476

JESUS CHRIST

JESUS CHRIST

Unction, from a very early age, seems to have been the emblem of consecration, or setting apart to a particular, and especially to a religious, purpose. Under the Old Testament economy high-priests and kings were regularly set apart to their offices, both of which were, strictly speaking, sacred ones, by the ceremony of anointing, and the prophets were occasionally designated by the same rite. This rite seems to have been intended as a public intimation of a Divine appointment to office. Thus Saul is termed the Lord's anointed' (1 Sam. xxiv. 6); David, the anointed of the God of Israel' (2 Sam. xxiii. 1); and Zedekiah, the anointed of the Lord' (Lam. iv. 20). The high-priest is called the anointed priest' (Lev. iv. 3).

From the origin and design of the rite, it is. not wonderful that the term should have, in a secondary and analogical sense, been applied to persons set apart by God for important purposes, though not actually anointed. Thus Cyrus, the King of Persia, is termed the Lord's anointed' (Isa. xlv. 1); the Hebrew patriarchs, when sojourning in Canaan, are termed God's anointed ones' (Ps. cv. 15; and the Israelitish people receive the same appellation from the prophet Habakkuk (Hab. iii. 13).

In the prophetic Scriptures we find this appellation given to an illustrious personage, who, under various designations, is so often spoken of as destined to appear in a distant age as a great deliverer. The royal prophet David seems to have been the first who spoke of the great deliverer under this appellation (Ps. ii. 2; xx. 1; xlv. 7). In all the passages in which the great deliverer is spoken of as the anointed one,' by David, he is plainly viewed as sustaining the character of a king.

The prophet Isaiah also uses the appellation, the anointed one,' with reference to the promised deliverer, but, when he does so, he speaks of him as a prophet or great teacher. He introduces him as saying, The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord God hath Ianointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them who are bound, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all that mourn,' &c. (Isa. lxi. 1, &c.).

Daniel is the only other of the prophets who uses the appellation the anointed one' in reference to the great deliverer, and he plainly represents him as not only a prince, but also a highpriest, an expiator of guilt (Dan. ix. 24-26).

During the period which elapsed from the close of the prophetic canon till the birth of Jesus, no appellation of the expected deliverer seems to have been so common as the Messiah or Anointed One; and this is still the name which the unbelieving Jews ordinarily employ when

Messiah, Christ, Anointed, is, then, a term equivalent to consecrated, sacred, set apart; and as the record of Divine revelation is called, by way of eminence, The Bible, or book, so is the Great Deliverer called The Messiah, or Anointed One, much in the same way as he is termed The Man, The Son of Man.

The import of this designation as given to Jesus of Nazareth may now readily be apprehended.(1.) When he is termed the Christ it is plainly indicated that HE is the great deliverer promised under that appellation, and many others in the Old Testament Scriptures, and that all that is said of this deliverer under this or any other appellation is true of HIM. No attentive reader of the Old Testament can help noticing that in every part of the prophecies there is ever and anon presented to our view an illustrious personage destined to appear at some future distant period, and, however varied may be the figurative representations given of him, no reasonable doubt can be entertained as to the identity of the individual. It is quite obvious that the Messiah is the same person as the seed of the woman' who was to bruise the head of the serpent' (Gen. iii. 15); 'the seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations of the earth were to be blessed' (Gen. xxii. 18); the great prophet to be raised up like unto Moses,' whom all were to be required to hear and obey (Deut. xviii. 15); the priest after the order of Melchizedek; the rod out of the stem of Jesse, which should stand for an ensign of the people to which the Gentiles should seek' (Isa. xi. 1, 10); the virgin's son whose name was to be Immanuel (Isa. vii. 14); the branch of Jehovah' (Isa. iv. 2); 'the Angel of the Covenant (Mal. iii. 1); the Lord of the Temple,' &c. &c. (ib.). When we say, then, that Jesus is the Christ, we in effect say,This is HE of whom Moses, in the law, and the prophets did write' (John i. 45); and all that they say of HIM is true of Jesus.

Now what is the sum of the prophetic testimony respecting him? It is this-that he should belong to the very highest order of being, the mcommunicable name Jehovah being represented as rightfully belonging to him; that his goings forth have been from old, from everlasting' (Mic. v. 2); that his appropriate appellations should be Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God' (Isa. ix. 6); that he should assume human nature, and become a child born' of the Israelitish nation of the tribe of Judah (Gen. xlix. 10), of the family of David (Isa. xi. 1); that the object of his appearance should be the salvation of mankind, both Jews and Gentiles (Isa. xlix. 6); that he should be despised and rejected' of his countrymen; that he should be cut off, but not for himself;' that he should be wounded for men's transgressions, bruised for their iniquities, and undergo the chastisement of their peace;' that by his stripes men should be healed;' that the Lord should lay on him the iniquity' of men; that exaction should be made and he should answer it; that he should make his soul an offering for sin;' that after these sufferings he should be 'exalted and extolled and made very high;' that he should see of the travail of his

JESUS CHRIST

soul and be satisfied, and by his knowledge justify many' (Isa. liii. passim); that Jehovah should say to him, Sit at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool' (Ps. cx. 1); that he should be brought near to the Ancient of Days, and that to him should be given dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, and nations, and languages should serve him-an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away,-a kingdom that shall not be destroyed' (Dan. vii. 13, 14). All this is implied in saying Jesus is the Christ. In the plainer language of the New Testament Jesus is the Christ' is equivalent to Jesus is 'God manifest in the flesh' (1 Tim. iii. 16),-the Son of God, who, in human nature, by his obedience, and sufferings, and death in the room of the guilty, has obtained salvation for them, and all power in heaven and earth for himself, that he may give eternal life to all coming to the Father through him.

(2.) While the statement Jesus is the Christ' is thus materially equivalent to the statement all that is said of the Great Deliverer in the Old Testament Scriptures is true of HIM,' it brings more directly before our mind those truths respecting him which the appellation the Anointed One' naturally suggests. He is a prophet, a priest, and a king. He is the great revealer of divine truth; the only expiator of human guilt, and reconciler of man to God; the supreme and sole legitimate ruler over the understandings, consciences, and affections of men. In his person, and work, and word, by his spirit and providence, he unfolds the truth with respect to the divine character and will, and so conveys it into the mind as to make it the effectual means of conforming man's will to God's will, man's character to God's character. He has by his spotless, all-perfect obedience, amid the severest sufferings, obedience unto death even the death of the cross,' so illustrated the excellence of the divine law and the wickedness and danger of violating it, as to make it a righteous thing in the just God' to justify the ungodly,' thus propitiating the offended majesty of heaven; while the manifestation of the divine love in appointing and accepting this atonement, when apprehended by the mind under the influence of the Holy Spirit, becomes the effectual means of reconciling man to God and to his law, 'transforming him by the renewing of his mind.' And now, possessed of 'all power in heaven and earth,'' all power over all flesh,' 'He is Lord of All.' All external events and all spiritual influences are equally under his control, and as a king he exerts his authority in carrying into full effect the great purposes which his revelations as a prophet, and his great atoning sacrifice as a high-priest, were intended to accomplish.

(3.) But the full import of the appellation the CHRIST is not yet brought out. It indicates that He to whom it belongs is the anointed prophet, priest, and king-not that he was anointed by material oil, but that he was divinely appointed, qualified, commissioned, and accredited to be the Saviour of men. These are the ideas which the term anointed seems specially intended to convey. Jesus was divinely appointed to the offices he filled. He did not ultroneously assume them, 'he was called of God as was Aaron' (Heb. v. 4; Isa. xi. 2-4). He was divinely commissioned:

JEW

477 He is

The Father sent him' (Isa. xlix. 6). divinely accredited (Acts ii. 22; John v. 37). Such is the import of the appellation Christ.

If these observations are clearly apprehended there will be little difficulty in giving a satisfactory answer to the question which has sometimes been proposed—when did Jesus become Christ? when was he anointed of God? We have seen that the expression is a figurative or analogical one, and therefore we need not wonder that its references are various. The appointment of the Saviour, like all the other divine purposes, was, of course, from eternity. He was set up from everlasting' (Prov. viii. 23); he was foreordained before the foundation of the world' (1 Pet. i. 20). His qualifications, such of them as were conferred, were bestowed in or during his incarnation, when God anointed him with the Holy Ghost and with power' (Acts x. 38). His commission may be considered as given him when called to enter on the functions of his office. He himself, after quoting, in the synagogue of Nazareth, in the commencement of his ministry, the passage from the prophecies of Isaiah in which his unction to the prophetical office is predicted, declared This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.' And in his resurrection and ascension, God, as the reward of his loving righteousness and hating iniquity, anointed him with the oil of gladness above his fellows' (Ps. xlv. 7), i. e. conferred on him a regal power, fruitful in blessings to himself and others, far superior to that which any king had ever possessed, making him, as the Apostle Peter expresses it, both Lord and Christ' (Acts ii. 36). As to his being accredited, every miraculous event performed in reference to him or by him may be viewed as included in this species of anointing-especially the visible descent of the Spirit on him in his baptism.

These statements, with regard to the import of the appellation the Christ,' show us how we are to understand the statement of the Apostle John, Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God' (1 John v. 1), i. e. is a child of God,' 'born again,' 'a new creature;' and the similar declaration of the Apostle Paul, 'No man can say that Jesus is the Lord,' i. e. the Christ, the Messiah, but by the Holy Ghost' (1 Cor. xii. 3). It is plain that the proposition, Jesus is the Christ,' when understood in the latitude of meaning which we have shown belongs to it, contains a complete summary of the truth respecting the divine method of salvation. Το believe that principle rightly understood is to believe the Gospel-the saving truth, by the faith of which a man is, and by the faith of which only a man can be, brought into the relation or formed to the character of a child of God; and though a man may, without divine influence, be brought to acknowledge that Jesus is the Lord,' 'Messiah the Prince,' and even firmly to believe that these words embody a truth, yet no man can be brought really to believe and cordially to acknowledge the truth contained in these words, as we have attempted to unfold it, without a peculiar divine influence.

JESUS, surnamed JUSTUS.
JETHRO. [HOBAB.]

[JUSTUS.]

JEW, a name formed from that of the patriarch Judah, and applied in its first use to one belong

JOAB

of Zeruiah, the sister of David, and captain of the host' (generalissimo) of the army during Dearly the whole of David's reign.

He first appears associated with his two brothers, Abishai and Asahel, in the command of David's troops against Abner, who had set up the claims of a son of Saul in opposition to those of David, who then reigned in Hebron. The armies baving met at the pool of Gibeon, a general action was brought on, in which Abner was worsted. In his flight he had the misfortune to kill Joab's brother, the swift-footed Asahel, by whom he was pursued (2 Sam. ii. 13-32). The consequences of this deed have been explained Isewhere [ABNER; ASAHEL.]. Joab smothered for a time his resentment against the shedder of his brother's blood; but being whetted by the natural rivalry of position between him and Abner, he afterwards made it the instrument of his policy by treacherously, in the act of friendly communication, slaying Abner, at the very time when the services of the latter to David, to whom he had then turned, had rendered him a most dangerous rival to him in power and influence (2 Sam. iii. 22-27). That Abner had at first suspected that Joab would take the position of blood-avenger [BLOOD-REVENGE] is clear, from the apprehension which he expressed (2 Sam. ii. 22); but that he thought that Joab had, under all the circumstances, abandoned this position, is shown by the unsuspecting readiness with which he went aside with him (2 Sam. iii. 26, 27); and that Joab placed his murderous act on the footing of vengeance for his brother's blood, is plainly stated in 2 Sam. iii. 30; by which it also appears that the other brother, Abishai, shared in some way in the deed and its responsibilities. At the same time, as Abner was perfectly justified in slaying Asahel to save his own life, it is very doubtful if Joab would ever have asserted his right of blood-revenge if Abner had not appeared likely to endanger his influence with David. The king, much as he reprobated the act, knew that it had a sort of excuse in the old customs of blood-revenge, and he stood habitually too much in awe of his impetuous and able nephew to bring him to punishment, or even to displace him from his command. I am this day weak,' he said, though anointed king, and these men, the sons of Zeruiah, be too hard for me' (2 Sam. iii. 39; 1 Chron. xi. 4-9). Desirous probably of making some atonement before David and the public for this atrocity, in a way which at the same time was most likely to prove effectual-namely, by some daring exploit-he was the first to mount to the assault at the storming of the fortress on Mount Sion, which had remained so long in the hands of the Jebusites. By this service he acquired the chief command of the army of all Israel, of which David was by this time king (2 Sam. v. 6-10).

It is not necessary to trace the subsequent acts of Joab, seeing that they are in fact the public acts of the king he served. And he served him faithfully; for although he knew his power over David, and often treated him with little ceremony, there can be no doubt that he was most truly devoted to his interests, and sometimes rendered him good service even against his own will, as in the affair at Mahanaim (2 Sam. xix. 5-8). But Joab had no principles apart from what he

deemed his duty to the king and the people, and was quite as ready to serve his master's vices as his virtues, so long as they did not interfere with his own interests, or tended to promote them by enabling him to make himself useful to the king. His ready apprehension of the king's meaning in the matter of Uriah, and the facility with which he made himself the instrument of the murder, and of the hypocrisy by which it was covered, are proofs of this, and form as deep a stain upon his character as his own murders (2 Sam. xi. 14-25). As Joab was on good terms with Absalom, and had taken pains to bring about a reconciliation between him and his father, we may set the higher value upon his firm adhesion to David when Absalom revolted, and upon his stern sense of duty to the kingfrom whom he expected no thanks-displayed in putting an end to the war by the slaughter of his favourite son, when all others shrunk from the responsibility of doing the king a service against his own will (2 Sam. xviii. 1-14). In like manner, when David unhappily resolved to number the people, Joab discerned the evil, and remonstrated against it; and although he did not venture to disobey, he performed the duty tardily and reluctantly, to afford the king an opportunity of reconsidering the matter, and took no pains to conceal how odious the measure was to him (2 Sam. xxiv. 1-4). David was certainly ungrateful for the services of Joab, when, in order to conciliate the powerful party which had supported Absalom, he offered the command of the host to Amasa, who had commanded the army of Absalom (2 Sam. xix. 13). But the inefficiency of the new commander, in the emergency which the revolt of Bichri's son produced. arising perhaps from the reluctance of the troops to follow their new leader, gave Joab an opportunity of displaying his superior resources, and also of removing his rival by a murder very similar to, and in some respects less excusable and more fou than, that of Abner [AMASA]. Besides, Amasa was his own cousin, being the son of his mother's sister (2 Sam. xx. 1-13).

When David lay on his death-bed, and a demonstration was made in favour of the successio.. of the eldest surviving son, Adonijah, whose interests had been compromised by the preference of the young Solomon, Joab joined the party of the natural heir. It would be unjust to regard this as a defection from David. It was nothing more or less than a demonstration in favour of the natural heir, which, if not then made, could not be made at all. But an act which would have been justifiable, had the preference of Solomon been a mere caprice of the old king, became criminal as an act of contumacy to the Divine king, the real head of the government, who had called the house of David to the throne, and had the sole right of determining which of its members should reign. When the prompt measures taken under the direction of the king rendered this demonstration abortive (1 Kings i. 7), Joab withdrew into private life till some time after the death of David, when the fate of Adonijah, and of Abiathar—whose life was only spared in consequence of his sacerdotal character-warned Joab that he had little mercy to expect from the new king. He fled for refuge to the altar; but when Solomon heard this, he sent Benaiah to put