Messias_," S. 151.) How
widely this opinion was spread among the Jews, is sufficiently apparent
from the circumstance, that the renowned pseudo-Messiah in the time
of Hadrian adopted, with reference to the passage under review, the
surname _Barcochba_, _i.e._, Son of the Star.--From the Jews, this
interpretation very soon passed over to the Christians, who rightly
found a warrant for it in the narrative of the star of the wise
men from the East. _Cyril_ of Jerusalem defended the Messianic
interpretation against _Julian_. (Compare _Julian_, ed. _Spanh._ p. 263
c. See other passages [Pg 100] from the fathers of the Church in
_Calov._) According to _Theodoret_ (Quest. 44 in Numb.), there were,
indeed, some to whom "Balaam appeared to have foretold nothing
concerning our Saviour;" but this opinion was rejected as profane. The
Messianic interpretation has, in a narrower and wider sense--_i.e._, as
referring in the first instance to David, but in the highest and proper
sense to Christ--become the prevailing one in the Evangelical Church
also. It was defended even by such interpreters as _Calvin_ and
_Clericus_, who, as to other passages, differed from the prevailing
Messianic interpretation. (Compare especially _Mieg_, _de Stella et
Sceptro Baleamitico_ in the _Thes. Nov._ p. 423 sqq., and _Boullier_,
_Dissert. Syll. Amsterdam_ 1750, _Diss._ I.) On the other hand, the
Messianic interpretation found a zealous and ingenious opponent,
first in _Verschnir_ in the _Bibl. Brem. nova_, reprinted in
his _Opusc._ He was joined by the rationalistic interpreters, who
maintained an exclusive reference to David. But _Rosenmueller_ and
_Baumgarten-Crusius_ (bibl. Theol. S. 369) returned to the Messianic
interpretation.

The question at issue is chiefly this:--Whether by the star and
sceptre some single Israelitish king is designated, or rather, an
ideal person--the personified Israelitish kingdom. The latter view I
proved, in my work on Balaam, to be the correct one, for the following
reasons:--1. The reference to a certain Israelitish king is against the
analogy of the other prophecies of the Pentateuch. A single person,
especially a single king of future time, is nowhere announced in
it,--except the Messiah, whose announcement, however, is different from
that of David. But, on the other hand, the rise of the _kingdom_ in
Israel is announced as early as in the promise to the Patriarchs, on
which all of Balaam's declarations rest through