28; St. Luke xi. 17 &c. The import 




" Deut. 
xxxiv. 1-3 

priori aii'ainst the personality of its king. Reasoning a jjriori, its 
credibility rests on the same kind of, only, perluijjs, on more generally 
patent, evidence as that of the Ijeneficent Anthor of all Good, so that 
— with reverence be it said — we have, apart from Holy Scripture, and, 
as regards one branch of the argument, as much evidence for l^elieving 
in a personal Satan, as in a Personal God. Holding, therefore, by the 
reality of this transaction, and finding it equally impossible to 
to Jewish legend, or to explain it by the coarse hypothesis of misunder- 
standing, exaggeration, and the like, this one question arises: Might 
it not have been a purely inward transaction, — or does the narrative 
present an account of what was objectively real ? 

At the outset, it is only truthful to state, that the distinction does 
not seem of quite so vital importance as it has appeared to some, 
who have used in regard to it the strongest language.^ On the 
other hand it must be admitted that the narrative, if naturally 
interpreted, suggests an outward and real event, not an inward trans- 
action; ^ that there is no other instance of ecstatic state or of vision 
recorded in the life of Jesus, and that (as Bishop £'^?/cof Hias shown), ^ 
the special expressions used are all in accordance with the natural view. 
To this we add, that some of the objections raised — notably that 
of the impossibility of showing from one spot all the kingdoms of the 
world — cannot bear close investigation. For no rational interpretation 
would insist on the absolute literality of this statement, any more than 
on that of the survey of the ivhole extent of the land of Israel by Moses 
from Pisgah."" * All the requirements of the narrative would be met l:)y 
supposing Jesus to have been placed on a very high mountain, whence 
south, the land of Judaea and far-ofi'Edom; east, the swelling plains 
towards Euphrates; north, snow-capped Lebanon; and west, the 
cities of Herod, the coast of the Gentiles, and beyond, the wide sea 
dotted w^ith sails, gave far-ofl' prospect of the kingdoms of this world. 
To His piercing gaze all their grandeur would seem to unroll, and 
pass before Him like a moving scene, in which the sparkle of beauty 
and wealth dazzled the eye, the sheen of arms glittered in the far 

of this, as looking back upon the history 
of the Temptation, has not alwaj's been 
sufficiently recognised. In regard to 
Satan and his power many passages will 
occur to the reader, such as St. Matt. vi. 
13; xii. 22; xiii. 19, 25, .39; xxvi. 41; St. 
Luke X. 18; xxii. 3, 28, 31 : St. John viii. 
44; xii. 31; xiii. 27; xiv. 30; xvi. 11. 

1 So Bishop Ellicott, Histor. Lectures, 
p. 111. 

^ Professor Godefs views on tliis sub- 
ject are very far fi'om satisfactory, 

whether exegetically or dogmatically. 
Happily, tliey fall far short of the notion 
of any internal solicitation to sin in the 
case of Jesus, which Bishop EUicott so 
justlv denounces in strongest language. 

•^ U. s. p. 110, note 2. 

* According to Siphre fed. Friedmnnn 
p. 149 a and b), God showed to Moses 
Israel in its hajipiness, wars, and misfor- 
tunes; the whole world from the Day of 
Creation to that of the Resurrection; 
Paradise, and Gehenna. 


distiuiei', the ti'amp of armed men, the hum of busy cities, and the CHAP. 
sound of numy voices fell on the ear like the far-otf rush of the sea, I 

while the restful harmony of thouiiht, or the music of art, held and ^^-^r^-^ 
bewitched the senses — and all seemed to pour forth its fullness in 
tribute of homage at His feet in Whom all is perfect, and to Whom 
all belongs. 

But in saying this we have already indicated tliat, in such circum- 
stances, the boundary-line between the outward and the inward must 
have been both narrow and faint. Indeed, with (.'hrist it can scarcely 
be conceived to have existed at such a moment. The ])ast,tlie present, 
and the future must have been open before Him like a map unrolling. 
Shall we venture to say that such a vision was only inward, and not 
outwardly and objectively real? In truth we are using terms Avhich 
have no application to Christ. If we may venture once more to speak 
in this wise of the Divine Being: With Him what we view as the 
opposite poles of subjective and objective are absolutely one. To go 
a step further: many even of our temi)tations are only (contrastedly) 
inward, for these two reasons, that they have their basis or else their 
point of contact within us, and that from the limitations of our bodily 
condition we do not see the enemy, nor can take active part in the 
scene around. But in both respects it was not so with the Christ. 
If this ])e so, the whole question seems almost irrelevant, and the dis- 
tinction oi outward and inward inapplicable to the present case. Or 
rather, we must keep by these two landmarks: First, it Avas not in- 
ward in the sense of being merely subjective; but it was all real — a 
real assault by a real Satan, really under these three forms, and it con- 
stituted a real Temptation to Christ. Secondly, it was not merely 
outward in the sense of l)eing only a present assault l)y Satan; Init it 
must have reached beyond the outward into the inward, and have had 
for its further object that of influencing the future Work of Christ, as 
it stood out ])efore His Mind. 

A still more difficult and solemn question is this: In what respect 
could Jesus Christ, the Perfect Sinless Man, the Son of God, have 
been tempted of the Devil? That He was so tempted is of the very 
essence of this narrative, confirmed throughout His after-life, and 
laid down as a fundamental principle in the teaching and faith of the 
Church.'' On the other hand, temptation without the inward corre- »Heb. iv. 
spondence of existent sin is not only unthinkable, so far as man is 
concerned," but temptation without the possibility of sin seems unreal ^^^^^ James 
— a kind of Docetism.^ Yet the very passage of Holy Scripture in 

' The heres}' which represents the Body of Christ as only apparent, not real. 


b St. James 
i. 14 


BOOK wliich Christ's equality witliiis as regards all temptation is expressed, 
III also emi)liatically excepts from it this one particular sin,^ not only in 

^- — -, ' the sense that Christ actually did not sin, nor merely in this, that ^our 

»^Hebr. iv. coucupisceuce '" had no part in His temptations, but emphatically in 
this also, that the notion of sin has to be wholly excluded from our 
thoughts of Christ's temptations.' 

To obtain, if we can, a clearer understanding of this subject, two 
points must be kept in view. Christ's was real, thougli unfaJlen 
Human Nature; and Christ's Human was in inseparable union with 
His Divine Nature. We are not attempting to explain these mysteries, 
nor at present to vindicate them; we are only arguing from the 
standpoint of the Gospels and of Apostolic teaching, which proceeds 
on these premisses — and proceeding on them, we are trying to under- 
stand the Temptation of Christ. Now it is clear, that human nature, 
that of Adam before his fall, was created botli sinless and i)eccable. 
If Christ's Human Nature was not like ours, but, morally, like that 
of Adam before his fall, then must it likewise have been both sinless 
and in itself peccable. We say, in itself — for there is a great differ- 
ence between the statement that human nature, as Adam and 
Christ had it, was capable of sinning, and this other, that Christ 
was peccable. From the latter the Christian mind instinctively re- 
coils, even as it is metaphysically impossible to imagine the Son of 
God pecca])le. Jesus voluntarily took upon Himself human nature 
witli all its infirmities and weaknesses — but without the moral taint of 
the Fall: without sin. It was human nature, in itself capable of sin- 
ning, but not having sinned. If He was absolutely sinless. He must 
have been unfallen. The position of the first Adam was that of being 
capable of not sinning, not that of being incapable of sinning. The Sec- 
ond Adam also had a nature capable of not sinning, but not incapable 
of sinning. This explains the possil)ility of ' temptation ' or assault upon 
Him, just as Adam could be tempted before there was in him any in- 
ward consensus to it.'^ The first Adam would have been 'perfected ' — 
or passed from the capability of not sinning to the incapability of sin- 
ning — by obedience. That ' obedience ' — or absolute submission to the 
Will of God — was the grand outstanding characteristic of Christ's work; 

1 Comp. Richm, Lehrbegr. d. Hebr. the same level with us in regard to all 

Br. p. 364. But I cannot agree with the temptations have been exempt from sin? 

views which this learned theologian ex- '■^ The latter was already sin. Yet 

presses. Indeed, it seems to me that he ' temptation ' means more than mere 

does not meet the real difficulties of the ' assault.' There may be conditional 

question ; on the contrary, rather aggra- mental assensus without moral consen- 

vates them. They lie in this: How could siis — and so temptation without sin. 

One Who (according to Riehm) stood on See p. 301, note. 


but it was so, because He was not only the Unsinning-, Unlallen Man, 
but also the Son of God. Because God was His Fatlier, thoretbic He 
must be about His Business, which was to do the Will ol' His Father. 
With a peccal)le Human Nature He was impeccable; not because He 
obeyed, l)ut being iuipeccable He so obeyed, because His Hunum was 
insei)arably connected with His Divine Nature. To keep this Union 
of the two Natures out of view would be Nestorianism.' To sum up: 
The Second Adam, morally unfallen, though voluntarily subject to all 
the conditions of our Nature, was, with a peccable Human Nature, 
absolutely impeccal)le as being- also the Son of God — a peccable 
Nature, yet an impeccable Person: the God-Man, 'tempted in re- 
gard to all (things) in like manner (as we), without (excepting) sin.' 

All this sounds, after all, like the stammering of Divine words 
by a babe, and yet it may in some measure help us to understand the 
character of Christ's first great Temi)tation. 

Before proceeding, a few sentences arc required in explanation of 
seeming dittcrences in the Evangelic narration of the event. The 
historical part of St. John's Gospel begins after the Temptation — that 
is, with the actual Ministry of Christ; since it was not within the 
purport of that work to detail the earlier history. That had been 
sufficiently done in the Synoptic Gospels. Impartial and serious 
critics will admit that these are in accord. For, if St. Mark only 
summarises, in his own brief manner, he supplies the two-fold notice 
that Jesus was ' driven ' into the wilderness, • and was with the wild 
beasts,' which is in fullest internal agreement with the detailed nar- 
ratives of St. Matthew and St. Luke. The only noteworthy difference 
between these two is, that St. Matthew places the Temple-temptation 
before that of the world-kingdom, while St. Luke inverts this order, 
probably because his narrative was primarily intended for Gentile 
readers, to whose mind this might present itself as to them the true 
gradation of temptation. To St. Matthew we owe the notice, that 
after the Temptation ' Angels came and ministered ' unto Jesus; to 
St. Luke, that the Tempter only ' departed from Him for a season. ' 

To restate in order our former conclusions, Jesus had deliberately, 
of His own accord and of set firm purpose, gone to be baptized. That 
one grand outstanding fact of His early life, that He must be about 
His Father's Business, had found its explanation when He knew that 
the Baptist's cry, 'the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand,' was from God. 
His Father's Business, then, was 'the Kingdom of Heaven,' and to it 

1 The heresy which unduly separated the two Natures. 


isoOK He consecrated Himself, so fulfilling all righteousness. But His 
Jll 'being about it' was quite other than that of any Israelite, however 

"- — ~Y ' devout, wlio came to Jordan, It was His consecration, not on!}" to 
the Kingdom, but to the Kingship, in the anointing and iternianent 
possession of the Holy Ghost, and in His proclamation from heaven. 
That Kingdom was His Father's Business; its Kingship, the manner 
in which He was to l)e ' a1)()ut it.' The next step was not, like the 
first, voluntary, and of preconceived purpose. Jesus went to Jordan; 
He was driven of the Spirit into the wilderness. Not, indeed, in the 
sense of His being unwilling to go,' or having had other purpose, 
such as that of immediate return into Galilee, but in that of not being 
willing, of having no will or purpose in the nuitter, but being ' led 
up,' unconscious of its i^urpose, with irresistible force, l)y the Spirit. 
In that wilderness He had to test what He had learned, and to learn 
what He had tested. So would He have full proof for His Work of 
the What — His Call and Kingship; so would He see its Hoiv — the 
manner of it; so, also, would, from the outset, the final issue of His 
AVork appear. 

Again — banishing from our minds all thought of sin in connection 

^Hebr. iv. with Christ's Temptation,'' He is presented to us as the Second Adam, 
both as regarded Plimself, and His relation to man. In these two 
respects, which, indeed, are one. He is now to be ti'ied. Like the first, 
the Second Adam, sinless, is to be tempted, but under the existing 
conditions of the Fall: in the wilderness, not in P]den; not in the 
enjoyment of all good, but in the pressing want of all that is neces- 
sary for the sustenance of life, and in the felt weakness consequent 
upon it. For (unlike the first) the Second Adam was, in His Tempta- 
tion, to be placed on an al^solute equality Avith us, except as regarded 
sin. Yet even so, there must have l)een some point of inward con- 
nection to make the outward assault a temptation. It is here that 
opponents (such as Strauss and Keim) have strangely missed the 
mark, when objecting, either that the forty days' fast was intrinsically 
unnecessary, or that the assaults of Satan were clumsy suggestions, in- 
capable of being temptations to Jesus. He is < driven ' into the 
wilderness by the Spirit to be tempted.^ The history of humanity 

1 This is evident- even from the terms Mark seems to imply some human shriiik- 

used by St. Matthew (dvifx^V) ^"'1 ^f- i".^ *^'i W\s, part — at least at the outset. 

Luke [ijyfTo). I cannot agree with - The place of the Temi)tation could 

Go(M. tiiat Jesus would have been in- not, of course, have been tlie traditional 

clined to return to Galilee tvnd begin ' Quarantaiiia,' but must have been neai' 

teaching. Jesus had no in(;]ination save Bethabara. See also >S^art^e?/'s Siuai and 

this— to do the AVill of Mis Father. And Palestine, p. 308. 
yet the expression ' driven ' used by St. 


is taken up anew at the point where lirst the kingdom of Satan was cilAP. 
lounUed, only under new eonditions. It is not now a- ehoice, but a I 

contest, for Sivtan is the prince of tliis world. During the Avliole ' — ^-r — • 
forty days of Christ's stay in the wilderness His Teini)tation continued, 
though it only attained its high point at the last, when, after the long 
fast, He felt tlu; weariness and weakness of hunger. As fasting oc- 
cupies but a very subordinate, we might almost say a tolerated, place 
in the teaching of Jesus; and as, so far as we know, lie exercised on 
no other occasion such ascetic practices, we are lelt to infer internal, 
as well as external, necessity for it in the present instance. The for- 
mer is easily understood in His pre-occupation ; the latter must have 
had for its object to reduce Him to utmost outward weakness, by the 
depression of all the vital powers. We regard it as a psychological 
fact that, under such circumstances, of all mental faculties the memory 
alone is active, indeed, almost preternaturally active. During the 
preceding thirty-nine days the plan, or rather the future, of the Work 
to which He had been consecrated, must have been always before Him. 
In this respect, then, He must have been tempted. It is wholly im- 
possible tliat He hesitated for a moment as to the means by which He 
was to establish the Kingdom of God. He could not have felt tempted 
to adopt carnal means, opposed to the nature of that Kingdom, and 
to the Will of God. The unchangeable convictions which He had 
already attained must have stood out before Him: that His Father's 
business was the Kingdom of God; that He was furnished to it, not 
by outward weapons, but by the abiding Presence of the Spirit; 
above all, that absolute submission to the Will of God was the way to 
it, nay, itself the Kingdom of God. It will be observed, that it was 
on these very points that the final attack of the Enemy was directed 
in the utmost weakness of Jesus. But, on the other hand, the Tempter 
could not have failed to assault Him with considerations which He 
must have felt to be true. How could He hope, alone, and with such 
principles, to stand against Israel? He knew their views and feel- 
ings; and as, day by day, the sense of utter loneliness and forsaken- 
ness increasingly gathered around Him, in His increasing faintness 
and weakness, the seeming hopelessness of such a task as He had 
undertaken must have grown upon Him with almost overwhelming- 
power.^ Alternately, the temptation to despair, presumption, or the 
cutting short of the contest in some decisive manner, must have 

1 It was this which would make the tal assensus — without impiyiiifj any in- 

' assault' a 'temptation' by vividly set- ward ro»A"e;^f;^s■ to tlie manner in which 

tin.iz; l)efore the mind tiie reality and ra- the Enemy proposed to liave them set 

tionality of these considerations — a men- aside. 


BOOK I'l'cscntcd itself to Hi.s mind, or rather have ])ecn presented to it by 
III the Tempter. 
-_--Y-.:^ And tliis was, indeed, the essence of His last three great tempta- 
tions; which, as the whole contest, resolved themselves into the one 
question of absolute submission to the Will of God,' which is the sum 
and substance of all obedience. If He submitted to it, it must be 
suft'ering, and only suffering — helpless, hopeless suffering to the bitter 
end; to the extinction of life, in the agonies of the Cross, as a male- 
factor; denounced, betrayed, rejected by His people; alone, in very 
God-forsakenness. And when thus beaten about by temptation. His 
powers reduced to the lowest ebb of faintness, all the more vividly 
would memory hold out the facts so well known, so keenly realised at 
that moment, in the almost utter cessation of every other mental 
faculty:' the scene lately enacted by the banks of Jordan, and the two 
great expectations of His own people, that the Messiah was to head 
Israel from the Sanctuary of the Temple, anil that all kingdoms of the 
world were to become subject to Him. Here, then, is the inward 
basis of the Temptation of Christ, in which the fast was not unneces- 
sary, nor yet the special assaults of the Enemy either ' clumsy sug- 
gestions,' or unworthy of Jesus. 

He is weary with the contest, faint with hunger, alone in that 
wilderness. His voice falls on no sympathising ear; no voice reaches 
Him but that of the Tempter. There is nothing l)racing, strengthen- 
ing in this featureless, l)arren, stony wilderness — only the i)icturc of 
desolateness, hopelessness, despair. He must. He will absolutely 
submit to the Will of God. But can this be the Will of God? One 
word of i)ower, and the scene would be changed. Let Him despair 
of all men, of everything — He can do it. By His Will the Son of God, 
as the Tempter suggests — not, however, calling thereby in question 
His Sonship, but rather proceeding on its admitted reality' — can 
change the stones into bread. He can do miracles — put an end to 
present want and question, and, as visibly the possessor of absolute 
miraculous power, the goal is reached! But this would really have 
been to change the idea of Old Testament miracle into the heathen 
conception of magic, which was absolute power inherent in an indi- 

1 All the assaults of Satan were really vividly in Christ's memory at that mo- 
directed against Christ's absolute sub- ment, that was flashed before Him as in 
mission to the Will of God, which was a mirror under tlie dazzling light of 
His Perfectness. Hence, by every one of temptation. 

these temi)tations, as Weiss saj's in re- ^ Satan's 'if was rather a taunt than 

gard to the first, ' rilttelt er an Seiner a doubt. Nor could it have been in- 

Vollkonimenheit.'' tended to call in ([uestion His ability to 

'•^ I regard the memory as affording the do miracles. Doubt m\ tliat point would 

basis for the Temptation, What was so alreaily have been a fall. 


vidua), without moral purixjso. The uu)i'al i)urpoi5C — the <;:rau(l luoi'al riLvr. 
purpose in all that was ol' Uod — was al)solute submission to the ^^'ill l 

of God. His Spirit had driven Him into that wilderness. His cir- ^~ — . ' 

cumstauees were God-appointed; and where He so appoints them, 
He will support us in them, even as, in the failure of l)read, He sup- 
ported Israel by the manna.''' And Jesus absolutely submitted to ^Deut.viu. 
that Will of God by continuing in His present circumstances. To 
have set himself free from what they implied, would have been despai7' 
of God, and rebellion. He does more than not succumb: He conquers. 
The Scri^jtural reference to a better life upon the Word of God marks 
more than the end of the contest; it marks the conquest of Satan. 
He emerges on the other side triumphant, with this expression of His 
assured conviction of the sufficiency of God. 

It cannot be despair — and He cannot take up His Kingdom alone, 
in the exercise of mere power! Absolutely submitting to the Will 
of God, He must, and He can, absolutely trust Him. But if so, then 
let Him really trust Himself u])on God, and make experiment — nay 
more, public demonstration — of it. If it be not despair of God, let 
it be presumption ! He will not do the work alone ! Then God-up- 
borne, according to His promise, let the Son of God suddenly, from 
that height, descend and head His people, and that not in any profane 
manner, but in the midst of the Sanctuary, where God w^as specially 
near, in sight of incensing priests and worshipping people. So also 
will the goal at once be reached. 

The Spirit of God had driven Jesus into the wilderness; the spirit 
of the Devil now carried Him to Jerusalem, Jesus stands on the lofty 
l)innacle of the Tower, or of the Temple-porch,^ presumably that on 
which every day a Priest was stationed to watch, as the pale morning 
light passed over the hills of Judsea far off to Hebron, to announce it as 
the signal for offering the morning sacrifice.^ If we might indulge our 
imagination, the moment chosen would be just as the Priest had quitted 

1 The suijply of tlie niamia was only the Sanctuary, where indeed tliere would 

an exemplification and application of tlie scarcely have been standin<t-rooni. It 

general i)rinciple, that man really lives certainly formed the watch-jmst of the 

by the AVord of God. Priest. Possibly it may have been the 

'^ It cannot be regarded as certain, that extreme corner of tlie ' wing-like ' porch, 

the TtTFpvyiov rov iepov was, as com- or uhim, which led into the Sanctuarj'. 

mentators generally suppose, the Tower Thence a Priest could easily luive com- 

at the southeastern angle of the Temple municated with his brethren in the court 

Cloisters, where the Royal (southern) and beneath. To this there is, however, tlu^ 

Solomon's (the eastern") Porch met, and objection that in that case it should have 

whence the view into the Kedron Valley been rov vaov. At p. 244, the ordinary 

beneath was to the stupendous deiitli of view of this locality has been taken. 

450 feet. Would this angle be called ' a ■' Comp. ' The Temple, its Ministry and 

wing' {■itTEf3vyiov)t Nor can I agree Services,' p. 132. 
with Delitzsch, that it was the ' roof ' of 


liOOK that station. The first desort-tcinptation had been in thegrey ofhivak- 
in ing light, wlicn to the faint and weary looker the stones of the wildcr- 

^- — ^ ' ness seemed to take fantastic shapes, like the l)read for which the faint 

body hungered. In the next tenijjtation Jesus stands on the watcli-i)ost 
which the white-robed priest had just quitted. Fast the rosy morning- 
light, deepening into crimson, and edged with gold, is spreading over 
the land. In the Priests' Court ])elow Him the morning-sacrifice has 
been offered. The massive Temple-gates are slowly opening, and the 
blasts of tlie priests' silver trumpets is summoning Israel to begin a 
new day by appearing before their Lord. Now then let Him descend, 
Heaven-borne, into the nndst of priests and people. What shouts of 
acclamation would greet His appearance! What homage of worship 
would be His! The goal can at once be reached, and that at the 
head of believing Israel. Jesus is surveying the scene. By His 
side is the Tempter, watching the features that mark the work- 
ing of the spirit within. And now he has whispered it. Jesus 
had overcome in the first temptation by simple, absolute trust. 
This was the time, and this the place to act upon this trust, even as 
the very Scriptures to which Jesus had appealed warranted. But 
so to have done would have been not trust — far less the heroism 
of faith — but presumption. The goal might indeed have been reached; 
but not the Divine goal, nor in God's way — and, as so often. 
Scripture itself explained and guarded the Divine promise by a 
preceding Divine command.^ And thus once more Jesus not only is 
not overcome, but He overcomes by absolute sulimission to the Will 
of God. 

To submit to the Will of God! But is not this to acknowledge 
His authority, and the order and disposition which He has made of 
all things? Once more the scene changes. They have tui-ned their 
back upon Jerusalem and the Temjile. Behind are also all popular 
prejudices, narrow nationalism, and limitations. They no longer 

1 Benrfpl: ' Scriptura per Scripturam to quote a verse. The child quoted 

iiiterpretanda et coucilianda.' This is Deut. xiv. 22, at the same time pro- 

also a Rabbinic canon. The Rabbis fre- poundini; the question, why the second 

quently insist on the duty of not expos- clause virtually repeated the first. The 

ing oneself to danger, in presumptuous Rabbi replied. 'To leach us that the giv- 

expectation of miraculous deliverance. ing of tithes maketh rich.' ' How do you 

It is a curious sayins;: Do not stand over know it ? ' askeil the child. ' By ex])eri- 

against an ox when he comes from the ence,' answered the Rabbi. 'But.' said 

fodder; Satan jumps out from between the child, ' such experiment is not lawful, 

his horns. (Pes. 112 6.) David had been since we are not to teni])t the Lonl our 

presumptuous in Ps. xxvi. 2 — and failed. God.' (See the very curious book of 

(Sanh. 107 n.) But the most aiit illus- Ral)bi So on-eyczrjk. Die Bibel, d. Talm. 

tration is this: On one occasion the child u. d. Evang. p. \?>'l.) 
(jf a Rabbi was asked by R. Jochanan 


breathe the stifled air, thick with the perfume of incense. They chap. 
have taken their flight into God's wide world. There they stand on i 

the top of some very high mountain. It is in the full blaze of sun- ^- — ~~.^ — 
light that He now gazes upon a wondrous scene. ]3efore Him rise, 
from out the cloud-land at the edge of the horizon, forms, figures, 
scenes^come words, sounds, harmonies. The world in all its glory, 
beauty, strength, majesty, is unveiled. Its work, its might, its 
greatness, its art, its thought, emerge into clear view. And still the 
horizon i?eems to widen as He gazes; and more and more, and beyond 
it still more and still brighter appears. It is a world quite other 
than that which the retiring Son of the retired Xazareth-home had 
ever seen, could ever have imagined, that opens its enlarging 
Avonders. To us in the circumstances the temptation, which at first 
sight seems, so to speak, the clumsiest, would have been well nigh 
irresistible. In measure as our intellect was enlarged, our heart 
attuned to this world-melody, we would have gazed with bewitched 
wonderment on that sight, surrendered ourselves to tlie harmony of 
those sounds, and quenched the thirst of our soul with maddening 
draught. But passively sul)lime as it must have appeared to the 
Perfect Man, the God-Man — and to Him far more than to us from 
His infinitely deeper appreciation of, and wider sympathy with the 
good, the true, and the beautiful — He had already overcome. It was, 
indeed, not ' worship," but homage which the Evil One claimed from 
Jesus, and that on the truly stated and apparently rational ground, 
that, in its present state, all this world 'was delivered ' unto him, and 
he exercised the power of giving it to whom he would. But in this 
very fact lay tlie answer to the suggestion. High above this moving 
scene of glory and beauty arched the deep blue of God's heaven, 
and brighter than the sun, which poured its light over the sheen 
and dazzle lieneath, stood out the fact: 'I must be about My 
Fatlier"s l»iisiness:" above the din of far-ofi' sounds rose the voice: 
'Thy Kingdom come!' Was not all this the Devil's to have and to 
give, ])ecause it was not the Father's Kingdom, to which Jesus had 
consecrated Himself? What Satan sought was, ' ]\Iy kingdom come' 
— a Satanic Messianic time, a Satanic Messiah; the final realisation 
of an enqiire of which his present i:)OSsession was only temporary, 
caused by the alienation of man IVoni God. To destroy all this: to 
destroy the works of the Devil, to abolish his kingdom, to set man 
free from Ids dominion, was the very object of Christ's Mission. On 
the ruins of tlie past shall tlie new arise, in jjroportions of grandeur 
and beauty hitherto unseen, only gazed at afar by pro})liets' rapt sight. 


BOOK It is to Ix'coiue the Kingdom of God; and Christ's consecration to it 
III is to be the corner-stone of its new Te)ni)le. Those scenes are to be 

^-^-v^^ transformed into one of higher worship; those sounds to mingle 
and melt into a melody of praise. An endless train, unnumbered 
multitudes from afar, are to bring their gifts, to pour their wealth, to 
consecrate their wisdom, to dedicate their beauty — to lay it all in 
lowly worship as humble offering at His feet: a world God-restored, 
God-dedicated, in which dwells God's peace, over which rests God's 
glory. It is to be the bringing of worship, not the crowning 
of rebellion, which is the Kingdom. And so Satan's greatest be- 
comes to Christ his coarsest temptation,' which He casts from Him; 
and the words: 'Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him 
only shalt thou serve,' whicli now receive their highest fulfilment, 
mark not only Satan's defeat and Christ's triumph, but the principle 
of His Kingdom — of all victory and all triumph. 

Foiled, defeated, the Enemy has spread his dark pinions towards 
that far-oft' world of his, and covered it with their shadow. The sun no 
longer glows with melting heat; tlie mists have gathered on the edge 
of the horizon, and enwra])ped tlic scene wliidi has faded from view. 
And in the cool and shade that followed have the Angels'^ come and 
ministered to His wants, both bodily and mental. He has refused 
to assert power; He has not yiehU-d to despair; He would not fight 
and conquer alone in His own strength; and He has received power 
and refreshment, and Heaven's company unnumbered in their ministry 
of worship. He would not yield to Jewish dream; He did not pass 
from despair to presumption; and lo, ai'ter the contest, with no 
reward as its object, all is His. He wouhl not have Satan's vassals 
as His legions, and all Heaven's hosts are at His command. It had 
been victor}^; it is now shout of triumphant ])raise. He Whom (Jod 
had anointed by His Spirit had conquered by the Spirit; He Whom 
Heaven's Voice had proclaimed God's beloved Son, in Whom He 
was well pleased, had proved such, and done His good pleasure. 

They had been all overcome, these three temptations against 
submission to the ATill of God, present, personal, and specifically 
Messianic. Yet all His life long there were echoes of them: of the 

'St. John first, in the suggestion of His brethren to show Himself;'' of the 
second, in the popular attempt to make Him a king, and perhaps 
also in what constituted the final idea of Judas Iscariot; of the 

1 Sin always intensifies in the coarse- and Demonology, see Appendix XIII. : 
ness of its assaults. 'Jewish Angelolo^y and Demonolo,2;y.' 

^ For the Jewish views on Angelology 


third, as being most plainly Satanic, in tlie question of Pilate: < Art CHAP. 
Thou then a king? ' I 

The enemy 'departed from Him ' — yet only 'for a season.' But ^— ^r-^ — -" 
this first contest and victory of Jesus decided all others to the last. 
These were, perhaps not as to the shaping of His Messianic plan,nor 
through memory of Jewish expectancy, yet still in sul)stance the 
same contest about absolute obedience, absolute submission to the 
Will of God, which constitutes the Kingdom of God. And so also 
from first to last was this the victory: 'Not My will, but Thine, be 
done.' But as, in the first three petitions which He has taught us, 
Christ has enfolded us in the mantle of His royalty, so has He Who 
shared our nature and our temptations gone up with us, want-pressed, 
sin-laden, and temptation-stricken as we are, to the Mount of 
Temptation in the four human petitions which follow the first. 
And over us is spread, as the sheltering folds of His mantle, this as 
the outcome of His royal contest and glorious victory, ' For Thine 
is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever! ' ^ 

^ This quotation of the Doxology leaves, niinetl, whether the words were part of 
of course, the critical question uudeter- the ' Lord's Prayer ' iu its original form. 




(St. John i. 10-24.) 

BOOK Apart from the repulsively carnal I'oriii which it had taken, there is 
III something absolutely sublime in the continuance and intensity of 

- — -r — ' the Jewish expectation of the Messiah. It outlived not only the 
delay of long centuries, but the persecutions and scattering of the 
people; it continued under the disappointment of the Maccabees, 
the rule of a Herod, the administration of a corrupt and contemptible 
Priesthood, and, finally, the government of Rome as represented by 
a Pilate; nay, it grew in intensity almost in proportion as it seemed 
unlikely of realisation. These are facts which, show that the doctrine 
of the Kingdom, as the sum and substance of Old Testament teach- 
ing, was the very heart of Jewish religious life; while, at the. same 
time, they evidence a moral elevation which placed abstract religious 
conviction far beyond the reach of passing events, and clung to it with 
a tenacity which nothing could loosen. 

Tidings of what these many months had occurred by the banks 
of the Jordan must have early reached Jerusalem, and ultinmtely 
stirred to the depths its religious society, whatever its preoccupation 
with ritual questions or political matters. For it was not an ordinary 
movement, n(jr in connection with any of the existing parties, religious 
or political. An extraordinary preacher, of extraordinary appearance 
and habits, not aiming, like others, after rencAved zeal in legal 
observances, or increased Levitical purity, but preaching repentance 
and moral renovation in preparation for the coming Kingdom, and 
sealing this novel doctrine Avith an e(iiially novel rite, had drawn 

1 This chaptcM' contains, among otlier was necessary in a work on 'Tiie Times,' 
matter, a detailed and critical exaniina- as well as 'The Life,' of Christ, 
tion of the i^reat Jewish Sects, such as 



from tOAvn and country nmltitiidcs ofull classes— inquirers, penitents CHAP. 
and novices. The great and burning question seemed, what the real H 

character and meaning of it was ? or rather, whence did it issue, ' < — -^ 

and whither did it tend ? The religious leaders of the people pro- 
posed to answer this by instituting an inquiry through a trust- 
worthy deputation. In the account of this by St. John certain 
l)oints seem clearly implied;^ on others only suggestions can be aj. i9_28 

That the interview referred to occurred after the Baptism of 
Jesus, appears from the whole context. ^ Similarly, the statement that 
the deputation which came to John was ' sent from Jerusalem ' by 
'the Jews,' implies that it proceeded from authority, even if it did 
not bear more than a semi-official character. For, although the ex- 
l)ression ' Jews ' in the fourth Gospel generally conveys the idea of 
contrast to the disciples of Christ (for ex, St. John vii. 15), yet it 
refers to the people in their corporate capacity, that is, as repre- 
sented by their constituted religious authorities.'' On the other bcomp. st. 
hand, although the term ' scribes and elders ' does not occur in the i6ri!x.''i8,''' 
Gospel of St. Johu,^ it by no means follows that ' the Priests and 12,' f/"'' 
Levites ' sent from the capital either represented the two great 
divisions of the Sanhedrin, or, indeed, that the deputation issued 
from the Great Sanhedrin itself The former suggestion is entirely 
ungrounded; the latter at least problematic. It seems a legitimate 
inference that, considering their own tendencies, and the political 
dangers connected with such a step, the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem 
would not have come to the formal resolution of sending a regular 
deputation on such an inquiry. Moreover, a measure like this 
would have been entirely outside their recognised mode of procedure. 
The Sanhedrin did not, and could not, originate charges. It only 
investigated those brought before it. It is quite true that judgment 
upon false prophets and religious seducers lay with it;'' but the ^sauh. i. 5 
Baptist had not as yet said or done anything to lay him open to such 
an accusation. He had in no way infringed the Law by word or deed, 
nor had he even claimed to be a prophet.^ If, nevertheless, it seems 
most probable that ' the Priests and Levites ' came from the Sanhedrin, 
we are led to the conclusion that theirs was an informal mission, 
rather privately arranged than publicly determined upon. 

1 This point is fully discussed l)y notes that the exiiression in St. John 

Liuke, Evana;. Joh., vol", i. i))). 396-30S. viii. 3 is unauthentic. 

- So Professor Westcott, in his Com- ♦ Of tliis tlie Sanhedrin must have 

mentary on the passage (Speaker's Com- been perfectly aware. Comp. St. Matt. 

meut., N.T., vol. ii. p. 18), where he iii. 7; St. Luke iii. 15 itc. 




" For ex. 
Vdina 1. .') 

'■ St. Matt, 
ill. 7, &c. 

And witli this tlic character of the deputies agrees. ' Priests 
and Levites ' — the colleagues of John the Priest — would be selected 
for such an errand, rather than leading Ral)binic authorities. The 
presence of the latter would, indeed, have given to the movement 
an importance, if not a sanction, which the Sanhedrin could not 
have wished. The only other authority in Jerusalem from which 
such a deputation could have issued was the so-called ' Council of 
tlie Temple,' 'Judicature of the Priests,' or 'Elders of the Priest- 
hood,'" which consisted of the fourteen chief officers of the Temple. 
But although they may afterwards have taken their full part in 
the condemnation of Jesus, ordinarily their duty was only connected 
with the services of the Sanctuary, and not with criminal questions 
or doctrinal investigations.^ It would be too much to suppose, that 
they would take the initiative in such a matter on the ground that 
the Baptist was a member of the Priesthood. Finally, it seems quite 
natural that such an informal inquiry, set on foot most probably 
by the Sanhedrists, should have been entrusted exclusively to the 
Pharisaic party. It would in no way have interested the Sadducees; 
and what members of that party had seen of John*" must have con- 
vinced them that his views and aims lay entirely beyond their horizon. 

The origin of the two great parties of Pharisees and Sadducees 
has already been traced.^ They mark, not sects, but mental directions, 
such as in their principles are natural and universal, and, indeed, 
appear in connection with all metaphysical ^ questions. They are 
the different modes in which the human mind views supersensuous 
problems, and which afterwards, when one-sidedly followed out, 
harden into diverging schools of thought. If Pharisees and Sad- 
ducees were not ' sects ' in the sense of separation from the unity 
of the Jewish ecclesiastical community, neither were theirs ' heresies ' 
in the conventional, but only in the original sense of tendency, 
direction, or, at most, views, differing from those commonly enter- 
tained.* Our sources of information here are: the New Testament. 

1 Comp. ' The Temple, its Ministry and 
Services,' p. 75. Dr. Geiger (Ursclir. u. 
Uebersetz. d. Bibel, pp. li:-!, 114) ascribes 
to them, however, a much wider jurisdic- 
tion. Some of his inferences (such as at 
pp. 115, IKJ) seem to me historically un- 

'^ Comp. Book I. ch. viii. 

•^ I use the term metapliysical here in 
the sense of all that is aljove tlie natural, 
not merely the speculative, but the 
supersensuous generally. 

* The word a'l'pscrii has received its pre- 
sent meaning chiefly from the adjective 
attaching to it in 2 Pet. ii. 1. In Acts 
xxiv. 5, 14, xxviii. 22, it is vitui^eratively 
applied to Christians; in 1 Cor. xi. 19, 
Gal. V. 20, it seems to apply to diverging 
l)ractices of a sinful kind; in Titus iii. 
10, the 'heretic' seems one who held or 
taught diverging opinions or practices. 
Besides, it occurs in tlie N.T. once to 
mark the Sadducees, and twice the Phari- 
sees (Act3 v. 17; XV. 5, and xxvi. 5). 


Josephiis, and Ra])l)iiiic wi'itiiigs. The Kew Testament only marks, CHAP, 
in broad outlines and i)opularly, the peculiarities of each party; t)ut H 
from the al)sence of bias it may safely be regarded ' as the most ^— ^r^^ 
trustworthy authority on the matter. The inferences which we 
derive from the statements of Josephus,^ though always to be 
qualified by our general estimate of his animus,^ accord with those 
from the New Testament. In regard to Rabbinic writings, we have 
to bear in mind the admittedly unhistorical character of most of 
their notices, the strong party-bias which coloured almost all their 
statements regarding oi)ponents, and their constant tendency to trace 
later views and practices to earlier times. 

Without entering on the principles and supposed practices of 
'the fraternity ' or 'association ' (C'^e&/ier, Chabhurah, Chabhurta) of 
Pharisees, which was comparatively small, numbering only about 
6,000 members,'' the following particulars may be of interest. The »./os. Ant. 
object of the association was twofold: to observe in the strictest 
manner, and according to traditional law, all the ordinances concern- 
ing Levitical purity, and to be extremely punctilious in all connected 
with religious dues (tithes and all other dues). A person might under- 
take only the second, without the first of these obligations. In that 
case he was simply a Neeman, an ' accredited one ' with whom one 
might enter freely into commerce, as he was supposed to have paid 
all dues. But a person could not undertake the vow of Levitical 
purity without also taking the obligation of all religious dues. If 
he undertook both vows he was a Chabher, or associate. Here there 
were four degrees, marking an ascending scale of Levitical purity, or 
separation from all that was profane." In opposition to these was the 'Chag. n. 

. 5. 7 ; oomp. 

Am ha-arets, or ' country people (the people which knew not, or Tohor. vn. 
cared not for the Law, and were regarded as ' cursed V- But it must 
not be thought that every Chabher was either a learned Scribe, or that 
every Scrilje was a Chabher. On the contrary, as a man might be a 
Chabher without being either a Scribe or an elder/ so there must have <• For ex. 

, , T 1 ,1 . . Kidd. 33 h 

been sages, and even teachers, who did not belong to the association, 
since special rules are laid down for the reception of such.** Candidates ' Bekh. 30 :> 
had to be formally admitted into the ' fraternity ' in the presence of 
three members. But every accredited public ' teacher ' was, unless 
anything was known to the contrary, supposed to have taken upon 

1 I mean on historical, not on tbeo- ^ For a full discussion of the character 

logical fjrounds. and writin,i!;s of Josephus, I would refer 

'^ I here refer to the following passages: to the article in Dr. Smith's Diet, of Chr. 

Jewish War ii. 8. 14; Ant. xiii. 5. 9; Biogr. vol. iii. 
10. 5, 6; xvii. 2. 4; xviii. 1, 2, 3, 4. 




» Bekhor. 30 
b Dem. ii. 2 

a In St. 
Luke xi. 42; 
xviil. 12; 
St. Matt, 
xxlii. 23 

t In St. 
Luke xl. 39, 
41: St. Matt. 
xxiii. 25, 26 

f Sot. 22 6; 
Jer. Ber. 
ix. 7 

J Abhoth <ie 
K. Nathan 5 

"< -ler. Chag. 
79</: T.13. 
Chag. iii. 

liim the obligations referred to.' The family of a Chabher belonged, 
as a matter of course, to the connnunity; ^ but this ordinance 
was afterwards altered.' The Neeman undertook tliese four obliga- 
tions: to tithe what he ate, what he sold, and what he bought, and 
not to be a guest with an Am ha-arets.^ The full Chabher undertook 
not to sell to an 'Am ha-arets ' any fluid or dry sul)stancc (nutriment 
or fruit), not to buy from him any such tluid, not to be a guest with 
him, not to entertain him as a guest in his own clothes (on account of 
their possible impurity) — to which one authority adds other par- 
ticulars, which, however, were not recognised by the Rabins generally 
as of primary importance.'' 

These two great obligations of the ' official ' Pharisee, or 'Associ- 
ate ' are pointedly referred to by Christ — both that in regard to tithing 
(the vowof theA'eemaw);'^and that in regard to Levitical purity (the 
special vow of the Chabher)." In both cases they are associated with 
a want of corresponding inward reality, and with hypocrisy. These 
charges cannot have come upon the people by surprise, and thoy may 
account for the circumstance that so many of the learned kept aloof 
from the 'Association ' as such. Indeed, the sayings of some of the 
Rabbis in regard to Pharisaism and the professional Pharisee are 
more withering than any in the New Testament. It is not necessary 
here to repeat the well-known description, both in the Jerusalem and 
the Babylon Talmud, of the seven kinds of ' Pharisees,' of whom six 
(the 'Shechemite,' the 'stumbling,' the 'bleeding,' the 'mortar,' the 
' I want to know what is incumbent on me,' and 'the Pharisee from 
fear') mark various kinds of unreality, and only one is 'the Pharisee 
from love.' ' Such an expression as ' the plague of Pharisaism ' is not 
uncommon; and a silly pietist, a clever sinner, and a female Pharisee, 
are ranked among ' the troubles of life.' ^ ' Shall we then explain a 
verse according to the opinions of the Pharisees?' asks a Rabbi, in 
supreme contempt for the arrogance of the fraternity.'' ' It is as a 
tradition among the Pharisees ' to torment themselves in this world, 
and yet they will gain nothing by it in the next.' The Sadducees 
had some reason for the taunt, that ' the Pharisees would liy-and-by 
subject the globe of the sun itself to their purifications,"' the more 
so that their assertions of purity were sometimes conjoined with 
Epicurean maxims, betokening a very different state of mind, such 
as, • Make haste to eat and drink, for the world which we quit 

' Abba Saul would also have freed, all 
students from tluxt formality. 
'^ Comp. the suggestion as to the sig- 

nificant time when this alteration was 
introduced, in 'Sketches of Jewish So- 
cial LitV; pp. 228, 229. 


resembles a wetUliut!: least; ' or this: 'My son, ii' thou possess any- cilAP. 
thing', enjoy thyseil', for there is no pleasure in Hades,' and death H 

grants no respite. But if thou sayest, AVhat then would I leave to ^— ^r ' 

my sons and daughters? Who will thaidv thee for this appointment