The Jewish Annotated New Testament (148 page)

A well-known example: Various Qumran texts downplay the division of people in this world between priests and lay Israelites, substituting that between Sons of Light and Sons of Darkness, which are quite universalistic categories. There was serious tension between that view and the sect’s basic priestly stance. If—as is often assumed, for good reason—there is a link between John the Baptist and Qumran, he was someone who took the sect’s universalistic message to its logical conclusion, preaching a message of salvation “for all flesh” (Luke, later than Mark, extends the quotation from Isaiah 40 through v. 5) and belittling the importance of Jewish descent, arguing that God can turn even stones into sons of Abraham (Lk 3.6–8).

CONCLUSION

It is true that apart from the nature vs. choice issue there were other issues and influences at work, and that all historical personalities have their own special character. Nevertheless, it seems that the successful rise of Christianity was based on the transformation of a leader, Jesus of Nazareth—who came from an environment favorable to a nationalist movement and whom Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, took to be the leader of such a movement—into the personification of a universalist mission aimed at all of humankind. The reader of this volume is left to ponder how the failure of a movement to restore Israel became instead a victory over death, and how the mission associated with Jesus changed from one devoted to national salvation to one focused on individual salvation.

MESSIANIC MOVEMENTS

David B. Levenson

The followers of Jesus of Nazareth founded an early Jewish movement centered on a charismatic figure who offered hope for an ideal future in which the power of the God of Israel would be dramatically manifested and universally recognized. The movement they began was not, however, the only one of its kind. Other such movements, dating from the first century BCE to the second century CE, promised a sudden end of the present age, which they regarded as evil and corrupt, and the inauguration of a new age in which God’s people would see the wicked punished and the world ruled in righteousness.

THE MESSIAH IN EARLY JEWISH THOUGHT

The evidence for these movements is sparse and mostly derives from unsympathetic witnesses. The concept of a divinely appointed deliverer, however, is widely attested in Jewish apocalyptic literature of the period. Although no apocalyptic texts can be directly connected to these movements and their leaders, the end-time scenario they present provides an important context for understanding how followers might have understood such charismatic leaders and how those leaders might have understood themselves.

An ideal Davidic king is one of the most prominent types of eschatological redeemer. The mid-first century BCE
Psalms of Solomon
(17.21–24,26–27; 18.6–7) provides a classic description:

Behold, O Lord, and raise up for them their king,
    the son of David, at the time which you choose,
          O God,
   to rule over Israel your servant.

And gird him with strength, to shatter unjust rulers,
   to purge Jerusalem from nations that trample (her)
        down to destruction;

in the wisdom of righteousness to thrust out
          sinners from the inheritance …
    to crush all their substance with a rod of iron;
    to destroy the lawless nations with the word of
        his mouth …

And he will gather together a holy people,
        whom he will lead in righteousness …
And he will not allow injustice to lodge any more in
            their midst,
    and no one knowing evil will dwell with them …

Blessed are the ones in those days,
    in that they will see the good things of the Lord,
         which he will perform for the generation that
         is to come,
    under the rod of discipline of the Lord’s anointed.

Here the future ideal Davidic king is the Lord’s “anointed one,” a designation also used for the figure who will conquer the nations and judge the world in
2 Baruch
and
4 Ezra
(2 Esd 3–14), two lengthy apocalypses composed after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE (
2 Bar
. 29–30; 39–40; 72;
4 Ezra
7 and 11–13). Notably, this king accomplishes his goals not by military might; his weapon is “the word of his mouth,” based on Isaiah 11.4.

The term “anointed one” translates the Hebrew
mashia
ḥ
(Gk
christos
). The Tanakh refers to human kings as “the Lord’s anointed” (e.g., 1 Sam 12.3; Ps 2.2), because they were “anointed” (Heb
m-sh-
ḥ
) with oil when they began their reigns (Judg 9.8–15; 2 Sam 5.3; 1 Kings 1.39). The “Anointed One” in
Psalms of Solomon
and
4 Ezra
is also called a descendant of David, reflecting the biblical tradition of God’s promise to David that his descendants would occupy the throne forever (2 Sam 7.13; 22.51; Ps 89.4 [Heb v. 5]). During the time of the Davidic kingship, the hope was expressed that a new king would establish a kingdom like that of his ancestor David, whose reign was idealized as a time of peace, prosperity, and justice. After the termination of Davidic kings in the sixth century BCE, the hope for such an ideal ruler was projected into the future. (The genealogies in Mt 1.1–17 and Lk 3.23–38 do not agree on the names listed between David and Jesus; there are no other reliable genealogical lists from the period tracing Davidic ancestry.) This future hope was intensified in apocalyptic circles, likely comprised of scribes intimately familiar with the rich resources of Israel’s literature; these writers saw foreign rulers such as the Hellenistic king Antiochus IV (175–164 BCE), best known today in relation to the festival of Hanukkah, and the succession of Roman rulers beginning in the first century BCE as oppressors of God’s people, unjustly claiming for themselves the land of Israel. Some of these writers also regarded Jewish rulers such as the Hasmonean kings (142–63 BCE) and Herod the Great (40–4 BCE) as oppressors who would be overthrown by the agents of God.

One major function of the Messiah is to bring about God’s justice by defeating all agents of oppression, human and superhuman (
Pss. Sol
. 17.24;
4 Ezra
13.38). However, the focus of the texts is less on the messianic figure than on the messianic age, the time when God’s justice, rather than Satan or Empire, would prevail. Apocalyptic texts such as
2 Baruch
and
4 Ezra
provide ample evidence of the supernatural character of the messianic age, such as a new Jerusalem descending from heaven (
4 Ezra
7.26;
2 Bar
32.4; see also Rev 21.2) and the resurrection of the dead (
4 Ezra
7;
2 Bar
. 50–51).
4 Ezra
7.29–32 also reports that the Messiah son of David will die seven days before the resurrection of the dead, final judgment, and the beginning of the new age.

Not only kings were anointed in ancient Israel, and therefore not all messiahs were Davidic kings. For example, Elijah is instructed to “anoint Jehu … as king over Israel” and “anoint Elisha … as prophet in your place” (1 Kings 19.16); in Isa 61.1 the prophet refers to himself as “anointed.” Elijah became viewed as the one to announce “the day of the LORD” (Mal 4.5 [Heb 3.23]) because he never died (2 Kings 2.11).

Anointing was also part of ordination to priesthood (e.g., Ex 29.7), and the high priest could be referred to as the “anointed priest” (
ha-kohen ha-mashia
ḥ
:
Lev 4.3,5,16; 6.15 [Heb v. 7 in some other versions]). These texts under-gird the development of prophetic and priestly eschatological messianic figures.

Finally, not all messianic figures—defined as agents of redemption and not necessarily as “anointed”—were human. In the book of Daniel, the angel Michael delivers the righteous at the end-time when the wicked king of the north (Antiochus IV) is about to attack Jerusalem (Dan 12.1; Michael might also be identified with the “the one like a son of man” [i.e., human being] in 7.13–14). In the
Similitudes of Enoch
(
1 En
. 37–71; first century CE), a preexisting heavenly Son of Man, reflecting the figure described in Daniel 7 (cf.
4 Ezra
13.26), also called the “Chosen One,” “Righteous One,” and “Messiah,” executes the final judgment (
1 En
. 46–53), punishing the wicked and rewarding the righteous (
1 En
. 62).

MESSIANIC LEADERS AND THEIR FOLLOWERS

The term “messiah” only rarely appears in the texts that describe “messianic” leaders and their movements. However, scholars often designate these leaders and movements as “messianic” because they proclaim a radical transformation of the world and the restoration of Israel’s independence and security under the leadership of charismatic figures, often claiming to be agents of divine deliverance. These figures fit into the three main categories of prophets, kings, and priests.

Prophetic Figures

Josephus is the chief source for “messianic” figures. The most prominent type among these were those whom many Jews regarded as prophets, but whom Josephus consistently calls deceivers and
goētes
(Gk “charlatans, enchanters”) and whom he associates with the various rebel groups, the chief villains in his history.

Josephus provides tantalizingly brief reports for six such individuals: (1) Under the Roman procurator Fadus (44–46 CE), a certain Theudas led a large multitude, who brought along their possessions, to the Jordan River, which he promised they could cross after the waters parted at his command. Many were massacred by a cavalry squadron sent by the procurator. Theudas was killed and his head was brought to Jerusalem (
Ant
. 20.97–99; cf. Acts 5.36). (2) In the time of Felix (52–60 CE), a man from Egypt led several thousand followers through the wilderness to the Mount of Olives; he promised them that at his command the walls of the city would fall and that they would enter the city where he would be installed as ruler. Roman soldiers killed 400 and took 200 prisoner, but their leader escaped (
J.W
. 2.261–63;
Ant
. 20.169–72; cf. “the Egyptian” in Acts 21.38). (3) Roman troops sent by Festus (60–62 CE) killed a man (whom Josephus does not name) and those who followed him into the wilderness, where he promised them they would find “salvation and rest from troubles” (
Ant
. 20.188). (4) In the last days of the Temple, a prophet proclaimed that God had commanded the people to go up to the Temple court to receive “the signs of their deliverance.” Instead 6,000 were killed when the portico where they had taken refuge caught fire (
J.W
. 6.285). (5) In the period immediately after the destruction of Temple, a weaver named Jonathan, whom Josephus associates with the Sicarii (Gk “dagger men,” rebels who assassinated those whom they saw as enemies of the Jews [
J.W
. 2.435; 7.432]), led a multitude of what Josephus describes as “the poor” of Cyrene into the wilderness, where he promised to show them “signs and apparitions.” Although the provincial governor initially spared Jonathan and used his testimony to accuse the local Jewish aristocracy of sedition and confiscate their wealth, he was executed after an inquiry ordered by Vespasian (
J.W
. 7.437–450). (6) A Samaritan, perhaps connected with the expectation of an eschatological Mosaic prophet attested in later Samaritan texts, organized an armed multitude for an ascent of Mount Gerizim (see Jn 4.20–21), promising them he would show them the sacred vessels which Moses had buried there. Their slaughter by troops sent by Pilate (26–36 CE) was the occasion for the prefect’s being recalled to Rome to face accusations the Samaritans leveled against him (
Ant
. 18.85–87).

Josephus’s hostile reports tell us little about the content of these prophets’ messages. They likely condemned the present situation and promised blessings for the elect who followed them. Some probably claimed the role of the prophet like Moses who, according to an interpretation of Deut 18.15–19 (cf. 1 Macc 14.41), they understood would arise at some future time. The wilderness recalls the place where the Israelites encountered God directly and from which they conquered the Promised Land. It was therefore an appropriate location from which to launch a new conquest that would purify the land from idolatrous foreign oppressors and corrupt Jewish leaders. The extent to which these figures planned or engaged in military action is hard to gauge. Josephus claims several did, and Rome’s swift and brutal response might seem to support such a conclusion. But caution is in order; history provides many examples in the first century CE—most notably Christianity—of the violent suppression of groups critical of present governments and anticipating a new age, but who demonstrate their faith not by military means but by relying on the imminent arrival of supernatural change.