THAT THE JEWISH PROPHECIES CONFIRM THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY.
(_A._) ISAIAH'S PROPHECY OF THE LORD'S SERVANT.
(1.) The historical agreement, very striking.
(2.) The doctrinal agreement, equally so.
(3.) The modern Jewish interpretation, quite untenable.
(_B._) THE PSALM OF THE CRUCIFIXION.
(1.) Its close agreement, all through.
(2.) Two objections, unimportant.
(_C._) THE DIVINITY OF THE MESSIAH.
At least three prophecies of this; it is also involved in some
hints as to the Doctrine of the Trinity.
(_D._) CONCLUSION.
Why are not the prophecies plainer? Cumulative nature
of the evidence.
We propose to consider in this chapter what is called the argument
from _Prophecy_, using the word, as we did in Chapter XI., in the
sense of _prediction_. Now it is a remarkable and undisputed fact
that for many centuries before the time of Christ, it was foretold
that a member of the Jewish nation--small and insignificant though
it was--should be a blessing _to all mankind_. This promise is
recorded as having been made both to Abraham, to Isaac, and to
Jacob;[365] and as a matter of fact, Christianity was founded by a
Jew, and has undoubtedly been a blessing to the human race. This is
at least a remarkable coincidence. And as we proceed in the Old
Testament, the statements about this future Messiah become clearer
and fuller, till at last, in the Prophets, we find whole chapters
referring to Him, which Christians assert were fulfilled in Christ.
[Footnote 365: Gen. 22. 18; 26. 4; 28.14.]
This argument is plainly of the utmost importance. Fortunately it is
much simplified by the question of _dates_ being altogether
excluded. As a rule, the most important point in an alleged prophecy
is to show that it was written before its fulfilment. But here this
is undisputed, since everyone admits that the whole of the Old
Testament, except some of the apocryphal books, was written before
the time of Christ. And as the writings have been preserved by the
Jews themselves, who are opposed to the claims of Christianity, we
may be sure that not a single alteration in its favour has been made
anywhere.
We will now examine a few of the strongest prophecies, avoiding all
those that were only fulfilled in a figurative, or spiritual sense;
and selecting whole passages rather than single texts. For though
many of these latter are very applicable to Christ, they might also
be applicable to someone else. So we will first discuss somewhat
fully Isaiah's prophecy of the Lord's Servant, and the Psalm of the
Crucifixion; and then examine more briefly a group of prophecies
referring to the Divinity of the Messiah.
(_A._) ISAIAH'S PROPHECY OF THE LORD'S SERVANT (52. 13-53. 12).
It may be pointed out at starting that no one denies the antiquity
of the passage, even if it was not written by Isaiah. And it forms a
complete whole, closely connected together and not mixed up with any
other subject. So in regard to its fulfilment, most of the details
mentioned occurred within a few hours. We will consider first the
historical, and then the doctrinal agreement.
(1.) _The Historical Agreement._
With regard to this, the following is the translation from the
Revised Version, together with the corresponding events. It will be
observed that the sufferings of the Servant are usually expressed in
the past tense, and his triumph in the future, the prophet placing
himself, as it were, between the two. But the Hebrew tenses are
rather uncertain, and what is translated as _past_ in the Revised
Version is translated as _future_ in the Authorised (_e.g._, 53. 2).
52. 13. 'Behold, my servant shall
deal wisely, he shall be exalted
and lifted up, and shall be
very high.
The excellence of Christ's
teaching and conduct is now
generally admitted; while as to
His exalted position, He is worshipped
by millions of men.
14. 'Like as many were astonied
at thee (his visage was so
marred more than any man, and
his form more than the sons of
men) so shall he sprinkle many
nations;
Yet at the time of His death,
which was public so that _many_
saw Him, the cruel treatment He
had received must have terribly
disfigured His face and body.
15. 'Kings shall shut their
mouths at him: for that which
had not been told them shall
they see; and that which they had
not heard shall they understand.
But now even Kings are silent
with reverence,[366] when contemplating
such a wonderful life.
[Footnote 366: _Comp._ Job 29. 9.]
53. 1. 'Who hath believed our
report?
'and to whom hath the arm
of the Lord been revealed?
Indeed what the prophet is
about to declare, is so marvellous
that it can scarcely be believed.
The Arm of the Lord evidently
means some instrument,
or Person, which God uses for
His work, as a man might use
his arm.[367] And here it must be
a _Person_, from the following
words, 'For _he_ grew up,' etc. It
is thus a most suitable term for
the Messiah, who was to be
recognised by hardly anyone.
2. 'For he grew up before him
as a tender plant, and as a root
out of a dry ground:
he hath no form nor comeliness;
and when we see him, there is no
beauty that we should desire
him.
This was because He lived at a
place (Nazareth) which was always
regarded as _dry ground_ so
far as anything good was concerned.[368]
Moreover, His appearance was
humble, and when at His trial,
Pilate presented Him to the
people, they did not desire Him.
3. 'He was despised, and rejected
of men; a man of sorrows,
and acquainted with grief: and
as one from whom men hide their
face he was despised, and we
esteemed him not.
But they at once rejected Him
as they had done often before.
4. 'Surely he hath borne our
griefs, and carried our sorrows:
yet we did esteem him stricken,
smitten of God, and afflicted.
While His life was not only one
of grief and sorrow, but such a
death seemed to show that He
was accursed of God, for the
Jews so regarded anyone who
was crucified.[369]
5. 'But he was wounded for
our transgressions, he was bruised
for our iniquities: the chastisement
of our peace was upon him;
and with his stripes we are healed.
The scourging and other ill-treatment
is here referred to;
including probably the nails,
and spear, for the word translated
_wounded_ is literally _pierced_.
[Footnote 367: _Comp._ Isa. 40. 10; 51. 9.]
[Footnote 368: John 1. 46.]
[Footnote 369: Deut. 21. 23; Gal. 3. 13.]
6. 'All we like sheep have
gone astray; we have turned
every one to his own way; and
the Lord hath laid on him the
iniquity of us all.
7. 'He was oppressed, yet he
humbled himself and opened not
his mouth; as a lamb that is
led to the slaughter, and as a
sheep that before her shearers is
dumb; yea, he opened not his
mouth.
Christ, who is sometimes called
the Lamb of God, not only bore
His ill-treatment patiently, but
refused to plead at either of His
trials (the verse repeats twice _He
opened not His mouth_) to the
utter astonishment of His judges.[370]
8. 'By oppression and judgment
he was taken away; and as
for his generation, who among
them considered that he was cut
off out of the land of the living?
for the transgression of my
people was he stricken.
He was not killed accidentally,
or by the mob, but had a
judicial trial; and was most
unjustly condemned. While
few, if any, of His contemporaries
understood the real meaning
of His death.
9. 'And they made his grave
with the wicked, and with the
rich in his death (i.e., _when he
was dead_. Comp. Ps. 6. 8);
although he had done no violence,
neither was any deceit in
his mouth.
He was appointed to die between
two robbers, and would
doubtless have been buried with
them, had not Joseph of Arimathea
intervened; when, in
strange contrast with His ignominious
death, He was honourably
buried, with costly spices,
and in a rich man's tomb.
Although His judge repeatedly
declared that He was innocent.
10. 'Yet it pleased the Lord
to bruise him; he hath put him
to grief: when thou shalt make
his soul an offering for sin, he
shall see his seed, he shall prolong
his days, and the pleasure
of the Lord shall prosper in his
hand.
Yet after His death He was to
see His seed, and _prolong His
days_, _i.e._, rise again from the
dead. The word _seed_ cannot
mean here, actual children,[371] since
He was to obtain them by His
death. But it may well refer to
the disciples, whom Christ saw
after His Resurrection, and called
His _children_.[372]
[Footnote 370: Matt. 26. 62; 27. 14.]
[Footnote 371: _Comp._ Isa. 1. 4.]
[Footnote 372: Mark 10. 24; John 21. 5.]
11. 'He shall see of the travail
of his soul, and shall be satisfied:
by his knowledge shall my righteous
servant justify many: and
he shall bear their iniquities.
And this is confirmed by their
being spoken of as _the travail of
His soul_, not body. While the
latter expression also implies
that He had had some intense
mental struggle comparable to
the bodily pains of childbirth;
which is very suitable to His
mental agony in the Garden and
on the Cross.
12. 'Therefore will I divide
him a portion with the great,
and he shall divide the spoil with
the strong;
because he poured out his soul
unto death,
and was numbered with the
transgressors: yet he bare the
sin of many, and made intercession
for the transgressors.'
His subsequent triumph in
the Christian Church is here alluded
to.
This implies that His sufferings
were of some duration; and is thus
very appropriate to a lingering
death like crucifixion.
While the closing words exactly
agree with His dying a
shameful death between two robbers;
yet praying for His murderers,
'Father, forgive them.'
It seems hardly necessary to insist on the agreement shown above; it
is indisputable. The sufferings and the triumph of the Lord's
Servant are foretold with equal confidence and with equal clearness,
though they might well have seemed incompatible.
(2.) _The Doctrinal Agreement._
But the significance of the passage does not depend on these
prophecies alone, though they are sufficiently remarkable, but on
the _meaning_ which the writer assigns to the great tragedy. It is
the Christian doctrine concerning Christ's death, and not merely the
events attending it, which is here insisted on. This will be best
shown by adopting the previous method of parallel columns, showing
in the first the six chief points in the Christian doctrine, and in
the other the prophet's words corresponding to them.
All mankind are sinners.
'All we like sheep have gone
astray.'
Christ alone was sinless.
'My righteous servant.'
'He had done no violence,
neither was any deceit in his
mouth.'
He suffered not for His own
sins, but for those of others.
Nor was this the mere accidental
suffering of an innocent man for
a guilty one; it was a great
work of _atonement_, an offering
for sin. This is the central
feature of the Christian doctrine,
and it is asserted over and over
again in the prophecy, which is
above all that of a _Saviour_.
'Surely he hath borne our
griefs, and carried our sorrows.'
'He was wounded for our
transgressions, he was bruised
for our iniquities; the chastisement
of (_i.e._, which procured)
our peace was upon him; and
with his stripes we are healed.'
'The Lord hath laid on him
the iniquity of us all.'
'For the transgression of my
people was he stricken.'
'Thou shalt make his soul an
offering for sin.'
'He shall bear their iniquities.'
'He bare the sin of many.'
And this Atonement was the
fulfilment of the old Jewish
sacrifices; especially that of the
Paschal Lamb; so there was a
special fitness in Christ's being
put to death at the time of the
Passover.
This is shown by the language
employed, the _offering for sin_
being the same word as that used
for the old _guilt-offering_.[373] And
the curious expression _So shall he
sprinkle many nations_ evidently
refers to the sprinkling of the
blood in the Jewish sacrifices, as
the same word is used, and
means cleansing them from sin.[374]
Yet it availed not only for
the Jews, but for all mankind.
The _many nations_ must include
Gentiles as well as Jews.
Lastly, Christ's sacrifice was
_voluntary_; He freely laid down
'He poured out his soul unto
death,' implies that the act was
[Footnote 373: _E.g._, Lev. 7. 1.]
[Footnote 374: _E.g._, Lev. 16. 19.]
His life, no one took it from Him
(John 10. 18).
_voluntary_, and this is rendered
still clearer from the context;
for it was _because_ He did this that
He was to divide the spoil, etc.
And the words _He humbled Himself_,
also imply that the humiliation
was voluntary.
All this, it is plain, exactly suits the Christ in whom Christians
believe; and it does not and cannot suit anyone else, since several
of the Christian doctrines are quite unique, and do not occur in the
Jewish or any other religion. This is indeed so striking, that if
anyone acquainted with Christianity, but unacquainted with Isaiah,
came across the passage for the first time, he would probably refer
it to one of St. Paul's Epistles. And every word of it might be
found there with perfect fitness.
(3.) _The modern Jewish interpretation._
Now, what can be said on the other side? Many of the ancient Jews
interpreted the passage as referring to their future Messiah;[375]
but the modern Jews (and most critics who disbelieve in prophecy)
refer it to the Jewish nation, or to the religious part of it, which
they say is here personified as a single man, the Servant of the
Lord. And it must of course be admitted that Isaiah does frequently
speak of the Jews as God's _servant_ (_e.g._, 'But thou Israel, my
servant, and Jacob whom I have chosen,')[376] though he nowhere else
uses the term 'my _righteous_ servant,' which he does here, and
which would have been inapplicable to the nation.
[Footnote 375: References are given in Edersheim's 'Life and Times
of Jesus the Messiah,' 1901, vol. ii., p. 727.]
[Footnote 376: Isa. 41. 8.]
But it is important to remember that this prophecy does not stand
alone, and a little before, we read in a similar passage, 'It is too
light a thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the
tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also
give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my
salvation unto the end of the earth. Thus saith the Lord, the
Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to
him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers: Kings shall
see and arise; princes, and they shall worship.'[377]
[Footnote 377: Isa. 49. 6-7; comp. 42. 1-6.]
Here it will be noticed the Lord's _servant_ is clearly
distinguished from both Jacob and Israel, and evidently means the
Messiah. While His bringing salvation to the Gentiles, as well as to
the Jews; His humiliation in being despised by men and hated by the
Jewish nation; and His subsequent triumph, even Kings submitting
themselves to Him; are all alluded to, much as they are in the
present passage.
No doubt there is a difficulty in the prophet thus passing from one
meaning of the word _servant_ to another (especially, in a closely
connected passage),[378] and various attempts have been made to
explain it; but it does not alter the fact that he does so. Perhaps
the best explanation is that Israel was _intended_ to be God's
Servant, but owing to their sins became unfitted; when God promised
in the future to raise up a _righteous_ servant, who should do all
His pleasure and atone for Israel's failure. And, it may be added,
the term _Servant_ is applied to the Messiah both by Ezekiel and
Zechariah, as well as in the New Testament.[379]
[Footnote 378: Isa. 49. 3, 5.]
[Footnote 379: Ezek. 34. 23; Zech. 3. 8; Acts 3. 13 (R.V.).]
Moreover, the Jewish interpretation not only leaves all the details
of the prophecy unexplained and inexplicable, but ignores its very
essence, which, as before said, is the atoning character of the
sufferings. No one can say that the sufferings of the Jews were
voluntary, or that they were not for their own sins, but for those
of other people, which were in consequence atoned for. Or, to put
the argument in other words, if the _He_ refers to the Jewish
nation, to whom does the _our_ refer in such sentences as _He was
wounded for our transgressions_? While v. 8 expressly says that the
Jews (God's people) were not the sufferers, but those for whom He
suffered. (For the transgression of _my people_ was _he_ stricken.)
This interpretation then is hopelessly untenable, and the passage
either means what Christians assert, or it means nothing.
In conclusion, it must be again pointed out that all these minute
historical details attending Christ's death, and all these
remarkable Christian doctrines concerning it, are all found within
fifteen verses of a writing many centuries older than the time of
Christ. It would be hard to over-estimate the great improbability of
all this being due to chance; indeed, such a conclusion seems
incredible.
(_B._) THE PSALM OF THE CRUCIFIXION (Ps. 22).[380]
[Footnote 380: This is discussed more fully in an article in the
_Churchman_, April, 1912, by the present writer.]
We pass on now to another most remarkable prophecy; for this
well-known Psalm describes what can only be regarded as a
_crucifixion_. The decisive verse is of course, _They pierced my
hands and my feet_; but even apart from this, the various sufferings
described cannot all be endured in any other form of death, such as
stoning or beheading. And the Psalm agrees with the Death of Christ,
both in its numerous details, and in its whole scope and meaning. We
will therefore consider this close agreement first, and then some of
the objections.
(1.) _Its close agreement._
We need not quote the Psalm, as it is so well known; but will point
out the agreement verse by verse.
Ver. 1. His feeling forsaken by God, and using these actual
words: 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?'
2. as well as praying for deliverance during the previous
night;
3. though in spite of His sufferings, He casts no reproach upon
God.
4. His belonging to God's chosen people, the Jews, so that He
could speak of _our_ fathers;
5. who had so often been helped by God before.
6. His pitiable condition in being exposed to the scorn and
reproach of men, and despised by the people.
7. His being lifted up to die in public, so that those who
passed by could see Him; and the way in which they mocked Him,
shaking their heads, etc.
8. The exact words they used: _He trusted on the Lord that He
would deliver him, let Him deliver him seeing He delighteth in
him_ (margin). These words show that the speakers themselves
were Jews, and that He was thus put to death among His own
nation. And the last clause can only be meant ironically in the
sense that the Sufferer _claimed_ that God delighted in him,
claimed, that is, in some special sense to be beloved by God.
9. And, as a matter of fact, God had always watched over Him,
and had saved Him in His infancy from being slain by Herod.
10. And in return His whole life had been dedicated to God; so
that He could say that God had been _His_ God, even from His
birth.
11. His being abandoned by His disciples, and left without a
helper;
12. though surrounded by His enemies, described as _bulls of
Bashan_. This curious term is used elsewhere for the unjust
rulers of the people,[381] and was therefore very applicable to
the chief priests and rulers, who had so unjustly condemned
Him, and now stood round the Cross reviling Him.
[Footnote 381: Amos. 4. 1.]
13. And they continually insulted Him, _gaping with the mouth_
being a common expression of contempt;[382] _ravening_
appropriate to the way in which they had thirsted for His blood
before Pilate; and _roaring_ to the great noise and tumult made
at the time.
[Footnote 382: _E.g._, Job 16. 10.]
14. His side being pierced, so that there poured out a quantity
of watery fluid (mixed with clots of blood), the probable cause
of this--the rupture of the heart[383]--being also hinted at;
while His bones were nearly out of joint, through the weight of
the suspended Body.
[Footnote 383: See 'The Physical Cause of the Death of Christ,'
by Dr. Symes Thompson, 1904.]
15. His suffering extreme weakness, and extreme thirst,
immediately before His death.[384]
[Footnote 384: Lam. 4. 4; John 19. 28-30.]
16. His being crucified (_i.e._, His hands and feet being
pierced), the men who did this being here called _dogs_. They
seem to have been a special set of men, different from the Jews
who had before been mocking Him. And as this was the very term
used by Christ Himself for the Gentiles, in distinction to the
Jews,[385] it was peculiarly appropriate to the Gentile (Roman)
soldiers who crucified Him.
[Footnote 385: Matt. 15. 26.]
17. And they also exposed and stretched out His Body, so that
the bones stood out in relief. And they then stood watching
Him;
18. and divided His garments among them, casting lots for one
of them.
19. Then follows a short prayer.
20. The term _sword_, like the _dog_, the _lion's mouth_, and
the _wild oxen_, need not be pressed literally; but may be used
here (as in other places)[386] for any violent death. And in
the New Testament it seems employed for all punishments,
including probably a death by crucifixion (St. Peter's).[387]
[Footnote 386: _Comp._ 2 Sam. 11. 24; 12. 9.]
[Footnote 387: Rom. 13. 4; Matt. 26. 52.]
21. Yet in spite of His troubles, and even death, He feels sure
of deliverance.
22. And now the strain suddenly changes, the Sufferer is
restored to life and freedom and at once declares God's name
unto His brethren. And this exactly agrees with Christ's now
declaring for the first time God's complete _Name_ of, Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, unto His _brethren_, as He calls them, the
Apostles.[388] While if we identify this appearance with that
to the five hundred, it was literally _in the midst of the
congregation_--in the presence, that is, of the first large
Christian assembly.
[Footnote 388: Matt. 28. 10, 19.]
23. Moreover, His deliverance is of world-wide significance,
and great blessings are to follow from it. These commence with
the Jews, who were to _praise_ and glorify God; though with a
strange feeling of _awe_ and fear; all of which was exactly
fulfilled.[389]
[Footnote 389: Acts 2. 43-47.]
24. And the blessings are somehow connected with God's not
having despised, but having accepted, His sufferings.
25. And they include a reference to some _vows_ (meaning
uncertain);
26. and to a wonderful feast generally thought to refer to the
Holy Communion.
27. And the blessings then extend to the Gentile nations also,
even to the most distant parts of the world, who are now to
become worshippers of the true God, Jehovah. And, as a matter
of fact, Christians exist in all known countries, and wherever
there are Christians, Jehovah is worshipped.
28. To Whom the whole earth, both the Jewish kingdom and the
Gentile nations, really belongs.
29. And to Whom everyone will eventually bow down.
30. After this we read of a _seed_ serving Him, probably used
here, as in Isaiah, for disciples, each generation of whom is
to tell of this wonderful deliverance to the next. And this
they have been doing for eighteen centuries.
31. And so they will continue doing to generations that are yet
unborn. While the closing words, _He hath done it_ (R.V.) are
often taken as referring to the whole Psalm, meaning that the
work of suffering and atonement was now complete, _It is
done_;[390] and they would thus correspond to Christ's closing
words on the Cross, _It it finished_.
[Footnote 390: Hengstenberg, Commentary on Psalms, 1867, vol.
i., 396.]
Everyone must admit that the agreement all through is very
remarkable; though there are two slight objections.
(2.) _Two objections._
The first is that there is nothing to show that the writer meant the
Psalm to refer to the Messiah at all, though, strange to say, some
of the Jews so interpreted it;[391] therefore if there is an
agreement, it is at most only a chance coincidence. But the idea of
_all_ these coincidences being due to chance is most improbable. And
there certainly is some indication that it refers to the Messiah,
since, as we have seen, it leads up to the conversion of the
Gentiles, which the other Jewish prophets always associate with the
times of the Messiah.
[Footnote 391: Edersheim, 1901, vol. ii., 713.]
Moreover, if the Psalm does not refer to Christ, it is difficult to
see to whom it does refer, since it is quite inapplicable to David,
or Hezekiah, or anyone else at that time; as crucifixion was not a
Jewish punishment, though dead bodies were sometimes hung on trees.
Yet, as just said, verses 7-8 show that the Sufferer was put to
death among his own nation. This strange anomaly of a Jew being put
to death among Jews, though not in the Jewish manner by stoning, but
by crucifixion, exactly suits the time of Christ, when Judæa was a
Roman province, and crucifixion a Roman punishment.
Many of the _details_ also are quite inapplicable. David, for
instance, never had his garments divided among his enemies; yet
(even apart from our Gospels) there can be little doubt that the
garments of Christ were so divided, as the clothes of a prisoner
were usually taken by the guard who executed him.
And any such reference (to David, etc.) is rendered still more
improbable, because the sufferer appears to have no sense of _sin_,
and never laments his own wickedness, as the writers so frequently
do when speaking about themselves. And here also the Psalm is
entirely applicable to Christ, since (as we shall see in the next
chapter) His sinlessness was a striking feature in His character.
Nor again did the deliverance of David in any way lead to the
_conversion of the Gentiles_, which, as just said, is the grand
climax of the Psalm, and excludes all other interpretations.
But in any case this objection (which is also made to other Old
Testament prophecies) cannot be maintained; for _who_, we must ask,
was their real author? Was it the human prophet, or was it God Who
inspired the prophet to write as he did? And the prophets themselves
emphatically declared that it was the latter. The word of the Lord
came unto them, or a vision was granted unto them, and they had to
proclaim it, whether they liked it or not. In fact, as St. Matthew
says, it was not really the prophet who spoke, but God, who spoke
_through the prophet_.[392] There is thus no reason for thinking
that they either knew, or thought they knew, the whole meaning of
their prophecies; and the objection may be dismissed at once.
[Footnote 392: _E.g._, Matt. 1. 22.]
The second objection is, that some of the events fulfilling this,
and other Old Testament prophecies, never occurred, but were
purposely invented. This, however, destroys altogether the moral
character of the Evangelists, who are supposed to tell deliberate
falsehoods, in order to get a pretended fulfilment of an old
prophecy. And the difficulty of admitting this is very great.
Moreover, such explanations can only apply to a very few cases;
since, as a rule, the events occurred in _public_, and must
therefore have been well known at the time.
And even in those cases where the event was so trivial, that it
might possibly have been invented, such an explanation is often
untenable. Take, for example, the manner in which Christ on the
cross was mocked by His enemies, who said, 'He trusted in God, let
him deliver him now if he desireth him.'[393] A more probable
incident under the circumstances can scarcely be imagined, the chief
priests quoting the familiar language (just as men sometimes quote
the Bible now) without thinking of its real significance. But,
supposing the words were never uttered, is it conceivable that the
Evangelist (or anyone else) would have invented them in order to get
a pretended fulfilment of this Psalm, where the Crucified One is
mocked with almost identical words; yet have never pointed out the
fulfilment himself, but have trusted to the chance of his readers
discovering it?
[Footnote 393: Matt. 27. 43.]
Neither of these objections, then, is of much importance; while the
agreement of the Psalm with the events attending the death and
Resurrection of Christ, seems, as in the previous case, to be far
too exact to be accidental.
(_C._) THE DIVINITY OF THE MESSIAH.
Our last example shall be of a different kind from the others. It is
that the Old Testament contains several passages which show that the
future Messiah was to be not only Superhuman, but Divine. And
considering the strong Monotheism of the Jews this is very
remarkable. The following are three of the most important:--
'For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the
government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called
Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of
Peace.'[394] Here we have a plain statement of the Divinity of One
Who should be born a child. The two words translated _Mighty God_
are incapable of any other translation, and no other is suggested
for them in the margin of either the Authorised or Revised Version;
while the same two words occur in the next chapter, where they
plainly mean _Mighty God_ and nothing else. Moreover, the term
_Everlasting Father_ is literally _Father of Eternity_ (see margin)
and means the Eternal One. This is another divine title, and does
not conflict with the Christian doctrine that it was the Son, and
not the Father, Who became Incarnate. While the following words,
that of the increase of His government _there shall be no end_, and
that it should be established _for ever_, also point to a Divine
Ruler, in spite of the reference to David's throne. And it is
significant that a few verses before it is implied that the Ministry
of this future Messiah should commence in the land of Zebulon, and
Naphtali, by the Sea of Galilee; where, as a matter of fact,
Christ's Ministry did commence.
[Footnote 394: Isa. 9. 6; 10. 21; 9. 1-2.]
'But thou, Bethlehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the
thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto me that is
to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from
everlasting.'[395] Here we have a prophecy of the birth of One who
had existed _from everlasting_; thus showing the Pre-existence and
apparent Divinity of the Messiah, who was to be born at Bethlehem,
where, again, as a matter of fact, Christ actually was born.
[Footnote 395: Mic. 5. 2.]
'Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is
my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts.'[396] The word translated
_fellow_ is only found elsewhere in Leviticus, where it is usually
translated _neighbour_, and always implies an equality between the
two persons.[397] Thus God speaks of the Shepherd who was to be
slain with the sword (a term, as before said, used for any violent
death), as equal with Himself, and yet at the same time Man; so no
one but a Messiah who is both God and Man--_Fellow-God_ as well as
_fellow-man_--can satisfy the language.
[Footnote 396: Zech. 13. 7.]
[Footnote 397: Lev. 6. 2; 18. 20; 19. 11, 15, 17; 24. 19; 25. 14,
15, 17.]
And here again the reference to Christ is confirmed by the fact that
several incidents in His Passion are alluded to, in some of which
His Divinity is likewise asserted. The most important are the way in
which He (the Just Saviour) rode into Jerusalem on an ass; and the
rejoicing with which He was received, when the people welcomed Him
as their _King_. And the fact that He (the Lord Jehovah) should be
sold for thirty pieces of silver, the money being cast down in the
House of the Lord, and afterwards given to the potter; and also that
He (again the Lord Jehovah) should be pierced.[398] These are, it is
true, expressed in figurative language, and often mixed up with
other subjects; so no instance by itself, affords a strong argument.
But still their all occurring so close together, and all leading up
to the violent death of a _man_, who was yet the _fellow_, or
_equal_, with God, can scarcely be accidental. While the prophecy,
like so many others, ends with the conversion of the Gentiles, the
Lord Jehovah being recognised as King over all the earth; which
seems to place the Messianic character beyond dispute.
[Footnote 398: Zech. 9. 9; 11. 12-13; 12. 10; 14. 9; Luke 19.
37-38.]
The Divinity of the Messiah is also involved in some hints which
occur in the Old Testament as to the doctrine of the _Trinity_. For
instance, the Hebrew word for God, _Elohim_, is a plural word,
though, strange to say, it generally takes a singular adjective, and
verb. Thus if we tried to represent it in English, the first verse
of the Bible would read, 'In the beginning the Gods, He created the
heaven and the earth.' Attempts have of course been made to reduce
the significance of this by pointing out that a few other Hebrew
words, such as _lord_ and _master_, sometimes do the same; or by
regarding it as a survival from some previous polytheistic religion;
or else as being what is called the plural of Majesty, a sort of
royal _We_. This, however, does not seem to have been in use in
early times, and never occurs in the Bible, where kings always speak
of themselves in the singular.[399] Anyhow it is very remarkable
that the Jews should have used a plural word for God with a singular
verb; especially as the same word, when used of false gods, takes a
plural verb.
[Footnote 399: _E.g._, Gen. 41. 41; Ezra 6. 12; 7. 21; Dan. 4. 6.]
Moreover, God is at times represented as speaking in the
plural,[400] saying, for instance, _Let us make man in our image_,
as if consulting with other Divine Persons; since it is obvious that
the expression cannot refer to angels, who are themselves created,
and not fellow Creators. Yet just afterwards we read, 'God created
man in _his_ own image,' thus implying that there is still but one
God. Another and even more remarkable expression is, _Behold, the
man is become as one of us_. This cannot possibly be the plural of
Majesty; for though a king might speak of himself as _We_ or _Us_,
no king ever spoke of himself as _one of Us_. Such an expression can
only be used when there are other persons of similar rank with the
speaker; therefore when used by God, it shows conclusively that
there are other Divine Persons. So again when God says, 'Whom shall
_I_ send, and who will go for _us_?' it implies that He is both one,
and more than one; which the previous _thrice_ Holy, points to as
being a Trinity.[401] The existence of such passages seems to
require some explanation, and Christianity alone can explain them.
[Footnote 400: Gen. 1. 26; 3. 22; 11. 7.]
[Footnote 401: Isa. 6. 8.]
(_D._) CONCLUSION.
Before concluding this chapter there is still one objection to be
considered. Why, it is said, if these prophecies really refer to
Christ, are they not plainer? Surely if God wished to foretell the
future, He would have done it better than this: and a few words
added here and there would have made the reference to Christ
indisputable. No doubt they would; but possibly God did not wish to
make the reference indisputable. Moreover, if the prophecies had
been plainer, they might have prevented their own fulfilment. Had
the Jews known for certain that Christ was their Messiah, they
could scarcely have crucified Him; and it seems to many that the
prophecies are already about as plain as they could be without doing
this. The important point, however, is not whether the prophecies
might not have been plainer, but whether they are not already too
plain to be accidental.
Lastly, we must notice the cumulative nature of the evidence. We
have only examined a few instances, but, as said before, Messianic
prophecies of some kind more or less distinct, occur at intervals
all through the Old Testament. And though some of those commonly
brought forward seem weak and fanciful, there are numbers of others
which are not. And here, as elsewhere, this has a double bearing on
the argument.
In the first place, it does not at all increase the difficulty of
the _Christian_ interpretation; for twenty prophecies are
practically no more difficult to admit than two. Indeed, the fact
that instead of being a few isolated examples, they form a complete
series, rather lessens the difficulty than otherwise.
On the other hand, it greatly increases the difficulty of _any
other_ interpretation; for twenty prophecies are far more difficult
to deny than two. If one is explained as a lucky coincidence, it
will not account for the next; if that is got rid of by some
unnatural interpretation of the words, it will not account for the
third, and so on indefinitely. The difficulties are thus not only
great in themselves, but are all cumulative; and hence together they
seem insuperable. Anyhow, it is clear that these Prophecies form
another strong argument in favour of Christianity.