the messiah in the old and new testaments, stanley porter

7/27/2019 The Messiah in the Old and New Testaments, Stanley Porter

1/279


2/279

The Messiah in theOld and New Testaments

Edited byStanley E. Porter


3/279

M C M A S T E R N E W T E S T A M E N T STUDIES

T h e M cM aster Mew Te stam ent Studies series, edited by Stanley E. Porter, isdesigned to address particular themes in the New Testament that are ofconcern to Christians today. Written in a sfyie easily accessible to ministers, students, and laypeople by contr ibutors who are proven experts intheir fields of study, the volumes in this series reflect the best of currentbiblical scholarship while also speaking directly to the pastoral needs ofpeople in the church today.


4/279

2007 Wm B. Ecrdmans Publishing Co.All rights reservedWm. B. Ecrdmans Publishing Co.

1140 Oak Indusihal Drive N.E.. Grand Rapids, Michigan 05 /P.O. Box 163. Cambridge CBj 9PU U.K.Printed in the United States of America

1 2 1 1 1 0 0 9 0 8 0 7 7 t S 4 ] 1 1

library of Congress Catalogicg-in-Pubbcalion DataThe 1 . in the Old and New Testaments /edited by Stanley E. Porter,p. cm. (McMaster New Testament studies)

Includes indexes.ISBN: 978-0-80*8-0766-3 (pblc:alk. paper)1 . Messiah Biblical teaching Congresses. 1. Bible Criticism, interpretation, etc Congresses. 3. |esus Christ Mciilahship Congresses. 4- Christianity Origin Congresses.L Porter. Stanley 1956-

BS6&0.M4M4B 1007a*V.i dcia006034679


5/279

PrefaceAbbreviations

Contributors

Contents

In t roduct ion: The Mess iah in the Old and New Tes tamentsStanley E. Porter

VII

Kill

P A R T I : O L D T E S T A M E N T A N D R E L A T E D P E R S P E C T I V ET h e M essiah; Ex ploratio ns in the Law an d W ritings 1 3

Tremper Longman III

Figur ing the Fu ture : T he Prop hets an d Mess iah 3 5Mark /. BodaTh e Messiah in the Q um ran D ocu m ent s 75

At Wolters


6/279

C O N T E N T S

Messianic Ideas in the Apocalyptic and Related Literatureof Early Judaism

Loren T Stuckenbruck

PART I I : N EW TESTA M EN T PERSP EC TIV EJesus as Messiah in Mark and Matthew

I. Howard MarshallThe Messiah in Luke and Acts: Forgiveness for the Captives

Stanley E. PorterR em em berin g Jesus: John 's Negative Christology

Tom ThatcherDivine Life and Corporate Christology: God, Messiah Jesus,and the Covenan t Communi ty in Pau l

S. A. CumminsMessianic Themes of Temple , Enthronement , and Victoryin Hebrews and the General Epistles

Cynthia Long WestfallThe Messiah in the Old and New Testaments: A Response

Craig A. EvansIndex of Modern AuthorsIndex of Ancient Sources


7/279

Preface

This co l lect ion of pap ers br ing s together the thoughts , responses , and revised tho ug hts of the pa r t ic ipan ts in the 2 0 0 4 H. H. Bingham Col loquiumin New Testament at McMaster Divinity College in Hami l ton , Onta r io ,C a na da , '['he C ol l oqu i um, the tenth in a cont inuing ser ies , was ent i t led"T he M ess iah in the Old and New Testaments. " Th is w as the m os t successful colloquium to date , in tha t we ha d an excellent set of con tribu tors and afull to overf lowing crowd of peo ple w ho cam e to hear and interact with thepar t ic ipants . To encourage such interact ion, we cont inued the procedurebegun the year before in having a planned respondent bui l t in to the pr o g r a m . I believe I speak for bo th pa r t i c ipan t s and at tendees in saying thatthe responses ( there were two sets of r esponses du r ing the actual conference) added great ly to the qual i ty of the conference itself.

Th e B ingham Co l loquium at M cM aster Divini ty Col lege provides anoppor t un i t y for selected scholars to present their perspectives on a c o n t e mpor a r y New Testamen t the m e of relevance to the l arge r com m uni ty ofboth s tudents and laity alike . The 2 0 0 4 Colloquium expanded that br ief int ha t it include d four pap ers that add ressed the Old Testament and writ ingsou ts ide of the New Testam ent, besides five pap ers directly on the N ew Test a me n t itself. In plann ing the C ol l oqu i um, it became obvious tha t wecould not discuss the Messiah in the New Testament wi thout knowings om e t h i ng a bo u t w ha t was t hough t a bou t the Messiah in theological writings that preceded the New Testament . The concern of this volume, l ike


8/279

P R E F A C E

It was clear thai before atte m ptin g to un ders tand the n oti on of Messiah inthe New Testament to say nothing of understanding i t as re levant fortoday 's Ch rist ian we had to se t the prop er fou nd at ion . I believe tha t th econtr ibutors who have addressed the Old Testament and other wri t ingshave do ne an excellent job of bri ng ing the m ajor issues to o u r atte ntio n. Asa result , I h o p e that this volum e opens u p insights int o the notio n of Messiah that would not otherwise have been possible if the scope of the volu m e ha d been more const r ic ted .

Th e B ingham C ol loqu ium i s nam ed a fte r Dr . H erb e r t H en ryB ing ham , w ho was a noted Baptist leader in O n ta rio . However, his leadership abil i t ies were recognized by Baptists across Canada and around thewo rld. H is quali t ies includ ed his ge nu ine friends hip, dedicated leadership,un sw erv ing C hris tian faith, tireless dev otion to du ly, insightful serv ice as apreacher an d pastor , and visionary direct ion for congregat ion an d de no m inat ion a l ike . These qual it ies endeared hi m bo th to his ow n church m em bers and to bel ievers in other denominat ions. The Colloquium was endowed by his daughter as an act of appreciation for her father. It is withregret, however, th at 1 no te that M rs. Kennedy h as no w passed on to bewith her Lord. I kn ow th at she took a great interest in the B ingha m Co llo-quia that she had established in honor of her father, and we wish to cont inue to remember his work through the conduct ing of future Colloquia .Future conferences have already been planned and are under way.

1 am also very pleased again to b e able t o tha nk W illiam B. EerdmansPublishing of G ran d Rapids, M ichigan, for unde rtaking the publ icat ion ofthe McMaster New Testament Studies series, of which this volume is then in th to app ear. Pr evio us colloquia pub lished in this series include Patternsof Discipleship in the New Testament ( 1 9 9 6 ) , The Road from Damascus: TheImpact of Pau l's Conversion on His Life, Thought, and Ministry { 1 9 9 7 ) , Life inthe Face of Death: The Resurrection Message of the New Testament ( 1 9 9 8 ) ,The C hallenge of Jesus' Para bles (2000), Into God's Presence: Prayer in theNew Testament ( 2 0 0 1 ) , Reading the Gospels Today (2004)) Contours of Chris-tology in the New Testament (2005), an d Hearing the Old Testament in theNew Testament ( 2 0 0 6 ) . I especially wish to th an k Bill Eerdm ans* Sam Ee rdma ns , Michael Thomson, and John Simpson, a l l of whom have been encouraging of the work that we are doing.

Lastly, I w ou ld l ike to t ha nk th e individual co ntr ibu tor s for their ef


9/279

Prefacecom m ents of o u r respo nde nt firmly in m ind , been t ransformed in to thesewri t ten prese ntat ion s designed to app eal to a w ide var iety of readers . Th eC olloq uiu m , as noted abo ve, was a nu m erical success cer tainly, b u t a lso, Ibelieve, a successful ve nu e for discu ssion of a topic of present an d c ont inu ing importance for scholars , s tudents , and lai ty al ike. The Col loquiumw ould no t have be en th e success that it was were it n o t foT the cont r ibut ionof the Bingham Trus t an d the co nt r ib uto rs , bu t al so those a t McM aster Di vini ty Col lege w h o helped to co ord inate th e day, includ ing Patr icia Webban d h er conference team , hea ded b y |enn Bowler. We all hop e that this volum e wil l serve as a useful guide to this im po rta nt topic .

S T A N L E Y E . PORTERMcMaster Divinity CollegeHamilton, Ontario, Canada


10/279

Abbreviations

AB Anchor BibleABRL Anchor Bible Reference LibraryAfO Archiv fr OrientforschungAG|U Arbeiten zu r Geschichte des antiken Juden tums un d desUrchristentumsAKTC Abingdon New Testament Com mentariesATD Das Alte Testament DeutschBDB F. Brown, S. R. Driver, an d C. A. Briggs, Hebrew and English

Lexicon of the Old TestamentBEATAJ Beitrge zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und des antikenJudentumsBECNT Baker Excgctical Com mentary on the New Testament

Bib BiblicaB TB B iblical Theology B ulletinBZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fr die aUlestamentliche WissenschaBZNW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift r die neutestamentliche WissenschaftCBC Cam bridge Bible CommentaryCBQ C atholic B iblical Q uarterlyCBR Currents in Biblical ResearchConBOT Coniectanea biblica, Old TestamentCR;BS Currents in R esearch: B iblical StudiesDJD Discoveries in the Judaean DesertExpTtm Expository TimesFAT Forschungen zum Alten Testament


11/279

Abbreviationsmit Harvard Tfieologtcal ReviewICC International Critical CommentaryITC International Theological CommentaryJBL Journal of Biblical LiteratureJBQ Jewish Biblical QuarterlyJETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological SocietyJHS Journal of Hellenic StudiesJJS Journal of Jewish StudiesJNES Journal of Near Eastern StudiesfNSL Journal of Northwest Semitic LanguagesjSlSup Journal for the Study of Judaism: SupplementsJSNT Journal for the Study of the New TestamentJSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Seriesjsor Journal for the Study of the Old TestamentJSOTSup Journal for the Study of ihe Old Testament Supplement ScriesJSPSup Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigraplu Supplement SeriesLXX SeptuagintNASB New American Standard BibleNCB New Century BibleNIBC New International Biblical CommentaryNICNT New International Commentary on die New TestamentNicor New International Commentary on the Old TestamentNlGTC New International Creek 'testament CommentaryNIV New International VersionNI VAC New International Version Application CommentaryNovTSup Novum Testamenlum Supplement ScriesNSRV New Revised Standard VersionNT New TestamentNTS New Testament StudiesNTTS New Testament Tools and StudiesOBO Orbis biblicus et orientalisOT Old TestamentOTL Old Testament LibraryOTS Oudtestamcntische StudienRB Revue bibliqueRSV Revised Standard VersionRTR Reformed Theological Review5BLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation SeriesSBLEJL Society of Biblical Literature: Early Judaism and Its Literature


12/279

ABBREVIATIONS

S)OT Scandinavian Journal of the Old TestamentSNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies M onog raph SeriesSP Sacra PaginaSSBJC Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism an d ChristianitySTAR Studies in Theology an d ReligionSTDf Studies on the Texts of the Desert of JudahTNfV Today's New International VersionUSFISFCJ University of South Florida Internationa l Studies in Form ativeChristianity and JudaismVTSup Supplements to Vetus TestamentumWBC W ord Biblical CommentaryWMANT Wissenschaftliche M onographien zum Alten un d NeuenTestamen lWUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen TestamentZA W Zeitschrift fr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft


13/279


14/279

CONTRIBUTORS

A L W O L T G R S , Professor of Religion a nd Th eolog y/Clas sical Langu ages, Redeem er U niversi ty College, Ancaster , O nta rio , Ca nad a


15/279


16/279


17/279


18/279


19/279

Introduction

G od . Early Jewish and New Testament au tho rs were convinced tha t m anytexts h a d m essianic significance, a n d ihey read a nu m be r of passages in th eLaw an d th e W rit ings in this way. Som e of the mo st im po r tan t passages include Gen 3 : 1 5 ; 1 4 : 1 7 - 2 0 ; 4 9 : 8 - 1 2 ; Num. 2 4 : 1 7 - 1 9 ; Deut 1 8 : 1 8 - 1 9 ; Psalms 2 an dn o ; and Dan 9 : 2 4 - 2 6 , where in th e las t mSSiah is actual ly used. 1 2 As a resul t , m od ern in terpre ters such as Lo ng m an raise the ques t ion wh ether th eoriginal authors and audiences of these texts actually understood them asmessianic. If th ey did n o t , th en the qu est io n ar ises of the na tu re of the N ewTestament use of th i s mater ia l .

Focus ing on another pa r t of the O ld Testament ca no n, Mark ] . B odaaddresses the issue of the Messiah in the Prophe t s . He notes tha t modernOld Tes tament scholarship has consis tent ly argued that the verbal rootmdSah and the related nominal form mUSlah ar e rarely associated w ith anexpected future leader within the Old Testament i tself with th e except ions often no ted in Dan 9 : 2 4 - 2 6 and Isa 6 i : i . 1 3 The major i ty of the passages in the O ld Testament descr ibe pas t or present Hebrew leaders. Afterexamin ing the terminological evidence in the O ld Tes t ament and reviewing expectat ions regarding a future leader in the Prophets , Boda a t temptsto show tha t the emp loym ent of the te rm s "Mess iah" an d "m ess ianic" i s anappropr ia te way to refer to a variety of future leaders or to functions of asingle leader . T his pro vide s the foun dat ion for examining the developmentof such expectat ions within the Prophets . Boda recognizes some tensionwithin the final sections of the Prophets regarding the character and roleof future leaders . This development becomes especial ly important as onesees the prophet ic voice making a t ransi t ion to a stronger cschatologicalemphas i s .

In his essay on the Messiah in the Q um ran do cum en t s , A l Woltc rst reads carefully thro ug h t h e con tested claims regarding m essianism in theQ um ran sc ro l ls . The re a re ques t ions r egard ing whe ther t he Q um ran com muni ty expected one or two m essiahs, w he the r on e can speak of a M essiahonly when the a ppr op r i a t e H e br e w w or d is used , and whether other facto r s m us t be present to justify speaking of a messianic figure. As a usefulg u i d e to his discussion, Wolters analyzes two synthet ic t rea tments of

iz. By comparison, Gen 3:15; .19:8-12; Psalm: 2 and no; and Dan 9:24-26 are treated inSattcrthwaite et al.,eds., The Lord's Anointed, in significant detail.


20/279

S T A N L E Y E. PORTER

Q um ran messianism by leading Qu m ra n scholars. T he first is John Coll insin his book The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrollsand Other Ancient Literature,1* who tentatively and carefully offers anuanced different ia t ion of four different messianic paradigms in thescrolls, relating respectively to kin g, pri est, pr o ph et , a n d heavenly m essiah.The second is by Michael O. Wise, The First Messiah: Investigating the Savior before Jesus,'6 who presents a bolder proposa l in which a single messianic figure, in many ways foreshadowing Jesus Christ , is the interpretivekey to a whole range of Qumran documents. Wolters assesses each t reatm e n t in tur n before offering h is ow n con struc tive res po ns e to eac h.

Part I o n preced ing and s ur ro un di ng texts concludes with t he essay byLoren Stuc kenb ruck on m essianic ideas in the apocalyptic and related litera ture . His considerat ion of the no t ion of th e Messiah in th e Psalms of Solomon, the Similitudes of i Enoch, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch reveals the degree towhich m essianic spec ulation varied from au tho r to autho r, an d even w ithinthe individual documents themselves. A n u m b e r of motifs are shared bym ore than on e of these w riting s, such as th e Dav idic lineage, preexistence ,the effects of messianic disclosure or coming , and other designat ions thatapply from th e narrative contexts. However, it remains striking that, whilesuch parallels between trad ition s exist, n o n e of th e m otifs is foun d in all theli terature or handled in the sam e way. These anc ient doc um ents , accordingto Stuckenbruck, ultimately resist any a t t empt to synthesize their ideas,which are so integral to the part icular concerns of t h e a u t h o r s and theircom m unit ies an d which depen d on the sorts of t radi tion-historical ma terials available. Stuc ken bruc k finds it hard to ima gine, for exam ple, that Jewish readers of Daniel 7, Psalms of Solomon, or any of the o the r documentstreated in his essay wou ld have un der stoo d the text ar o un d a basic core tradition about God's eschatological Messiah, since such a notion simply didno t exist . W hat we do have, Stuck enbru ck finds, is a series of Jewish docum ents co m pos ed near the tu rn of the era th at were insp ired by biblical tradit ion and subsequent pa t te rns and t radi t ions of in te rpre ta t ion , and tha texpressed ho pe in a world in the control of Israel 's Go d.

The essays in Part II deal directly with the various corpora of N ewTestament writ ings. We begin with the Gospels, in par t icu la r Mark andMatthew. Howard Marshal l takes a narra t ive approach to th e Gospel of


21/279

Introduction

M ark so tha t the var iou s chr is tological s tatem en ts an d designat ions can beapp recia ted in their several co ntex ts in th e teac hin g, healing , an d sufferingm ission of Jesus. In a passage th at ha s bee n widely discussed by scholars,Peter 's co nfess io n, 1 6 Jesus is recognized by Peter as the Messiah and acknowledged by God as his Son, hut Jesus himself, according to Marshal l ,exp lains his role m o re in term s of the Son of M an wh o m us t suffer beforereceiving do m ini on from G od his Father . M arshall f inds tha t , in M ark, theseveral christological terms bring their individual , dist inctive contribut ions f rom their Old Testament roots to an understanding of Jesus, butth at they tak e o n new significance in th e l ight o f the way he l ived a n d die d.Th us they to so m e extent becom e in terchangeable . T he Gospel of M at thewtel ls m uc h the sam e story as M ark , according to M arshal l , bu t the Chris tol -ogy is en ha nc ed by th e add it ion of fresh m aterial and th e Evangelist 's wayof telling his story. As a resu lt, suc h a spe cts of th e role a nd ch ara cte r of Jesus as his filial relat ion to G od , his fun ction as a teacher, a n d his su pre m eau tho r i ty no ne of wh ich i s absent from M ark s tan d o u t mo re c learly .

In an essay tha t treats bo th the Gospel of Luke and the B ook of Acts ,rather than developing a number of di fferent ideas, Porter focuses upontwo key passages that emphasize Jesus as the anointed prophet and seeshow these ideas are developed thr ou gh ou t th e two respect ive wo rks. Luke4 : 1 6 - 3 0 is seen as pro vid ing a pro gr am m atic s tateme nt for dep ict ing Jesusas Messiah in Luke's Gospel. Jesus' citation of Isa 61 : 1 -2 a n d 58:6 , and hisin terp ret at io n in te rm s of pro claim ing forgiveness for captives, set th e ton efor Jesus' m essian ic claim as an oin ted pro ph et . T his the m e is a lso found inJesus ' birth na rrat iv e, John th e Bap tist's an ticipa tion of Jesus, Peter 's acclam at io n of Jesus in Luke 9 , Jesus ' deal ing with the autho ri t ies thr ou gh ou tth e G ospe l , a n d Jesus' revelat ion of himself after h e is r isen. In the B ook ofActs, Peter 's speech at Pentecost in Acts 2 :14 -3 6 provides a s imilar programmat ic s ta tement regarding Jesus as the Mess iah. Other pronouncem en ts of Jesus as M essiah ar e foun d in Peter 's se rm on in th e tem ple , Paul 'sspeech in Thessalonica, and Paul 's defense before Agrippa. In the Gospel ,Luke draws upon a number of Old Testament passages, especial ly Isaiahbu t not on ly pro ph et ic sources narrow ly def ined, that resonated with cu r-

1 6 . Peter's confession is probably the single most widely discussed passage regardingthe claims of leans regarding being the Messiah. Many of the works cited in footnotes fl,


22/279

S T A N L E Y E . PORTER

rent Jewish thought to depict Jesus as both the messianic prophet, andhence th e eschatological pro p h et co m ing in the last tim es , an d the fulfillmen t of O ld Testament prop hecy concerning the anoin ted com ing one . Inboth Luke and Acts, the author continues to develop the idea of Jesus asanointed pro ph et , while a lso depict ing other , and potent ia lly c om plem entary, viewpoints, such as Jesus as royal son of David.

In t reat ing John's Gospel , Tom Th atcher argues that the prese ntat ionof Jesus in the Fourth Gospel, though notoriously difficult , is characterized by notable internal tensions and expressed through complex l i terarymotifs such as irony, am biguity, an d m isu nd ers tan din g. This is th e case be cause John's Christology is largely negative, denning Jesus by what he isnot in order to refute the c la ims of two co m petin g group s, " the Jews" an d"th e Antichrists." Against th e claims of "th e Jews," John asserts th a t Jesus isth e C hris t, a divine figure. Against th e claims of "th e A ntichris ts," Jo h n in sists that the divine Christ is the historical Jesus. As Christ, Jesus is portrayed as superior to Jewish messianic expectations and, ult imately, superior to Judaism itself. As Jesus, Ch rist is portray ed as a historical figure th atcam e "in w ater an d blood." As su ch , according to T hatcher, John evidencesboth the highest Christology in the New Testament and the greatest interest in Jesus as a his tor ica l figure.

Moving from the Gospel material to the rest of the New Testament,we first tur n to Pau l. Tony C u m m in s exam ines the Pauline letters and findsthat, for the apostle Paul, what it means for God to disclose himself in Jesus Christ is to incorpo rate th e wh ole of hu m an ity into M essiah Jesus andthereby into the divin e life. T h e historical an d theological dim ens ion s ofsuch a claim arc delineated in two interrelated aspects of Paul's Christology. T h e first is th at Jesus' m essianic id entity encom passes an Israel-specific l ife and death transposed into a creation-wide glorification. Thesecond is that this pattern and path are replicated in the lives of the messianic and Spir i t -empowered eschatological people of God. Cummins focuses this analysis on several representative passages that are central toPaul's major le t te rs Ro m ans 5 - 8 , 2 Co r in th ians 3 - 5 , an d Gala t ians 1 - 2 .H e show s that Paul 's und ers tan din g of Jesus as M essiah l ies at the h ea rt oflu s theology , ecclesiology, an d eschato logy. T h e M essiah a n d hi s faithfulfollowers are agents of a divine life that em braces red em pti on , reconciliat ion, and re-creat ion.


23/279

Introduction

they are ne ithe r records of Jesus a n d resp on se to him , such as the G ospels,no r wr it ing s of Jesus' f irst majo r in terp rete r, Pau l. Cy nthia Wostfal l's s tudyof the Messiah in Hebrews and the General Epist les focuses on the earlyCh rist ian fusing, refraining , an d deve lopm ent of the Jewish representat ions of the Messiah. In Hebrews and the General Epist les, the term"Chris t" consis tent ly occurs wi th words and phrases that can roughly becategorized acco rding to the three royal sym bols of en thr on em en t , temp le,and victory. The references to believers ei ther sharing in Jesus' messianicpo sit ion o r function o r re sp on din g to Jesus as kin g, pries t , or victo r reflectho w th e ancient k ing was b o u n d together w i th h i s people and functionedas their representative. Although Hebrews and the General Epist les connect the t i t le of Christ with Jewish messianic associat ions of enthronem en t, tem ple, a n d victory, the repre sen tation of Jesus as Messiah is significantly different from Jewish expectat ions. Each symbol is reinterpreted.T h e essential rep rese nta tion o f the C hris t as th e Son of Go d pe rvade s theseepist les, but the extensive development of Jesus' high priesthood and hissan ctua ry, cov ena nt, an d sacrif ice in Heb rews is th e mo st significant con t r ibu t ion of this co rp us to the early church 's representat ion of the Messiah.

At the Col loquium itself, Craig Evans gave two separate oral respo nse s, o n e after the first five pa pe rs and the o th er after the next four. Herein the p r inted v olu m e, he com bine s these two responses into a s ingle w ri t ten response. Evans provides useful inroads into the various essays by exam ini ng a variety of features. In respo nse t o so m e of the essays, he calls intoqu estion som e of the assu m ptio ns or analyses offered by th e pa pers . In react ion to others , he proposes addi t ional ideas and enhances the presentat ion . In interp retat io n of a final gr ou p, h e calls into que stion so m e conc lusions and proposes his own analyses and answers to crucial questionsrega rding de pictio n of th e M essiah. In every case, th e respo nse prov ides anopportuni ty to see some of the engagement that occurred at the t ime thepap ers w ere originally prese nted an d offers an initial ave nu e for further explo ratio n. W h at beco m es clear in this discussion is that there is a wealth ofm aterial to be discussed from bo th the O ld a n d New Testam ents. Scholarlydiscussion co nt inu es to deb ate the messianic im pl icat ions of var ious booksan d even individ ual passages, liven those w ho clearly en do rse Jesus as M essiah find different em pha ses and th em es with in the bo ok s of the New Testamen t . These varying pictures provide both a challenge for fur ther un de rsta nd ing o f Jesus as the Ch rist an d a com plex and multifeceted po rtrai t of


24/279

PART IO L D T E S T A M E N T

AND RELATED PERSPECTIVE


25/279

The Messiah:Explorations in the Law and Writings

Tremper Longman Hi

To .study the idea of th e Messiah in ih eT o ra h and th e W ritings is a da un ting task indeed. While most Chr is t ians today wonder why anyone couldmiss seeing how Jesus so precisely fulfilled O ld Te stam ent pro ph ecy , scho lars are apt to wonder how the Mew Testament authors could presume touse these texts in application to him.

As we will illustrate below in con ne cti on w ith certain selected texts,it is impossible to establish that any passage in iis original literary and historical context must or even should be understood as portending a futuremessianic figure. So in one sense this chapter could be very short. On theother hand, the New Testament as well as intcrtesramental l i terature isfilled with citations of texts from the Torah and the Writings that are applied with a definite messianic m ea nin g. By what herm encu tical strategydoes one get from the Old Testament to these later writings, and should weconsider this s tra tegy appropr ia te? 1

How ever, even before gettin g to those vexed qu estio ns w e need to define ou r term s, particularly the term "mcssiah." W hen wc ask abo ut messianic expectation in the Old Testament, what are we asking?As m an y other excellent studie s have pointed o ut , we do no t get very

1. In this we follow the prescription of P. P. Jeiison. "Models o f Prophetic Predictionand Matthew'* Quotation of Micah 5:2," in Vie Lord's Anointed- Interpretation of O l d Testament Prophetic Texts (cd. P. K-SaitertliwaUe, R. I less, and (!. Wenham; Grand Rapid*: lijkcr,1995) 190, when he ays, "Old Testament *ptt uliil* jllem pi to make sense ot (hv phenomenon from hack to front; New Testament K h n l a r t from front to hack." However, in the final


26/279

T R E M P E R L O N G M A N I I Ifar n ou r i nqu i ry b y pu rsu ing th e Heb rew word th a i can b e t r ans l a ted"mess iah , " th ou gh i t p rov ides a h e lp fu l s t a r t i ng po in t ( see b e low) . 1 T h eH e b r e w w o r d i s maSiah . W i th o n e e x c e p ti o n i t o c c u r s in re fe re n c e t o c o n t e m p o r a r y h u m a n k i n g s , p r i es ts , a n d ( o n o n l y t w o o c c a s io n s i K gs 1 9 : 1 6a n d P s 105:15) t o p r o p h e t s ( th e se c o n d refe re n c e is e n i g m a t i c ) . 3 Th e s ing leexcep t ion to th i s i s fou nd in Dan 9 : 2 5 - 2 6 , a text that is so difficult that wecanno t even b e cer t a in wh eth er th e mdiiah in v. 25 i s used the same way asin v. 26!* Th e verb miah " t o a n o i n t " o c c u rs m o r e o ften t ha n th e n o u n , b u tnever i n a way th a t i n forms ou r u nders t and ing o f a fu tu re esch ato log ica lfigure.

H ow ever, th e fi eld i s w e ll b ey on d th e p o in t o f th ink in g th a t a co nc ep ti s l imi ted to a s ing le word . Th e idea o f a mess i ah may b e assoc i a ted wi thpassages that do not use e i ther milah or a form of the verb rruUah .Yet a fur ther quest ion that ar ises due to the fact that we do not l imi to u r u n d e r s ta n d i n g t o th e e xa c t w o r d c o n c e r n s h o w b ro a d l y w e u n d e rs ta n dthe concept of mess ian ic expectat ion , especia l ly as i t i s appl ied to Jesus int h e N e w T e sta m e n t. S o m e s c h o l a rs a d o p t a n e x tr em e ly b ro a d u n d e r s t a n d ing o f mess i an i c expecta t ion so th a t v i r tu a l ly any an t i c ipa t ion o f Jesu s inthe Old Testam ent is l abeled as re levan t to the s tud y. 5 On th e o th er h and , i tseems more e legant to associate as speci f ica l ly mess ian ic texts those pas -

2.J. Oswalt. "m*h,~ in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology andFxegesis jcd. W . A. Van Gemeren, Grand Rapids: Zondcrvan, 1997- ) ; ua \ 36 , provides anexcellent discussion.i. The issue* revolve around ihe identity of the referent as well as the nature of parallelism. In regard to the referent, we m ust first of all keep in m ind that this part of the psalmdescribes the period of the patriarchs. It is true that Abraham is called a prophet in Gen 20:7,but Psalm 10s does not refer to him alone but to the family of God. Probably the best understanding of the term is that the poet is using honorific term s ("anointed ones" and prophets") from a later lim e and applying them (0 the people of God in the patriarchal period .However, thi* understanding of the verse might still allow for the equation of "anointed"and "pophet" if one insists on an A=B approach to the relationship between thefirstandsecond cob. However, following lames Kugel (The Idea of Biblical P arallelism |Ncw Haven:Yale University Frew. 1979I). it is better lo see an 'A . what's m ore B* relationship at workhere. That is, the people of Israel are here described m etaphorically as Cod's "anointed* andthen as "prophets" in the second colon. We should take note of the parallel between Ps 105:15and 1 Chron 16:22.4. And of course there is a debate over w hether the reference is authentically future-oriented or ex evrniu.


27/279


28/279

i K I Ml'bK L O N G M A N 111

ferent sphere when it comes to the roo t mih. No longer is "to anoin t " applied to priests. We move from the realm of the cult to the realm of thecourt.* The virtually exclusive use of words formed from mih has to dowith the king. Th is is part icularly true of the Psalms (2:2; 1 8:50 [ 5 1 ] ; 20:6[ 7h 28:8; 4 5 7 [ 8 j ; 84 : 9 [io|; 89:20 [ 21 ] , 3 8 [I* 1 3 2 : 1 0 , 1 7 ) . The roo t is alsoused in Chronicles (1 C h r o n 16 :22 ' ; 2 Ch ron 6 : 42 ) and Lamenta t ions ( 4 : 2 0 )to refer to the king. Daniel 9 : 2 5 , 2 6 associates the roo t mih (here maitah )with another term from the cour t , ndgid "prince." Of addit ional interest isth e fact th a t nearly all of these references to the anointed king highlight theking's role as protector and vanquisher of Israel 's ene m ies. Even Lam 4 : 2 0 ,which speaks of the demise of the LORD'S anointed at t he han ds of the enemy, may be using this title with irony.

If w e restrict our focus to passages in the Torah and the Writings, wecome to the following obse rvation s. In the Torah the word is almost exclusively used of an anointed pr iest and in the Writings of an anointed king.However, in both cases, with the except ion of Dan 9:25 and 26 to be discussed below, the word is used to refer to a present , not a future, priest orking. Th e te rm s' occu rrences do not in and of themselve s justify the exp ectat ion of an eschatological figure, either priestly or royal, and certainly notprophet ic .

Background to the Psalms* Use ofM SH in the Former Prophets

The Torah uses mdiah for priests, and the W ritings uses it for kings. We canexplain the origin of the connection between kings and anoint ing only bym eans of appeal to the Form er Prop hets, in part icular the book s of Samuel.

While the Torah anticipated kingship (note especial ly predict ivetexts like Ge n 49 :8-12 and Num 24:17. to be discussed be low), there were ofcourse no kings during this t ime period. However, when Saul becomes thefirst king, he is know n as God's anointed (1 Sam 10 :1; 12:3, 5 ; 1 5 : 1 7 ; over allhe is called anointed some fif teen t imes). Of even more significance for

6 . Dan 9:24 provides an 1 1 1 1in in thai this verse anticipates the anointing of .1 rred place, but even here the next two verses speak of an "anointed prince." thus moving


29/279

The Messiah: Explorations in the Law and Writingso u r t o p i c as we will see, David 's anoint ing is ment ioned a n u m b e r oft imes, sixteen in all, and the ri tual of his anoin t ing is narrated in 1 Samuel1 6 . Solomon, Ichu. and a n u m b e r of other kings are also specifically connected with anointing.T hus , the p ractice of ano int ing kings in the historical books providesa historical background to the anointed king in the Psa lm s. Even so, thesereferences in and of themselves still do nol encourage readers to understand th e ano inted king in the Psalms to be an yth ing but references to contemporary kings ra ther than a future eschatological ruler. It is, of course,in the latter sense thai the term is applied to Jesus in the New Testament. Inthe next section, wc will cho os e one of the royal psalms that mention theanointed king and interpret it with in its Old lestament se l l ing.

P s a l m 2 as a C o r o n a t i o n P s a l mPsalm 2 draws our attention for thre e reason s. First, it is a royal psalm thatrefers to the kin g as the 1 -onn's ano inte d (2:2). Second, it is freque ntly citedin the New Testament in reference to Christ 's identification as the Messiah(Mk 1:11 [and parallels]; 9:7 [and parallels}; Acts 4 : 2 3 - 3 1 ; 1 3 : 3 3 ; Rom 1:4;Heb 1:5; 5:5; 2 Pet 1:17; Rev 1 1 : 1 8 ; 1 9 : 1 9 ; to name a selection). Third, it appears likely th.it Psalm 2 was intentionally placed al the beginning of thePsalter to serve as a kind of in t roduc t ion to the whole book. T hu s, as Gerald Wilson points out, its presence at this point may serve as a key to theinterpreta t ion of the royal psalms that follow."

Psalm 2 is a significant poem for us to stu dy con siderin g i ts relationship w ith the Davidic covenant, even alluding to the crucial section whereGod describes the father-like relationship he has with the king (Ps 2:7 echoes 2 Sam 7 : 1 4 ) -

As we read the psalm in its Old Testament context, we have no reasonto insist that the hu m an com poser consciously intended the referent of theanointed to reach beyond the human ruler. Those many scholars who argue that the psalm is a coron ation psalm may well be correct, though it is

ft. G. Wikoi), Pitttms, Volumet (NlVAG GrandKapi.1vZondcmn. 2001) 107-. Wilson P \ U > notes that some early Greek texts of Acts 13:3} refer toPsalm 2 as the "first psalm"
http://th.it/http://kapi.1v/http://kapi.1v/http://kapi.1v/http://th.it/


30/279


31/279


32/279


33/279

The Messiah: Explorations in the law and Writingspublished dissertation The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter" and numerousstudies th.it followed.

Elsewhere 1 provide an extensive description and critique of Wilson'sv i e w s , b u t for ou r purposes I will be relatively brief. Pivotal to his unders t and ing of the s t ruc ture and its me a n i ng is his belief that certain keypsalms are placed at what he calls the scams of the Psalter. The seams arcthe opening and closing psalms of the five "Books" of the Psalms, nr atleast selective examples of such. What str ikes Wilson is the occurrence ofpsalms that seem to have lo do with the Davidic covenant. Psalm 2 is thefirst such; while not mentioning David even in the title nor ment ioningthe coven ant , it is connected to the covenant because of the language wehave already noted that al ludes to 2 Sam uel 7. W ilson believes that ihispsa lm announces the Davidic covenant. Psalm 4, which closes Book 1 , istaken as a statem ent of confidence in the Davidic covenan t this in spiteof the fact that the covenant is not ment ioned or alluded lo in the body ofthe psalm.

While Wilson does not c o m m e n t on the opening composi t ion ofBook 2 as relevant, he does believe the closing psalm, 7%, is . 'I"his psalm is apsalm of Solomon according to the title, but he t reats it as a psalm of David and a prayer for So lom on . H e believes th at this psalm provides for thepassing on of the covenant promises from David to his son.

W h e n we c o m e to the end of Book 3 , for the first time the concernwith the Davidic cov ena nt bec om es explicit. Ac cordin g to W ilson, Psalm 89.is abo ut "a covenant remembered but a covenant failed. The Davidic covenant introduced in Ps 2 has com e to nothin g and the comb ination of threebooks concludes with the anguished cry of the Davidic descendants ." 1 7

Here I will intr od uc e my first critical rem ark a bo ut this proj ect. If th eredactors of the Psalter wa nted us Lo think this is a cry of Davidic descendan t s at the l ime they sensed the failure of the covenant, presumably laterin history, why would they at tr i bu te th e bo ok to Ethan the Ezrahite w ho isment ioned in 1 Kings 4 as a renowned wise man at the t ime of Solomon,perhaps implying that he established his fame during David's reign? Also,it seems tno harsh to say that this psalm is about the failure of the Davidic

15. C H. Wilson. Tne Editngef the Hebrew Flatter (Chun. CA: Scholars Presxn*Ss).1 6 . In "Narrative Impulses in the Interpretation of the Psalm*. l>rovcrbs. and Song ofSongs; A Reappraisal." the 1001 Brownlec lecture, sponsored by (he Institute for Antiquity
http://th.it/http://th.it/


34/279


35/279


36/279


37/279

The Messiah: Explorations in the Law and WritingsFrom the historical context of Jacob's last will and testament for his son s, itis har d not to think that this oracle anticipates the rise of the Davidic dynasty. It is not ant ic ipat ing a future eschatological figure beyond Davidand his d y n a s t y . 2 1 The s a m e may be said for the Numbers passage;

I see him, but not now;I behold him, but not near

a star shall come out of Jacob,and a scepter shall rise out of Israel;

it shall crush the borderlands of Moab,and the terri tory of all the Shethitcs.

(Num 2 4 : 1 7 )B alaam's oracle again an ticipates the rise of th e m onarc hy in Israel, but afte r the failure of the monarchy the idea that it ant ic ipated a greater kingwh o would derive Irom the Davidic l ine m igh t have captu red the im agin at ion of the people .

W a r r i o r King and Priest?Rereading Genesis 1 4 and P sa lm 1 1 0

Psalm 1 1 0 is certainly the most en igmat ic song in the collection and, perh a p s for th e sa m e reason, also the m os t cited in the New Testament (Matt22:41-45 fand parallels); 1 Cor 15 :25 ; Heb 1:3; 5:6; 7 : 1 7 , 2 1 ) . One of the mainreaso ns wh y this psalm is so difficult has to do with the divine declarationthat the king is a "priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek"(v. 4 ) . W ith this we have a difficult psalm citing an obscure event fromGenesis 1 4 .

T he psalm begins with a divine o racle directed to the k ing who is thepsalm ist 's lord to the effect that he will su bd ue the king's ene m ies. Th is or-

1 1 . X D. Alexander. "Messianic Ideology in the Book of Genesis," in Sallerlhwaile etal.,eds., The Lo rd's Ano inted, suggests that, when understood within the broader narrative o f Genesis with its emphasis on Ihe preservation of the seed of Judah, Gen 40:-!?. refers beyond David and Solomon ro a messianicfigure.He also believes that the language ofthe subjligation of the "peoples" (v. 10b} refers to something beyond David's accomplish


38/279

TREMPER LONGMAN III

acle also reveals that the king is one who has assumed a posi t ion of powera nd honor at God's r ight hand.

The proclamat ion of the king as a priest according to the order ofMekhizedek comes af ter the psalmist assures the king of Yahweh's commission that he should lead his people in bat tle . The p oe m end s wi th theassurance that God is with the king and his army with the result that hewill successfully render violent judgment on t he na t ions .

But why is the king associated with priesthood, and why specificallythe pr iesthood of M ekhize dek? O ther texts express con cern that kings no tassum e priest ly prerogatives (1 Sam 13 :8 - 15 ) . However, Melchizedek doesprovide a precedent for a priest -king, and one who greets Abraham aftersuccessful hot)' war and receives a por t ion of the plunder. Melchizedekprovides a pretext for at t r ibut ing to the king priest ly functions withoutblurr ing the dist inction between the kingship and Aaronic pr ies thood.

Unde r s t ood in this way, Psalm 1 1 0 , l ike Psalm 2, m ay be unders toodcither as a coronat ion psalm or as a pre -ho ly war song. T h e t it le a t t r ibutesthe psalm to David; an d, tho ug h the historical na rrat iv e never declares thatDavid was a priest, he sometimes acted l ike a priest (2 Samuel 6) and hissons are called priests in an adm it tedly enigm at ic verse (2 Sam 8:18}.

Th e p oint is that Psalm 1 1 0 is no t an obvious except ion to the rule established abo ve or to my unders t and ing of the rereading of the psalms inthe light of the dem ise of the mon archy. H ere, tho ug h, we learn that Godprom ised David no t on ly an eternal dynasty bu t also a priesthood that wil llast forever. Furthermore, this priest-king is a warr ior .

T h e C o r n i n g W a r r i o rSo far we have looked at texts in the Torah and Wri t ings that are not explici tly esc ha tolo gic al ." 1 w a nt to turn ou r at tent ion no w to Daniel , a lso ofcourse in the W ri tings. Th e second par t of the bo ok (chapters 7 - 1 2 ) is os tensibly escha tolog ical , 7 4 and inc luded in its vision of th e future is th e in-

aj. I am using the term "esehatologicarin the narrow sense here. Genesis 49:8-12 andNum 247 axe explicitly eschaiologicsl in the sense that they looked to die future e*tablish-meni of the Davidic mooarchy.24. Of course, there are differences even among evangelical scholars on this. Compare


39/279

The Messiah: Explorations in the Law and Writingst rusi n of a war rior k ing w ho wil l l ibera te his peo ple from bo nd ag e to evilhuman kingdoms. Most memorable is the descr ipt ion of the one l ike theson of man appearing on the clouds of heaven:

I saw one like a human beingcoming with the clouds of heaven.And he came to the Ancient Oneand was presented before him.To him was given dom inionand glory and kingship,that all peoples, nations, and languagesshould servo him.I lis dom inion is an everlasting d om inio nthat shall not pass away,and his kingship is one(hat shall never be destroyed.

(Dan 7 : 13 - 14 )Th is fascinating text share s a sim ilar escha to logical ho p e of futu redeliverance with other late biblical prophetic voices (Zcchariah 1 4 ; Malachi4 ) . It is clear tha t in the future a w ar rin g king w ou ld a pp ear, com m ission edby Cod (the Ancient of Days) to bat t le the evil human kingdoms represented by the hybrid beasts in the first part of the vision. What is particularly intriguing about the description of this figure is that there are hintsthat this king himself is divin e. W h at I am referring to is the descript ion ofth e f igure r iding the clou d. Th is imag e has an a ncie nt pedigree, of co urse ,extending back into ancient Near Eastern mythological lexis lhal describethe war god, typical ly a storm god, r iding a cloud into batt le. One thinksimm ediately of the c loud-r id er B aal. In a nu m b er of poet ic and prophet ictexts, Yah well is describe d as rid ing the clou d in to b attle (Pss 18:10-13;

68:33 ; 104 :3 ; Isa 1 9 : 1 ; N ah 1:3) . Thus, the human appearance of the char iotrider is especially deserving of note.

A P r o p h e t i c M e s s i a h ?


40/279

T R E M P E R L O N G M A N III

raises a queslion ab ou t w hether we sho uld talk abo ut t he rise of a messianic prophetic figure. The dynamic appears to me to be much the same.Deu te ronomy 18:15-22 announces that God wil l ra ise up a p ro p h e t

like Moses for the people of Israel. While the expectation is expressed interms of a singular prophet, this singular is righdy understood as a collective sing ular since the peo ple's request for a mediat ing spokesperson thatleads to this promise is a constant need. In other words , Deuteronomy 18understood within its ancient context may be perfectly explainable interms of the rise of the prophe tic m ovem ent and prop hets l ike Sam uel, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, and so on.

However, even the post-Mosaic redactor of Deuteronomy 3 4 s ta testh at "there has never been an oth er pro ph et l ike M oses" (De ut 3 4 : 1 0 ) . As welook at the rest of the O ld Testa m ent, in oth er w ord s, we see that there areprophets like Moses in the sense of shar ing the characterist ics of Moses asp ro p h e t , 3 5 but no ne that are "like M os es" in the sense of his preeminence.Numbers 0 :3 -8 a lso seems to indicate this when it says that, while Godspeaks to Moses face to face, he speaks to the prophets by "visions anddreams."

In any case, Acts 3:17-23 a n d 7:37 allude to Deute ronomy 18 and citeJesus as the (singular) Prophet that that passage anticipated. What seemsto b e happ en ing here is an exploitation of the fact that the expectation wasexpressed by means of a singular, collective though it m a y b e . 2 6

We may grant all this and still question whether it is a specificallymes sianic idea. T he gr ou nd s for b elieving so are simp ly based on th e occasional evidence that prophets, like priests and kings, were anointed fortheir task (1 Kgs 1 9 : 1 6 ; Isa 6 1 : 1 - 2 ; Ps 1 0 5 : 1 5 ) .

E x p e c t a t i o n at the C l o s e of the O ld Testament T i m e P e r i o dWhat then was the expectation of a Messiah at the close of the Old Testament t ime period? What should it have been?

Intertestamenlat and New Testament l i terature suggests that expec-

25. Notice ttut the call of l?r 1:4-10 has an echo o f the call o f M o w s in order to makehat connection.


41/279


42/279

T R B M P B R L O N G M A N III

is. In his response to my paper delivered at the conference, Craig Evans made the insightful suggestion that John's doubts were not triggered by lesus' healings and exorcisms,but rather by the fact that since, according to Isaiah 6\, the Messiah was going to set the prisoners free, Jesus may not be the Messiah since lohn is still in prison. Even though this maybe a belter explanation of John's doubts, it slill supports my central idea that John docs notunderstand the meaning of his own prophetic word*. In other words there it still a transitionfrom physical to spiritual warfare.

19. Apoint made byJ. H- Charleswurth. "Preface," in Charlesworth, ed.. The Messiah.

ing the good news. "Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait foranother?" {Matt 1 1 : 3 } . "

Thus, we must acknowledge that the Old Testament did not providethe first century C E with a clear blueprint for the Messiah. If even the forerunner, lesus' own cousin, feels some cognitive dissonance concerning therelationship between Old Testament expectation and the person andearthly ministry of Jesus, we can understand why others of that generationstruggled.

The Surpr is ing FulfillmentAgain, while there was no agreed upon specific description of the expectedMessiah in the first century C B , 2 9 there was an expectation and there werecommon themes to the expectation. Based on what we have seen in the To-rah and Writings, those common themes would include kingship, priesthood, and warfare.

Jesus himself provided the focal point that crystallized messiahshipin the minds of his followers. His fulfillment may have been surprising, butonce they saw him in the light of the resurrection, they knew him. Theymay not have anticipated him, hut after the resurrection the Scriptures fellinto place for them. Luke 24 describes two post-resurrection appearancesof Christ that illuminate this point.

In the first, Jesus walks with two of his disciples who are utterly confused and dismayed at his recent crucifixion. They do not recognize him; 3 0and as they express their consternation, they reveal their previous expectation when they say, "we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel"(Luke 24:21) . Jesus replies: "Oh, how foolish you are, and how slow of heart


43/279

The Messiah: Explorations in the Law and Writingsto believe all th at the pro ph ets have declared! W as it not necessary that theMessiah should suffer these things and then enter into his glory?" Thesewords are backed b y his appeal to Scriptu re, w hen the narra tor repo rts th at"beginning with Moses and all the prophe t s , he interpreted to them thethings about himself in all the scriptures" (24 :25-26 ) .

Soon thereafter, he appears to a bro ade r grou p of disciples, and Lukereports the event as follows:

Then he said lo them , "These are my words lhat I spoke to you while Iwas still with yo u that everything written about me in the law of M oses, the prophets, and the psalms must be fulfilled." Then he openedtheir m inds to un derstand the scriptures, an d he said to the m , "Thus it iswritten, that the Messiah is to suffer and to rise from the dead on thethird day, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You arewitnesses of these thing s. And see, I am sending upon you what my Father prom ised; so stay here in the city until you have been clothed withpower from on high." (Luke 24 :44 -49 )

There is much about this passage that we can debate; however, there arecertain thin gs tha t are clearly delineated here . First, the disciples had an expec ta t ion , though it was apparent ly not clearly formed or accurate. Theimp erfection of th eir expe ctation is imp lied by their confusion at the t imeof the crucifixion a n d also ab ou t re po rts of th e em pt y tom b. Second, Jesusis an gry o r at least disappointed thai they did not know whal to expect. After all, he taught them dur ing his earthly ministry. I hope this isn't disrespectful, but he sounds l ike a peeved professor who has labored to teachhis students something that they just haven ' t understood. Third, he givesthem another lesson , a lesson in hcrm eneu tics, that w e are to assume theyfinally understood in the light of the resurrection. From this point on, thedisciples cannot read the Old Testament except in the light of the resurrected Jesus.

Hermeneutical Implications


44/279

the light of the ret icence among Old Testament scholars, even evangelicalO ld Testament scholars, to read th e O ld Testam ent in the light of the resurrection. From W alter Kaiser to Joh n W aho n to John Goldingay, bu t for different reasons, we hear that it is w r o n g to " i mpos e " the New Testamenton to the Old T e s t a m e n t . 3 1 1 agree that it is necessary for serious study ofthe Old Testament to begin with the question, difficult enough in itself:How did the Old Testament author(s ) and first hearers understand thetext? In our study of the con cep t of th e M essiah in th e Torah and Writings,we have done just that , concluding that it is highly unlikely that comp o s e r s ) and first audience had an inkling of the messianic significance ofwhat they were saying."However, even before the Christ event , due to the unfolding dramaof the history of redem pt ion an d the progress of revelat ion, the reading ofthi s mater ia] ch an ge d. 3 3 Th is climaxes in the crucifixion and resurrectionof Christ. Christ himself urges his disciples to unders t and the Old Testament Scriptures in the l ight of his person and w o r k . 3 4

31. W Kaiser, Toward an Exegetiad Theology (Grand Rapid* Baker. 1998); J. Goldingay, Old Testament Theology: Israefs Gospel (Downers Grove: ImerVartity Press, 2003). For1. Walton, see how he handles (or doesn't) New Testament allusions to Genesis in his Genesis(NTVAC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1002).

31.1 am admittedly simplifying the picture here by talking only about the Divine andhuman author. Actually, the picture is more complicated since many of the biblical book*have a history of composition, which means that we should also reflect on the intention ofeditors. This w pointed out to me by C. Evans in his response to the oral presentation ofthis paper. However, though not directly addressed in the paper, I would say that later editors would have an increasing sense of the deeper meaning of the text in the light of the unfolding events of redemptive history.

3J. Note |. G. McConville's insightful comment in regard to a developing messianicunderstanding of certain Old Testament texts: "The interpretation of the O ld Testament isnot a one-way. but a two-wayflow, n which contemporary situations were compared withthe Scripture*, and the Scriptures were then brought to bear, sometimes in (to lis) unexpected ways, on the situations. The Old Testament, indeed, underwent a good deal of 1 rinterpretation even as hopes of deliverance were being worked out" See McConville, "Messianic Interpretation of the Old Testament in Modern Context." in Satterthwaite et al.. edsThe Lord's Anointed, :>.

34 . The comment* of P lenson ("Models of Prophetic Prediction.' 1 1 1 ) on Matthew'squotation of Mic y.i are relevant here: T h e adaptation of the quotation thus display's a creativity and a faithfulness that is impressrve. The verse b not regarded as an apologetic jokerthat will merely prove the messiahship of Jesus. Rather, it is aflexibleentity that can be

TRBMPER LONGMAN III


45/279

The Messiah; Explorations in the Law and WritingsThis perspective, of course, raises the much vexed and recently dis

cussed question of the locus of m e a n i n g of a text. It may sound as if 1 ammoving from an author ia l -based in te rpre ta t ion to a reader-based approach , but I am not . Ra t h e r , ! am suggesting th at , tho ug h the h u m a n authors "spoke bet ter than they knew" (cf. 1 Pet 1 : 1 0 - 12 ) , there is a n o t h e r Autho r wh ose in tent ions come to perfect fidfillment. If one wants to call thissensus plenior, I have no objection. 3 5

B ut let me conc lude by reflecting on the w o rd s of John the Baptist ,w hich 1 com m ented up on ear lie r. He spoke of the coming of a violentMessiah, but what he was th inking as he "authored" these words wasth rown in to quest ion when Jesus began his minis t ry of hea l ing andpreaching the G oo d New s. Rather tha n slaying sinn ers and Gentiles, hew as perceived as their "friend" (Matt 1 1 : 1 9 ) .

Does tha t mean tha t the words of John were incorrect because theyd id not conform to his consc ious unde rs tandin g ( in tent ion)? Not at all. Inthe first place, Jesus' actions during his earthly ministry can be seen as anact of violence in the spiri tua l realm . As Susan Garr ett has poin ted out , theexorcisms are a form of holy w ar . 3 6 Paul un de rsta nd s Jesus ' death and resurrec t ion (Col 2:13-15) and his ascension (Eph 4 : 7 - 1 0 , citing; the holy warpsa lm, 6 8) as a military victory. Indeed, it inaugurates a period of spiri tual

35. W. Kaiser and J. Sailhamer, both defenders of lodging the meaning of a text in theconscious intention of the human author, must labor mightily or simply ignore more obvious interpretations as tliey exegele these texts in a way that suggests that the original authorsactually were thinking of a future messianicfigure ike Jesus. For instance. Kaiser does noteven interact with the most obvious possibility that Genesis 49 and Numbers 24 refer to thefuture Davidic monarchy coming from the tribe of Judah; rather, he simply presumes thatthe Messiah was in mind (Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids;Zondcrvan, 19951 50-57). Note Kaiser's comment about Old Testament messianic texts that a"straightforward understanding and application of the text leads onestraight to the Messiahand to Jesus of Nazareth, who has fulfilled everything these texts said about his first coming"(232).J. Sailhamer argues that the narrative of the Pentateuch is set within a poetic framework and that the narrative needs to be interpreted through the lens of these intentionallyplaced poems. These poems are each marked with the phrase "in the last days," thus givingthe Pentateuch an cschatological significance. He argues this way to posit a connection between Jesus and the Pentateuch's promise of a future king in texts like Genesis 49 and Num

bers 24. See Sailhamer, Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach (Grand Rapids:Zondervan, 1995).


46/279


47/279

Figuring the Future:The Prophets and Messiah

Mark /. Boda

D e f i n i n g M e s s i a h , D e f i n i n g O u r S t u d y

For an O ld Testam ent schola r to ven ture into a study of M essiah is a darin gact inde ed, especially in light of the following co m m en t by Ron Clem ents:"virtually all of the major books on Old Testament theology say very l i t t leat all about such messianic hope and, even when they do, do so in a veryguarded and c ircumscribed way." 1 T h e reas on for i ts absen ce in O ld T estam ent theologies is obv ious if on e accepts the do m in an t view of the O ldTestament evidence, expressed for example by Roland Murphy long ago:

It is a tact tha t th e term "messiah," as a terminus technicus designatingthe ideal king who was to com e, does not occur in the Old T estam ent Itreceived this connotation only towards the beginning of the Christianera, whereas in itself it m eans merely th e "an ointed," referring to kingsand priests. 2

W ith such a st rong consensus evident within O ld Testament scholarship inthe twentieth century, is there any use in proceeding further?Fart of the challenge that faces us revolves around this issue of "ter-1. R. E. Clements, "The Messianic Hope in the Old Testament," /S07*43 (19&9) 3-19 .here noting exceptions in Quids and Schmidt.2, R. E. Murphy, "Notes on Old Testament Messianisra and Apologetics," CBQ 19


48/279


49/279

Figuring the Future: The Prophets and MessiahThese three definitions highlight the difficulty of finding a definitive starting point for this study. Points of divergence are obvious: Is this a present,future, or eschatological figure? Is this a royal, priestly, or prophetic figure?These questions reveal the multidimensional character of any definition ofa figure called "Messiah."

First of all, this figure is defined according to a particular sociologicalrole . For Collins and Rose this figure is royal, while for J. I. M. Roberts thisfigure is predominantly royal but could also be priestly or prophetic Second, this figure is defined according to a temporal reference. For Robertsthe figure is present, while for Rose and Collins the figure is future. Third,even the temporal future can be nuanced further: for while both Rose andCollins speak of a future figure, the latter characterizes this future as qualitatively "eschatological" and "end time."

The reason for this divide within scholarship is related, at least partially, to the historical and literary evidence that is under purview. The focus of Roberts's study was the Hebrew Bible; for Rose it was the late prophetic books; while for Collins it was Second Temple Judaism andChristianity. Nevertheless, it is important that we at least identify what wemean by our terms even if we are focusing on different textual and temporal evidence. In order to do that, a closer look at both the sociological roleand temporal reference is in order; and there is no better place to start thanwith the Hebrew semantic range that gave messianic expectation its terminology.

Sociological Role

Semantic Range o/masah

The verbal root m&Sah, the adjectival form maiiah, and the nominal formsmdihdh and miihdh occur tjo times in the Old Testament.6 Of these wordsmaihah is the most obscure, occurring only once in Num 18:8 to refer to"consecrated portion," a gloss also found for miihdh on two occasionsDavid: Ancient Uriel's Vision of the Messiah, in Israel's Messiah in the Bibir and the DeadSea Strolls (cd K. S Hess and M. Daniel Carroll R,: Grand Kapids: Baker Academic, 2003)17-56, here 23.


50/279

M A R K ). BODA

(both in Lev 7:35) . Usually miiiuSh is found in a collocation with iemen(oil) to signify the "o in tmen t" used to consecrate the priests (e.g., Exod25:6 ; Lev 8 : 2 , 1 0 , 1 2 , 3 0 ) . The verbal root mdsah is used in a more gener icway to refer to the act of smearing a substance (usually oil) on someth ingelse. T h u s, it is used for applying oil to a weapon ( Isa 21:5; 2 Sam 1:21) orcakes (Exod 29:2; Lev 2:5; 7:12; N u m 6 : 1 5 ) , but also for apply ing per fumes /o in tm e n t s to one ' s body (Amos 6 :6 ) or pain t to a house (Jer 22 :1 4 ) . Nevertheless, it is used mos t commonly in ceremonial r i tuals connected withconsecrating sacred objects (altar , vessel) , buildings ( tabernacle, temple) ,and especially people to an office or role w ithin Israel. Th e sem antic rangeof the adjective mdSlah is ne arly restricted to this final gloss: that is, to d escr ibe people who are consecrated to an office or role within Israel.

King, Priest, and ProphetsIt is interesting that the verbal and adjectival forms are both connec tedw ith th ree key sociological func tionaries w ithin Israel 's texts: king, priest,and p rophe t . ' As n o te d by Collins, Rose, and Rober ts above, the m o s tc o m m o n u s e of these two forms is in reference to the royal stream. Them onarch is ano inted as well as called th e ano inted o n e.

m&lah: Idg 9 :8 ; 9 : 15 ; 1 Sam 9 : 1 6 ; 1 0 : 1 ; 1 5 : 1 , 1 7 ; 1 6 : 3 , 1 2 , 1 3 ; 2 Sam 2 : 4 , 7;3 :39 ; 5^3 ( = 1 Chron 1 1 : 3 ) ; 5 : 17 ; 12 :7 ; 2 Sam 1 9 : 1 1 ; 1 Kgs 1 : 3 4 . 39. 45;5:15; 1 9 : 1 5 . 1 6 ; 2 Kgs 9:3 6 , 1 2 ; 11 : 12 ; 23:30; 2 Chron 22:7 ; 2 3 : 1 1 ; 29:22;Ps 89:21 |Eng2o | ;45:8 [Bog 7 ] (Niphal: 1 Chron 1 4 : 8 ) .

mtiSUth: 1 Sam 2 : 1 0 , 3 5 ; 1 2 : 3 , 5 ; 1 6 :6 ; 2 4 : 7 " . IK 2 6 : 9 , 1 1 , 1 6 , 2 3 ; 2 Sam 1 : 1 4 ,1 6 ; 1 9 : 2 2 ; 2 3 : 1 ; Pss 2:2; 18:51 ( = 2 Sam 2 2 : 5 1 ) ; 2 0 : 7 ; 28 :8 ; 8 4 : 1 0 ; 89:39,5 2 ; 1 3 2 : 1 0 (= 2 Chron 6:42), 1 7 ; Isa 4 5 : 1 ; Lam 4 : 2 0 ; Dan 9:25-26.*

How ever, R oberts was correct to note the pr ies tly conne ction because references to pr ies ts and anoin t ing a re the second mos t abu nd ant , wi th spe-

7. Uncertain is rhe evidence of (wo passages: Hab 3:13 and Ps 28:8. In the first 'am(people) Is paralleled with mHliah, but one cannot assume that these are to he equated, forthe two lines may be referring to two different entities that were saved: (1 ) the people as awhole, and (a) an anointed leader. In the second, people and anointed one are in l couplet,


51/279

Figuring the Future: The Prophets and Messiah

rial focus on the high priest as the one anointed and called the anointedone.

maiah: Exod 28:41; 29:7, 29; 30:30; 40:13, 15* 1 ; Lev 7:36; 8:12; 1 6 : 3 2 ;Num 3:3; 35:25; 1 Chron 29:22 (Niphal: Lev 6:13)*

mdStah: Lev 4:3, 5,16; 6:15

Finally, although rare, there arc texts that indicate that prophets arc alsoanointed and considered anointed ones. In particular, alongside a reference to the anointing of a royal figure (Ichu), 1 Kgs 1 9 : 1 6 refers to Elijahanointing Elisha "as prophet in your place." Many have suggested that thefigure in Isa 61:1 who is "anointed" is a prophetic figure because of his roleof proclamation. Furthermore, Ps 105:15 (/ /1 Chron 16 :22) parallels the plural of maiiah with "my prophets." 1 0 This evidence then reveals that the terminology associated with the Hebrew root mdiah was connected with thethree major socio-religious functionary streams in Israel: king, priest,prophet, 1 1

Timing

The evidence on sociological role confirms Roberts's broader definition ofthe Messiah in the Old Testament, but it remains to be seen whether histemporal reference can also be accepted. He, along with many Old Testament scholars, has suggested that a close look at the temporal referencewhen this terminology appears in the Old Testament reveals that the vastmajority of the texts are focused on a present figure, with only a couplelooking to a future figure (Isa 45:1 ; 6 1 : 1 ) and possibly only one looking to afigure inaugurating an eschatological era (Dan 9 : 2 4 - 2 6 ) .

However, there arc reasons to question this conclusion. First of all,9 . Or things tiered, tabernacle, vessels: Gen 3 1 : 1 3 : Num 7:11 Exod 29:36:30:26; 40:9.10,

1 1 ; Lev 8:10,11; Dan 9:14 (Niphal: altar Num 7:10.84, 88).1 0 .This is, indeed, odd as the psalmist is speaking about the patriarchs, but no matterhow you understand the connection between the patriarchs and prophets, the fact still remains that the pulmi


52/279

M A R K J. BODA

this ap pro ach is based o n a historicist stance th at views the texts of t he O l dTestament merely as annals of the past . That is , it is assumed tha t when atext in, for example , the De uteronom ic His tory emp loys m essianic te rm inology it is merely reco rding a past event in w hich a reference was made toa then pre sen t figure (e.g., 2 Sa m 22:51). How ever , a l thou gh I am confidentthat the texts of the D eutero no m ic H is tory are rooted in th e pre- exilic per iod, many of them were brought into their f inal form in the exilic periodand , as the end of 2 Kings 25 reveals, in a t ime when there was need for ane ndur i ng hop e for the reinst i tut ion of at least royal lead ersh ip. O r, further,when Psalm 2 makes reference to the "mess iah" it is often noted that thispsalm finds its Sitz im Ixben in the corona t ion ce remony of ancientJudahi te kings and th us is referring to a contemporary f igure .1 1 However,it ha s lon g bee n n oted that Psalm 2 jo in s Psalm 1 as an i n t roduc t ion to thePsalter as a whole and has been placed in this posit ion at a late date afterthe monarchy was no longer a poli t ical reali ty. ' 3 It appears that the in tent ion of the edi tors who drew the Psalter together was to signal a futurem essianic ho pe . '* These tw o exam ples sho w us tha t , al thoug h references to"messianic" figures may have referred to "present" f igures in their "original" historical set t ings, they have bee n taken up to encourage future hopein a later era. Furthermore, when these texts establ ish the validity of"anointed" figures in the past and note their enduring quali ty (especial lyreferences to 'dl&m), they arc establ ishing something that has serious impl icat ions for future hope.

Second, if a future or ien tat io n can be discerned in references to Messiah in the O ld Testamen t , on e m ay legi timately challenge the dist inct ionthat has often been made between simple future and cschatological future.Such a dist in ction is based on a certain view of t im e that m ay have m ore tod o with la ter temp oral c on cep t ions th an w ith ancient H ebrew views of "cs-

1 1 W. II. Brownlee, "Psalms 1 -1 as a Coronation Liturgy." Bib s i (1971) 3 1 1 3 6 ; S. E.Gillingham, ""The Messiah in the Psalms: History and the Psalter." in King and Meuiah in Is-rati and the Ancient Near East (cd. I. Day- JSOTSup; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,109) 2O0-2J7.

13- E.g.. G II. Wilson, The FJiting of the Hebrew Piaher (Chko, CA: Scholars, 1965!;G. H. Wilson. T h e Us* of Royal Psalms at the 'Seams' of the Hebrew Psalter," /SOT3 5 (19S6)6S-94; I- C McCann. The Shape and Shaping of the Ptalter ()SOTSup; Sheffield: JSOT, 1993).14. See also the use of mdliah in Pss 89:39 and 132:10. two passages that appear to be


53/279


54/279


55/279


56/279


57/279

Figuring the Future: The Prophets and Messiahpress future expectations, these terms were employed for describing futureideal leadership figures. Rather than an abuse o f Hebrew language and literature, reference to mdsah/mdsiah within Second Temple Judaism and nascentChristianity was actually a natural outgrowth o f the Hebrew tradition. 3 0T h u s , studying Messiah in the Old Testament need not be so daringan act as expressed at the outset of this section, since the term "Messiah"appears to have been used gencrically for religious functionaries operativein Hebrew society and tradition, functionaries for whom there was hopeo f an enduring role. Adopting such an approach to Messiah in the Old Testament does justice to the use o f this term, not only on the literary level ofthe final form of the text, but also within the social context from whichthese texts have arisen. It also opens the way for greater dialogue withscholars studying the phenomena o f Messiah and messianic within SecondTemple Judaism and Christianity, as the present volume provides.

Prophets and MessiahN o Old Testament tradition is more closely associated with messianic expectation in popular Jewish and Christian consciousness than the prophets. Such a consciousness is the result o f a long history of reflection on thelarge corpus of prophetic literature. To deal adequately with this literaturewould require (and has required!) a monograph of its own, and so this article will be more focused. In light of my definition o f "Messiah" above, Iwill investigate the broader phenomenon of "messianism," that is, presentdescription and future expectation of socio-religious functionaries,31 butwill limit this exploration to the final phase of the prophetic corpus, thatis, to Haggai-Malachi.

The reason I have chosen this focus is not only due to the limitedspace of this paper, my own expertise, and the appearance of recent sur-

30 . Laato, StarftRising, 3-4, although noting that the Hebrew terminology related toMessiah can he used of king, high priests, and prophets, then explicitly states that the goal ofhis monograph is to show how this terminology moved from denoting the king chosen byYHWH to "terminus technkus. 'Messiah.' for a coming eschatologicalfigure."The broaderview of the figure is already seen in the Old Testament; the key is the move to the future mideschatological.


58/279

MARK I. BODA

veys on the Messiah in the Old Testament and the P r o p h e t s , " but m o r e sobecause of the role that the Haggai-Malachi corpus plays within Hebrewand Chr is t ian t radi t ion.

First of all, in historical perspective these books provide records ofthose who prop hesied after the exile to a Jewish com m un i ty in the midst ofthe reformulation of faith, religion, and society without the advantage ofindependent na t ionhood. These books then of fer us a window into theways the Jewish co m m un ity's view of leadership was be ing shap ed after theexile. Key trajectories are set in this era that would have a great impact onthe faith of Second Temple Judaism, which would in turn provide a context for Christ ianity. It is well known that these books played a major rolein shap ing messianic expectation within Second Temple Judaism , nascentChristianity, and beyond, and so it is appropr ia te to investigate the perspective of t h e s e b o o k s . "

Second, in redactional perspective, recent research on the Book ofthe Twelve as well as Haggai , Zechanah, and Malachi has advocated thatthese three books at one t im e formed an independent corpus tha t was incorporated into the Book of the Twelve in the final stage s of its developm e n t . 3 * Thus , there is some justification for deal ing with this sub-groupwi thin prophet i sm.

32. See especially |. J. M. Roberts, The Old Testament's Contribution to MessianicExpectations," in Charlesworth, cd., The Messiah, 3 1 - 5 1 ; P. E. Sattcrthwaitc. R. S. Hess, andG. J. Wenhani, eds., The Lord's Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Tex(Tyndalc House Studies; Carlisle. UK: Paternoster/Grand Rapids- Baker, 1995); Day.ed-, Kingand Messiah in Israel; and Block, "My Servant David." 17-56.

33. For the impact on Judaism and Christianity see M.). Boda, Haggai-Zechariah Research: A Bibliographic Survey (ToolsforBiblical Studies; Iiden: DEO Publishing, 2003);M. (. Boda, Haggai/Zechariah (NIVAG Grand Rapids: Zondeivan, 2004).34- Some include Zechariah 914 in this Haggai-Malachi corpus (e.g.. A. Schart,"Putting the Eschatological Visions of Zechariah in Their Place: Malachi us a HernieueuticalGuide for the Last Section of the Book of the Twelve," in Bringing out the Treasure: InnerBib

licalAllusion and Zechariah 9-14 [cd. M. T. Boda and M. H. Floyd; JSOTSupj Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003) 333-43); others do not (e.g., P. L . Rcdditt, "Zechariah 9-14: TheCapstone of the Book of the Twelve," in Boda and Floyd, eds., Bringing out the Treasure, 305-32;, treating it as the final insertion after the number of books had reached twelve. For a fullreview of this stream of research, sec P. L Rcdditt. "Recent Research on the Book of theTwelve as One Book," CftSS 9 (2001) 47-80; P. L Redditt. "The Work of the Book of theTwelve Seminar," in Thematic Threads in the Book of the Twelve (ed. A. Schart and P. Redditt;


59/279

Figuring the Future: The Prophets and MessiahThird, in tradition perspective, these books portray self-awareness of

their place in the history o f prophetism in particular and revelation in general. 3 5 Haggai draws on earUer traditions and language from the formerand latter prophets as well as the Torah, not only to summon the people torebuild the temple, but also to paint a picture o f a glorious future." Zecha-riah sums up this Persian period phase well when he introduces his summary of the message of prophetism by referring to the '"earlier prophets"( 1 : 4 ; 7:7} and describes the Torah as the authoritative covenant document(Zech 5 : i - 4 ) - ' 7 Zechariah 9-14 is universally recognized as a pastiche ofquotations, allusions, and echoes drawn from the Torah and the Formerand Latter Prophets." Malachi mines earlier Torah and Prophetic tradition to confront dysfunction and announce a new age, concluding with acall to remember the Torah and to expect Elijah. 39

Finally, while many Christian scholars assume that the Longer prophetic books of Jeremiah, Ezekie l , and especially Isaiah were formativefor New Testament Christology, there is an odd absence of influencefrom these books on the key Gospel passion accounts. For instance, onewould expect to see the influence of Isaiah 5 2 - 5 3 , one of the key "Suffering Servant" passages (cf. A cts 8 : 3 3 ) , but it appears that Luke is the onlyGospel that cites Isaiah 52-53 in connection with the crucifixion (Luke22:37//1 SJ 53 : 12) . Instead, formative for the suffering of the Messiah arepassages from the Psalms (Ps 22//Matt 27 : 4 6 ; Mark 15 :34 ; John 1 9 : 2 4 ; Ps4 1 : 9 / / J o h n 13 :18; Ps n8//Matt 21 : 42 ; Mark 12 : 1 0 - 1 1 ) and Zechariah (Zechi i / / M a t t 27: 10 ; Z e c h i2//John 1 9 : 3 7 ; Z e c h i3//Matt 26 : 3 1 ; Mark 14 :27) , afact that encourages a closer study of Zechariah within the propheticcorpus.

Our focus, then, will be on the way in which Haggai, Zechariah, and35- Sec a similar approach to this issue of messianism in J. II. Sailhamer. "The Messiah and the Hebrew Bible,"/ETS44 (2001 ) 5-23, who mines the later stages of the formationof the Hebrew Bible for messianic hope.36 . I. Kesslcr. The Book of Haggai: Prophecy in Early Penian Yehud (VTSup; Leiden:Brill. 2002).37.). t.Tollington, Tradinon and Innovation in Haggai and Zechariah i~S (JSOTSup;Sheffield: JSOT. 1993).3. See Boda and Hoyd, cd*,. Bringing out the Treasure.39- E. M. Meyers, "Priestly Language in the Book of Malachi," HAR w (1986) 225-37;R. Ktigler, Prom Patriarch to Priest: The Levi-Priestly Tradition from Aramaic Levi 10 Test


60/279

MARK J. BODAM a l a c h i treat socio-religious figures in their own day and then create expectation for such figures in the future.4 0

H a g g a i - M a l a c h iRecent ResearchAlber to Ferreiro's recent publication of the Ancient Christian Commentary on the Twelve Prophets reveals the fixation of the early church on thebooks of Haggai , Zechariah, and Malachi as a source for their understanding of fesus Christ. 4 1 Such an interest in these books within the Christiancommunity is not surprising, considering the attention afforded thesebooks within the New Testament witness. 4 2 This in turn is also not exceptional, for one can discern an equal fascination with the cschatological andmessianic in Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi within Second Temple Judaism. Such fascination, however, demands careful assessment. What relationship is there between the later Jewish and Christian appropriation ofthese books and the original message of the books themselves? In whatway can they be sources for messianic and/or cschatological theology?

Reflection over the past decade on these books has offered a range ofviewpoints on this issue.4 3 For example, in treating Haggai and Zechariah1 -8 , Janet Tollington concluded that these prophets affirmed Zcrubbabel asthe inheritor and representative of the enduring Davidic legacy, even i f thelatter prophet equally affirmed a diarchlc rule of sacral and secular leadership until the reinstitution of independent rule.4 4 In contrast, KennethPomykala denies any David ic royalist or messianic expectation to Haggai orZechariah ( 1 - 8 ) , whether connected to Zerubbabcl or the mysterioussemah,45 even if these prophets provided the foundation for later messianic

40. For a full review of research, sec Boda, Haggai-Zechariah Research; Boda, Haggai/Zechariah.41. A. Ferreiro, ed., The Twelve Prophets (Ancient Christian Commentary: Old Testament; Downers Grove, 1 1 . : IntcrVarsity Press, 2003) 219-313.42. Cf. Boda, Haggai-Zechariah Research, 31-34.124,174-78.241-47; and the introduction to Boda, HaggailZechariah.43. See fuller review in Boda, Haggai-Zechariah Researdt, 20-31.


61/279

Figuring the Future: The Prophets and Messiahreflection.46 Antli Laato intertwines evidence from ancient Near Easterntemple rebuilding ceremonies with the Davidic royal traditions to showthat Zerubbabel was considered a royal messianic figure in both Haggai andZechariah. In the latter, however, there is a closer relationship betweenpriestly and royal figures, as can be seen in the "Branch" prophecies (Zech 3;6) and the two olive trees in Zechariah 4, and in its final form there is "a distinction between the ideal figures o f the future (the Branch and the Priest)and the figures of the historical present (Zerubbabel and Joshua)."47 R. A.Mason, while cautiously affirming evidence of a hope for a Davidic royal renewal in Haggai , suggests that Zeehariah's original vision of a priestly-Toyaldiarchy was modified to embrace the emerging theocracy under thepriests.4 8 Rose rejects a royalist/messianic reading of Hag 2:20-23, but doesaffirm such for Zechariah 1-8, but only in connection with the "Zemah" figure, who is not equated with Zerubbabel. 4 9 Thomas Pola interprets Zechariah 1-6 as a document that highlights how the cult, temple, and priesthoodare given responsibility for preserving the messianic and eschatologicalhope. 3 0 Zerubbabel symbolical ly affirms this by his involvement in the temple building, and Zechariah trumpets it with his declaration that the priesthood was a sign that a future Messiah would one day emerge (Zech 3:8), ahope preserved by the memorial crown in the temple (Zech 6 : 1 4 ) . JohnKessler restricts his focus to the book of Haggai, but emphasizes that thisb o o k affirms the prophetic stream by highlighting the role and success ofthe prophetic institution in the early Persian per iod.5 1 In terms of all three

throughout this paper to transliterate the Hebrew term that has traditionally been translatedas "Branch" in Icr 23:5; 33:15; Zech 3:9; 6:12. The term denotes vegetation or growth, ratherthan the branch of a tree; cf. Rose, Zemah and Zerubbabel.4 6 . K. E. Pomykala, The Davidic Dynasty Tradition in Early Judaism: Its History andSignificance for Messianism (SBLEIL; Atlanta: Scholars, 1995) 45-60.47. Laato, Star Is Rising, 202.48. R. A. Mason, "The Messiah in the Postexilic Old Testament Literature," in Day,ed.. King and Messiah in Israel, 338-64.4 9 . Rose, Zemah and Zerubbabel: W. Rose, "Messianic Expectations," in Yahwism After the Exile: Perspectives on Israelite Religion in the Persian Era (ed. B. Becking andR. Alberts STAR; Assen; Royal Van Gorcum, 2003) 168-85.50 . T. Pola, Das Priestertum bei Sacharja: Historische und traditionsgeschichtlichUntersuchungen zur ruhnachexilischenHerrschererwartung (FAT; Tubingen:). C . B. Mohr(Paul SiebeckJ, 2002); T. Pola, "Form and Meaning in Zechariah 3." in Becking and Albert?,


62/279

MARK | . BODAfunctionary streams, Kessler demonstrates that Haggai affirms the enduring validity of all three streams in the Persian period, even i f this involved a"hermeneutic of equivalents" that achieved continuity with pre-exilic patterns through "functional equivalents often involving theological compromises."" He finds some space between an outright rejection of a royalistreading o f Hag 2:20-23 and the opposite messianic reading o f the same passage. Thus the royal stream is affirmed, even if for now this would involve aprovisional partnership with Persian imperialism.

Similar diversityo f opinion is evidenced in the study o f royal/messianictradition in Zechariah 9 -14 . Some argue for an enduring David ic royal tradition centered on leadership figures;*3 otherssee atrend o f democratization inwhich thissame tradition is now connected to the entire community;5* whilestill otherssee an abandonment o f such traditions in favor o f hope in a DivineWarrior enacting salvation alone." In relation to the enduring role of theprophet in Zechariah 9-14, some scholars have concluded that this corpushails the end o f prophecy.5* In response, others have highlighted the fact thatZechariah 9-14 contains a polemic against false prophecy attached to idolatrous leadership." While there appears to be little explicit focus on the

52. Kessler, Book of Haggai, 27.53. E.g., S. L. Cook. "The Metamorphosis of a Shepherd: The Tradition History ofZechariah 11 :17 +13.7-9

the messiah in the old and new testaments, stanley porter

Documents