UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

DEPARTMENT OF RELIGIOUS STUDIES

LECTURE NOTES IN OLD TESTAMENT STUDIES

This material is exclusively authored and designed by Very Rev. Olugbemiro Berekiah, Ph.D,
JP as personal teaching notes for use on the University of Ibadan Remote Teaching Platform
for First Semester 2020/2021 Academic Session. All materials used are duly referenced and
acknowledged.

COURSE CODE: RCS 322

COURSE TITLE: Messianic Concept and Figures

COURSE CONTENT:
This course is designed to examine the circumstances, from which the Biblical Messianic
expectation arose, and the various Judaic concepts and designations of the Messiah within their
literary and historical contexts, pointing out their diachronic and synchronic elements. The
mysterious and human figure of the Messiah and his responsibilities within the ambit of the
apparent fulfilment of the prophecies about Him would also be discussed.

COURSE OUTLINE
1. The Title Messiah
1.1 Etymology of the title
1.2 Implications of the title
1.3 Qualifications of the Messiah

2.0 Historical development of the Messianic Expectation I

2.1 Pointers to Messianic hope up to the Patriarchal period.
2.2 The Messianic Hope in pre-monarchical Israel
2.3 The Messianic Hope in the Monarchical Period

3.0 Historical development of the Messianic Expectation I

3.1 The Messianic Hope in the Exilic and Post Exilic Period
3.2 The Messianic Hope in the Intertestamental Period
1
3.3 The Messianic Hope in the New Testament Period

4.0 Typological designations of the Messiah

4.1 The Son of God
4.2 The Son of man
4.3 The Son of David

5.0 Antetypes of the Messiah in Ancient Israelite History

5.1 By categories
5.2 By Individual personalities

6. Revision Questions

Term Paper ICT 2015 (B.A & B.Th): Critically discuss the qualifying attributes of Jesus the
Messiah as the Kinsman Redeemer of Israel

1.0 THE TITLE MESSIAH

1.1.0 Etymology
In Christendom, the word Messiah denotes Jesus Christ, regarded as the deliverer and
liberator of humanity. However, this word “Messiah” is not originally an English word. It is a
transliteration of the Hebrewַ ‫יח‬
ַ ‫( ָֹמ ִש‬pronounced as mâshîach1) which ordinarily meant “the
anointed”. According to Collins, it was incorporated into English via the Old French “Messie”2.
Hebrewַ ַ‫ ָֹמ ִשיח‬is a derivative of the root ‫מׁשח‬, (msch) cast in substantive form. The verbal form

“ ‫” ָֹמשח‬3 simply means “to smear or rub with oil”. The English can be used in secular parlance to
refer to “an exceptional liberator of a country or people”. In Judaism, it is reserved for the “awaited
king of the Jews4 to be sent by God to free them” apparently from social, political and economic
oppression. In Christian revelation, on the other hand, these roles were seen to have been fulfilled in
the person of Jesus of Nazareth, in a spiritual manner, and the expectation of full empirical
emancipation is anchored in an expectation of His second return in a triumphant form, which is to
be realised at a future time.

1.1.1 The Word Messiah in The Hebrew Bible

The Hebrew wordַ ‫יח‬
ַ ‫ ָֹמ ִש‬and its variants, in the verbal form, were used many times in the
Hebrew Bible, which Christendom inherited as the Old Testament, to describe the act of physically

1
G/K. No.5431; Strongs. No.H4899.
2
Hanks, P. Et.al, (Eds) Collins English Dictionary. (London: William Collins Sons & Co.)
3
G/K.No.5417; Strongs No.H4886
4
Note for instance Pilate‟s inscription of the purported crime for which Jesus was Crucified ...“ Jesus of Nazareth, King

2
smearing oil on an object, or person, as an act of consecration, or ordination. The first instance of
occurrence of this verbal form in the Hebrew Bible5 is in Gen. 31:13, which refers back to Jacob‟s
initial act of consecration of a pillar in memorial of his revelation at Bethel, while on his flight to
Padan Aram6. Apart from this first instance, the predicative usage, that is, the verbal form, is
exclusively used in the Torah, that is, the Pentateuch, in connection with the Tabernacle and its
accessories (Lev.8:10-11; Num.7:1, 10, 84, 88,); the various meal offerings, which are smeared with
oil, (for instance, Exo.29:2; Lev.2:4; 7:12; Num.6:15); and the Priests (Lev.7:35-36; 8:12; Num.3:3;
35:25). It is significant, that the term is not used at all in connection with the king, in the
Pentateuch, not even in Deut.17:13-14, which is the Deuteronomic legislation concerning the
monarchy. The predicative usage of the verbal form in Deuteronomistic History is predominantly,
but not solely in connection with the act of consecrating the kings of Israel, and Judah, beginning
with Saul, and David (Jdg. 9:8,15; 1Sam.9:16; 2Sam.2:4; e.t.c.). Two exceptions are 2Sam.1:21 and
1Kin.19:16. In the first case, David mourns for Saul and remarked that his shield seemed as though
it had not been anointed with oil. In the second case Elijah was commanded to anoint Elisha, not as
a king nor as a priest, but as a prophet. It is noted that in the era of Judges, the term was not used in
connection with Abimelech, who was appointed “king” over the Shechemites, though the term is
used in Jotham‟s riddle, which is congruent to the same literary unit. In the Ketubiim, it is used
predicatively in Dan.9:24, in reference to the consecration of the most holy7. It is used attributively
in some instances, that is, as a qualifying adjective in the form “ַ‫שיח‬
ִַ ‫”־־הַָֹ ָֹמ‬. Throughout the Torah,
that is, the Pentateuch, the attributive usage is limited to the Priests, in form of the construction
“ַ‫שיח‬
ִַ ‫“ – ”הכהֵ ן ַהַָֹ ָֹמ‬the anointed priest” (Lev. 4:3,5,16; 6:20,22). It is in the Nebiim, that the term is
mostly used substantively,8 in various forms such as the rendering “‫“ – ” ְֺמ ִשיחֹו‬His anointed, or the

LORD‟s Anointed” as in 1Sam.12:3; 16:6; or in the form “ַ‫יחי‬

ִ ‫ – ” ְֺמ ִש‬my anointed as in 1Sam.2:35;
It also occurred in the simple form “ ‫יח‬
ַ ‫ ” ְֺמ ִש‬in combination with a preposition as in the form
“ַ ‫ ” לִ ְֺמ ִשיח־יהוה‬- “to the LORD‟s Anointed”; and in the construct form “‫” ְֺמ ִשיח ַיהוה‬ - “the
LORD‟s Anointed”. It is this substantive usage that is most directly linked with the title of the
expected Messiah. Throughout Deuteronomistic History,9 the substantive usage is mostly in
reference to, but not limited to the kings of Israel and Judah, beginning with Saul and David. A

of the Jew”.
5
The version of the Hebrew Bible used here is the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, however this assertion is probable
true of all known manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible, considering the fact the Text Critical Apparatus did not indicate any
variants.
6
It is notable that the record of the initial act which occurred in Gen.28:18 in the Hebrew Bible preferred the root ‫יצק‬
instead of the root ‫ מׁשח‬.
7
The Phrase here may denote the „holy of holies‟ referring to the consecration or rededication of the sanctuary.
8
That is, as an adjectival noun.
9
that is, Joshua, Judges Samuel and Kings
3
particular instance of the substantive rendition is capable of eschatological or spiritual
interpretation. This is 1Sam.2:35 in which it is not clear, whether a physical or spiritual entity is
referred to, or whether it is a historical or eschatological figure that is intended.
From the majority of the instances of usage of the Hebrew word and its variants, it can be
inferred that the terminology is intended to connote the act of consecration. Other words and
terminologies are preferred in connection to secular usage of oil as in sanitation and cosmetic use.
These words include derivatives of the roots “‫ (”יצק‬ytsq)10 and “‫( ”סוך‬Sukj)11. The word “‫ ”יצק‬in
various contexts had been translated as “anoint, pour, cast, serve, smelt, wash away, spread out”. In
Gen. ‫ ָֹיַצַק‬is used to denote Jacob‟s act of pouring oil and wine on the pillar at Bethel, whereas later

in the text, Gen.31:13 reference was made to this act, with using the phrase ַָֹ‫ מָֹ ׁש ְֺחת‬derived from the

root ‫ מׁשח‬. The word “‫ ”סּוְך‬on the other hand had been translated in various contexts as “to use
lotions, healing balm, perfume, pour”(2Chron.28:15 Ezek.16:9; Rut.3:3; 2Sam.14:2). It was also
translated as “spur on, stirred up” in in some other contexts. In Daniel, ‫ סּוְך‬is used to denote the use

of lotion,(Dan.10:2) while the word “‫יח‬

ַ ‫ ”מָֹ ִׁש‬is exclusively preserved to denote the Consecrated
Deliverer (Dan.9:25-26).
It is notable that in the earlier segments of the Tanakh, the Torah and the Nebiim, the subject
of the adjective “anointed (one)” are usually contemporary figures, usually a priest, king or prophet.
But right from Daniel, (Dan. 9:25-26) in the Ketubiim, onwards, subsequent reference of the word
implied a future figure. This developed into a special use in which the word stands on its own,
without the complement of a divine name or a suffix, but preceded by the article: “the messiah”,
and specifically connotes an expected future personality. This is how one finds the word in early
Jewish writings, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, and most Rabbinic literature, and also in most cases,
in modern discussions.12

1.1.2 The Word Messiah in Intertestamental Literature

During the exilic and post exilic period, the Messianic expectation had gradually crystalized
and culminated in the specific usage of Messiah as the titular designation of an expected
eschatological deliverer of the Jewish Nation. The extant literature that has come to us from the
intertestamental literature includes the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scroll (DSS). Josephus and
Philo also wrote in the intertestamental period. While Josephus wrote a history of the Jews, Philo
made a philosophical treatise on the Torah. Moreover, Josephus and Philo were written in Greek,

10
G/K.No.3668; Strong‟s No. H3332
11
G/K. No. 6056-6058 Strong‟s No.H5480
12
Rose, Wolter, “Messianic Expectations in the Old Testament” In die Skriflig 35(2) 2001:275-288

4
therefore there was the tendency to use the Greek root χριω (krio) rather than the Hebrew derived
Messias. Notwithstanding there were some occurrences of the word Messiah in the DSS and the
Apocrypha, for instance, 4Esdras 12:32 (RSV), and in the DSS we have phrases like “the Messiah
of Israel” and “the Messiah of Aaron”13 giving the picture that two distinct messiahs were
anticipated, one of the Aaronide / Zadokite priesthood, and the other of the Davidic kingship
lineage. Despite the relative paucity of the word Messiah in intertestamental literature, the concept
of the messiah and the messianic expectation as found in the New Testament derived from the
Intertestamental period. The Apocrypha and the DSS gave a lofty vision of the expected Messiah.
Various titles were used to designate the expected eschatological person. These include: the Branch
of David, the Root of Jesse14, the Anointed Prince. All these titles and appellation were derived
from the Old Testament. It is noteworthy, however, that the apocrypha and DSS gave a picture of
two messiahs, one priestly, and the other political, with the priestly having primacy over the
political.

1.1.3 The Word Messiah in the New Testament

The word Messiah is not found at all in the Synoptic Gospels, neither in the Epistles nor in
the Apocalypse of St. John. The only two occurrences in the Greek and English versions of the New
Testament were found in the Gospel of St. John, in which context it is clear that the contemporary
rendition of the word Messiah is the Greek κριστος (Kristos). This is understandable because the
Greek word κριστος is used consistently in the Septuagint, that is the Greek Old Testament, to
render the Hebrew “‫יח‬
ַ ‫”מָֹ ִׁש‬, and this is the form adopted by the New Testament writers. This was
why there were no mention of the word Messiah in the English versions of the New Testament
except in two places in John‟s Gospel (John.1:41; and 4:25), where the Greek text retained a
transliteration of the Hebrew in the form “Messias”, and then gave the translation as “the Christ”.

“He first found his brother Simon, and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which
means Christ).” [RSV John 1:41]
“The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ); when
he comes, he will show us all things."” [RSV John 4:25]

It is notable that all the writers of the New Testament wrote in Greek and not Hebrew. Moreover, it
is very likely that they used, and quoted more from, the Septuagint than from the Tanakh, that is the
Hebrew Bible15. This can be partly due to the fact that as at the time New Testament was

13
See for instance, The manual of Discipline 1QS.
14
See for instance, the Piercing Messiah Text of the Dead Sea Scrolls (4Q285);
15
For the case of Paul‟s usage of the Septuagint, see, for instance, Atowoju, A. A. 2004. Paul of Tarsus (Lagos: BPrint)
p.45

5
composed, Greek could be seen as the universal language of learning, bequeathed to the world by
the Hellenistic era; and partly due to the fact that the Church of the New Testament age has more
Hellenistic members than Jewish members. It is therefore natural that the Greek equivalent
“Κριστοσ” which is transliterated “Christ” in English, is used to replace the Hebrew Messiah in the
New Testament. Both Terms had come to signify the same person and concept. It is clear that the
whole of the New Testament is built on the fundamental theology of Jesus of Nazareth as the
fulfilment of the anticipated Messiah. Specifically, the occurrences of the words Messiah and Christ
in the New Testament depict that the expectation focused on a single personality, rather than two
portrayed in the Dead Sea Scrolls and some books of the Apocrypha. Hence at the time of the
composition of the New Testament, the messianic expectation have already crystalized and focused
on only one person. In the New Testament, a new terminology was introduced into the messianic
hope, “the second Adam” or the “last Adam” [1Cor.15:45]

1.2.0 MESSIAH AS TITTLE, AND THE TITULAR IMPLICATIONS

Titles and offices cannot the separated from their role expectations and the qualifying attributes
attached to such title or office. It seems that the messianic concept had been present in Israel‟s
religious consciousness from antiquity, attaining various dimensions of individual and collective
expression until it culminated in the personification of an eschatological personality, in reference to
whom office and title of “Messiah” became attached. Once the word Messiah had attained a titular
status, there are certain role expectations and qualifying attributes attached to any personality before
the title messiah can be applicable to such. It is necessary to trace once more the emergence of the
titular usage of the term and the titular implications, that is, the role expectations that had become
attached to the title, in Jewish thought just prior to the advent of Jesus of Nazareth.

1.2.1 The Messiah as Title

From the foregoing discussion, it could be deduced that the use of the term “Messiah” as a
titular designation for a specific, anticipated deliverer, did not occur in the Hebrew Canon until the
last segment, the Ketubiim, precisely in Dan.9:25-26. A close look at this passage, in conjunction
with the New Testament occurrence in the Johanine Gospel, suggests that the title “Messiah” is used
particularly to designate an eschatological figure. This does not in any way negate the presence of
the messianic concept in Israelite thought right from an early stage; nor does it preclude the
antiquity of messianic expectation among the people. We would trace the development of the
messianic concept in subsequent sections. However it evidently shows that the ultimate
6
crystallisation of the messianic expectation in a certain individual, and in an ideal future age, did not
occur until late in Israel‟s religious consciousness. Majority of scholars and theologians have
concluded that this final culmination of the messianic hope in an eschatological figure took final
shape during the period between the Testaments.16 By this time, various role expectations have
become attached to the title of the Messiah, due to the prevalent socio-political condition of the
Jews at the time of the advent of Jesus of Nazareth.

1.2.2 The Implications of the title:

From the secular usage of the title, taking Cyrus (Isaiah 44:28-45:25) as a case for study, at
least, five basic characteristics are expected of the Messiah: (i) The Messiah is expected to be a
liberator of God‟s people. (ii) He must have been particularly chosen by God for the specific task of
liberating God‟s people. (iii) He would be seen as an agent of God; hence he acts on behalf of God.
(iv) He would be an avenger of God‟s people. (v) He is expected to have universal or worldwide
dominion.
The Messiah is expected to be a liberator of God‟s people. In popular Jewish thought as at
the time of the advent of Jesus, the expected Messiah would be a National hero of the Jews. He is
expected to be a warrior-king, of Davidic descent, who would take over physical political rule, and
subject the Gentile enemy nations under His military might. This notion cannot be separated from
their national experience of political sovereignty and socio-economic prosperity under the rule of
King David. This expectation is legitimised by the Jerusalemite Royal Theology, engendered by the
Davidic Covenant communicated by the prophet Nathan, who declared God‟s resolve to provide an
eternal dynasty for David and his descendants in 2 Samuel 7:1-17. This conception of the Messiah
can be considered as a radically different, diverging from earlier concepts of the Messiah that can be
pictured from the Hebrew Bible‟s messianic texts from the fall of Adam up to the monarchical
period. Though the kingship of the Messiah cannot be disputed, yet, the scriptural evidence with
regards to the nature and form of the kingship are capable of very diverse interpretations; hence the
dichotomy between Jewish and Christian interpretation of the kingship of the Messiah. The notion
that the primary preoccupation of the messiahs was to liberate Israel from social and political
adversity, grew out of Israelite national political experience.
The messiah also must have been particularly chosen by God for the specific task of
liberating God‟s people. The precursor is seen in the anointed priests, the charismatic judges, who
were endowed with charismatic prowess as military deliverers, and finally the anointed kings, of
which Saul and David were examples. All these pre-figured the Messiah, but they fall short of the

16
See for instance, Dahl, George: “The Messianic Expectation in the Psalter” Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 57,
No. 1 Mar.1938, pp. 1-12

7
ideal perfection of the expected eschatological Messiah, who would be an embodiment of divine
perfection immanent in human form. Right from the etymological roots of the word, the act of
anointing with oil indicated consecration rather than cosmetic use. The concept of anointing
significantly denoted a special impartation of the Spirit of God in order to communicate specific
charismatic abilities. Hence the Messiah is seen as one that is specially chosen and anointed by
God. He is specifically endowed with abilities to perform extraordinary tasks. Such a personality,
by consequence of the anointing, is seen as possessing certain divine prerogatives. Hence he is seen
as acting as a Divine Regent.
He would be seen as an agent of God; hence he acts on behalf of God. The charismatic
endowment of the Messiah is seen to be superior to that of previous priests, kings or prophets. It is
such that the Messiah Himself would possess divine attributes and execute divine prerogatives. This
is most evident in the Psalms, and some other scriptures which apply divine appellations reserved
only for God in Jewish religious traditions to the person of the Messiahs. For instance the ‟elohim is
used as a designation for God in the Hebrew Bible, but it was also given to the anticipated
messianic King. His relationship with God is described with the metaphor of sonship.
He would be an avenger of God‟s people. The term commonly used to express this
expectation is found in form of the phrase “he will judge…” Judgement in this term is not mere
administration of civil justice. It denotes more precisely, the carrying out of divine decree of
punishment against the gentile oppressors of the people of God. A good precursor in found in the
era of charismatic leaders of the pre-monarchical tribal league. These “shophetiim” i.e. judges were
so called because they delivered the people of God from oppressive gentile enemies through
military action. Such action is mirrored in Ps.149: 7-9 (KJV). But none of these judges was without
human moral and spiritual impediments. Hence they provide a motivation toward a messianic
expectation, looking forwards to the emergence of the ultimate Judge of perfect moral and spiritual
virtues. Some of the kings which were also anointed in the history of Israel sharpened this
expectation. For instance David was able to ward off the Philistine threat, and establish a large
empire, giving the dominion for the people of God with the surrounding gentile nations paying
tribute. But the rule of David as a person, and that of his sons after him were not eternal. They were
also with their moral and spiritual flaws.
He is expected to have universal or worldwide dominion. The notion of universal rule of the
Messiah is not a novel development of the New Testament period. The messianic idea, if traced to
Genesis, could be seen to portray the Messiah as the saviour of all humanity. In considering Adam
as prefigure of the Messiah, he, that is Adam is attributed with authority and the greatest patriarch,
hence the chief ruler of all humanity. In the case of Cyrus the gentile king, who was peculiarly
referred to with the messianic terminology, he was known as the ruler of all known human
8
civilisation at the time. In the case of David he established a significantly large empire, which
covers a substantive territory of the then know human civilisation. Hence the anticipated Messiah is
seen as one whose dominion would extend to cover all of human civilisation.

1.3 QUALIFICATIONS OF THE MESSIAH:

From the titular implications of his office, any person who would fit into the scheme of the
expected Messiah would at least, exhibit certain minimum qualities. These include the special
anointing; specific call to the office; relation by blood decent with the chosen people of God; and
freedom from all forms of indebtedness.
The anointing oil, as used in Israelite religious practices, symbolises the special Charisma
imparted by the Spirit of the LORD. In most cases of practical physical anointing in the Hebrew
Bible, there is an attendant manifestation of a spiritual impartation from God upon the individual
that had been so anointed with physical oil. Significant instances that illustrate this phenomenon
include the episodes of the anointing of Saul and David. Less dramatic cases like that of the
anointing to the priestly office presuppose an inner less visible transformation of the individual. It is
also significant that there are clear instance in which the physical use of oil is not indicated or
implied, yet the individual is considered anointed because there is evidence of possession of
charisma which is attributed to the operation of the Spirit of God. A good case is the case of Elisha
and Elijah. On instruction to Elijah to anoint Elisha as prophet in his stead, we do not have the
record of physical smearing of oil on him, rather we read of Elijah casting his mantle upon Elisha,
and later on, Elisha picking up the mantle that fell off Elijah on the occasion of his ascension to
heaven in a chariot of fire.
The expected Messiah should be someone related by blood to the people of God. This is
necessary for him to qualify as a kinsman redeemer, an important role expected of the Messiah. In
Job for instance, the title Messiah is totally absent, instead we see the word “redeemer” to denote an
anticipated deliverer (Job.19:25-27). This role of kinsman-redeemer is anticipated in the Kingship
legislation of Deut.17:14-19; and in the priestly substitute for the kinsman in Numbers 5:8. The
roles of the kinsman in Israelite socio-religious culture include securing the family‟s land titles, and
ensuring the continuity of the family name as reflected in Num. 27:6-11; Ruth.3:9-13; 4:1-8. He is
therefore called the “kinsman-redeemer”. Apart from these, the near kinsman is also referred to as
an avenger of blood (Deut. 19:6, 11-12). Abraham fulfilled the role of kinsman-redeemer for Lot
when he delivered him by force of arms from his captors, thereby avenging him (Gen.14:11-16).
Simeon and Levi also fulfilled the same role when they avenged Dinah‟s rape. (Gen.34:1-7, 26-31).
Aside from the instances mentioned above, there are diverse ways of achieving the redemption of
persons and property. This may be by restoration of owed debt, payment of a ransom, or payment of
9
the purchase price of the enslaved person or mortgaged property. It is therefore natural for the
Israelites to look forward to an anointed prince out of their own people who would restore to them
the lost fortunes of the nation. This role is tied to the conception of a warrior-king who would
liberate His kinsfolk by force of arm and military prowess, restore their landed property and avenge
them on their gentile oppressors.(Ps.72:14). An anomaly in the Cyrus case, as a typology of the
Messiah, is that he was not a blood relation, hence not reckoned as a kinsman redeemer.
The Messiah must be someone that if free from all indebtedness. He who would liberate the
people of God must himself be free from the need for liberation. He must therefore have the
substance and the ability to liberate.

2. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE MESSIANIC EXPECTATION

The messianic expectation, seen from Christian perspective, could be traced down to the fall
of man in the garden of Eden and up through to the Patriarchal period, the pre-monarchical period,
the Monarchical period, the exilic and post-exilic period, the intertestamental period and finally the
New Testament period; with significant shifts in the conceptualization of the phenomenon along the
timeline.
2.1 From Eden to the Patriarchal period
Pointers to Messianic hope from the fall of man up to the Patriarchal period can be seen in
the proto-evangel of Genesis 3:15; the comment attached to the name given to Noah in Genesis
5:29; Job‟s expression of hope in Job 19:25 and Jacob‟s prophetic blessing of his sons in Genesis
49:10. From these instances, it could be deduced that the messianic expectation focuses more on a
universal deliverer from the curse of the fall. This seems to carry the distinctive stamp of New
Testament picture of Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfilment of the Expected Messiah. The messianic
expectation has not assumed a nationalistic flavour at this level, probably because the notion of
Israel as the chosen people of God was yet to come into full portrait. The Messiah is seen as a
common redeemer of all humanity, from the common enemy and common doom. The “Seed of the
woman” in the proto-evangel is seen as the kinsman-redeemer of all humanity, because, by virtue of
his ancestry through the woman, he partakes in human nature. Also the serpent is seen as the
common enemy of the whole human race, the descendants of Adam. Noah was so named because,
in his days, there was a general expectation of a deliverer from the curse of the fall in Eden. Despite
Job‟s personal piety, he concluded that he was in need of a Redeemer from the common doom of
humanity. Jacob‟s prophetic blessing of Judah predicted that the sceptre would not depart from
Judah until Shiloh shall come. The root meaning of the Hebrew name “Shiloh” in spite of the
controversy concerning its exact literal and symbolic meaning, points decisively to one who is “a
10
mediator of peace”. This personality, in Jacob‟s blessing upon Judah, would take over the mantle of
leadership, and not only Israel, but all peoples shall be gathered unto Him.

2.2 The Messianic Hope Before the Monarchy:

During the pre-monarchical period reflected in Israel‟s traditions recorded in the Hebrew
Bible, the messianic hope is mirrored in Moses‟ future prophet, (Deut.18:15ff); and in the persons
of the Moses, Samuel and the Judges. The Judges have characteristics that contributed to the final
formation of the messianic hope. The people looked forward to a perpetual ruler-deliverer, due to
the shortfalls of the Judges, and the temporal nature of Moses and Samuel‟s tenure of leadership. A
significant shift in the conceptualization of the messianic hope during this period was towards an
increasing emphasis on the nationalistic focus. In their collective experience as a chosen race, they
found out that whenever they apostate from the Lord, they experience captivity and political
oppression which results in social and economic hardships. When they cried to the Lord, He raised
up for them a charismatic leader in the person of the judges. Through several cycles of apostasy-
repentance-restoration; the notion of a the redeemer assumed the dimension of a national political
deliverer emerged and this though, being of a more immediate concern, overshadowed the notion of
the universal deliverer of humanity from sin and the curse of the fall in Eden. The Moses, and later
the judges, and afterwards Samuel were seen as agents of the Lord. It was the Lord God of Israel
that had chosen the people and brought them out of slavery in Egypt to be a peculiar, chosen people
unto Himself; the human leaders were seen as agents of the Lord. However, the limitations of these
human agents became evident in the fact that they were temporal, and on their demise, there was
usually a vacuum, and problems of succession. Israel then asked for a “king like other nations”.
This grieved Samuel, who sees this rejection of charismatic leadership as a direct rejection of the
Lord as their king. The major concern was not the issue of a monarch, but the prevailing practice of
the institution in their socio-cultural environment; after all, the judges also were referred to as kings
by the Samaritan Pentateuch, but it was clear that they were not perpetual hereditary rulers, like the
gentile kings. At that time the gentile kings were seen as “divine”. They were conceived among the
heathen as descendants of the gods or incarnation of the gods. However in Israel, the conception of
leadership was that of the invisible Creator God, as the Lord and Supreme King of Israel, with the
human rulers as mere representatives of the Lord. Nonetheless, the yearning for monarchy
prevailed, and they were given a king. The era of monarchy lead to further developments in Israelite
messianic expectations.

2.3 The Messianic Hope in the Monarchical Period

After the initial transition crises under Saul, the monarchy was consolidated under the reign
11
of David, and effectively incorporated into Israelite religio-political ideology through the Davidic
covenant, which in turn gave rise to the “Jerusalemite royal theology”. The Jerusalemite royal
theology holds that God had chosen Israel as his special people, the Davidic dynasty as an
everlasting family of kings which would not fail to have a successor to the throne, and Jerusalem
(Zion) as the holy city where He had chosen to put His name there forever, because of the Temple.
Based on these three pivots, the people believed that the Zion, the Davidic dynasty and the nation
Israel could never be utterly destroyed, but failed to consider the need for genuine piety, and moral
righteousness. The effect of this on the Messianic thoughts was to expect the ultimate deliverer of
the human race to emerge from the Davidic line.

2.4 The Messianic Hope in the Exilic Period and Post Exilic Period
To the dismay of the people, and in fulfilment of the word of the Lord proclaimed by the
prophets, the fall, first of Samaria and later of Jerusalem, led to the immediate sack of the Davidic
dynasty and the exile of the people. This produces a rude shock and serious political and theological
crisis for the people. The realisation of the devastating effect of apostasy and sin, and the futility of
religion without inner transformation became glaring to the people. Some particular themes in the
messages of the exilic and post-exilic prophets suggest that it was in the context of the exile, that
the reality of the depravity of the human soul and the dire need for redemption from the power and
consequences of sin became clearly emancipated from the shadows of nationalistic zeal in Israelite
religious thought. For instance, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah spoke of a regeneration of the human soul,
such that it would be enabled to conform to the demand of the law of the Lord; [Eze.36:25-27,
Jer.31:31ff,] while Deutero Isaiah spoke of atonement for sin, [Isa.44:22; 53:10-12] Nonetheless, in
response to the shock, many theological answers were sought to explain the emerging theodicy.
Among such was the theological treatise composed in historical format, giving rise to the present
version of Deuteronomistic History (i.e. the narrative of Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings.) There
were other schools of thought, which were more nationalistic in orientation that also influenced the
messianic hope. Apart from conceiving the Messiah as a descendant of David, they also picture Him
as a conquering warrior-king who would vanquish their enemies and avenge all the oppressions
they had suffered from the hands of their captors, while restoring to them their political sovereignty.
This coalesced with an expectation of a messianic age of prosperity and universal cosmological
peace.

2.6 The Messianic Hope in the Intertestamental Literature

The period between the testaments, often referred to as the Jewish dark-age, saw the
cessation of prophecy and the emergence of apocalyptic. It is evident from available sources that
12
diverse strands of messianic doctrine had emerged as at this time. As hinted earlier, the extant
literature that has come to us from the intertestamental literature include the Apocrypha and the
Dead Sea Scroll (DSS). Many of these writings, particularly, majority of those that had messianic
implications were apocalyptic in nature. In this period, the messianic expectation, though diverging
in specifics among various sects, had assumed a fully eschatological dimension. The Messiah was
no longer a soon-expected deliverer, but rather a future expected personality, particularly belonging
to the end-time or close of the age often referred to as the „latter days‟ or the “last days”. During this
period, a loftier notion of a messianic age of perfect peace and tranquillity emerged. The figure of
the Messiah became intricately woven into the scheme of a series of end-time events including a
global cataclysm, a universal judgement of the wicked and reward of the righteous, resurrection of
the dead, and the inauguration of a new earth and a new heaven in which absolute righteousness and
perfect peace would reign. The DSS reveals that the Essenes sect was expecting not only one
Messiah but two. One from the priestly line of Aaron, a Levitical Messiah, which would take
precedence over the other, a Messiah of Davidic line, a political Messiah. There was also an
expectation of Prophetic role in the concept of the Messiah, tolling the line of Moses prediction of a
prophet like himself in Deuteronomy. However, the concept of this prophetic Messiah is not clearly
articulated in the extant sources that have come down to us. It suffices to conclude that the Messiah
is expected to fulfil prophetic functions on the ideal scale.

2.7 The Messianic Hope in the New Testament Period.

The mention of “Messias” in the Johanine Gospel, [John 1:41; 4:25] is clear enough
evidence that the Messiah in New Testament is rendered Christ. The context of this occurrence also
shows that both Jews and Samaritans were expecting the Messiah. As at this time there were various
and divergent strands of the messianic expectation. It is notable, as observed by R. T. France17, that
one of the reasons underlying Jesus‟s reluctance to publicly apply the title “Christ” to Himself was
due to the diverse and misconceived notions of the messianic expectations in current circulation
among the people of Palestine at the time of His advent. The most dominant of such was the notion
of the Messiah as a political liberator; an emancipator from the current Roman domination. This
situation is quite natural, and as a matter of fact, should be expected. At that time, Palestine had
come under Roman rule, and the people had to pay taxes to Rome. These taxes on property, goods
and services were collected through entrepreneurs who, probably often abuse their tasks. Aside
these taxes, Jews had to pay their traditional temple levies. 18 These, and the realities of the Roman

17
France, R. T. 1996: “Messiah” in Douglas, J. D. Eds. New Bible Dictionary, 3rd Ed. (England: IVP) 760
18
See further, McConville, G. 1994. “Biblical History” in Carson, D. A. et. al. Eds. New Bible Commentary, 21st
Century Edition (England, IVP.) p. 37
13
presence, which is expressed in the appearance of the Roman Soldiers in common places, and their
use to quell and supress civil protests, coupled with the memory of the victories of the Maccabean
revolt in the recent past, gave the Jews the notion of emancipating the “Holy Land” from the gentile
Roman overlords. It is therefore, not strange that the Messianic hope should be intricately entangled
with their political and nationalistic agenda, given their understanding of their God as the Lord of
history, who had severally intervened in their national life to guarantee political emancipation. For
instance, the deliverance from Egypt, and the various instances of political emancipation during the
period of the Judges serve as a template for the expectations of future divine interventions in their
national lives. John 6:14-16 clearly shows that Jesus was aware of this dominant view of the
Messiah as a conquering prince, and He tactfully evaded getting Himself entangled with it
throughout His earthly ministry. Consider for instance, the episode in John 6:14-16, where He had
to hide Himself from them after the feeding of the five thousand, so that they would not come and
make Him king by force; and the dispute over civil tax in Luke 20:20-26; 23:2. Note also that even
the close disciples of Jesus were expecting a triumphant Saviour who would be a political
emancipator. [Mk.8:29-34; Lk.24:19-32; Acts 1:6]
Notwithstanding the Messianic Secrecy in the Gospels, the New Testament clearly shows
that Jesus of Nazareth is the real fulfilment of the true scriptural messianic hope. There is no iota of
doubt in the Acts, the Epistles and Revelation that the early Church was fully convinced that Jesus
is the expected Messiah. In Him, the all the anticipated offices of the Messiah became realised
except that of the conquering prince, which also, was preserved to a future time in Christian
eschatology. The role as Priest and Prophet was already realised through His passion and
resurrection. His role as the Conquering Prince however is only partly fulfilled in His victory over
death. It would be fully realised in the political sense at the second coming. [Matt.16:27-28; 19:28;
25:31-32; 26:63-64]
The historical development of the Messianic hope could therefore be summarised as
follows: It could be said that the Messianic hope had been present with humanity right from the fall,
but assumed a nationalistic outlook with the election of Israel as a Chosen race. During the various
epochs of Israel‟s national development, various dimensions of the soteriological mission of the
Messiah was revealed, which gave rise to different streams of messianic though among the Jews,
due to unequal emphasis placed on the various revealed roles of the Messiah, which include the
roles of a Prophet, Priest, and King. The messianic hope came to full development during the
intertestamental period. At the advent of Jesus of Nazareth, majority of the Jews were looking
forward to the restoration of political sovereignty of their nation under a divinely appointed heir of
the Davidic throne, but were mostly oblivious to His other roles as a suffering servant and atoning
priest. Having fulfilled these roles during His first advent, Jesus, the expected Messiah, would
14
appear the second time, in the end-time, to fulfil the role of the Conquering Prince. The expected
period of the reign of the Messiah is called Messianic age, or golden age which would be
characterised with perfect peace and prosperity. This age is referred to as the Millennial Reign in
Christian Eschatology.

3.0 TYPOLOGICAL DESIGNATIONS OF THE MESSIAH

Following upon the discussion so far, it is necessary at this point to discuss specific titles,
apart from the title “Messiah” and “Christ”, applied to the expected eschatological figure and
consider their implications. Among these are the following: Son of God; Son of Man; Son of David;
Suffering Servant; Anointed Prince; Anointed Conqueror; The Branch; Seed of the Woman; and The
Second Adam. We would discuss some of these.
3.1 The Son of God:
This title emphasises the Divine nature of the eschatological Messiah. In the New Testament
it exclusively refers to Jesus. [Matt.8:29; 14:33; 26:63; 27:54; John 1:34, 49; 3:18 ] The title shows
that He is an extraordinary person of Divine origin.[Isa.7:14; Matt.1:22-25] It also depicts His
eternity [Isa.9:6b; 63:16; Dan.7:14]; and His right to exercise Divine prerogatives. [Ps.2:7-12;
Matt.9:2-7] This Title was first explicitly used in the book of Daniel, whose literary setting was cast
in a period towards the end of the exile. [Dan.3:25]. During the Intertestamental period this title was
further developed, and by the time of the Advent of Jesus, it is fully understood to be a messianic
title. The consequence of His divinity, apart from his being of Divine origin, that is supernatural
birth, and depicting His eternity, also implies His right to exercise Divine prerogatives reserved only
for God. Jesus for instance demonstrated this in his act of forgiving sins, and executing Divine
judgement [Matt.9:2-7; Acts.10:42; 17:30-31]. It also shows His superiority above the failings of
the human nature and freedom from the indebtedness of humanity to vanity, and satanic influences.
The title “Son of God” highlights His perfection and worthiness to perform the role of redeemer of
the human race, as one who is over and above the human race, because He did not inherit the sinful
nature of Adam.

3.2 The Son of man:

The title “Son of Man emphasises the human nature, of the Messiah. Unlike the title “Son of
God”, it qualifies Him to perform the role of kinsman redeemer and avenger of blood, from the
perspective of kinship. It shows that though He is the “Son of God”, yet He was historically
incarnate, and He partook of the human nature. [Heb.2:11-18]. This title also was first used as full
messianic title in Daniel 7:13. But even in this context, it was the Divine origin is showcased by
depicting Him as “coming with the clouds”, thereby suggesting figuratively, His Divine origin. The
15
earlier usage in Psalm 8:4, has also been identified as a messianic passage. As a human He was able
to die, but as the Son of God, He was able to overcome the power of death and resurrect. Jesus,
avoiding the personal use of the title “Christ” in reference to Himself, prefers to refer to Himself as
the “Son of Man” throughout the Gospels; probably because the centrality of His passion in His
mission at the first advent. [Rom.1:3-4] The full import of this title is summarised by Paul with
another title “the second Adam” or the “last Adam” [1Cor.15:45]

3.3 The Son of David

The title “Son of David” was not expressly found in the Old Testament as a messianic title.
Its appearance in the New Testament shows the Jewish anticipation of the restoration of the Davidic
Dynasty, and consequently, the restoration of the political sovereignty of Israel, at the time of the
Advent of Jesus. This title fits the Messiah into the eschatological hope of restoration of the
Jerusalemite royal theology. Other messianic titles of similar import with this were “the Anointed
Prince”, and the “Conquering Prince”.

3.4 Other Messianic Titles

There are various other messianic titles emphasizing various aspects of the messianic hope.
These include: The Seed of the Woman, like the “Son of Man” emphasizes His humanity; but also
could be considered in the light of the reality of Jesus being conceive mainly of the woman, and not
by copulation with any man. However, in actual reality this title projects the messianic hope upon
the proto-evangel unequivocally suggesting that the Messiah would fulfil the prophecy in this
scripture. It is the Messiah that would crush the head of the serpent, and thus avenge the whole of
humanity upon the devil, who is here represented by the serpent. It is to be noted also here that there
was the tendency in the Old Testament to trace human origins through the mother. Moreover, such
messianic passages as Is.7:14 and Mic.5:3 gave hints of the conception and birth of a supernatural
child.
The title “Suffering Servant” derived from Isaiah 40-55, where the pictured deliverer of
Israel is consistently referred to as “My Servant” [Is.42:1ff ] This title emphasises the messiah as an
Agent of God, acting in full obedience and in unity with God. Though in Isaiah it is often used
figuratively to depict Israel, as a corporate entity, seen as God‟s agent of universal salvation; it is
also used specifically for the Messiah, a personified saviour of Israel in particular, and humanity in
general. [Is.49:5,6]

4.0 ANTE-TYPES OF THE MESSIAH IN ANCIENT ISRAELITE HISTORY

The typology of the Messiah in Israelite historical experience can be examined from two
16
perspectives: (i) By Categories (ii) By Personalities

4.1 By Categories:
From our treatment of the etymology of the term, various categories of people have depicted
the Messiah along the story line of Israelite history. These were the Prophets, Priests and Kings,
Judges Prophets. All these were seen as “anointed” in one way or the other.
The office of the Prophet as typifying the eschatological Messiah can be traced to the
prophecy of Moses in Deuteronomy 18:15. In this prophecy, Moses predicted that the Lord would
raise a prophet unto them like unto himself. We would see the full implication of this when we look
closely at the personality of Moses as a prophetic prototype of the Messiah. It is evident in the
Gospels, for instance, John. 1:21; 4:25; 6:14; that the Jews and Samaritans were expecting a
Prophetic Messiah.
The priests could be seen as performing messianic roles in the sense that they intercede and
make atonement for the people, thereby averting imminent danger consequent upon sin. They were
also to teach the people the law, thereby guiding them from the path of destruction into the path of
truth and righteousness, which will guarantee life and prosperity. However it should be noted that
the Priest at times stands in for the kinsman-redeemer [Num.5:8]. But ultimately, the Jews in the
Intertestamental Period as reflected in the DSS were expecting a Priestly Messiah, through whom
an ultimate atoning sacrifice would be made, and true worship would be re-instituted. In Christian
conception, this priestly-messianic function is fulfilled by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus through His
passion. [Rom.5:11; Heb.9:11]
The Kings were also anointed with oil as a mark of consecration. This was to demonstrate
that the Spirit of the Lord had been imparted upon them. They were seen as extraordinary people
with special charismatic endowment. As rulers of God‟s people, they perform messianic roles by
ensuring the safety of the people by warding off enemy attacks. They also ensure peace and
prosperity by providing the needed socio-political structures for the people. They were also to
ensure justice and equity, thereby delivering the people from personal injustice and collective
anarchy. Kings, as prefigures of the Messiah, in Israelite religious thought were to be agents of God
in establishing His rule on earth. In the case of the eschatological Messiah, He was to possess the
Spirit in full measure. The previous kings, chief of which was David, were seen as only imperfect
depictions of the yet to come perfect and eternal king. We would look more closely by using David
as personification of a kingly symbol of the Messiah.
The Judges were not usually anointed with oil, but they were seen as people who were
endowed with the Spirit of God in an extraordinary manner. The judges in their times were clearly
seen as agents of the rule of the Lord. The Lord Himself was seen as the King of Israel, and the
17
Judges were mere human agents of His Divine rule [Judg.8:22-23]. The judges furthermore, were
primarily military deliverers, and as such they were pointers to the role of the Messiah as an
anointed prince and conquering prince. The emphasis here is the deliverance of the people from the
oppressor; a role which Jesus would later fulfil in His second advent, the Parousia.

4.2 The Messiah as Antitypes of Historical Personalities

Various historical personalities have one way or another depicted some sterling qualities of
the Messiah and the messianic age. Among them were Adam, Noah, Moses, David and Cyrus.
The concept of Adam as prefigure of the Messiah could best be understood within the
context of the Garden of Eden before the fall. The situation could be summarised in two words:
peace and prosperity. Adam as a messianic figure could be seen as: (i) the first leader and ultimate
progenitor of the human race (iii) A leader of a dispensation of peace, in which there was perfect
harmony in nature. No violence even among animals and the lesser creatures. There was perfect
bliss, and there was no “curse”, no disease, not distress, and not tears. There was no death. (iv) The
prosperity in the Adamic dispensation is vividly described in Genesis 2:8-17. This is now expected
to be restored by the eschatological Messiah, hence He is also called “the second Adam” or the
“last Adam” by Paul.[1Cor.15:45] Jesus of Nazareth, seen as the fulfilment of Christian messianic
hopes had only partially fulfilled this expectation as prefigured by Adam. The fulfilled aspect is yet
to me made manifest. This fulfilled aspect consists in the spiritual regeneration of the believer
[2Co.5:17]. Hence Jesus is seen, like Adam, a progenitor of a new race of humans who not only
have the natural birth, but now also have the spiritual birth [Rom.8:9]. But the restoration of the
peace and prosperity of the created order like the times of Eden is yet to be accomplished. This is
anticipated in the Millennial reign, which would be inaugurated at the second advent of Christ as a
conquering prince. [1Pet.3:13; Rev.21:1-5].
The Messianic expectation could also be seen as personified in Noah. In Gen. 5:28-29 there
is an echo of messianic hope in the name given to Noah:
28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son: 29 And
he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work
and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.

This name is prophetic, and Noah could be seen to have partly fulfilled a messianic role in the
following ways: First, he virtually became a head of a new race, since the whole of humanity was
except his family were wiped out by the flood. Secondly, he became a mediator of a new covenant,
between God and the whole of creation [Gen.8:20 – 22], and thus a recipient of a new law for all
humanity [Gen.9:1-17]. It could be said therefore that a new creation and a new dispensation was
mediated through Noah. Though there was a fiery judgment on the whole of humanity, yet a

18
remnant was saved through the ark built by Noah. Jesus also likened the manner of His second
advent to the times of Noah [Lk.17:26-27].

4.3 The Messiah and Moses

The portrait of Moses and the event of the deliverance from bondage and exodus from Egypt
occupy a crucial position in Israelite social, political and religious thought. Moses could be
considered the real archetype of Jewish messianic hope. The prophecy of Moses in Deuteronomy
18:15-19 is important in discussion of this messianic expectation:
15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from
your brethren -- him you shall heed -- 16 just as you desired of the LORD your God at
Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, `Let me not hear again the voice of
the LORD my God, or see this great fire any more, lest I die.' 17 And the LORD said
to me, `They have rightly said all that they have spoken. 18 I will raise up for them a
prophet like you from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and
he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not give heed to
my words which he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.

The phrase “a prophet like me” in verse 15; and “a prophet like you” in verse 18 sets Moses as a
pattern for the forth-coming Messianic prophet figure. Various arguments have been marshalled
with regards to whether this passage refers specifically to the Messiah, or to a succession of prophet
as was experienced later in Israelite national and religious history. Notwithstanding these
arguments, it could still be asserted that it refers in part to these chain of prophets, since each true
prophet is in one respect or the other a foreshadow of the coming Messiah; and on the other hand it
refers ultimately to the future eschatological figure of the Messiah 19. The following aspects of
Moses‟s life and ministry could be seen as providing the template for the coming Messiah.
First, Moses had such relationship with the Lord that the Lord spoke “face to face” with
him, and not by dreams or visions. This foreshadows the Messiah, who would be a direct agent of
God.
Secondly, Moses was a recipient of, or rather a mediator of a novel covenant at Sinai, all
other prophets were preachers and sustainers of this covenant while they point to a forthcoming
mediator of a new covenant. See for example, Jeremiah 31:31ff. The forthcoming Messiah would
also be a mediator of a new covenant. It must be noted that the covenant of Moses at Sinai had
several precursors as well. Though it cannot be divorced from the previous covenants like the Noah
covenant and the covenants with the Patriarchs, yet it is entirely new because it launched the
Hebrews into an entirely new phase in their national and religious experience just as the Noah
covenant marked a new phase in the life of humanity.

19
For more detailed explanation on this discuss see Motyer, J. A. “Messiah” in Douglas, J. D. et. al. Eds New Bible
Dictionary 3rd Ed. (England: IVP ) p.760

19
 Furthermore, Moses midwifed a new liturgical community. With the Sinai covenant arose a
new priesthood and liturgy; a completely new system of worship with its prescribed liturgy and
rites. All other prophets battled for the maintenance and sustenance of this liturgical community,
while they point forward to the forthcoming personality who would inaugurate a new liturgical
community and propel the religious community into a new phase. Compare for instance Exodus
19:5-6 cf 1Pet.2:9; consider also John 4:21-25.
Moreover, Moses was an agent of deliverance under God. God used him to deliver His
people from bondage in Egypt and inaugurate them as a sovereign people, with their own political
freedom. The overthrow of the Egyptian chariots in the Red Sea is also seen as a sort of military
deliverance. [Exo.15:1-5].
He could also be seen as a kinsman, and an avenger of blood. Though he was brought up in
Pharaoh‟s palace as though he were an Egyptian prince; he was nursed by his mother who must
have shown him that he is a Hebrew by blood. Not only did he bring them out of Egypt, there were
serious blows of judgement meted out on the Egyptians and their gods. For instance, the various
plagues, particularly the death of the firs-born sons, symbolised revenge upon the Egyptians for
killing the Israelite male children, and the bitter labour to which they subjected them.
Considering the foregoing, it could then be rationally concluded that Moses was indeed an
archetype of the forthcoming Messiah.

4.4 The Messiah and David

David provides the model for the expected Messiah, as the Anointed King. It is notable that
David also had a covenant which sealed a new level in the national experience of the Hebrews. The
Davidic Covenant sealed the transition from tribal confederacy to monarchy. This covenant is the
basis of Jewish hope of a Messiah who would be a “Son of David”, that is, a prince from the lineage
of David who would have all rights to claim David‟s throne and restore the Kingdom (Acts. 1:6)
This apart, David was anointed with oil and consequently became endowed with the Holy
Spirit. He was described as “a man after God‟s heart, symbolising that he was Chosen by God and
that he was acting as moved by God‟s Spirit. He reorganised the cult, and prepared the ground for
the building of the Temple which was to be a significant symbol, and ushered in a new phase in
Israelite religious experience.
David performed the role of kinsman-redeemer in his fight against Goliath, and his
subsequent military campaigns against the Philistines and other national enemies of the Hebrews.
He is seen as a deliverer from the tyrant attacks of the enemy nations. Note it was the tribe of Judah
that first enthroned David as king, and later after the civil war led by Absalom, they were insistent
on the fact that David was their own “flesh and blood”. Consider for instance, 2Samuel 2:4; 19:40-
20
43.
Moreover, it was under David that the kingdom was consolidated. David expanded the
frontiers of Israel‟s dominion, provided political stability and ushered in a period of peace and
prosperity. Though David was not morally and spiritually perfect, his rule gave the Israelites a deep
yearning for a perfect, eternal Kingdom of peace and prosperity.

21
 5.0 REVISION QUESTIONS
1. Critically discuss the qualifying attributes of Jesus the Messiah as the Kinsman Redeemer
of Israel
**Discuss the role and the qualification of the Redeemer as kinsman Redeemer –Term Paper
2021.

2. Trace the etymology of the term Messiah and discuss its titular implications
3. What are the expected qualifications of the anticipated Messiah?
4. Critically discuss the following typological designations of the Messiah (i) The Son of God
(ii) The Son of Man (iii) The Son of David
5. Explain the various ways in which the following people pre-figure the expected Messiah: (i)
Adam (ii) Moses (iii) David (iv) Noah (v) Cyrus
6. Discuss the roles and qualities of the following in relation to Israelite Messianic expectation:
(i) Priests, (ii) Judges, (iii) Kings, and (iv) Prophets
7. Discuss exhaustively, the dual nature of the anticipated Messiah with regards to his
humanity and divinity
8. Explain the origin and development of the Jewish expectation of a Messianic conquering
King
9. What are the relationships between the Jerusalemite royal theology and Jewish Messianic
hope?
10. The anticipation of two Messiahs in the Intertestamental period is fully realised in the person
and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth – Discuss.

References

Abegg, Martin G. "Messianic Hope and 4Q285: A Reassessment." Journal of Biblical Literature 113, no. 1
(1994): 81-91. Accessed February 18, 2021. doi:10.2307/3266311.

Aytoun, W. R. "The Rise and Fall of the 'Messianic' Hope in the Sixth Century." Journal of Biblical Literature
39, no. 1/2 (1920): 24-43. Accessed February 18, 2021. doi:10.2307/3260109.

Clements, R.E. 'The Messianic Hope in the Old Testament', Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 43
(Feb. 1989): 4.

Ellison, H.L. The Certainty of the Messianic Idea for the Old Testament. Leicester: TSF, p.16.

Hengstenberg, E.W. Christology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1973, p.38.

Kae, A.W. The Messianic Hope. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975, p.13.

22
Mathews, Shailer. "The Jewish Messianic Expectation in the Time of Jesus." The Biblical World 12,
no. 6 (1898): 437-43. Accessed February 18, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3137371.

Max Botner. "The Messiah Is “the Holy One”: ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ as a Messianic Title in Mark 1:24."
Journal of Biblical Literature 136, no. 2 (2017): 417-33. Accessed February 18, 2021.
doi:10.15699/jbl.1362.2017.167203.

Oliver, Isaac W. "MESSIANIC JEWS AND THE EARLY JEWISH FOLLOWERS OF JESUS."
Hebrew Studies 57 (2016): 367-75. Accessed February 18, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/44072311.

Schmidt, W.H. The Faith of the Old Testament. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983, pp.199-200.

Smith, Henry Preserved. "The Origin of the Messianic Hope in Israel." The American Journal of
Theology 14, no. 3 (1910): 337-60. Accessed February 18, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3154989.

Online Resources

The Messianic Hope https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_messiah.html

Why the Messianic Prophecy is Important https://wordsearchbible.lifeway.com/products/36366-

new-american-commentary-studies-in-bible-theology-the-messianic-hope/sample_text

Craig A. Evans: MESSIANIC HOPES AND MESSIANIC FIGURES IN LATE ANTIQUITY:

https://arts.ucalgary.ca/sites/default/files/teams/2/CLARE/Chair_Christian_Thought/2004nov2_
evansmessianichopes.pdf

The Messianic Hope in the book of Isaiah https://open.bu.edu/handle/2144/7252 permanent

link https://hdl.handle.net/2144/7252

23