CHAPTER VII
Expecting the Messiah
Few persons, if any, competent to judge, will question the existence in history of a Messianic age. The first historian who records the fact is Josephus, who was a witness of its existence. It was contemporaneous with his own life and that of his immediate ancestors, and was limited in its manifestation to Judea, the land, of his birth; and it is he who has related the incidents which occurred in it, as well as the philosophic views and political agitations, with the errors and crimes, which characterized it. In it the first announcement was made to the world of an expectation, which extended far over the borders of Judea, of the advent of the Messiah in fulfilment of biblical prophecies. It was an age of portents and prodigies, of signs on earth and signs in heaven, and it coincided neither with the period of the procuratorship of Pontius Pilate nor that of the reign of Tiberius.
For the insignificant individual who was slain by Pilate, and whose death and that of his followers led to his recall, was neither the founder of a new philosophy nor a pretender to the Messiahship, but simply an impostor. The age referred to commenced when the philosophy of Judas of Galilee began to circulate and find acceptance, partly among the simple-minded, partly among the political zealots and partly among the more restless spirits of the community; and when Caligula at length commanded his image to be set up in Judea and worshipped, then the idea of the kingdom of God as preached by Judas, with its renunciation of all merely human kingship, began violently to seize on the heart and sway the great mass of the people; only as the reign of Caligula was short-lived, and his successor, Claudius Caesar, commenced his government in a milder and less exacting spirit (though he openly persecuted the Druidic religion in Gaul and Britain,) the revolt was for a time allayed and there was no open outburst.
The days of religious fanaticism, however, had set in, and another pretender to prophetical inspiration arose, who endeavored to delude the people. This was when Fadus was procurator of Judea, in the early days of Claudius Caesar (41CE.) This impostor was called Theudas: “He persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with them and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them he was a prophet, and that he would, by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it." So Josephus reports (Antiquities, Book xx. cap. 5, § 1.)
Up to this moment no mention whatever is made of Jesus Christ: of him, if he existed previously, all his contemporaries are silent, and that though the names of many others are given who were pretenders to divine powers, or powers, at least, transcending such as are normal to humanity.
The procuratorship of Marcus Antonius Felix, which extended to the reign of Nero (52-58CE,) witnessed further attempts at innovation under the pretext of a Divine commission: "The works that were done by the robbers filled the city with all sorts of impiety. And now these impostors and deceivers persuaded the multitude to follow them into the wilderness, and pretended that they would exhibit manifest wonders and signs, that should be performed by the providence of God. And many that were prevailed on by them suffered the punishment of their folly; for Felix brought them back and then punished them. Moreover, there came out of Egypt about this time to Jerusalem, one that said he was a prophet, and advised the multitude of the common people to go with him to the Mount of Olives, as it was called, which lay over against the city, and at the distance of five furlongs. He said further that he would show them from hence how, at his command, the walls of Jerusalem would fall down, and he promised them that he would procure them an entrance into the city through those walls, when they were fallen down. Now, when Felix was informed of these things, he ordered his soldiers to take their weapons; and came against them with a great number of horsemen and footmen from Jerusalem, and attacked the Egyptian and the people that were with him. He also slew four hundred of them, and took two hundred alive. But the Egyptian himself escaped out of the fight, and did not appear any more. And again the robbers stirred up the people to make war with the Romans, and said they ought not to obey them at all; and when any person would not comply with them, they set fire to their villages and plundered them." (Antiquities, Book xx. cap. 8, § 6)
Here, again, we have another pretender to divine powers of no great significance portrayed by the historian of the day, and still not one word of Jesus of Nazareth. The case referred to is one more instance of the existence and influence on the popular mind of the religion of Judas of Galilee, and the prevailing expectation of a Messiah, which tended to make men impatient of every other authority, and converted, at length, a community collected together under the name of religion into a gang of open robbers, who pillaged right and left from those who would not consent to go along with them in their revolutionary action. Why, it is natural to ask, are there accounts on the page of history of these inconsiderable fanatics, and no word of Jesus, who is traditionally represented as having so acted and spoken as to have impressed his disciples with the conviction that he was the co-equal of the Deity, the doer of many wonderful works, the founder of a new religion which was to swallow up and sweep away every other; who when alive brought the dead to life and stilled the turbulence of the sea; over whose person the heavens opened, and out of which the astonished human ear heard God's own voice saying, "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased;" one on whom had fallen the mantle of Moses and Elijah, who descended from heaven to pay him homage and resign him their thrones? Of all this the pages of authentic history are silent, and that though this Jesus is said to have preached his doctrine from mountaintops to assembled multitudes, and fed his hungry followers by thousands, — not with manna, but with substantial bread and fish miraculously multiplied; and though there were numbers alive who had witnessed his death amid darkness on the cross, been with him after his resurrection from the dead, shared in the enthusiasm which followed his ascension to heaven, and wrought signs and wonders by faith in his name, as the prince of life to the world.
Festus succeeds Felix (58CE,) and a new impostor appears, but still no word of Jesus: "So Festus sent forces, both horsemen and footmen, to fall upon those that had been seduced by a certain impostor, who promised them deliverance and freedom from the miseries they were under, if they would but follow him as far as the wilderness. Accordingly those forces that were sent destroyed both him that had deluded them and those that were his followers also." (Antiquities, Book xx. Cap. 8, § l0)
Pretenders to Messianic powers followed each other at this time in rapid succession, and deluded more or fewer by promises of deliverance by the right hand of God from the miseries the nation suffered under the Roman domination. Many of these pretenders, much as they, with their followers, suffered for their superstitious beliefs and proceedings, were themselves the victims of a delusion that was inspired by others, on whose shoulders, therefore, the responsibility lay.
Not till a later period does a pretender of the name of Jesus appear on record; for one of this name comes to light just as the Jewish state is falling to pieces, on the eve of the destruction of the city and Temple. He is preceded by that religious teacher whose reputation for piety, renunciation of all worldly ties and engagements, and insistence on baptismal purification are mentioned by Josephus, who, as we have seen, resided with him for three years, that is, sixteen years subsequent to the recall of Pontius Pilate (53CE.)
Now, if Luke's chronology be accepted, John the Baptizer would at this time be about thirty-six years old; and surely such a character as this could not already be forgotten. Or is it not more probable that Banus with whom Josephus was associated, and whose name, by the way, is derived from a word signifying "to dip," is really the identical person spoken of under the name of John in a subsequent age, of which we learn for the first time, from four Greek writers, that he, as Baptizer, lived at an earlier date precisely such a life as is here indicated historically by Josephus, who, however, is not aware of any other person as leading such an ascetic life?
Would Josephus have referred to this Banus as the head of a particular sect of Judaism, and yet be silent about John the Baptizer, had a different individual of that name and ascetic life previously existed? Would he not have referred to Banus as the follower or disciple of this John, whom, in the case assumed, he must have succeeded after an interval of only a year or two? Would Banus have become as famous as Josephus represents, if he had been born at a later date than that which the chronology of Luke assigns to the birth of John? It would require many years of private training and public manifestation before anyone could acquire such historical prominence as is assigned by Josephus to Banus in his autobiography; and we may well conclude, therefore, that the Banus of Josephus is the John of Evangelical tradition.
Considerations such as these tend to fix for us the correct chronology; and the fixing of this is an important point towards the establishment of the truth. The many incidents occurring at different periods both prior and subsequent to the procuratorship of Pilate should be most conscientiously studied by all lovers of historical truth; and history, which even Christianity regards as a most sacred domain, ought not so to be tampered with in the interest of any theology. And so far is the testimony of history from confirming the dates of the traditional accounts that we find, as we read the historic page that we have already finished the reigns of Tiberius (14– 37CE,) Caligula (37-41CE,) and Claudius (41-54,) and advanced into the reign of Nero (54-68CE,) before we come upon the name of Jesus. Up to this period there is no mention whatever either of him or his religion, or the wonderful works on which, according to the Evangelists, he grounded his title to respect.
The Jewish religion was, as we have already seen, divided at this period into four sects, three of which were of more or less ancient date, and the new sect founded about the period of the Cyrenian taxation by Judas of Galilee (14CE.) This latter sect was an innovation on the old cult and introduced new forms; it was instinct with superstitious enthusiasm, and blended politics with the sacred rites of religion, having in view the breaking of the Roman yoke and the establishment, pure and simple, of the kingdom of God, whose administration was to be a sacerdotal one in the hands of the high-priest, who should rule the nation according to the laws of God.
But this Messianic ideal required the appearance of a Messiah - an anointed heir of David - whom the Greeks translated: κριστοσ, from which is derived Christ-ian and pretenders to Messianic power in consequence followed each other in rapid succession, who promised the deliverance sought for to multitudes of dupes. The Roman authorities knew of the prevailing delusion, and treated it as a political subterfuge to overthrow the Roman yoke. Pontius Pilate's recall from the procuratorship (37CE,) for killing, along with his followers, the pretended prophet of Samaria, whom we have so often referred to, was prompted by the conviction that the act was a political blunder, the Samaritan senate having satisfied the imperial authorities that there was no insurrectionary spirit or meaning in the attempt. The Roman world became familiar with the story of these transactions and the memory of them subsequently blended themselves, more or less transformed, in the traditional accounts that apply to Jesus.
Only let us note it was the expectation of a Messiah, and not the advent of one, which brought Palestine to destruction, and the true history of the period confirms this conclusion. It was this expectation that gave the zealots and demagogues such influence over the mass of the people.