the confident reply of the
Sanhedrim to the question of Herod as to the birth-place of Christ. And
it is not less evident from John vii. 42. The circumstance that, after
the tumult raised by Barcochba, not only Jerusalem, but Bethlehem also,
was, by the Emperor Adrian, interdicted to the Jews as a residence,
renders it probable that this interpretation was not given up
immediately after the death of Christ. But even after this edict of
Adrian, and after the difficulty had appeared in all its force, they
did not, for a considerable time, venture to assert that the prophecy
knew nothing of Bethlehem as the birth-place of the Messiah. It is with
the later Rabbinical interpreters only, who were better skilled in the
art of distorting, that this assertion is found. The ancient Jews
endeavoured to evade the difficulty by the fable, dressed up in various
ways, that the Messiah was indeed born at Bethlehem, on the day of the
destruction of the temple, but that, on account of the sins of the
people. He was afterwards carried away by a storm, and had, since that
time, remained, unknown and concealed, in various places. Thus speak
the Talmud, the very ancient commentary on Lamentations, _Echa
Rabbati_, and the very old commentary on Genesis, _Breshith Rabba_
(compare the passages in _Raim. Martini_, S. 348-50; _Carpzovius_ and
_Frischmuth_, l.c.). Indeed, we can trace this fiction still farther
back. Closely connected with it is the explanation of [Hebrew: epl
bt-civN] by "darkness of the daughter of Zion" ([Hebrew: cpl] being
confounded with [Hebrew: apl]), _i.e._, hidden on account of Zion. This
explanation is found as early as in Jonathan. The concealment of the
Messiah is only an isolated feature of this fiction. The fiction
itself, indeed, has its roots, not only in the passage under review,
but also in the endeavour to remove the contradiction between the
destruction of the temple, and the firm expectation of the Messiah's
appearing during the time of its existence,--an expectation founded on
passages of the Old Testament. This concealment of the Messiah is
mentioned as early as in the _Dialogus cum Tryphone_ (No. 8 _Bened.
Ven._; compare also p. 114): "Christ, even if he be born, and exist
anywhere, is unknown, and neither manifests himself in any way, nor has
he any power until Elijah come, etc." In order to be convinced that, at
the time when this book was composed, [Pg 497] and hence in the second
century, the fiction wa