Christology of the Old Testament: And a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions Volume I Part 1

Christology of the Old Testament: And a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions.

by Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg.

VOL 1.

PREFACE.

The first edition of the Christology, although the impression was unusually large, had been for years out of print. It was impossible that the work could appear a second time in its original form. The first volume of it--written twenty-five years ago--was a juvenile performance, to which the Author himself had become rather a stranger; and the succeeding volumes required references to, and comparisons with, a large number of publications which subsequently appeared. But for the remodelling and revising which these circ.u.mstances rendered necessary, the Author could not find leisure, because new tasks were ever and anon presenting themselves to him; and these he felt himself, as it were, involuntarily impelled to undertake. But now he is led to believe that he could no longer delay. A powerful inclination urges him to comment on the Gospel of St John; but he thinks that the right to gratify this inclination must first be purchased by him by answering a call which proceeds from the more immediate sphere of his vocation, and which he is the less at liberty to disregard, as manifold facts give indication that the Christology has not yet completed its course. The Author dislikes to return to regions which have been already visited by him. He prefers the opening up to himself of paths which are new. It cost him therefore, at first, no little struggle to devote himself for years to the work of mere revision and emendation; but very soon, even here, he learned the truth of the proverb: "If there be obedience in the heart, love will soon enter."

The arrangement in the present edition differs from that which was adopted in the former. It bears a closer resemblance to that which has been followed in the Commentaries on the Psalms, Revelation, and the Song of Solomon. The work opens with a discussion and commentary on the particular Messianic prophecies, in their historical order and connection. The general investigations with which, in the first edition, the work commenced, are, in the present edition, to appear in the form [Pg 10]of comprehensive treatises, at the close. The latter have thus obtained a more solid foundation; while the objections which might be raised against this arrangement will have force only until the completion of the whole, which, if it please the Lord, will not be very long delayed. The reader will then, of course, be at liberty, before he enters upon the particular portions, to go over, cursorily in the meantime, the closing treatises,--the proper study of which will be appropriate, however, only after he has made himself acquainted with the particular portions of the main body of the work.

The matter of the two sections of the first part has been entirely rewritten. That of the two last parts appears more as a revisal only,--so executed, however, that not a single line has been reprinted without a renewed and careful examination.

The Author shall take care that the new edition shall not exceed the former one in size. The s.p.a.ce intended to be occupied by the enlarged discussions, and by the new investigations, will be gained by omissions. These, however, will be limited to such matters as now clearly appear to be superfluous; _so that the old will not retain any value when compared with the new edition._ The Author, had he pursued his usual method of representation, would have curtailed many points, particularly the history of the interpretation. But the mode of treating the subject which he had previously adopted, is not without its advantages, and has a certain right to be retained. The former character of the work, in so far as the avoidance of everything properly ascetic is concerned, has been, in the present edition, also retained.

Scientific Theology is at present threatened by serious dangers in our Church. Works of an immediately practical interest more and more exclusively occupy the n.o.blest minds, since the problems which present themselves in this field are indeed unfathomable. But the Lord of the Church will take care that an excellent gift, which He has bestowed upon German Christendom especially, shall not, for any length of time, continue to be neglected. If such were to be the case, a more general decay would be gradually brought on; and even those interests would be injured to which at present, with a zeal, n.o.ble indeed, but little thoughtful, solid theological learning is sacrificed.

"Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but to Thy name give glory."

[Pg 11]

THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES IN THE PENTATEUCH.

In the Messianic prophecies contained in Genesis we cannot fail to perceive a remarkable progress in clearness and definiteness.

The first Messianic prediction, which was uttered immediately after the fall of Adam, is also the most indefinite. Opposed to the awful threatening there stands the consolatory promise, that the dominion of sin, and of the evil arising from sin, shall not last for ever, but that the seed of the woman shall, at some future time, overthrow their dreaded conqueror. With the exception of the victory itself, everything is here left undetermined. We are told neither the mode in which it is to be achieved, nor whether it shall be accomplished by some peculiarly gifted race, or family of the progeny of the woman, or by some single individual from among her descendants. There is nothing more than a very slight hint that the latter will be the case.

After the destruction of a whole sinful world, when only Noah with his three sons had been left, the _general_ promise is, to a certain extent, defined. Deliverance is to come from the descendants of Shem; j.a.phet shall become a partaker of this deliverance; Ham is pa.s.sed over in silence.

The prophecy becomes still more definite when the Lord begins to prepare the way for the appearance of this deliverance, by separating from the corrupt ma.s.s a single individual--Abraham--in order to make him the depositary of His revelations. The Lord, moreover, according to the good pleasure of His will, further specifies which of the descendants of Abraham, to the exclusion of all the rest, is to inherit this dignity, with all its accompanying blessings. From among the posterity of Shem, the Lord sets apart first the family of Abraham, then that of [12] Isaac, and lastly that of Jacob, as the family from which salvation is to come. Yet even these predictions, distinct though they be when compared with those previously uttered, are still very indefinite when compared with those subsequently given, and when seen in the light of the actual fulfilment. Even in these, the blessing only is foretold, but not its author. It still remained a matter of uncertainty whether salvation should be extended to all the other nations of the earth through a single individual, or through an entire people descended from the Patriarchs. The former is obscurely indicated; but the mode in which the blessing was to be imparted was left in darkness.

This obscurity is partially removed by the last Messianic prophecy contained in Gen. xlix. 10. After what had previously taken place, we might well expect that the question as to which of Jacob's twelve sons should have the privilege of becoming the source of deliverance to the whole earth, would not be left undetermined; nor could we imagine that Jacob, when, just before his death, and with the spirit of a prophet, he transferred to his sons the promises which had been given to his ancestors and himself, should have pa.s.sed over in silence the most important part of them. On the contrary, by being transferred to Judah, the promise of the Messiah acquires not only the expected limitation, but an unexpected increase of clearness and precision. Here, for the first time, the _person_ of the Messiah is brought before us; here also the _nature_ of His kingdom is more distinctly pointed out by His being represented as the peaceful one, and the peacemaker who will unite, under His mild sceptre, all the nations of the whole earth. Judah is, in this pa.s.sage, placed in the centre of the world's history; he shall obtain dominion, and not lose it until it has been realized to its fullest extent by means of the _s.h.i.+loh_ descending from him, to whom all the nations of the earth shall render a willing obedience.

The subject-matter of the last four books of the Pentateuch would naturally prevent us from expecting that the Messianic prophecies should occupy so prominent a place in them as they do in Genesis. The object contemplated in these books is rather to prepare effectually the way for the Messiah, by laying the theocratic inst.i.tutions on a firm foundation, and by establis.h.i.+ng the law which is intended to produce the knowledge of sin, and [Pg 13]to settle discipline, and by means of which the image of G.o.d is to be impressed on the whole national life.

If the hope of the Messiah was to be realized in a proper manner, and to produce its legitimate effect, it was necessary that the people should first be accustomed to this new order of life; that, for the present, their regards should not be too much drawn away from this their proximate and immediate vocation. Yet, even in the last four books there are not wanting allusions to Him who, as the end of the law, was, from the very beginning, to be set before the eyes of the people.

In Num. xxiv. 17-19, Balaam beholds an Israelitish kingdom raised absolutely above the kingdoms of the world, extending over the whole earth, and all-powerful; and he sees it in the form of an _ideal_ king, with reference to Jacob's prophecy contained in Gen. xlix. 10, according to which the kingdom rising in Judah shall find its full and final realization in the person of one king--the Messiah.

We have here the future King of the Jews saluted from the midst of the heathen world, corresponding to the salutation of the manifested one by the wise men from the East: compare Matt. ii. 1, 2.

From the whole position of Moses in the economy of the revelations of G.o.d, it is, _a priori_, scarcely conceivable that he should have contented himself with communicating a prophecy of the Messiah uttered by a non-Israelite. We expect that, as a prefiguration of the testimony which, in the presence of the chief among the apostles, he bore to the Messiah after He had appeared (compare Matt. xvii. 3), he should, on his own behalf, testify his faith in Him, and direct the people to Him.

This testimony we have in Deut. xviii. 15-19. It is natural that Moses'

attestation should have reference to Christ in so far as He is his ant.i.type. He bears witness to Christ as the true Prophet, as the Mediator of the divine revelation--thus enlarging the slender indications of Christ's prophetical office given in Gen. xlix. 10. A new and important feature of Messianic prophecy is here, for the first time, brought forward; and because of this, the character of the prophecy is that of a germ. Behind the person of the future Prophet, which is as yet _ideal_, the _real_ person of Him who is the Prophet in an absolute sense, is, in the meantime, concealed. It is reserved for the future development [Pg 14]of the prophetic prediction to separate that which is here beheld as still blended in a single picture.

_Finally_, the doctrine of the Divine Mediator of the unseen G.o.d, of the Angel of the Lord, or of the Logos, which forms the theological foundation for the Christology, is already found pervading the Books of Moses.

After this survey, we now proceed to an exposition of the particular pa.s.sages.

THE PROTEVANGELIUM.

As the mission of Christ was rendered necessary by the fall of man, so the first dark intimation of Him was given immediately after the fall.

It is found in the sentence of punishment which was pa.s.sed upon the tempter. Gen. iii. 14, 15. A correct understanding of it, however, can be obtained only after we have ascertained who the tempter was.

It is, in the first place, unquestionable that a real serpent was engaged in the temptation; so that the opinion of those who maintain that the serpent is only a symbolical signification of the evil spirit, cannot be admitted.[1] There must be unity and uniformity in the interpretation of a connected pa.s.sage. But the allegorical interpretation of the _whole_ is rendered impossible by the following considerations:--The pa.s.sage stands in a book of a strictly historical character; it is connected with what follows, where the history of the same pair who, in this section appear as actors, is carried forward; the condition of mankind announced to them in this pa.s.sage as a punishment, actually exists; there is the absence of every indication from which it might be inferred that the author intended to write an allegory, and not a history; there exist various pa.s.sages of the New Testament (_e.g._, 2 Cor. xi. 3; 1 Tim. ii. 13, 14; Rom. v. 12), in which the context of the pa.s.sage before us is referred to as a real historical fact;--and there are the embarra.s.sment, ambiguity, and arbitrariness shown by the allegorical interpreters whenever they attempt to exhibit the truth intended to be conveyed; whereas perspicuity is a characteristic essential to an allegory.--The subtlety of the [Pg 15] serpent, pointed out in chap. iii. 1, is a natural attribute of that animal; and the comparison, in this respect, of the serpent with the other beasts, clearly indicates that a real serpent is spoken of. To such an one the denunciation of the punishment must necessarily, in the first instance, be referred. The last two reasons also exclude the opinion that Satan a.s.sumed merely the semblance of a serpent.

The serpent itself cannot, however, have acted independently; it can only have served as an instrument to the evil spirit. The position which the serpent would occupy, in the event of our considering it as the self-acting, independent seducer, would be in direct contradiction to the position a.s.signed to the animal creation throughout Holy Scripture--especially in the history of the creation--and would break down the limits which, according to it, separate man and beast. By such an a.s.sumption we should be transferred from the Israelitish territory--which is distinguished by the most sharply defined limitations of the respective spheres of G.o.d, angels, men, and beasts--to the heathenish, were these are all mixed up together, and where all the distinctions disappear in the confusion. Such a fact would be altogether isolated and without a parallel in Holy Scripture.

Nor is it legitimate to adduce the argument, that the conditions and circ.u.mstances of the paradisaic period were different from those of subsequent times. It is indeed true, according to the statements contained in the Mosaic account itself, that the animal world of that time was different from that of the present; but whatever, and how great soever, this difference may have been, it had no reference to the fundamental relation of the beasts; and hence we cannot, from it, explain the high intellectual powers with which the serpent appears endowed, and by the abuse of which it succeeded in seducing men. Man, as the only being on earth created in the likeness and image of G.o.d, is, in Gen. i., strictly distinguished from all other living beings, and invested with the dominion over them. Into man alone did G.o.d breathe the breath of life (ii. 7); and, according to ii. 19, 20, man recognises the great gulf which is fixed betwixt him and the world of beasts. This gulf would be entirely filled up, the serpent would altogether step beyond the sphere appointed by the Creator to the world of beasts, if there were no _background_ in Gen. iii. 1-5. _Further_, The words [Pg 16] of the serpent are an effect of wickedness: they raise in man doubts as to the love of G.o.d, in order thereby to seduce him to apostasy, and bring about the execution upon him of the fearful threatening, "On the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." The serpent does not stand in the truth; it speaks lies; it represents to man as the highest good, that which in truth is the highest evil. Such language cannot proceed spontaneously from a being, the creation of which falls within the work of the six days during which the whole animal creation was made. For everything created within this s.p.a.ce of time was _good_, according to the remark constantly repeated in the history of creation. To this we must add the nature of the curse itself, in which a higher reference to an invisible author of the temptation s.h.i.+nes clearly through the lower reference to the visible one; and, further, the remark in iii. 1, "Now the serpent was more subtle," etc., evidently points to something beyond the natural subtlety of the serpent, as the result of which the subsequent words cannot be understood, but behind which we may discover the intimation: let him who reads, understand.

The view, that the serpent was the sole independent agent in this transaction, is thus refuted by internal reasons. It is set aside by the testimony of tradition also. It was an opinion universally prevalent among the Jews, that Satan himself had been active in the temptation of the first man. It is found in _Philo_; and in the Book of Wisdom, ii. 24, it is said, "By the envy of _Satan_, death came into the world." In the later Jewish writings, _Sammael_, the head of the evil spirits, is called ???? ??????? "the old serpent," or simply ???

"serpent," because in the form of a serpent he tempted Eve. (See the pa.s.sage in _Eisenmenger's entdecktes Judenthum_ i. S. 822.) In the sacred books of the Persians also, the agency of Satan in the fall of our first parents is taught. According to the _Zendavesta_ (ed. by _Kleuker_, Th. 3, S. 84, 85), the first men, Mes.h.i.+a and Mes.h.i.+aneh, were created by G.o.d in a state of purity and goodness, and destined for happiness, on condition of humility of heart, obedience to the requirements of the law, and purity in thoughts, words, and actions.

But they were deceived by Ahriman, "this mischievous one who from the beginning sought only to deceive, were induced to rebel against G.o.d, and forfeited their happiness by the eating of fruits." According to the same book (Th. iii. [Pg 17] S. 62), Ahriman in the form of a serpent springs down from heaven to earth; and another evil spirit is called (Th. ii. S. 217) the serpent--_Dew._ (Compare _Rhode_, _die heilige Sage des Zendvolkes_, S. 392.) These facts prove that at the time when the Persian religion received Jewish elements (compare _Stuhr_, _die Religionssysteme des Orientes_, S. 373), and hence, soon after the captivity, the doctrine of Satan's agency in the temptation of our first parents was prevalent among the Jews.

But of decisive weight upon this point is the evidence furnished by the New Testament. We must here above all consider the important testimony supplied by the fact of the history of the first and second Adam being parallel (Rom. v. 12 sqq.; 1 Cor. xv. 45 sqq.),--a testimony, the weight and importance of which have, in modern times, been again pointed out by _Hahn_ in his _Dogmatik_. The necessity of Christ's temptation by the prince of this world, in order that He, by His firm resistance, might deprive him of his dominion over mankind, indicates that Adam was a.s.sailed by the same tempter, and, by being overcome, laid the foundation of that dominion.

Among the express verbal testimonies of the New Testament, we must first consider the declarations of the Lord Himself; and among these the pa.s.sage John viii. 44 requires, above all, to be examined. In that pa.s.sage the Lord says: ?e?? ?? t?? pat??? t?? d?a???? ?st?, ?a? t??

?p????a? t?? pat??? ??? ???ete p??e??. ??e???? ?????p??t???? ?? ?p?

?????, ?a? ?? t? ????e?? ??? ?st??e?? ?t? ??? ?st?? ????e?a ?? a?t?. ?ta?

?a?? t? ?e?d??, ?? t?? ?d??? ?a?e?? ?t? ?e?st?? ?st? ?a? ? pat?? a?t??.

There is, indeed, an element of truth in the opinion, that Satan is in this pa.s.sage called the murderer of men from the beginning, with reference to the murder by Cain--an opinion lately brought forward again by _Nitzsch_, _Lucke_, and others. This is evident from a comparison of 1 John iii. 12, 15, and of Rev. xii. 3. (See my commentary on this pa.s.sage.) Moreover, the words in ver. 40, "Ye seek to kill Me," have a more direct parallelism in Cain's murder of his brother, than in the death which Satan brought upon our first parents; although it is altogether wrong to maintain, as _Lucke_ does, that Satan at that time committed only a _spiritual_ murder, which could not have come under notice. Bodily death also came upon mankind through the [Pg 18] temptation. (Compare Gen. ii. 17, iii. 19; Wisd. ii. 24; Rom.

v. 12.) But when the reference to Cain's slaying his brother is brought forward as the sole, or even as the princ.i.p.al one, we must absolutely reject it. Cain's murder of his brother comes into consideration only as an effect of the evil principle which was introduced into human nature by the first temptation; as, indeed, it appears in the book of Genesis itself as the fruit of the poisonous tree, the planting of which is detailed in chap. iii. The same murderous spirit which impelled Satan to bring man under the dominion of death by the lie, "Ye shall not surely die," was busy in Cain also, and seduced him to slay his pious brother. The following reasons forbid an exclusive reference to the deed of Cain:--1. The murdering of man by Satan is brought into the closest connection with his _lie_. In connection with Cain's deed, however, there was not even the appearance of falsehood; while, in the case before us, lies, false and deceitful promises of high blessings to be attained, and the raising of suspicions against G.o.d, were the very means by which he seduced man, and brought him under the power of sin.

The words of Jesus, when they are understood according to their simple meaning, carry us back to an event in the primitive times, in which murder and the spirit of falsehood went hand in hand. 2. The co-operation of Satan in Cain's deed is not expressly mentioned in Genesis. That there was any such we can with certainty infer, only if this event be viewed in close connection with what Satan did against our first parents,--if, behind the serpent, Satan be concealed.

Whensoever Jesus has to deal with Jews, He does not teach any mysterious doctrines, but makes an open appeal to the events narrated in Scripture. 3. The words, "Ye are of your father the devil," point to the seed of the serpent spoken of in Gen. iii. 15. 4. The words, "From the beginning," direct to an event which happened at the first beginnings of mankind, and in which our first parents took a part.

Whatever this may be, the event in question must be the first in which the devil manifested himself as the murderer of man. Now, as by the Jews of that time the temptation of the first man, in consequence of which death entered the world, was attributed to sin--and this appears not only from what has been already said, but also from a pa.s.sage in the _Sohar Chadash_, referred to by _Tholuck_, in which the wicked are [Pg 19] called "The children of the old serpent which has slain Adam and all who are descended from him"--it is evident that, by "the murderer of men from the beginning," Jesus can mean only the first tempter of men. That the words, "from the beginning," refer to the fall of the first man, is also clearly shown by the parallel pa.s.sages 1 John iii. 8, and Rev. xii. 9, xx. 2. 5. Jesus says: Satan stands not in the truth, does not move in its element, because there is no truth in him.

This points to a well-known event, in which Satan displayed his lying nature; and such is found only in the account of man's fall. 6. Jesus calls Satan not only a liar, but, by way of emphasis, He designates him as the father of lies. But Satan can be designated thus, only with reference to a lie of his which is charged against him by Scripture, and which preceded all lies on earth. Now that is the lie of which we have an account in Gen. iii. 4, 5. The words, "and the father of it,"

correspond with the words, "from the beginning."

Another declaration of our Lord is found in St Matthew xiii. 38: t? d?

??????? e?s?? ?? ???? t?? p?????? (_i.e._, _mali_, _masculinum_, according to _Bengel_), compared with ver. 39: ? d? ?????? ? spe??a? a?t? ?st?? ?

d??????. The children of the wicked one, or of the devil, who are spoken of in this pa.s.sage, are the seed of the serpent who is mentioned in Gen. iii. 15, and to whom allusion is made in the words ? spe??a?

a?ta also. Less incontrovertible is the pa.s.sage in St Matthew xxiii. 33, where the Lord addressed the Pharisees as ?fe??, ?e???ata ???d???.

(Compare Matt. xii. 34, iii. 7.) _Olshausen_, in his commentary on Matt. iii. 7, gives it as his opinion that the serpent designates the _diabolic nature_. But, according to Matt. xii. 34, the point of comparison is only the wickedness (p?????? ??te?), and it is quite sufficient to refer it to Ps. cxl. 4, where David says of the future enemies of his dynasty and family foreseen by him, "They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent; adders' poison is under their lips"

(compare also Ps. lviii. 5; Deut. x.x.xii. 33; Isa. lix. 5),--a pa.s.sage to which special allusion is made in the words, p?? d??as?e ??a??

?a?e??, Matt. xii. 34, and in the connection of serpents with vipers, which would be strange when referred to the history of the fall of the first man.

Let us now turn from the Lord to His disciples. Just as is done in the account of the transaction itself, Paul, in 2 Cor. [Pg 20] xi. 3 (?? ?

?f?? ??a? ???p?t?se? ?? t? pa??????? a?t??), places the invisible cause of the temptation in the background, and speaks of the visible one only. But that behind the serpent he beholds Satan, appears immediately from ver. 14 and 15: ?a? ?? ?a?ast??? a?t?? ??? ? Sata???

etas??at??eta? e?? ???e??? f?t??. ?? ??a ??? e? ?a? ?? d??????? a?t??

etas??at????ta? ?? d??????? d??a??s????, where the etas??at??eta? is explained by _Bengel_: "_Transformat se: Praesens, i.e., solet se transformare. Fecit id jam in Paradiso._" The Apostle alludes to an event narrated in Scripture, where Satan shows himself in this character. But such an occurrence is not found anywhere else than in Gen. iii. 4, 5, the only pa.s.sage where Satan represents himself as the friend and saviour of men. We have here the explanation of the ???p?t?se? in ver. 3.--In Rom. xvi. 20, the words, ? d? Te?? t?? e??????

s??t???e? t?? Sata??? ?p? t??? p?da? ???, contain an allusion to Gen.

iii. 15, too plain to be mistaken. The Apostle recognises, in the promise of the victory over the serpent given there, a pledge of the victory over Satan. The words of Paul to Elymas in Acts xiii. 10, "O thou child of the devil," likewise contain a distinct reference to that which, in the history of man's fall, is written concerning the serpent.

In the charge of subtlety, mischief, and enmity to all righteousness which he brings against him, there is an evident allusion to Genesis.

In 1 John iii. 8, ? p???? t?? ?a?t?a?, ?? t?? d?a???? ?st??? ?t? ?p?