(Continued from Chapter II)

I handed him a Hebrew Bible and asked him to read and translate the first verse, which thing he did. He began his translation as follows, "God said unto my God." I interrupted, and asked him to reread and translate. He scrutinized the passage more carefully and repeated his translation as he had read it at first. I then called his attention to his translation which implied that there is at least two divine eternal personalities--the speaker and the one addressed. He replied by saying that Moses taught that there is but one God and then asked me to hand him a Yiddish translation, which he read. He could not harmonize the thought of two divine personalities, here mentioned, with his conception of Deuteronomy 6:4, namely, the great confession of Israel already discussed; yet he said that this passage plainly teaches that there are two divine personalities. I insisted that he waive the effort to harmonize this passage with Israel's confession and asked him, for the sake of clearness, to call the one who is doing the speaking in this passage, "God Number One," and the one who is addressed, "God Number Two." He agreed.

I then asked him what had God Number One said to God Number Two, and he replied by translating the words, "Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool." I then called his attention to the fact that God Number Two has enemies for the verse thus states it. To this thought he replied by asking me how could God Number Two have enemies. In reply to this query I recalled a kind remark which he had made earlier in the evening that he felt very kindly toward me, adding this question, "Now did you, Mr.…, like me five years ago?" Immediately he replied in the negative, stating that it was impossible because he had not known me that long. A second question I asked him was, "Could you have hated me five years ago?" To this question he immediately answered in the negative, stating that such a thought was impossible. I then called his attention to the fact that, since Messiah has enemies, the presupposition is that he has come in vital contact and relationship with certain persons who became hostile toward him. To this thought he assented, stating that such an inference was necessary. Without hesitation he then asked who these enemies were. In answering his question I urged him to read verse two, which thing he did.

I called his attention to the characteristic of Hebrew poetry known as "Hebrew Parallelism." Frequently the poets expressed a thought in certain word's and repeated the same idea with some little modification or addition in the following line. This distinctive feature of Hebrew poetry enables one to understand the meaning more clearly. Thus in the first part of verse two, he speaks of Zion and in a corresponding part of the second line he speaks of Messiah's enemies. Hebrew parallelism, therefore, demand's that one understand that the people of Zion are the enemies of Messiah. When he saw this point, he asked me if it could be possible that the people of Zion could become enemies of their Messiah. To this question I replied in the affirmative because the prediction thus states that fact. In the further discussion I called his attention to the fact that this verse presupposes that Messiah comes to Zion. As to how he comes no intimation is given here.

After the people of Zion become his enemies, God Number One invites Him to leave Zion (Jerusalem) and to ascend to heaven and to sit at His right hand in the heavens. (I am thoroughly acquainted with those interpretations which endeavor to make this language apply to the command for the Royal Palace to be built on the south side of the temple of God, and like explanations. One has to violate the fundamental rule of interpretation to find such material references in this passage. Each word is to be taken at its primary ordinary literal meaning unless the context indicates otherwise. This context does not indicate that the words here are to be taken otherwise than literally; therefore I consistently hold to the literal meaning.)

According to verse one, Messiah (God Number Two), having ascended to the right hand of God Number One in the heavens, remains there until the latter subjects the formers enemies under Him, that is, until God Almighty providentially puts the people of Zion (the Jewish nation) under their Messiah whom they reject at his first coming. God Number One is at work in his effort to put them under his feet from the time they reject him until He has accomplished this task. Of course, in dealing with man, He respects everyone's power of free choice, but the ultimate outcome will be that God Number One will bring the Hebrew race to the point that it will gladly accept Messiah (God Number Two), whom it rejects at his first coming.

When this work is accomplished, Messiah will come to Zion the second time and the Hebrew people will most gladly and willingly offer themselves to Him--"Thy people offer themselves willingly in the day of thy power." Messiah then assumes His government in Zion and He reigns over Israel. Not only will He be King of Israel, but He will also be a priest of the nation, "After the order of Melchizedek."

From this little study, it is clear that the entire career of Messiah is clearly outlined by the prophet in this hymn. For the sake of clearness permit me to repeat it. The inference of verse one is that Messiah comes to Zion. Verses one and two state that the people of Zion, the Jews, become His enemies. Verse one foretells God's invitation to Messiah to leave Zion after His rejection by His people and His ascension to the throne of God in heaven. Verse one likewise shows that Messiah is to remain there until God providentially brings the Jewish nation to that attitude of mind when it will gladly accept His Messiahship. Verse three shows that the very people, the Jews, who reject Him at His first coming, most ardently accept Him at His return--"In the day of thy power."

Thus two comings of Messiah to Zion are clearly seen in this passage. When he comes the first time He fulfills those predictions of the sufferings of Messiah; when He returns from heaven to Zion, He will fulfill those predictions of the glorious reign of Messiah. It is clear from this passage that there are not two Messiahs; but only one who is at first rejected and later returns and is heartily welcomed by his former enemies.

In the preceding paragraph it has been shown that Messiah, according to the prophetic word, is to be rejected by his people at His first appearance. It is absolutely necessary, having thus shown from the Scriptures that He is to come and be rejected at first, to show the time of His first appearance as indicated by the prophets. There are two predictions which bear upon this point.

In Genesis 49:10 the prediction is made that "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh come, And unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be." This prediction has been correctly interpreted by many outstanding Hebrew commentators as a definite prophecy of the Messiah. This verse presupposes that the time will come when the sceptre (the government) shall depart from Judah; or, in other words, this verse foretells the complete fall and destruction of the government of Judah. It likewise foretells that Messiah shall appear before that disaster.

It is a well-known fact that at the fall of Jerusalem in the year A.D. 70 the Jewish government was completely annihilated and the people scattered to the four winds of the earth. Since then there has been no government in Judah. The prediction being true, it is evident that Israel's Messiah has come and, according to the other predictions, has suffered, and has been rejected by His people. From this conclusion there can be no escape.

A second passage giving the exact time of Messiah's appearing is found in Daniel 9:24f. In verse 24, Daniel is told by the Angel Gabriel that seventy weeks are decreed upon the Jewish people and upon the city of Jerusalem to bring in the glorious reign of righteousness and peace, which is constantly referred to by all the prophets. The expression (seventy weeks) means seventy sevens, or 490. The context must be consulted to ascertain the subject of discussion. According to verse two, Daniel had been reading about years; therefore the context indicates clearly that the seventy weeks refers to 490 years.

The beginning of these 490 years, according to verse 25, was the year when Cyrus issued a decree for the Jews to return to their homeland from exile. The year of the return was 536 B.C. according to Ussher's chronology or the year 3589 A.H. (from the creation of man). According to verse 26, sixty-nine weeks after the decree of Cyrus, Messiah is to "be cut off and shall have nothing." According to this verse, Messiah was to come and to be cut off exactly 483 years after the decree of Cyrus. Was this prediction fulfilled?

Ussher's Chronology, which is the generally accepted one, is unreliable because it is based upon the computation of Ptolemy, the heathen astronomer, who arbitrarily chose the longer chronology for the Persian period. As for me, I am convinced that neither the shorter nor the longer chronology for the Persian period is correct. I prefer to accept the inspired infallable Word of God, as given by Daniel, that the Messiah was to be cut off 483 years after Cyrus issued his decree for the Jews to return to Jerusalem. Since the Word of God cannot be broken, it is evident to everyone who believes this message of God, that Messiah came and was cut off according to the prediction.

Having shown to the intelligent, honest inquiring Hebrew that the Tenach teaches the Triune nature of the Divine Being; that one of these Divine Personalities was scheduled to appear and become Israel's Divine-human Messiah; that Messiah at His first coming was to be rejected, received up into heaven and remain there until the Jews become willing to accept Him at which time He will return and reign over the world; and that His first coming was prior to the downfall of the kingdom of Judah, one is then prepared to show that Jesus of Nazareth, whose life corresponded exactly to all of the predictions of the Old Testament was and is Israel's rightful Messiah.

The Gospel according to Matthew was written especially to show to the Hebrew people that Jesus was their longed-for Messiah. It is well for one who wishes to present the claims of Jesus to the Hebrew people to familarize himself with this record of the Gospel. Having given the gist of Matthew to him, it is wise and proper for him to turn to the second chapter of Acts and present Jesus to the Jew just as the inspired apostle Peter did on the first pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus to His Jewish audience in the city of Jerusalem.

(Continued on the next page)