Peter Kirby

The time period is ca. 100 BCE-100 CE, and the question is "messianic expectation."

Does anyone have suggested resources on this? Their own ideas? Evidence?

It's been a long-time interest of mine.

best,
Peter Kirby

Wallener

Based on Bar Kokhba experience of the 130s CE, the Messianic expectation included:

(a) a human being (as opposed to deity or demi-god)
(b) a ruler, not a prophet
(c) some level of military leadership

He was referred to as "Prince" and "King", and his reign, such as it was, was referred to as the Redemption of Israel. The guy minted coins, so it certainly seems the "Messianic Age" was an earthly one. My understanding is that the disagreements with Akiva from the other prominent sages on Bar Kokhba's messiahship centered on his status as sinful (or not).

To put down Bar Kokhba, a number of Roman legions from Egypt and Greece were called in. Given the overlap of gospel redaction with the return of these legions to their home bases, I do wonder from time to time if stories brought back by the legionnaires from Masada etc didn't conflate with the "other stuff".

Diogenes the Cynic

The main expectation was that he would be an heir to the throne of David who would restore the Kingdom of Israel an initiate an era of world peace. There was also a strong conception of him as a priestly king -- i.e. a king who held both political and religious authority. There was some variation on how he would manifest his power and accomplish his mission -- whether he would be primarily a military leader, for instance, or a prophet or a sage. There was, of course, no expectation that he would be God or that he would be a redeemer of sins, or that he would be killed or resurrected,

Anat

Wallener, I wonder how much the Jewish concept of Messiah changed immediately following the rebellion and the destruction of the temple. Was the only change that the Messiah got the additional task of rebuilding the temple and resuming the sacrifices?

Steven Carr

A related question is which Biblical references supported their expectations of what a Messiah would do.

Wallener

That's a good question. The current understanding is the third temple was prophecied all along, so that part shouldn't have had to change, but I don't really know how widespread the belief was back then. I do find it interesting to compare Bar Kokhba - a very visceral kind of figure - with the other great false messiah 1600 years later, Shabbetai Zevi - who had no army, no political influence, and whose strategy seemed to most closely resemble Harmonic Convergence.

For the other poster: citations for this view of messiah can be found at the JewFaq.

http://www.jewfaq.org/moshiach.htm#Age

Sensei Meela

And how much was a response to Christian claims of messianic inheritance.

CJD

Here's my growing bibliography on this, Peter:

H.L. Ellison, The Centrality of the Messianic Idea for the Old Testament
S. Mowinckel, He That Cometh
J. Klausner, The Messianic Idea in Israel
H. Ringgren, The Messiah in the Old Testament
J. Liver, "The Doctrine of the Two Messiahs in Sectarian Literature in the Time of the Second Commonwealth," (HTR 52: 149–85) 1959.
Samson H. Levy, The Messiah: An Aramaic Interpretation
J. Neusner, Messiah in Context
_____, et al., Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era
J.H. Charlesworth, The Messiah: Development in Earliest Judaism and Christianity

Best,

CJD

Amaleq13

CJD,

Is there anything approaching a consensus or at least points of agreement, among the sources you offered?

CJD

As you might expect, not on the surface. But looking closer at some of the underlying work does reveal a few points of agreement.

1. The Jewish national hope anticipated a time when YHWH would bless his people, thus revealing his favor.

2. It may or may not entail a personal Messiah (Moreover, some Christians' ideas regarding "the Messianic hope" of the Jews cannot be borne by the sources.)

3. The center of this expectation was on the nation and the age to come rather than a Messiah per se. Indeed, "Messiah" is only one of many handles or labels available. Early Jewish Christians appropriated this for obvious reasons.

4. The Tanak makes reference to "the anointed," or messiah, frequently. These were people specially chosen for some special task. The future expectation of a Messiah comes only through the appropriation of this historical category to the blessed age to come, usually in post-exilic and inter-testamental literature, though "Messiah" is not a particularly prominent concept therein.

5. The majority of these texts seem to point to a plurality of leadership that constitute the "Messiah." Notably, 4Q521 is the closest thing to a Christian Messiah we have to date.

6. The anticipation of the re-establishment of the Davidic throne becomes increasingly important by the first-century CE. But maybe not until after the year 70.

7. In sum, then, the Jewish expectation is wide and varied. Where a particular individual was in view, no careful details of his function or person are delineated. The Messiah is thought of more in terms of "the age of the Messiah" as opposed to his vocation. Thus we learn the majority of the content of the Messiah's vocation from the stories and prophetic literature of the Tanak as interpreted by the authors of the NT.

Best,

CJD