{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_34201/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_34201","id":"gutenberg_34201","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34201","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Zechariah -- Commentaries","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Messiah -- Prophecies","Millennium (Eschatology)"],"text":"An\n\n                           Amicable Controversy\n\n                                   With\n\n                             A Jewish Rabbi,\n\n                                    On\n\n                          The Messiah\u2019s Coming:\n\n                                Unfolding\n\n                          New Views on Prophecy\n\n                                 And The\n\n                         Nature of the Millenium:\n\n                           With an Entirely New\n\n                         Exposition of Zechariah,\n\n                                  On The\n\n                            Messiah\u2019s Kingdom\n\n                         By J. R. Park, M.D. &c.\n\n                                 London:\n\n                    Smith, Elder, And Co. 65, Cornhill\n\n                                   1832\n\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nPreface.\nIntroduction.\nZechariah On The Messiah\u2019s Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter IX.\nNotes To Chapter IX. Hebrew Punctuation.\nThe Rabbi\u2019s Exposition And Reply, Chapter IX.\n   Zechariah, Chapter IX.\n   Remarks On The Rabbi\u2019s Exposition.\nZechariah On The Messiah\u2019s Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter X.\nNotes To Chapter IX.\nThe Rabbi\u2019s Reply, And The Author\u2019s Remarks Upon It. Chapter X.\nZechariah On The Messiah\u2019s Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter XI.\nNotes To Chapter XI.\nThe Rabbi\u2019s Translation. Chapter XI.\nThe Rabbi\u2019s Exposition. Chapter XI.\nZechariah On The Messiah\u2019s Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter XII.\nNotes To Chapter XII.\nThe Rabbi\u2019s Exposition, And The Author\u2019s Remarks. Chapter XII.\nZechariah On The Messiah\u2019s Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter XIII.\nNotes To Chapter XIII.\nZechariah On The Messiah\u2019s Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter XIV.\nNotes To Chapter XIV.\nThe Millenium.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nWhat! another Commentary on Zechariah! the reader is ready to exclaim.\nHave we not a Lowth and a Blayney? What can learning, talent, or research\neffect, that has not been effected already? In a word, I answer\u2014nothing.\nBut, on the other hand, I ask, what have they effected? With the exception\nof particular passages, on which light has been thrown, the general scope\nof the prophecy remains as obscure as ever. Sufficient proof of this\nappears in the want of consistency in the plan of interpretation, which in\none verse looks to future events, and in another to events long past, for\nexplanation; in one part supposes the prophet to offer a connected series\nof consecutive predictions; in the next supposes him to be carried away by\na transport into a digression bordering upon incoherency; varying,\nmoreover, continually in the principle of exposition, which is literal or\nfigurative, political or spiritual by turns. Surely this is not legitimate\nexposition, but rather bespeaks some latent error, some radical defect in\nthe plan, or principle of investigation.\n\nTo point out that defect, which the writer fancies he has discovered, is\nthe object of the present attempt; whether he be right or wrong, the\nreader must decide. The traveller who mistakes his road, only goes the\nfarther astray the more he prolongs his journey. So the commentator on\nprophecy, who labours to force the text to a sense which it was not\nintended to bear, the more learning and ingenuity he employs, the more he\nbecomes involved in intricacy and obscurity.\n\nIn expounding the prophecies relating to the Jews, commentators have had\nchiefly in view their temporal and political state; whereas the writer\nconceives, that their moral and religious, that is, their spiritual\ncondition, is really the main purport of those which relate to the\nrestoration of Israel. Let any one read the description of the New\nJerusalem in the 21st chapter of Revelations, and ask himself, if this can\npossibly apply to a literal city, or political state. It evidently cannot;\nand yet it must apply to some state of the Jews on earth; for the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom is always described as a kingdom on earth; and,\ntherefore, if the description does not apply to their temporal, it must to\ntheir spiritual condition.\n\nThe Messiah\u2019s kingdom is allowed to be the chief subject of these\nprophecies; but if Christ be the Messiah, his kingdom is a spiritual one,\nand what relates to it must be spiritually understood. We marvel at the\nblindness which prevents the Jews from perceiving in prophecy the numerous\nintimations of a spiritual Messiah, all of which appear to us to have been\ndistinctly fulfilled in the person of Christ; and yet that very blindness\nto their spirituality is what prevents ourselves from understanding other\nprophecies relating to the same subject. Let this be steadily and\nuniformly kept in view, and most of the difficulties will vanish; and an\ninterpretation will unfold itself, not only historically minute, and\nchronologically accurate, but which is, moreover, as far as scriptural\nlanguage admits, literal; for in what relates to spiritual affairs, the\nspiritual is the most literal interpretation. This, then, is the principle\nof the following exposition, and when it has been found necessary to\ncorrect the translation, it was not for the purpose of finding out more\nrecondite meanings, but to bring back the words of the text to their\nordinary and literal signification.\n\nWith regard to the controversial form under which the treatise appears, a\nword of explanation may be requisite. The writer having framed his views\nof prophecy on principles most at variance with those of the Jews, and\nbeing only a self-taught Hebraist, was anxious to know how far his\nexposition might be controverted by an acknowledged Hebrew scholar of the\nJewish persuasion. Upon inquiry he was referred to his present opponent,\nas the fittest person for that purpose; and he had the satisfaction to\nfind, that however they might differ in the plan of interpretation, yet\nhis opponent could rarely challenge the accuracy or fidelity of his\ntranslation; which he acknowledged to be more in accordance with the\nChristian principle of exposition, than any he had previously met with.\n\nAt the same time he declared the views it unfolded, to contain nothing\nlikely to have any weight with a Jew; and readily pledged himself to\nanswer those views, should the writer ever be disposed to publish them.\nThe views and the answer are now before the reader.\n\n[Transcriber\u2019s Note: Single-word Hebrew quotations in the original book\nare often rendered here in the form \u201cA (or B)\u201d, with the same word\nrendered in \u201cA\u201d and in \u201cB\u201d, but with the letters stored in opposite\norders. This is to allow the same e-book to render properly in both HTML\nand PDF. The full-paragraph quotations should appear correct in all\nformats.]\n\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION.\n\n\n    \u201cThe testimony of Jesus in the spirit of prophecy.\u201d\n\n\nFew, perhaps, of those who read the Scriptures are fully aware of the\nextent to which the language of them abounds in metaphor; yet is this\nknowledge indispensable to the right understanding of both the Old and the\nNew Testament, and especially the prophetic parts of these books.\n\nProphecy, though not the largest, is beyond question the most important\npart of Scripture, affording the only irrefragable proofs of God\u2019s moral\ngovernment of the world, and of Christ\u2019s being the promised Messiah. These\nproofs depend upon no human testimony, but carry their evidence in\nthemselves, not resting on man\u2019s credibility. Deposited in the hands of\nthose, whose blindness understands them not, and whose prejudice would\ngladly pervert their meaning, they have been handed down to us, who are\nblinded by similar prejudices, and in expounding these prophecies are only\na shade more enlightened than the Jews.\n\nThis rich mine of miraculous evidence, still remains, almost wholly\nunexplored, although it is to this testimony especially, that Christ\nhimself appealed. _Search the Scriptures_, said he, _for in them ye think\nye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me_. This\ntestimony still remains to Christians of the present day, for the most\npart, a sealed book; for beyond a partially successful attempt, to point\nout in it, the prediction of a few leading events, fulfilled near two\nthousand years ago, and therefore now no longer miraculous evidence to us,\nbut resting on the authenticity of historical records, all the rest is\nveiled from their sight.\n\nThe subsequent history of the progress of our religion, continued in these\nprophecies, in one uninterrupted series of predictions up to the present\nday; detailing the triumphant progress of the Gospel\u2014the downfall of\nJudaism\u2014the subversion of Paganism\u2014the corruption of Christianity by the\nGentiles\u2014the long age of darkness consequent thereto\u2014the rise and\nsuccessful career of Mahommedism, which has supplanted nominal\nChristianity over half the globe\u2014the exact boundary line, affixing a limit\nto the dominion of each of these grand apostacies\u2014their co-existence and\nsimultaneous downfall\u2014and the revival of true Christianity\u2014with other\nevents, clearly foretold, and now fulfilling before our eyes, have all\nescaped the detection of the most learned commentators whether Jewish or\nChristian.\n\nThe inability to explain these prophecies thus tacitly acknowledged, which\nhas accompanied their transmission to our hands, is in some degree a\npledge that they have been faithfully handed down to us; for who would be\nat the pains to interpolate what none could pretend to explain or apply?\nAt the same time, the cause of their remaining unexplained, and of their\nappearing inapplicable to passing events, becomes a highly interesting\nobject of inquiry; and will be chiefly found to arise from the\ncircumstance alleged at the outset, namely, the misinterpretation of the\nfigurative language of Scripture and Prophecy.\n\nThe leading subject of prophecy is the Messiah\u2019s kingdom; a kingdom which\nthe Jews expected to be a temporal one, and in this expectation, rejected\nChrist as a spiritual prince. Whence arose their error?\u2014From their taking\nin a literal sense the language, in which the prophets had described that\nkingdom. The Apostles, and first disciples of our Lord were under a\nsimilar illusion; and had Christ at once undeceived them, and banished\nfrom their minds all hope of temporal dominion, it is probable they would\nto a man have deserted him. In fact, they did so desert him at his\ncrucifixion; nor did they fully perceive their error, till after his\nresurrection, when they received the gift of the Spirit on the day of\nPentecost, and their eyes were at length fully opened to the spiritual\nnature of his reign.\n\nThe Jews still remain under this illusion, continuing still to look for a\ntemporal prince, and the literal fulfilment of prophecy. Thousands also of\nChristians, who look for the second coming of Christ, expect his personal\nadvent; that is, that he will come in person to reign with the saints on\nearth for a thousand years. And the title of saints, whether assumed by,\nor bestowed upon the millenarians, seems to be fondly cherished by them,\nin anticipation of the share they expect in the glories of that reign now\napproaching, or, as they suppose, just at hand.\n\nThat there be any among these, who would, like the first disciples, desert\ntheir Lord, if robbed of this pleasing expectation, it were perhaps\ninvidious to suppose. Whether, like the Jews, they are led into this hope\nof an earthly kingdom, by their misconception of the prophecies that\nrelate to this period, it were premature as yet to enquire. But certain it\nis, that they are for the most part zealous advocates for the literal\nsense of prophecy; and equally adverse with the Jews, to what may be\ntermed the spiritual exposition.\n\nThe term spiritual has, however, been so much misunderstood, in regard to\nthe interpretation of prophecy, that it may be well to explain here what\nis intended by it. No more is meant by this term, than that the prophecies\nrelating to the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, which the Christian must allow to be of\na spiritual nature, foretel events which regard the moral and religious,\nand not the political state of the world. In a word, that they foreshow\nthe progress, and final establishment of true christianity on earth; this\nbeing the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, or his spiritual reign. In this subject, or\nthe progress of our religion, we have a history abounding in events more\ndiversified in their nature, and more interesting in their consequences,\nbecause more influential on the happiness of mankind, than any which\npolitical history can furnish. Their chronology and geography are in some\npoints peculiar; but, rightly understood, even these admit of being marked\nwith unerring precision, and present some of the most striking proofs of\ndivine foreknowledge.\n\nWe have intimated that prophetic language abounds in metaphor; but this\nremains to be proved, as well as stated; and the nature of these metaphors\nrequires to be pointed out and explained. This can only be done by\ncitations from the prophecies themselves, which shall, however, be made\nwith as much brevity as the subject will admit of. The passages shall all\nbe taken from prophecies relating to the Messiah\u2019s kingdom; and while\ntheir purport is made manifest, it shall at the same time be shewn that\nthey are uniformly employed in the same sense, when the Messiah\u2019s kingdom\nis the subject treated of, throughout the New as well as the Old\nTestament. We proceed to show the metaphorical nature of prophetic\nlanguage.\n\nWhen Isaiah (Ch. lxi.) uses such phrases as, _trees of righteousness_,\n_garments of praise_, _garments of salvation_, it is manifest that he\ncannot mean literal trees or literal garments; the figurative and\nspiritual import expressed by the epithet affixed to each, namely\nrighteousness, salvation and praise, is the only one that can be given to\nthem.\n\nWhen the same prophet (Ch. lx.) foretelling the glory of the Messiah\u2019s\nreign, by the conversion of the Gentiles, says _The abundance __ of the\nsea shall be converted unto thee; the forces of the Gentiles shall come\nunto thee_, it is evident that the sea does not mean the literal sea, but\nfiguratively the Gentile nations, as afterwards expressed.\n\nWhen he styles the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, _Zion, the city of the Lord, whose\nwalls shall be called salvation, and whose gates praise_; a spiritual and\nnot a literal city must be intended. When, changing the metaphor, he calls\nthe city _a bride_ (Ch. lxii, 5,) or describes it _as a woman in labour,\nand bringing forth a male child_, (Ch. lxvi. 6. 8.) it is clear that all\nthese expressions must be metaphorical; _the mountain, the city, the bride\nand the mother_, being alike used to express the same object; and that\nobject, as the context declares, the spiritual glory of the Messiah\u2019s\nreign; splendid in righteousness, abundant in salvation.\n\nAlthough the spiritual import of these expressions appears self-evident;\nwhile the context may satisfy the Christian that these chapters foreshow\nthe nature of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, metaphorically styled by the\nprophets, _the Zion of God, His holy mountain, the heavenly Jerusalem,\n&c._, terms which alone bespeak its spirituality; yet have we moreover the\ndirect sanction and authority of the Apostles Paul and John for thus\nunderstanding them.\n\nSt. Paul, when comparing the advantages of the two covenants, and\ncontrasting the rigorous severity of the law, with the indulgent mildness\nof the gospel, borrows these very metaphors from the prophets, calling the\nformer Mount Sinai, and the latter Mount Zion. (Heb. xii. 18.) _For ye are\nnot come_, says he, _to the mountain that might be touched, and that\nburned with fire, nor unto blackness and darkness and tempest, &c._\n\n_But ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the\nheavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of Angels._\n\n_To the general assembly and church of the first-born, which are written\nin heaven, &c._\n\nHere we see _Mount Sinai_, from which the law was delivered, figuratively\nused to signify the Old Covenant; and _Mount Zion_, and _the Heavenly\nJerusalem_ to signify the New Covenant,\u2014called also the _general assembly\nand church of the first-born_; that is of the regenerate through Christ.\n\nIn like manner St. John, when foreshowing the final establishment of true\nChristianity, uses the same metaphor of a city and a bride, that had been\npreviously used by Isaiah. (Rev. xxi. 2.) _And I, John, saw the holy city,\nnew Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven prepared as a bride,\nadorned for her husband, &c._\n\nBut let it not be erroneously supposed that the figurative character of\nprophetic language consists merely in the use of these terms to express\nthe Messiah\u2019s kingdom; or that the proof of its spirituality is confined\nto the employment, however frequent, of such phrases as _trees of\nrighteousness, waters of life, wells of salvation_, &c.; the fact is, that\nevery allusion to that kingdom is couched in terms, which admit only of\nspiritual interpretation: and where any lengthened description occurs, the\nlanguage assumes the form of continued allegory, in which the moral and\nreligious state of mankind is foreshewn in terms appropriate only to the\nphysical world. As in Ezekiel xxxiv. 26.\n\n_And I will make them, and the places round about my hill a blessing; and\nI will __ cause the shower to come down is his season; there shall be\nshowers of blessing._\n\n_And the tree of the field shall yield her fruit, and the earth shall\nyield her increase, and they shall be safe in their land, and shall know\nthat I am the Lord._\n\nWhen Jeremiah (xxxi. 12.) in similar language foretels the abundance of\nblessings promised in this kingdom, even the Rabbi admits that the\nfigurative and not the literal sense is to be taken; and that spiritual,\nnot temporal blessings are here intended by the prophet.\n\n_Therefore they shall come and sing in the height of Zion, and shall flow\ntogether for the goodness of the Lord, for wheat and for wine, and for\noil, and for the young of the flock, and of the herd_, &c.\n\nBut the main point aimed at in the following exposition; and what the\nwriter wishes to be its distinguishing characteristic is, that of making\nscripture its own interpreter; for in every passage that has been referred\nto, and perhaps it may be said, in every one that can be referred to,\nthere will be found in the context sufficient intimation of the purport of\nthe figurative expressions employed.\n\nOn this plan the boldest metaphors will be found to admit of easy\nexplanation; and passages otherwise inexplicable will find their solution,\nupon one consistent and uniform principle of interpretation. A few\nexamples will afford illustration of the proposed plan of exposition.\n\nOne of the boldest metaphors used by the prophets in reference to the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom is, that which represents the establishment of this new\norder of things, promised in his reign, as _a new heaven and a new earth_;\nin fact as a new creation: a mode of expression, which has no doubt been\noften understood, by those who are not sufficiently conversant with the\nnature of prophetic language, as literally foretelling a change in the\nphysical world, that we inhabit.\n\nNor is this error confined to the unlearned: it appears to have been\nfallen into by one who may perhaps be justly styled the most learned\ncommentator on prophecy of the present age; and moreover the very writer\nwho has pointed out the true principle of exposition.\n\nThe intelligent and profound Dean of Lichfield in his work on the\nApocalypse, after pointing out the figurative sense of such passages, yet,\nstrange to say, relinquishes this sense where it seems the most\nappropriate, and adopts the literal.\n\nIn allusion to the first establishment of the Jewish Theocracy, we find in\nIsaiah (li. 16.) the following figurative language.\n\n_When I have put my words in thy mouth, and covered thee with the palm of\nmy hand, that I may plant the heaven, and lay the foundation of the\nearth._\n\nThus, selecting the Jews to be God\u2019s chosen people, and putting his words\nin the mouth of the prophet, are said to be _planting the heavens_ and\n_laying the foundation of the earth_. And in conformity with this style,\nwhen the old Covenant was to be dissolved, and the new one to be\nestablished, _new heavens_ and _a new earth_ are said to be created. (Isa.\nlxv. 17.)\n\n_For behold I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former shall not\nbe remembered nor come into mind._\n\nWhen St. John, in the Rev. vi. 12. foretels the corruption of\nChristianity, in a prophecy which appears distinctly applicable to the\nevents that occurred at the beginning of the fourth century; he borrows\nthe same metaphors, and describes the loss or corruption of true religion\nas the departure of the heavens, and the darkening of the heavenly\nluminaries. (Rev. vi. 12.)\n\n_And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and lo there was a great\nearthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon\nbecame as blood;_\n\n_And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth; even as a fig-tree casteth\nher untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind._\n\n_And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together, &c._\n\nThe historical view of this period, taken by Dr. Woodhouse, exactly\naccords with the figurative sense of the prophecy\u2014yet, to the manifest\ninjury of consistent interpretation, it is here that he relinquishes the\nfigurative, and adopts the literal sense, supposing the day of judgment to\nbe here foretold.\n\nWhile thus compelled to dissent from some particular views of this writer,\nI cannot pass by this opportunity of expressing the very high estimation\nin which I otherwise hold his most valuable publication. (Woodhouse on the\nApocalypse.)\n\nOther commentators on prophecy, who have for the most part adopted the\npolitical in preference to the spiritual view, regard _the heavens_, as\nsymbolizing the civil government or ruling powers in a state; and it is\ntrue that these expressions have not been always confined in prophecy to\nthe prediction of spiritual events; but have been also used in foretelling\nthe judgments of God upon political states and kingdoms.\n\nBut when the Messiah\u2019s kingdom is the acknowledged subject, to look to\npolitical events for its fulfilment, is surely to run into the error of\nthe Jews, and to disregard the intimation expressly given by him; who\ndeclared that _his kingdom was within us_; or as the prophets had\npreviously foreshewn\u2014_behold, I will put my law in their inward parts; and\nwrite it in their hearts_.\n\nOne example more shall suffice, for shewing the superiority of the\nspiritual view, in affording the solution of passages, which upon any\nother must appear utterly inexplicable. It has been stated that Zion is\nalso represented as a woman, and a mother; of which the most remarkable\ninstance occurs in the following extraordinary passage in Isaiah lxvi. 7,\n8.\n\n_Before she travailed she brought forth; before her pains came she was\ndelivered of a man-child._\n\n_Who hath heard such a thing? Who hath seen such things? Shall the earth\nbe made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for\nas soon as Zion travailed she brought forth her children._\n\nThe Christian may perhaps suppose, as some have done, that Christ is the\nman-child here intended; but that cannot be. For Zion is the mother, and a\nmountain can never be literally understood to bring forth a man; the\nmountain is a figurative mother, and the child must be a figurative child.\n\nWhat does the mother figuratively signify? is then the question most\nlikely to lead us to the nature of the child. We have already seen that\nthis term is constantly applied to Israel, and especially with reference\nto their spiritual state of regeneration through Christianity. Such we may\npresume, then, is the meaning of Zion here; and that the regeneration of\nthe Jews through Christianity is the birth and parturition here spoken of.\n\nUpon this view Judaism, or the Jewish Church will be the mother, and the\nChristian Church or Christianity her child\u2014the man-child, who was ordained\nto rule all nations. Ps. ii.\n\nThe next question is, how the birth can be said to have preceded the\nlabour-pains.\n\nMr. Lowth, to whom more than any other I feel indebted for much valuable\nassistance in explaining the Old Testament prophecies, supposes the\nlabour-pains to be \u201cthe destruction of the Jewish Polity, making way for\nthe growth of Christianity.\u201d And this seems a plausible explanation, as\nthese troubles of the Jewish Church followed the birth or promulgation of\nChristianity forty years.\n\nBut the solution is only plausible; for the growth is not the birth; or if\nit be taken as the birth, then it no longer precedes but follows the\nlabour-pains, for whatever effect the destruction of Judaism had in\npromoting Christianity, this effect was subsequent and not prior to that\nevent; and thus the solution fails in the main point.\n\nMoreover, upon the spiritual plan of exposition, it may justly be\nobjected, that these troubles of the Jewish Church were rather of a\npolitical than a spiritual character; and certainly in no way essential to\nthe birth of Christianity, and cannot therefore be considered as the\nlabour-pains, or even as the after-pains of that birth.\n\nThis objection being valid, let a more spiritual view be taken, and the\nobjection will vanish. Let the worldly feelings which prevented the Jews\nfrom receiving Christ as their Messiah, and the inward struggle required\nto overcome these, symbolise the pains of labour, and the connexion will\nbe evident. For this very struggle and victory over worldly feelings\nconstitute the regeneration through Christ; and this therefore is\nessential to the birth of Christianity, \u201cthe new birth unto\nrighteousness.\u201d\n\nBut with the first Christians this struggle could not precede the birth,\nfor they received Christ, before they were aware of the spiritual nature\nof his mission; the Apostles did not look for a spiritual Messiah until\nafter the day of Pentecost, and therefore the birth preceded the pains\nwith them; but once aware of the sacrifice required, they cheerfully\nsubmitted to every species of persecution, and triumphed over all worldly\nfeelings. And in every individual who receives Christianity, this struggle\nwith worldly feelings must in some measure continue during their whole\nlives.\n\nWith the Jews, the prevalence of these worldly feelings, and the hope of a\ntemporal Messiah, still prevent their receiving Christianity, or obstruct\ntheir regeneration. And when the evidence of its truth shall be forced\nupon them, it is probable that this conviction will precede rather than\nfollow the entire conquest over worldly feelings; so difficult is it to\nchange our habits and feelings at once. And in this we may perceive the\nsense of the remaining verse, cited above; _Can the earth be made to bring\nforth at once? Can a nation be born in a day? For as soon as Zion\ntravailed she brought forth her children._\n\nThe _earth_ and the _nation_ shew that a whole people, or race of men, are\nhere spoken of; and the _man-child_ of the former verse, we here find\nchanged into _children_, in the plural number. Such appears to be the\nsolution of the difficulty, on the spiritual plan of exposition.\n\nIf an equally satisfactory solution can be offered by reference to\npolitical events, this will no doubt be the best defence of that mode of\nexposition that can be offered. How, then, is the fact? The fact is, that\nsuch commentaries are obliged to consider nine-tenths of these prophecies\nstill unaccomplished, although a period of two thousand five hundred years\nhas elapsed since they were uttered; and most of this interval is thus\nleft, to Christians as well as Jews, a perfect blank in this prophetic\nhistory of the progress of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom; without any proof,\nduring this time, at least as drawn from these prophecies of the Old\nTestament, of God\u2019s foreknowledge of events, of his providence in the\ngovernment of the world, or of his interposition in the disposal of human\naffairs. Some eight or ten verses, out of six chapters, are all that\nappear upon this plan to admit of explanation; whereas, by applying the\nprophecy to the progress of Christianity, as Christ\u2019s spiritual kingdom,\nand looking to spiritual instead of political events, all the leading\noccurrences in the history of our religion, from its first promulgation to\nthe present day, already fulfilled, or now in the progress of fulfilment,\nwill be found to be clearly foreshewn in one uninterrupted series of\npredictions, comprising every verse and every line in these chapters,\nexcept a few verses which are still veiled in futurity. Admitting the\nspiritual interpretation, being in fact equivalent to admitting that\nChrist is the Messiah, is the main point at issue between the Rabbi and\nthe Author; but as many Christians still reject the figurative and\nspiritual exposition, it is hoped that to them also the foregoing remarks\nmay be not altogether useless; nor an unsuitable introduction to the\nfollowing new plan of expounding Zechariah\u2019s prophetic view of the\nprogress of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom.\n\n\n\n\n\nZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH\u2019S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER IX.\n\n\nThe subject of these chapters appears to be that, which, from its constant\nrepetition by all the Prophets from the earliest to the latest, was\nevidently esteemed the most important to the interests of mankind; namely,\nthe coming of the Messiah.\n\nThis great event, being promised as a blessing to the descendants of\nAbraham, and particularly to the house of Judah, it was natural that the\nJews should expect to obtain by it peculiar advantages; and accordingly,\nwhatever may be their views at this time, we learn from the writings of\nSt. Paul, that their general expectation then was, that to their nation\nwould the benefits of it be confined. The nature of these benefits was\nmoreover expected to consist, chiefly, in the political supremacy to be\nconferred upon them by a great temporal prince, who should establish their\ndominion over all the earth.\n\nSuch were the expectations of the Jews; whereas the Christians who equally\nbelieve the prophecies which contain these promises, have been taught to\ninterpret them in a very different manner. They conceive that these\nbenefits will extend to all mankind; and understand them as having no\nreference to political power or temporal affairs, but as affording the\nmeans of obtaining advantages of a far higher and more permanent nature;\neven the blessings of eternal life, and eternal happiness. Not that these\nblessings were by the Messiah\u2019s coming to be directly and unconditionally\nconferred upon mankind; but that the means of obtaining them would thereby\nbe afforded to all such as were disposed to seek after them. These means\nthey conceive to be accomplished through the establishment of a kingdom on\nearth; a kingdom, however, not of a temporal, but of a spiritual nature;\none which consists in the reign of true religion in the heart of man, a\nreal Theocracy; by which man is enabled to overcome the world, that is, to\nrule and direct his passions and worldly propensities, and by making his\nfuture existence a paramount consideration, to render him meet to enjoy\nit. Such, according to the Christian\u2019s view, is the victory to be gained;\nsuch the kingdom to be established by the Messiah; and hence the apparent\ncontradiction, that while battles and conflicts are spoken of, it is yet\ndeclared to be a peaceful kingdom.\n\nBut conceiving the prophecies which announce the coming of the Messiah to\nhave been accomplished in the person of Christ, the Christian supposes\nthis kingdom to be already established, and that Christ does actually\nreign in the heart of every true believer. That the numbers of such are\ncomparatively small, and by no means to be estimated by the number of\nthose who bear the name of Christian, is a lamentable truth; but it is a\ntruth, which he was fully prepared to look for by the same unerring word\nof prophecy; which clearly announced, that a long period of darkness and\napostacy would intervene between the appearance of the Messiah on earth,\nand the universal establishment of his kingdom.\n\nIt is true that the Christian finds the clearest annunciation of this long\nperiod of antichristian darkness, in books which are of no authority in\nthe estimation of the Jew, in those of the New Testament, to wit; but if\nit can be shewn, as we conceive it can, that the same events are also\nclearly foretold by the Prophets of the Old Testament, the subject will\nthen prefer an equal claim to the attention of both; to that of the Jew,\nas calling upon him, impartially to consider the evidence, which seems to\nprove that his Messiah has already appeared on earth; and to that of the\nChristian, as calling upon him carefully to examine how far the religion\nhe professes may, both in doctrine and practice, still be tinctured with\nthe corruptions of antichristianity.\n\nThis, then, is the point at issue; whether or not, we have in these six\nchapters of Zechariah, one of those Divine revelations, which displays a\nprophetic view of the coming of the Messiah; of his being rejected by most\nof his own nation, but received by the Gentiles; of the consequent\nabolition of Paganism, (then, except with the Jews, the universal religion\nof the world), and the substitution of Christianity in its stead; but\nwhich at the same time foretels the corruption of this religion by us the\nGentiles; and the long reign of antichristian darkness which has since\nprevailed in the room of it; with all the most notable events attending\nthese extraordinary revolutions in the human mind; events still fulfilling\nbefore our eyes, and open to the observation of all who think the subject\nworthy of their attention. Whether all this be clearly intimated in the\nchapters before us, and can be made out without violating grammatical\nconstruction in the translation of the Hebrew, or legitimate consistency\nin the interpretation of prophetic language, is the question we propose to\nconsider. Frequent perusal and careful examination have satisfied the mind\nof the writer, that the subject of them is no other than an epitome of the\nprophetic history which was afterwards amplified in the Revelations of St.\nJohn; where we find, as occurs in other instances in which the predictions\nare repeated, that the events are unfolded with greater precision and\nminuteness as the period of their accomplishment draws nigh.\n\nThat no such subject distinctly appears, through the medium of the\nauthorised translation contained in our Bibles, is most certain; nor was\nit to be looked for, that any passages, which admitted of different modes\nof construction, should be rendered in a way least acceptable to the\nexpositor, in a translation which is almost wholly Jewish, being founded\non the Masoretic punctuation. On the contrary, it appears, in not a few\ninstances, that the usual and literal sense has been rejected for one more\nremote, but more consonant to the views and prejudices, of those who\nframed the punctuation. That this statement may not rest on the\nquestionable ground of assertion or opinion, the reader will find, in the\nnotes subjoined, a full statement of the reasons for all the changes\nproposed; and the Hebrew scholar will thus have full opportunity to\nchallenge their validity, if he find occasion. It is the writer\u2019s wish\nthat they should be freely canvassed; truth is the only object he has in\nview; and he asks no other conditions on entering the arena, than that of\ndisclaiming the authority of the Masoretic punctuation. His reasons for\nthis will appear sufficiently obvious. If, without the aid of the points,\nwe obtain a meaning that is simple and satisfactory in many passages,\nwhich by them are rendered obscure or unintelligible;\u2014if a connected and\nunbroken explanation of each verse be attainable without them, while only\na few verses detached from the context have been explained by the ablest\ncommentators through their aid; sufficient reason will surely appear for\nrejecting an authority which, instead of facilitating our progress, only\nencumbers the subject with unnecessary difficulties.\n\nThe reader need not, however, expect that every difficulty will be removed\nby the proposed alterations; or that even the amended translations will\nafford such an exposition as to admit of no possible objection. It were\nabsurd to suppose that the strength of the argument can lie all on one\nside, where two are engaged in the controversy. For the Jew is in this\ncase no man of straw, set up to be knocked down at pleasure, but a true\nJew, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, an advocate as zealous in the cause he\ndefends, as his Christian opponent. Each believes himself in the right;\neach expects to obtain the victory; and it is not improbable that the\nreader, who sits as umpire in the contest, may, after all, though\nunconscious of partiality, give judgment according to the bias of his\nfeelings, whether he be Jew or Christian, rather than according to the\nabstract merits of the question.\n\nRegarding the subject of the prophecy, as the coming of the Messiah, the\nintroduction, which is comprised in the first eight verses of this\nchapter, appears to be the most appropriate that can possibly be\nconceived. It opens with a denunciation against worldly-mindedness, and a\ndeclaration of God\u2019s purpose to frustrate the schemes, and cut off the\nhopes of ambition, pride, and avarice, in the judgments pronounced against\nthose cities, which were then the most conspicuous for their riches and\npower. This is immediately followed, as if by way of contrast, by a view\nof the spiritual nature of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, founded in meekness and\nhumility, and affording benefits of a very different kind, namely, the\ntaking away of sin, and the redemption of mankind from a state of sin and\nperdition; benefits which were not to be confined to the Jews alone, but\nto extend to the Gentiles also, and that on terms of equal participation\nwith the Jews.\n\nThe denunciations are contained in the first six verses as follow: Zech.\nix.\n\n_The heavy burden of the word of the Lord against the land of Hadrach and\nDamascus_; _his sending down_, (that is, the Lord\u2019s) _for the Lord\u2019s is\nthe eye of man_, (the eye of the seer who receives the vision,) _and all\nthe tribes of Israel_ (whom it immediately concerns).\n\n_Hamath also shall have a limit set to her; Tyre and Sidon also, though\nshe be very wise_\u2014(worldly-wise). _For she hath built herself Tyre, a\nstrong hold, and heaped up silver as the dust, and fine gold as the mire\nof the streets. Behold the Lord will cast her out, and smite her power in\nthe sea, and she shall be devoured with fire. Ashkalon shall see it and\nfear, Gaza also shall see it and __ be very sorrowful; and Ekron, for her\nhope shall be dried up, and the king shall perish from Gaza, and Ashkalon\nshall not be inhabited, and a stranger shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will\ncut off the pride of the Philistines._\n\nThese denunciations are chiefly directed against the Philistines, the\ncities enumerated being the most conspicuous of any they possessed, and no\ndoubt, the pride of their nation. Here, then, appears sufficient reason\nfor the Jews to interpret the prophecy, as altogether in their favour,\ndenouncing judgments upon their enemies. But yet it is possible they may\nhave viewed them too partially, and may even have overlooked the express\nobjects of denunciation in the prophecy; which denounces their avarice and\nambition, and declares that the _pride_ rather than the _cities_ of the\nPhilistines shall be cut off. As for the cities themselves, heavy\njudgments are pronounced against them all. One, it is declared, shall not\nbe inhabited; another, Sidon, is threatened with an overthrow, which it\nreceived not long after from Ochus, king of Persia, in precisely the\nmanner here foretold; while Tyre, Gaza, and others, were taken by\nAlexander the Great; but if we keep to the letter of the prophecy, it is\ntheir avarice, ambition, and pride, that are distinctly marked as the\nobjects of Divine displeasure; and even the judgments pronounced against\nthem on this account, are immediately coupled with the succeeding promise\nof mercy and redemption, through the means of a meek and humble Messiah,\nwho should _take away sin and pollution, and speak peace to the heathen_.\n\nBut why, it may be asked, were these offences condemned in the Philistines\nparticularly? Were not the Jews also addicted to pride, avarice, and\nworldly ambition? No doubt they were so; and the prophecy being addressed\nto them, it appears that the admonition was expressly intended for their\nuse.\n\nPride was even less excusable in the Jews, who could find no sanction for\nit in their religion; while this was the very basis of Pagan morality; the\npedestal on which honour was erected; that idol of self-estimation, the\nhighest of Pagan virtues. These vices were therefore more appropriately\ndenounced in the Philistines, as peculiarly belonging to them, though\nspreading, by contagion, to the Jews; and if punishable in the former, how\ncould they be excusable in the latter?\n\nThe mind of the Christian reader will naturally revert to the pride which\nrevolted at the idea of a meek and humble Messiah, and caused the Jews to\nreject him. But that cannot be the question here; for the Jews are not\nhere pointed out as the objects of Divine displeasure; nor is any\nintimation hitherto given of their offence; and that of its punishment\ncould not surely precede it. The feeling might indeed be there, and a\nsalutary warning of its being displeasing in the sight of Heaven, and of\nthe fatal consequences about to result from it, seems here intended; but\nthe penalty was not incurred till the overt act was committed, and to\nforetell the punishment before the offence itself was intimated, would\nhave been a prophetical solecism. As we proceed, we shall find, in its\nproper place, due notice taken both of the one and the other.\n\nIn the next verse we find these denunciations, coupled with promises of\nmercy and redemption to the remaining Gentiles, verse 7, _But I will take\naway his blood from out of his mouth; and his pollution from between his\nteeth; and he that remaineth, even he shall be for our God_; that is, the\nremaining Gentiles shall have their sins forgiven, their pollution washed\naway, they shall be redeemed from the darkness of Paganism, and reclaimed\nto the worship of the true God;\n\n_And he shall be as a chief in Judah, Ekron, as well as the Jebusite_;\nthat is, he (the remaining Gentile) shall attain thereby to a full\nparticipation with the Jew, in all the spiritual blessings promised in the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom.\n\nThe prophecy having now declared the admission of the Gentiles, promises\nthat the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, thus established, shall ever enjoy Divine\nprotection and support.\n\n_And I will encamp about mine house, against the army, against him that\npasseth over, and against him that returneth, and there shall no oppressor\npass over them any more, for now have I seen with mine eyes._\n\nIn the following verse, the subject of the prophecy is so distinctly\nannounced as the coming of the Messiah, that Jews as well as Christians\nconcur on this point, though they have not perceived how the preceding\nverses refer to this kingdom.\n\n_Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold\nthy King shall come unto thee, just and having salvation; lowly and riding\nupon an ass, even a colt the foal of an ass._\n\nThe manner of the Messiah\u2019s coming being here so plainly foretold, and his\ncharacter so distinctly described, we wonder how the Jew can deny that\nthis was all fulfilled in the person of Christ. The reason is simply this;\nhe disbelieves the facts. The books in which they are recorded, are of no\nauthority in his estimation; he challenges their testimony on grounds too\nnumerous to be discussed here. To answer his objections, every\ndisagreement between the writers of the New Testament must first be\nreconciled; a task which appears to him to have hitherto failed with all\nwho have attempted it. But this is not the only objection he has to urge.\nHe charges the Christian with perverting the sense of prophecy; and this\nverse furnishes him with an instance. Thus, the Hebrew word rendered,\n\u201c_having salvation_,\u201d is really the past participle of the verb \u201cto save,\u201d\nliterally \u201c_being saved_;\u201d and that too followed by the emphatical pronoun\n_himself_, \u201cbeing saved himself.\u201d Surely this point might be safely\nconceded by the Christian, who admits that Christ \u201cwas the first fruits of\nthem that slept;\u201d the first who rose from the dead, to everlasting life;\nand that through him we become partakers in that resurrection.\n\nThe peaceful nature of his kingdom, the participation of the heathen in\nits blessings, and the boundless extent of its dominion are next declared:\n\n_And he will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from\nJerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off; and he shall speak peace\nto the heathen; and his dominion shall be from the sea even to the sea,\nand from the river to the ends of the earth._\n\nThe Christian reader will find no difficulty in the interpretation of the\nverse which follows.\n\n_As for thee, by the blood of thy covenant, I have sent forth thy\nprisoners from the pit wherein is no water._\n\nThe Messiah is spoken of throughout; who then but the Messiah can be\napostrophised in the words, \u201c_As for thee?_\u201d Then follows \u201c_by the blood\nof thy covenant_.\u201d What blood but the blood of Christ? What covenant, but\nthat sealed by his blood, can be alluded to? \u201c_I have sent thy prisoners\nforth._\u201d What prisoners, but those who were in the bondage of sin? \u201c_from\nthe pit wherein is no water_.\u201d What pit, but the darkness of idolatry,\nwhich had none of the waters of life? Surely this is a most clear and\ndistinct intimation of the sacrifice of the Messiah, and of the benefits\nthereby conferred upon mankind in the redemption of the heathen world from\nthe darkness of idolatry; thus opening the way to immortality, to the\nwhole human race.\n\nBut the Messiah here appears to be promised to the Gentiles, having been\npreviously promised to the Jews; were then these promises retracted? By no\nmeans. To the Jews he was promised, and to them he came, exclusively\naddressing himself to the house of Israel. Nor was it till after the\nmajority of that nation had rejected and crucified him, that the calling\nof the Gentiles took place. The blessings he offered being refused by the\nformer, appears to have been the immediate cause of their being given to\nthe latter. Accordingly this seems to be the purport of the next verse,\nwhich intimates that there was some reason why these blessings could not\nbe directly and unconditionally transferred to the Gentiles.\n\n_Return ye to the strong hold, my prisoners, wait thou unto the day I\ndeclare, that I will repay thee double_; that is, wait for the day when\nthese blessings will become yours, through the Jews\u2019 refusal of them.\n\nNor yet was the Messiah rejected by all the Jews; for the apostles were\nJews; the disciples were Jews; by Jews was the Gospel preached and\npropagated; and to the Jews belongs the honour of the first triumph of\ntrue religion over Paganism, and what is more, over the passions and\nworldly propensities of man; and this triumphant progress of the Gospel\nseems to be the victory intimated in the verse which follows; wherein the\nreason is at the same time assigned why Christ did not address himself to\nthe Gentiles.\n\n_For I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow Ephraim; and raised up thy\nsons, O Zion, against thy sons, O Greece; and made thee as the sword of a\nmighty man._\n\nThe triumphs of Judas Maccabeus, generally supposed to be here foretold,\ncannot be the victories alluded to; for Ephraim, or the ten tribes, here\ndeclared as bearing a part in them, had already gone into captivity, and\nbore no share whatever in these subsequent wars of Judah. The true meaning\nappears to be that Judah was destined to have the honour of first\nestablishing the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, as promised from the beginning.\n\nHow then could Ephraim, or the ten tribes, it may be asked, bear a part in\nthe triumphs of the Gospel, having previously gone into captivity? The\nprophecy does not distinctly say so; if we keep to the letter, it is only\nsaid that Ephraim as well as Judah was prepared and marshalled for the\nspiritual conflict: the triumph is declared to _Zion_ over _Greece_; that\nis, to true religion over Pagan idolatry; and in this warfare, though not\nin the wars of Judas Maccabeus, Ephraim did bear a part; for it is not to\nthe apostolic age alone that we must look for the accomplishment of the\ngreat scheme of Providence for man\u2019s redemption. This was only one act in\nthe great drama; which began under the Old Covenant, and is not yet\nfinally completed under the New. In the former, or the Old Covenant, all\nthe tribes of Israel bore their share, Ephraim as well as Judah; and the\nwarfare not being finally concluded, who shall say but Ephraim may again\nappear, and bear a further part in it?\n\nHaving declared the union of the Gentiles with the Jews, and their joint\nparticipation in the blessings of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, the prophecy goes\non to promise the support and protection of Heaven, in terms alike\napplicable to both.\n\n_And the Lord shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the\nlightning; and the Lord God shall blow the trumpet, and shall go forth\nwith whirlwinds of the south. And the Lord of hosts shall defend them, and\nthey shall devour and subdue with sling-stones; and they shall drink as\nwine, and they shall be filled like bowls, like __ the corners of the\naltar._ (which were purposely so constructed as to receive the blood of\nthe sacrifices).\n\nThat the whole of these expressions require to be taken figuratively and\nspiritually, no one conversant with scriptural and prophetic language can\nsurely deny; or for a moment suppose that literal drunkenness and\nbloodshed are here intended.\n\nShould any doubt remain that the Gentiles are included in these promises\nas well as the Jews, the next verse appears to decide the question.\n\n_And the Lord their God shall save them in that day, as the flock of his\npeople._\n\nIf the Jews be called his people, who but the Gentiles can be meant by the\nother? But this is followed by the direct declaration that all distinction\nbetween them is on the eve of its abolition.\n\n_For the wall of separation is tottering over his land._\n\nA remarkable and striking expression, but strangely perverted in our\ntranslation. Why the Jews have laboured to give a different turn to it, by\nseeking a more figurative and recondite meaning, we need be at no loss to\nconceive; nor why they apply these verses to themselves alone. See note to\nthe translation of this verse.\n\nBut this view, which would limit the bounty of Heaven to a particular\nrace, besides being at variance with the context, seems little calculated\nto call forth the feelings of adoration and praise with which this chapter\nconcludes.\n\n_For how great is his goodness, and how great is his beauty. Corn shall\nmake the young men cheerful, and new wine the maids._\n\nCorn, wine, &c. in prophetic language ever signify the food of spiritual\nknowledge, to be henceforth freely bestowed on all, Gentiles as well as\nJews.\n\n\n\n\n\nNOTES TO CHAPTER IX. HEBREW PUNCTUATION.\n\n\nA Summary of the arguments for and against the antiquity and authority of\nthe Vowel Points, is given at the beginning of the Second Vol. of Horne\u2019s\nIntroduction to the Study of the Scriptures; from which the following\nconsiderations seem most entitled to selection. That the earliest traces\nof the points are to be found in the tenth century\u2014that many of the oldest\nmanuscripts now extant are without them\u2014that the copies of the Jewish\nScriptures now used in the Synagogue and esteemed peculiarly sacred, are\nwithout them\u2014that the Samaritan letters which were the same as the Hebrew\nbefore the captivity, are without them\u2014and the Samaritan Pentateuch is\nwithout them\u2014that there are no traces of them to be found in the shekels\n(coins) struck by the kings of Israel\u2014that the fathers, particularly\nOrigen and Jerome, who treat of the Hebrew pronunciation, make no mention\nof them\u2014that all the antient various readings of the Jews regard the\nletters only, not one of them relates to the vowel points\u2014to which may be\nadded, that there are five vowels in the Hebrew alphabet which are quite\nsufficient for reading the language, though they may not enable us to\ndetermine with precision the antient pronunciation. \u201cThese\nconsiderations,\u201d says Mr. Horne, \u201chave determined the majority of Hebrew\nscholars in the present day to reject their authority.\u201d Still we may admit\ntheir utility in fixing the pronunciation, and perhaps also in\nfacilitating the construction; but the main objection to them is, that by\nchanging the vowels, they frequently alter the sense, as well as the\nsound, and that in passages where a Jewish interpretation is particularly\nopen to suspicion. Thus in prophecies relating to the Messiah, both their\nprejudices and their feelings unfit them for becoming guides to a\nChristian expositor.\n\nVerse 1. :\u05de\u05e9\u05d0 \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d7\u05d3\u05e8\u05da \u05d5\u05d3\u05de\u05e9\u05e7 \u05de\u05e0\u05d7\u05ea\u05d5 \u05db\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05e2\u05d9\u05df \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd \u05d5\u05db\u05dc \u05e9\u05d1\u05d8\u05d9\n\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc\n\n_The heavy burden of the word of the Lord in the land of Hadrach, and\nDamascus shall be the rest thereof; when the eyes of man, as of all the\ntribes of Israel, shall be towards the Lord._\n\nThese are the words of the translation in our Bible; but the sense of them\nI must acknowledge my inability to unravel. Of what Damascus is to be the\nrest, or what period is intimated by the adverb of time _when_, I am at a\nloss to discover. The separation of Hadrach and Damascus by the insertion\nof a comma between them, evidently owes its origin to the supposed\nnecessity for rendering the word \u05de\u05e0\u05d7\u05ea\u05d5 (or \u05d5\u05ea\u05d7\u05e0\u05de) _the rest thereof_. But\nif deriving it from \u05e0\u05d7 (or \u05d7\u05e0) or \u05e0\u05d5\u05d7 (or \u05d7\u05d5\u05e0) does not afford any\nintelligible sense, we are naturally led to seek another derivation; and\nwe find one in the verb \u05e0\u05d7\u05ea (or \u05ea\u05d7\u05e0) _to descend_ or _send down_, which\nwithout violating grammatical construction affords a meaning not only\nintelligible, but in perfect unison with the context. The Hemantiv \u05de\nprefixed, gives the _thing sent down_, while the suffix \u05d5 _his_, evidently\nrefers to _the Lord_ who sends the vision or denunciation. The English\nconstruction, of course, requires it should be rendered _his sending\ndown_, that is, the Lord\u2019s denunciation, _against_ Hadrach and Damascus,\nas well as the other cities which are mentioned afterwards; for \u05d1 here\nrendered _in_, may with more propriety be rendered _against_ or _upon_.\nThe verb \u05e0\u05d7\u05ea (or \u05ea\u05d7\u05e0) _to send down_, occurs in Joel iii. 11 and\nelsewhere: but the writer freely acknowledges that he has no authority for\nthe participial noun with the Hemantiv \u05de prefixed to signify the thing\nsent down, or the act of sending down, as the sense seems to require here.\nHe therefore rests this construction solely on the ground of its being\ngrammatically admissible, consonant to analogy, and in accordance with the\ncontext, as affording a satisfactory meaning. Let those who are not\nsatisfied with such reasons furnish a better solution of the difficulty.\nIn the next place, there is no necessity for rendering \u05db\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05db) _when_,\nwhich more frequently signifies _for_; and when so rendered, it will be\nfound to connect together the latter and the former part of the verse. For\nthis, we only require to render the dative \u05dc, as it frequently is rendered\nin Hebrew, as well as Greek and Latin, to denote _possession_; and the\nverse will run thus. _For the Lord\u2019s is_, or to the Lord belongs, _the eye\nof man_; to wit, the eye of the Seer, who receives the vision, _and all\nthe tribes of Israel_, whom the vision chiefly concerns. Making the tribes\na genitive case, by inserting _of_ before them, is wholly uncalled for by\nthe text.\n\nVerse 2. :\u05d5\u05d2\u05dd \u05d7\u05de\u05ea \u05ea\u05d2\u05d1\u05dc \u05d1\u05d4 \u05e6\u05e8 \u05d5\u05e6\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05df \u05db\u05d9 \u05d7\u05db\u05de\u05d4 \u05de\u05d0\u05d3\n\n_And Hamath also shall border thereby, Tyrus and Sidon though it be very\nwise._\n\n\u05ea\u05d2\u05d1\u05dc (or \u05dc\u05d1\u05d2\u05ea) _to set bounds to_, in the Hiphil, occurs in Exod. xix. 12\n& 23.\u2014It here appears to be the Huphal or passive of Hiphil\u2014signifying _to\nbe bounded_, or _to be set bounds to_. It is only necessary to remark,\nthat leaving aside the punctuation, the form of the future tense will be\nidentical in both these voices. The sense as it stands is scarcely\nintelligible. What is meant by _border thereby_, it is not easy to\nconceive; but by discarding the points we readily obtain a meaning that is\nperfectly intelligible. \u05ea\u05d2\u05d1\u05dc (or \u05dc\u05d1\u05d2\u05ea) may then be rendered in the passive\nvoice, instead of the active, and will signify _to be limited_, or _have\nbounds set to_; and \u05d1\u05d4 (or \u05d4\u05d1) _on_ or _to her_, which follows, accords\nwith, and seems to demand its being so rendered. _And Hamath also shall\nhave bounds set to her_; that is, her growing greatness shall be checked.\n\n_Tyre, and also Sidon though she be very wise_, \u05d7\u05db\u05de\u05d4 (or \u05d4\u05de\u05db\u05d7), _wise_, no\ndoubt, means here, _worldly wise_, or very subtle.\n\nVerse 5. :\u05ea\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05e9\u05e7\u05dc\u05d5\u05df \u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d5\u05e2\u05d6\u05d4 \u05d5\u05ea\u05d7\u05d9\u05dc \u05de\u05d0\u05d3 \u05d5\u05e2\u05e7\u05e8\u05d5\u05df \u05db\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d5\u05d1\u05d9\u05e9 \u05de\u05d1\u05d8\u05d4\n\n_Ashkalon shall see and fear, Gaza also, and she shall be very sorrowful,\nand Ekron for her expectation shall be ashamed._\n\n\u05d4\u05d5\u05d1\u05d9\u05e9 (or \u05e9\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05d4) may be derived either from \u05d1\u05d5\u05e9 (or \u05e9\u05d5\u05d1) _to be ashamed_,\nor from \u05d9\u05d1\u05e9 (or \u05e9\u05d1\u05d9) _to dry up_, and whither as a plant for want of\nmoisture. The latter seems preferable here, but it is not very material to\nthe sense.\n\nVerse 6. :\u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05d1 \u05de\u05de\u05d6\u05e8 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d3 \u05d5\u05d4\u05db\u05e8\u05ea\u05d9 \u05d2\u05d0\u05d5\u05df \u05e4\u05dc\u05e9\u05ea\u05d9\u05dd\n\n_A bastard shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the\nPhilistines._\n\n\u05de\u05de\u05d6\u05e8 (or \u05e8\u05d6\u05de\u05de) may be rendered a _stranger_, as well as a _bastard_,\n\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 in the Septuagint, which renders the sense more obvious.\n\n_And I will cut off the pride of the Philistines._ These denunciations\nappear chiefly directed against the Philistines, in whom pride, avarice,\nand ambition, are specified as the great offences. The delivery of Ashdod\ninto the hands of a stranger is the judgment pronounced against them in\nthis verse, as the last means of their humiliation. But here the tone of\nthe prophecy changes, and instead of further punishments, we find repeated\npromises of blessings and mercy; _he that is left shall be for our God,\nand as a Governor in Judah_,\u2014and in the verse following\u2014_He_ (the Messiah\nbeing manifestly meant here) _shall speak peace to the Heathen_.\u2014Whence\nthen this change? We are led to seek, and naturally expect to find, some\nground for it. And accordingly the next verse unfolds the reason, and\nexplains the occasion of this change in the counsel of Heaven; a change\nresting not on their own merits, but on Divine Mercy. For such a\nconstruction will this verse bear, quite as well as the one usually put\nupon it; and this construction is far more in unison with the context,\nthan the received one.\n\nVerse 7. :\u05d5\u05d4\u05e1\u05e8\u05ea\u05d9 \u05d3\u05de\u05d9\u05d5 \u05de\u05e4\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d5\u05e9\u05e7\u05e6\u05d9\u05d5 \u05de\u05d1\u05d9\u05df \u05e9\u05e0\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d5\u05e0\u05e9\u05d0\u05e8 \u05d2\u05de-\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 \u05dc\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 \u05d5\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4 \u05db\u05d0\u05dc\u05e3\n\u05d1\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d4 \u05d5\u05e2\u05e7\u05e8\u05d5\u05df \u05db\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05e1\u05d9\n\n_And I will take away his blood from out of his mouth, and his\nabominations from between his teeth, and he that is left, even he shall be\nfor our God, and he shall be as a Governor in Judah, and Ekron as a\nJebusite._\n\nWith scarcely any alteration in the translation, the words, even as they\nstand, admit of a very different acceptation from that in which they are\ncommonly taken; and instead of being a figurative expression, borrowed\nfrom the rescuing its prey from the jaws of a lion; in which sense the\nJews take it, as a promise to themselves of deliverance from their\nenemies; the words more literally taken, will convey the promise of mercy\nand redemption to the remaining Gentiles: whose sin and pollution are to\nbe taken away, who are to be reclaimed to the worship of the true God, and\nadmitted to a full participation in all the blessings, promised to Israel\nby the coming of the Messiah.\n\nThe Gentiles were esteemed polluted by eating things unclean, which were\nprohibited to the Jews. Certain animals\u2014things strangled\u2014and the blood in\nparticular were among the forbidden food. The new covenant removed this\nprohibition, thereby taking away the pollution from between his teeth, as\nit ceased to be a cause of pollution. The command given to St. Peter, Acts\nx. 14, to kill and eat, where all manner of food was presented to him, was\nexpressly received by him as a command to preach the Gospel to the\nGentiles, or to admit them into the Messiah\u2019s kingdom; and this admission\nwas unaccompanied with any such prohibition, nor was it subsequently\ngiven.\n\nEating things sacrificed to idols was another cause of pollution which the\nNew Covenant removed, by taking away the cause in the abolition of\nidolatry. This literal fulfilment of the words of the prophecy may,\nhowever, be figuratively understood, to foreshew the remission of sins\nthrough Christ, and the admission of the Heathen nations to the hopes of\neverlasting life founded on the Gospel.\n\nThe only change required in the English version is to read _But_, for\n_And_, which are expressed alike by the Hebrew \u05d5, and to understand \u05e9\u05e7\u05e6\u05d9\u05d5\n(or \u05d5\u05d9\u05e6\u05e7\u05e9) _his abominations_, in the sense most appropriate to it, as\nalluding to the worship of idols, and we have the sense already expressed,\nwhich perfectly harmonizes with the context. Whereas, taken in the other\nsense, what becomes of the antithesis? Who is _he that is left_, that\n_shall be for our God_, and _as a chief in Judah_? Surely it cannot be the\nJew, who shall be as a Jew. But the next words are decisive, declaring\nthat Ekron and the Jebusite, both Gentiles, are here intended.\n\n_And Ekron as a Jebusite._ This mode of rendering leaves, indeed, the\nforce of these words rather ambiguous; but there can be no intelligible\nsense put upon the \u05db\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05db), but that of _in like manner as_, or, _as\nwell as_; that is, Ekron as well as the Jebusite, shall both be as\nGovernors in Judah.\n\nVerse 8. :\u05d5\u05d7\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9 \u05de\u05e6\u05d1\u05d4 \u05de\u05e2\u05d1\u05e8 \u05d5\u05de\u05e9\u05d1 \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0 \u05d9\u05e2\u05d1\u05e8 \u05e2\u05dc\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd \u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05e0\u05d2\u05e9 \u05db\u05d9 \u05e2\u05ea\u05d4 \u05e8\u05d0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\n\u05d1\u05e2\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9\n\n_And I will encamp about mine house because of the army, because of him\nthat passeth by, and because of him that returneth; and no oppressor shall\npass through them any more: for now have I seen with mine eyes._\n\nIt is not certain, though probable, from 1 Sam. xxvi. 5-7, that the Jews\nhad entrenched camps; if so, the passage would be clearer by rendering\n\u05d5\u05d7\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d7\u05d5) _I will entrench_ instead of _encamp_; though the sense\nis sufficiently obvious, as meaning to afford protection against the army,\n&c. The house of God, to which protection is promised, is his Temple,\nfiguratively denoting true religion purified from idolatry; the great\nspiritual adversary constantly warring with Israel, and, as we learn from\nScripture, frequently prevailing; which is probably the warfare here\nalluded to. But if taken literally, this passage conveys the promise that\nthe Messiah\u2019s kingdom should put an end to oppression and injustice. The\nexact import of the expression, _for now have I seen with mine eyes_, is\nnot very evident; but may imply God\u2019s foreseeing the unfitness of the Jews\nto receive a spiritual Messiah; who, in consequence of their rejection of\nhim, would be given to the Gentiles.\n\nVerse 9. :\u05d2\u05d9\u05dc\u05d9 \u05de\u05d0\u05d3 \u05d1\u05ea \u05e6\u05d9\u05d5\u05df \u05d4\u05e8\u05d9\u05e2\u05d9 \u05d1\u05ea-\u05d9\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05dc\u05dd \u05d4\u05e0\u05d4 \u05de\u05dc\u05db\u05da \u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05d0 \u05dc\u05da \u05e6\u05d3\u05d9\u05e7 \u05d5\u05e0\u05d5\u05e9\u05e2 \u05d4\u05d5\u05d0\n\u05e2\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d5\u05e8\u05db\u05d1 \u05e2\u05dc \u05d7\u05de\u05d5\u05e8 \u05d5\u05e2\u05dc \u05e2\u05d9\u05e8 \u05d1\u05df \u05d0\u05ea\u05e0\u05d5\u05ea\n\n_Rejoice greatly, Daughter of Zion, shout, oh Daughter of Jerusalem,\nbehold thy King cometh unto thee; he is just and having salvation, lowly\nand riding upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass._\n\nThere is no ambiguity in the purport of this verse, which is the coming of\nthe Messiah, as all commentators allow; but I can in no wise agree with\nLowth and others, that this verse is a rhapsodical digression from the\nsubject of the rest of the chapter, in which the Prophet being wrought up\nto the highest pitch of enthusiasm, breaks off from the immediate object\nof his vision to foretel the coming of the Messiah, and then returns back\nto his former subject. On the contrary, I can see nothing like digression\nhere, but one connected and consistent object throughout; this verse being\nthe keystone of the arch, which binds together those which precede and\nthose which follow it, forming the whole into one united and compact body.\nInstead of a digression from the subject, I regard this verse as the clue\nto guide us through the labyrinth, by fixing and determining the subject\nof all the rest.\n\n_Behold thy King cometh unto thee_: \u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05d0 (or \u05d0\u05d5\u05d1\u05d9) is really the future\ntense, literally _shall come_, and changing it to the present, _cometh_,\nseems unnecessary, if it does not in some degree interfere with the\nchronological order of the events predicted afterwards.\n\n_Just and having salvation._ This is certainly an ambiguous rendering of\n\u05e0\u05d5\u05e9\u05e2 (or \u05e2\u05e9\u05d5\u05e0) the past participle of the verb \u05d9\u05e9\u05e2 (or \u05e2\u05e9\u05d9) to save, which\nliterally signifies _being saved_, and the emphatic \u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 (or \u05d0\u05d5\u05d4)\n_himself_, following it, more strongly marks the sense, as _having\nobtained salvation himself_.\n\n_Riding on an ass, and a colt, the foal of an ass._ The connective \u05d5\n_and_, should certainly be rendered here by _even_, or, _to wit_, and not\nby _and_, which makes it appear that the Messiah was to ride upon two\nasses.\n\nVerse 11. :\u05d2\u05dd \u05d0\u05ea \u05d1\u05d3\u05dd \u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea\u05da \u05e9\u05dc\u05d7\u05ea\u05d9 \u05d0\u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05d9\u05da \u05de\u05d1\u05e8 \u05d0\u05d9\u05df \u05de\u05d9\u05dd \u05d1\u05d5\n\n_As for thee, by the blood of thy covenant, I have sent forth thy\nprisoners, from the pit wherein is no water._\n\nThat the Messiah is apostrophized in these words, cannot, surely, admit of\ndoubt or dispute; and words more forcible, or more pregnant with meaning,\nupon the Christian\u2019s view of them, it is not easy to conceive. \u05e9\u05dc\u05d7\u05ea\u05d9 (or\n\u05d9\u05ea\u05d7\u05dc\u05e9) _I have sent forth_, is really the perfect tense, though written\nseveral centuries before the coming of Christ; but it is not at all\nunusual in prophetic language to use this tense, which represents as\nalready accomplished, what is determined in the Divine purpose, although\nthe fulfilment be still future.\n\nThe writer is well aware of a formidable objection presented by the Hebrew\npunctuation, against the application of this verse to the Messiah, as the\npronoun \u201cthee\u201d \u05d0\u05ea (or \u05ea\u05d0) is by the pointing made to be of the feminine\ngender. This is one of many instances in which the punctuation tends to\nembarrass instead of elucidating the subject of the prophecy\u2014instances\nwhich have mainly contributed to the determination of the writer to\ndisregard the points. It remains for those who regard them as of paramount\nauthority, to offer a solution of this and other passages equally clear\nand satisfactory, and equally consistent throughout. If \u201cthee\u201d be meant to\napostrophise the daughter of Zion, what blood\u2014what covenant\u2014what\nprisoners\u2014what pit, are here alluded to? Upon the view here offered, the\nevent foreshewn is the death of the Messiah, an event wholly at variance\nwith the expectations of the Jews, but here distinctly announced, along\nwith the most striking particulars attendant on that event; such as the\nfrustration of the hopes of temporal advantages expected from his\ncoming\u2014the nature of the spiritual blessings which it was really intended\nto impart; namely, the remission of sins, and the redemption of the\nGentile world from idolatry. Along with these is stated the personal\ncharacter of the Messiah, and the express manner of his coming; not in\nglory as expected, but in meekness and humility\u2014the peaceful nature of his\nkingdom\u2014its boundless extent, destined to embrace all nations\u2014yet in\napparent contradiction, his death is intimated, but also his resurrection\nwhereby he becomes \u201c_the first fruits of them that slept_.\u201d These are all\nclearly intimated in this chapter; and of these, how many have former\ncommentators, with or without the aid of points, been able to make out? At\nmost, only three or four verses, as where he is mentioned as riding into\nJerusalem on an ass; and here, according to Blaney, the text requires to\nbe altered, to shew that he was a Saviour, \u05e0\u05d5\u05e9\u05e2 (or \u05e2\u05e9\u05d5\u05e0) being saved,\nbeing altered into \u05de\u05e9\u05e2 (or \u05e2\u05e9\u05de) a Saviour; while, according to Lowth, all\nthat here relates to the Messiah is to be regarded as a rhapsodical\ndigression from the subject of the context.\n\nVerse 12. :\u05e9\u05d5\u05d1\u05d5 \u05dc\u05d1\u05e6\u05e8\u05d5\u05df \u05d0\u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05d9 \u05d4\u05ea\u05e7\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d2\u05dd \u05d4\u05d9\u05d5\u05dd \u05de\u05d2\u05d9\u05d3 \u05de\u05e9\u05e0\u05d4 \u05d0\u05e9\u05d9\u05d1 \u05dc\u05da\n\n_Return to the strong hold, ye prisoners of hope, even today do I declare\nthat I will repay you double._\n\nSuch is the received translation, nor as it now stands, does the sense\nappear at all ambiguous, signifying, _Return to your prison-house until\nthe day of your promised liberation arrives_; that is, the day of the\nMessiah\u2019s coming. There can be no doubt who are meant by the prisoners,\nbut the change of number in the personal pronoun, from plural to singular,\nmakes it not improbable that the latter part of this line is addressed to\nthe Messiah, who was apostrophized in the verse preceding. Upon this view\nthe word \u05d0\u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05e8\u05d9\u05e1\u05d0) may be rendered, _my prisoners_, instead of\n_prisoners of hope_, which is rather obscure; and \u05d4\u05ea\u05e7\u05d5\u05d4 (or \u05d4\u05d5\u05e7\u05ea\u05d4) as the\nimperative hithpael of the verb \u05e7\u05d5\u05d4 (or \u05d4\u05d5\u05e7) to wait. And the sense will\nthen be as given in the text; _Return to the strong hold, my prisoners:\nwait thou till the day I declare that I will repay thee double._\n\nVerse 13. :\u05db\u05d9 \u05d3\u05e8\u05db\u05ea\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d4 \u05e7\u05e9\u05ea \u05de\u05dc\u05d0\u05ea\u05d9 \u05d0\u05e4\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05e2\u05e8\u05e8\u05ea\u05d9 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05da \u05e6\u05d9\u05d5\u05df \u05e2\u05dc \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05da \u05d9\u05d5\u05df\n\u05d5\u05e9\u05de\u05ea\u05d9\u05da \u05db\u05d7\u05e8\u05d1 \u05d2\u05d1\u05d5\u05e8\n\n_When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow Ephraim, and raised up thy\nsons, Oh Zion! against thy sons, Oh Greece! and made thee as the sword of\na mighty man._\n\nHere \u05db\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05db), which signifies _for_, is rendered _when_, thus imposing\na future signification on the verbs that follow. This has, no doubt,\narisen from a supposed allusion to the subsequent wars of Judas Maccabeus.\nBut Ephraim, or the ten tribes, having no share in those wars, militates\nagainst that supposition; and it seems more probable that this verse,\ninstead of designating the _time when_ the promised blessing would be\nconferred upon the Gentiles, here declares the _reason why_ the Messiah\ncould not be sent to them directly and unconditionally; namely, because he\nwas previously promised to Israel. _For I have bent Judah for me, filled\nthe bow Ephraim_; that is, I have chosen Israel as my people, and\nappointed them my instruments for the overthrow of paganism. And,\naccordingly, to the house of Israel he came, and was by some of them\nreceived; nor until the great body of that people declined the office,\nwere the Gentiles called in to fill up the ranks, and carry on the\nspiritual warfare; a warfare which was thenceforward carried on by both in\nconjunction, for the first Christians still were Jews, though blindness\ncame in part over Israel.\n\nVerse 14. :\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05e2\u05dc\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd \u05d9\u05e8\u05d0\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 \u05db\u05d1\u05e8\u05e7 \u05d7\u05e6\u05d5 \u05d5\u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d1\u05e9\u05d5\u05e4\u05e8 \u05d9\u05ea\u05e7\u05e2 \u05d5\u05d4\u05dc\u05da\n\u05d1\u05e1\u05e2\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea \u05ea\u05d9\u05de\u05df\n\n_And the Lord shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the\nlightning; and the Lord God shall blow the trumpet, and shall go forth\nwith whirlwinds of the South._\n\nThis and the following verse evidently contain promises of Divine\nprotection, and of triumphant success; but to whom these promises are\ngiven may admit of a question. \u05e2\u05dc\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd (or \u05dd\u05d4\u05d9\u05dc\u05e2) _over them_, may mean the\nJews last spoken of, or the Gentiles mentioned before, or it may apply to\nboth. And if the triumph of true religion over Pagan idolatry be the\nvictory here spoken of, as this was obtained by both in conjunction,\nduring the Apostolic age at least, so both must be included in the\npromises. Nor can any construction, worthy of the subject, or adequate in\ndignity and importance, be put upon the expression, _the sons of Zion_,\nand _the sons of Greece_, but that which refers to the religion of each.\nThe triumph of true religion over idolatry was one that affected the whole\nworld, including every country, and extending to every age, and regarding\nthe eternal as well as temporal interests of mankind.\n\nVerse 15. .\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d9\u05d2\u05df \u05e2\u05dc\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd \u05d5\u05d0\u05db\u05dc\u05d5 \u05d5\u05db\u05d1\u05e9\u05d5 \u05d0\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05dc\u05e2 \u05d5\u05e9\u05ea\u05d5 \u05d4\u05de\u05d5 \u05db\u05de\u05d5 \u05d9\u05d9\u05df\n\u05d5\u05de\u05dc\u05d0\u05d5 \u05db\u05de\u05d6\u05e8\u05e7 \u05db\u05d6\u05d5\u05d9\u05ea \u05de\u05d6\u05d1\u05d7\n\n_And the Lord of hosts shall defend them; and they shall devour, and\nsubdue with sling stones; and they shall drink and make a noise as through\nwine; and they shall be filled like bowls, and as the corners of the\naltar._\n\nTo take these expressions in the literal sense, as promising to man the\ngrossest of sensual indulgences, would surely be a strange misconstruction\nof prophetic language; \u05d4\u05de\u05d5 (or \u05d5\u05de\u05d4) which is rendered, _and make a noise_,\nis not preceded by the connective \u05d5 _and_; it may, therefore, be simply\nthe personal pronoun _they_, being the nominative to the verb _drink_;\n_they shall drink as of wine_, &c. Who is intended by the pronoun _they_,\nif at all doubtful here, becomes sufficiently clear in the next verse,\nwhere it is repeated in a manner that leaves no ambiguity, at least as far\nas concerns the Gentiles.\n\nVerse 16. :\u05d5\u05d4\u05d5\u05e9\u05d9\u05e2\u05dd \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd \u05d1\u05d9\u05d5\u05dd \u05d4\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 \u05db\u05e6\u05d0\u05df \u05e2\u05de\u05d5 \u05db\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e0\u05d6\u05e8 \u05de\u05ea\u05e0\u05d5\u05e1\u05e1\u05d5\u05ea \u05e2\u05dc\n\u05d0\u05d3\u05de\u05ea\u05d5\n\n_And the Lord their God shall save them in that day, as the flock of his\npeople, for they shall be as the stones of a crown, lifted up as an ensign\nupon his land._\n\nHere the pronoun _them_, in evident contradistinction with _his people_,\nshews that two nations are spoken of; otherwise the passage might be\nrendered, _the Lord God, shall save as a flock, his people_. But the\nantithesis marked by the pronoun _them_, is rendered still more obvious,\nif possible, in the next line. _For the wall of separation is waving_ (or\ntottering) _over his land_. Such is the literal meaning of the Hebrew,\nwhen the words are taken in their primary and ordinary sense. Thus, \u05d0\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\n(or \u05d9\u05e0\u05d1\u05d0) in its usual sense means, _stones_, as the stones of a wall; but\nin a more remote and figurative sense, _precious stones_: \u05e0\u05d6\u05e8 (or \u05e8\u05d6\u05e0) in\nthe primary sense, signifies, _to separate_, or, _separation_; occurring\nin this sense ten times at least in Numbers, ch. vi.; but in the secondary\nor more remote sense, _a diadem_, which separates or distinguishes the\nprince from the people: \u05e0\u05e1\u05e1 (or \u05e1\u05e1\u05e0) in the primary sense means to wave to\nand fro, as a flag, or as a wall before it is blown down by the wind; but,\nin a secondary sense it signifies, as some understand it here, to glitter\nor sparkle, as a diamond, when waved or moved. Thus we see the pains taken\nto avoid the plain and obvious sense of the passage; but the Hebrew\nscholar will judge for himself.\n\nThe concluding verse, in which the prophet breaks forth into expressions\nof adoration and praise for the goodness of the Lord, well accords with\nthis view of his bounty being unlimited, and extending to all his\ncreatures alike.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE RABBI\u2019S EXPOSITION AND REPLY, CHAPTER IX.\n\n\nAs I conclude that the object of the Christian, who thinks he sees in this\nProphecy a clear prediction of the coming of Jesus Christ, is to learn in\nwhat manner it is expounded by the Jews; it appears to me that the\nsimplest way in which I can reply, will be to lay before him what I\nconceive to be the proper translation and interpretation. In doing this,\nit will be unnecessary to offer any further explanation or exposition,\nbeyond what may be given in the form of comment on the translation; while\nhe is at liberty to conclude with regard to those passages, where no\ncomment or explanation is offered, not, assuredly, that I assent to _his_\ninterpretation, but merely that I acquiesce in the reasons he assigns for\nmy dissent; or that his anticipation of my argument has rendered its\nrepetition superfluous, as is the case in verses 9 and 10. The following\nis my mode of translating this chapter and expounding it:\u2014\n\n\n\n\nZechariah, Chapter IX.\n\n\nVerse 1. _The burden of the word of the Lord on the land of Hadrach, and\nDamascus, his residence; for to the Lord (will be) the eye of man, and\n(particularly that) of all the tribes of Israel._\n\nThis prophecy is directed against a king named Hadrach, and against\nDamascus his residence. According to some who have visited Syria, there is\nto this day, near the desert, a village bearing the name of that king,\nwhose inhabitants assert that formerly a large district about it, that\nconstituted a powerful kingdom, was called by the same name.\n\n_For to the Lord_, saith the prophet, _will be the eye of man_, agreeably\nto what he further declareth, that the extermination of the wicked will\nprecede the turning to God, the eyes of the residue of man.\n\nVerse 2. _And also (on) Hamath which borders on her; (on) Tyre, and (on)\nSidon, though she be very wise._ Verse 3. _And Tyre did build herself a\nstrong hold, and heaped up silver as dust, and gold as mire of the\nstreets._\n\nThe burden of the Lord is also touching Hamath, which was bordering on the\nformer; also Tyre, and Sidon, which thought herself very wise; yet her\nwisdom availed her nothing, as was also foretold by Ezekiel, chap. xxvii.\nver. 32.\n\nVerse 4. _Behold the Lord will make her poor, and smite her power in the\nsea, and she shall be devoured with fire._ Verse 5. _Ashkelon shall see it\nand fear; Gaza also, and she shall be very sorrowful. Ekron also, for he\n(God) has made ashamed her expectation: and the king shall perish from\nGaza: and Ashkelon shall not remain._ Verse 6. _And a foreigner shall\ndwell in Ashdod, and I will cut of the pride of the Philistines._\n\nAll the foregoing is known from history to have been already accomplished,\nthrough the conquests of Alexander the Macedonian; who also destroyed the\nfleet of Tyre, and smote her power on the sea. Among others also, it is\nsaid, Ekron shall be very sorrowful, since her hope was blasted; Tyre, on\nwhich she solely confided, being destroyed.\n\nVerse 7. _And when I shall have taken away his blood out of his mouth, and\nhis abominations from between his teeth; then even he shall remain for our\nGod, and he shall be as a chief in Judah, and Ekron like Jebusi._\n\nNow the prophet continues to predict, what is yet to be accomplished, that\nafter their filth and pollution shall have been taken away, a remnant of\nthem also will be to God; each of whom will not be inferior even to a\nchief in Judah, and Ekron will be in a manner as holy as Jebusi, which is\nJerusalem. See Joshua, chap. xviii. ver. 28.\n\nThis, and all that is connected with it, to the end of the following\nchapter, may refer to a remoter period, to which the mind of the prophet\nwas suddenly transported; or these events may have been intended,\nimmediately after the overthrow of these nations, to have followed under\none of the princes of Judah, who was already joined by a part of Ephraim;\nand the whole of whom would have been gathered under his banners, were not\nthis delayed on account of their having acted contrary to the will of God.\nFor, that the promises of God are conditional, and sometimes delayed, if\nthose to whom they were made, render themselves undeserving of them,\nappears in many instances. See Zech. chap. viii. ver. 14-16. Jeremiah,\nchap. xviii. ver. 9-10. Among other instances, may be cited what took\nplace with our ancestors, who went out of Egypt. The land of Canaan\npromised to Abraham (Genesis, chap. xv. ver. 16.) was again promised to\nthem, even after their having worshipped the calf\u2014Exodus, chap. xxxiii.\nver. 1.\u2014yet, for their frequent rebellions, was the fulfilment of this\npromise finally delayed to another generation. (Numb. chap. xiv. ver. 23.)\nNay, it even appears that it would have been retracted, or at least\ndelayed many generations, but for the intercession of Moses. (Exod. chap.\nxxxii. ver. 10.) And, in like manner, may the fulfilment of these\npromises, and that of others, which follow, respecting the restoration of\nIsrael, be delayed, in consequence of the wickedness of our people,\nexciting the displeasure of the Lord.\n\nVerse 8. _And I will encamp about my house (to protect) against an army,\nagainst one passing and returning, and no oppressor shall pass over them\nany more: for now have I seen it with my eyes._\n\nNow have I seen it with mine eyes, means having graciously turned his\nparticular attention to them, as is similarly expressed in Exod. chap. ii.\nver. 25.\n\nVer. 9. _Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion, shout, daughter of Jerusalem,\nbehold thy King shall come unto thee just, and he being saved, humble and\nriding upon an ass, the foal of an ass._\n\nVer. 10. _And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from\nJerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace\nunto nations; and his dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the\nriver to the end of the earth._\n\nVerse 11. _Also thou, by the blood of thy covenant, I have sent away thy\nprisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water._\n\nBy the blood of the covenant, apparently, is meant that related in Exod.\nchap. xxiv. ver. 8. A pit without water means a land of captivity.\n\nVerse 12. _Return ye to the strong hold, ye prisoners of hope, even to-day\n__(I)__ declare __(THAT)__ I will render double unto thee._\n\nThe prisoners are to return and shelter in this strong hold.\n\nVerse 13. _For I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow Ephraim, and\nraised up thy sons, Oh Zion! against thy sons, Oh Greece! and made thee as\nthe sword of a mighty man._\n\nJudah and Ephraim are represented as warlike instruments in the hand of\nGod, the sword, and the bow which he bends, and fills his hand with;\nsimilar to the expression in 2 Kings, chap. ix. ver. 24.\n\nVerse 14. _And the Lord shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go\nforth as lightning; and the Lord God shall blow the trumpet, and shall go\nforth with the whirlwinds of the South._\n\nVerse 15. _The Lord of hosts shall defend them; and they shall devour, and\nsubdue the sling stones; and noisily drink (their blood) as wine; and they\nshall be filled as a bowl, as the corners of an altar._\n\nThe prophet in derision here compares their enemies to sling-stones,\ncontrasted with which in verse 16 that follows, Israel is compared to\nprecious stones; and of whom it was before said that they were the sword\nin the hand of the Lord, to be filled with the blood of their relentless\npersecutors. See also Isaiah, chap. xxxiv. ver. 6.\n\nVerse 16. _And the Lord their God will save them, his people as a flock,\nfor as the stones of a crown shall they be glittering upon his land._\n\nVerse 17. _For how great is his goodness, and how great is his beauty! The\nyoung men he will make as fruitful as corn, and the maids as wine._\n\n\n\n\nRemarks On The Rabbi\u2019s Exposition.\n\n\nWere I candidly to express my sentiments, I might say, perhaps, that the\nRabbi\u2019s answer had disappointed me, being neither so full nor so forcible\nas I expected; but if he, as a Jew, be satisfied, it is not for me as a\nChristian to complain. There are, moreover, certain points of coincidence\nin our translation, in which the acquiescence of the Rabbi, as a\ndistinguished Hebrew scholar, is truly gratifying; while there are also\nsome points of disagreement, in which I am inclined to relinquish my own\nin favour of the Rabbi\u2019s translation. I propose briefly to advert to each;\nbut there is one circumstance that first deserves to be noticed, and\nwhich, however singular it may appear, might yet have been expected. It is\nthis, that wherever I have ventured to differ from Christian commentators,\nthere I am also at issue with the Rabbi. Now, having formerly stated that\nour received translation is chiefly founded on the Masoretic punctuation,\nwhich is Jewish, a coincidence was naturally to be looked for between the\nJew\u2019s exposition, and that which is in a great measure borrowed from it.\nAnd accordingly such is the case, the Jew\u2019s exposition differing from that\nof our own commentators, principally on those points where the latter\ndiscover allusions to Christ. These, the Jew, of course, no where finds.\n\nNow, what the Jew no where perceives, and the Christian only here and\nthere, as it were incidentally, I maintain to be wholly and solely the\nsubject of these chapters. This is, at least, a broad and well marked line\nof distinction: but here I unfortunately stand alone, having Christian as\nwell as Jew opposed to me. Even the Jew allows that the subject of the\nlatter part of this prophecy is the Messiah and his kingdom; but if Christ\nbe the Messiah, as the Christian must admit, then is Christianity his\nkingdom, and the subject of the prophecy. So much for the state of the\nquestion.\n\nThe first point of disagreement between us is unconnected with the\npunctuation, and is one of little importance to the question, beyond what\nit may derive from the concurrence of my opponents. The Rabbi and Dr.\nBlaney agree in regarding Hadrach in the first verse, as the name of a\nprince, instead of a city or state. The Rabbi gives no authority for his\nopinion, and Dr. Blaney supports his by the conjecture that Rehob, spoken\nof in 2 Sam. viii. 3, who is by Josephus named \u0391\u03c1\u03b1\u03bf\u03c2 or \u0391\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2, may be the\nprince alluded to. Now since the avowed reason for resorting to this\nsupposition is the want of a city of this name, I would venture to\nsuggest, that Aradus bears quite as much resemblance to Hadrach as \u0391\u03c1\u03b1\u03bf\u03c2\ndoes; and to Aradus was annexed a considerable district of country, which\nwas precisely the first conquered by Alexander, when he invaded Syria, as\nappears by the following citation from Quintus Curtius, lib. 4. cap. 1.\n\u201cAradus quoque insula deditur regi. Maritimam tum oram, pleraque longius \u00e2\nmari residentia, rex ejus insul\u00e6 Strato possidebat. Quo in fidem accepto,\ncastra movet ad urbem Marathon.\u201d Aradus, like Tyre, was the daughter of\nSidon, as stated by Strabo; \u0395\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f64\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03b5\u03ba \u03a3\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\nThese then, are circumstances which add weight to the supposition that\nAradus may be here intended; but still it is no more than conjecture, and\nas such, _quod valet, valeat_.\n\nIn the same verse, the Rabbi\u2019s rendering of \u05de\u05e0\u05d7\u05ea\u05d5 (or \u05d5\u05ea\u05d7\u05e0\u05de) _his\nresidence_, must, of course, stand or fall with the previous question,\nWhether Hadrach be the name of a man or a city? If it be that of a prince,\nwhose residence was Damascus, I have only to observe, that no such person\nappears to have resided there at the time the prophet wrote, and this is\nthe only time that can accord with the Rabbi\u2019s translation.\n\nWith regard to the last line of this verse, which the Rabbi renders nearly\nin the same manner as our commentators, _for to the Lord will be the eye\nof man_, &c. I can only say, that he does not appear to me to have thrown\nany new light upon the passage, the sense remaining as vague and obscure\nas before. But let the reader judge for himself.\n\nIn verse 2nd, the Rabbi agreeing with Lowth, renders \u05ea\u05d2\u05d1\u05dc (or \u05dc\u05d1\u05d2\u05ea) as an\nactive verb, \u201c_which borders on her_,\u201d while Blaney, with me, makes it\npassive. If, by Hadrach, be intended the district of country extending\ninland from the town of Aradus, this would lead us directly to Epiphania,\nwhich was the lesser Hamath; and this expression might be meant to\ndistinguish it from the greater Hamath, the modern Antioch; but the Rabbi\ndoes not acquiesce in this meaning of Hadrach; and, upon the whole, I see\nno sufficient reason to relinquish my own mode of rendering.\n\nIn verse 4th, the Rabbi\u2019s translation, \u201c_Behold the Lord will make her\npoor_,\u201d I certainly prefer to that of our version, namely, \u201c_shall cast\nher out_;\u201d but his explanation of the remainder of this verse, \u201c_and smite\nher power in the sea, and she shall be devoured with fire_,\u201d appears less\nsatisfactory than that of Dr. Blaney, which I have adopted from him. The\nRabbi explains the accomplishment of this passage by Alexander\u2019s defeating\nthe fleet of the Tyrians, and burning their city; but such an\ninterpretation is hardly borne out by history; a few occasional skirmishes\nby sea, and a partial conflagration, after the city was taken, being the\nutmost that took place. And accordingly this verse has been otherwise\nexplained by Lowth, who understands the \u201c_smiting her power in the sea_,\u201d\nas referring to the insular situation of new Tyre; but Dr. Blaney, by a\nmode of rendering fully warranted by the Hebrew text, applies these words\nto Sidon, where they received their accomplishment in a manner strikingly\npeculiar. The difference of translation consists in reading\u2014\u201c_For she_\n(Sidon) _has built Tyre, a fortress for herself_,\u201d instead of \u201c_For Tyre\nhas built a fortress for herself_;\u201d thus applying the expressions which\nfollow to Sidon, instead of Tyre; which, however, is not thereby excluded\nfrom a full participation in the burden of the prophecy, evidently\ndenounced against both. In regard to Sidon, the fulfilment was as\nfollows:\u2014When besieged by Artaxerxes Ochus, some years earlier than the\nsiege of Tyre by Alexander, the Sidonians, lest individuals might be\ntempted to seek their personal safety by flight, and abandon the defence\nof the city, burned all their shipping in the first instance; and, when,\nby the cowardly treachery of their king, the enemy was admitted within\ntheir walls; they then set fire to their houses, and consumed their city,\ntheir families, their wealth, and themselves; no less than forty thousand\nperishing in the flames, according to Diod. Sic.: \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f54\u03c0\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9, \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1f76\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd. Lib. 16. cap. 45.\n\nIn verse 5. The fate of Gaza and its governor, who was dragged round the\ncity by Alexander, in imitation of Achilles, though noticed by Lowth, is\ndisregarded by Blaney, for what reason I know not, since this seems as\nwell intitled to notice as any other literal fulfilment of prophecy.\n\nIn verse 7th, the Rabbi\u2019s acquiescence in the meaning of the words, \u201c_when\nI have taken away his blood out of his mouth and his pollution from\nbetween his teeth_;\u201d as signifying, literally, the taking away of sin and\npollution, is highly important to the Christian exposition, for it\nintimates the first and greatest benefit we derive from the coming of the\nMessiah. That the Rabbi does not so understand it, as alluding to the\nremission of sins through Christ, is not to be wondered at; but it does\nseem singular that Lowth and Blaney should have disregarded or\nmisunderstood so remarkable a passage, in the sense of which even the Jew\nacquiesces, though not in the application. \u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05e1\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05e1\u05d5\u05d1\u05d9), according to\nthe Rabbi, means Jerusalem, that is, \u201c_Ekron shall be as Jerusalem_.\u201d Now\nthe Jebusites were the original inhabitants of Jerusalem, it is true; but\nwhy the prophet should here use the word Jebusi for Jerusalem, and here\nonly, is rather unaccountable, and I cannot but prefer the translation I\nhave given.\n\nIn verses 8, 9, 10, there is no material disagreement between us either in\nthe translation or the interpretation. Here Jew and Christian agree in\napplying these verses to the coming of the Messiah. The only question\nbetween us is, whether Christ be the Messiah, which the Rabbi, of course,\ndenies.\n\nVerse 11. In the words, \u201c_By the blood of thy covenant_,\u201d &c. it was not\nto be expected that the Rabbi would see any intimation of a covenant for\nthe redemption of mankind, sealed with the blood of Christ; though we\nmight have looked for it in Dr. Blaney. The application of this and the\ntwo preceding verses to Christianity, was so clearly perceived, and so\nably expounded by Lowth, that we only wonder he should have confined that\nview to these three verses, considering them as a digression, when by\nextending the same principle of interpretation to other parts of the\nprophecy, he might have found a clue to the solution of many difficulties.\nThe want of this clue obliges Dr. Blaney to come to the same conclusion as\nthe Rabbi, that the remaining part of the prophecy is still\nunaccomplished; a conclusion which I am compelled most strenuously to\noppose. To the Jew, the suspension of the fulfilment of this prophecy\nwould be almost equivalent to that of all others; for the Messiah\u2019s\nkingdom is alike the subject of all, and if this one be unaccomplished,\nthen must they all be so. To the Jew then, I would say\u2014Is this consonant\nwith the previous ordinations of God in the government of the world, to\nleave an interval of more than two thousand years, without the fulfilment\nof prophecy, which is to mankind, the most convincing of all proofs of his\nDivine superintendance and control over human affairs? To Dr. Blaney, on\nthe other hand, who conceives that \u201csince our Saviour\u2019s appearance on\nearth, nothing has happened to the Jewish nation in any degree answerable\nto what is here predicted; no return from captivity, no victories, no\nsuccesses,\u201d &c.; to him I would say, why may not \u201c_the children of the\npromise_\u201d be here included as well as \u201c_the children of the flesh?_\u201d The\nfirst Christians were Jews, the apostles and disciples were Jews, while\nthe converted Gentiles were no less styled, \u201c_Israelites by adoption_;\u201d\nand so they are continually called in prophetic language. If then the\nterms, \u201c_Sons of Zion_\u201d and \u201c_Israel of God_,\u201d be _not less_ applicable to\nthose who received Christ for their Messiah, than to those who rejected\nhim; we cannot surely say with Dr. Blaney, that there have been no return\nfrom captivity, no victories, no successes, since the coming of Christ;\nfor it will hardly be maintained that redemption from the bondage of sin\nis no return from captivity; that the triumph of Christianity over\npaganism is no victory, and the rapid propagation of the Gospel no\nsuccess.\n\nIn verse 12, \u201c_The strong hold_,\u201d which is evidently the same as the\nprison-house, called in the preceding verse, \u201c_the pit without water_,\u201d\nand which the Rabbi allows to be a state of captivity, is here, somewhat\nabruptly, transformed into a place of shelter and protection.\n\nVerse 15. The Rabbi\u2019s idea, that the prophet here uses the term\n\u201c_sling-stones_,\u201d in derision, as an appellative for the enemies of\nIsrael, while he applies to themselves, in the next verse, the term\n\u201c_precious stones_,\u201d appears to me, I must acknowledge, somewhat novel;\nand as I dispute that translation of the next verse altogether, so I\ncannot acquiesce in such an explanation of this. With regard to the\nrendering of \u05d4\u05de\u05d5 (or \u05d5\u05de\u05d4) in the same verse, which I have considered as\nthe personal pronoun, \u201c_they_,\u201d instead of the verb \u201c_to make a noise_\u201d\u2014I\nbelieve the Rabbi\u2019s, upon re-considering the passage, to be the more\ncorrect translation.\n\nBut these verbal differences, however they may interest the Hebrew\nscholar, are of trivial importance, as regarding the grand question\nbetween us, namely, whether the accomplishment of the predictions\ncontained in this chapter, ceases before we arrive at verse 9, which is\nadmitted to announce the coming of the Messiah. Upon this point, then, I\nplead the general issue. If I succeed in shewing that every part of the\nprophecy in the following chapters, as well as the present, has been\nclearly accomplished in the leading events of the history of Christianity,\nI gain my cause. If I fail to do so, let the verdict go for the Jew.\n\n\n\n\n\nZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH\u2019S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER X.\n\n\nTwo points appeared to be established in the last chapter; one, that the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom is the subject of this part of the prophecy, and the\nother, that that kingdom is a spiritual one; or these points, if not\nproved, were, at least, shewn to be in perfect accordance with every\nverse, and every line contained in that chapter.\n\nThat the Messiah\u2019s kingdom is the subject, appeared from the express\ndeclaration of the 9th verse, \u201c_Behold, thy King cometh_,\u201d &c., and from\nthe exact accordance of every other with this view.\n\nThe circumstances that intimated the spiritual nature of that kingdom, and\nshewed that the prophecy refers to Christianity, were the following:\u2014the\ndenunciations against worldly-mindedness, wherewith the subject is\nprefaced and introduced; these being immediately followed by, and\ncontrasted with the promise of spiritual blessings from the Messiah\u2019s\ncoming; which were declared to be the remission of sins, and the\nredemption of the Gentile world from the darkness of idolatry;\u2014next, the\npersonal character of the Messiah, and the express manner of his coming,\nnamely, in meekness and humility;\u2014the peaceful nature of his reign;\u2014the\nshedding of his blood for the redemption of mankind from the bondage of\nsin;\u2014the joint instrumentality of Israel in the accomplishment of the\ngreat scheme of redemption, but the admission of the Gentiles to a full\nparticipation in the blessings which result from it, and the removal of\nthe partition wall, mentioned by St. Paul, (Ephes. ii. 14,) by which they\nhad been previously excluded from them. These are the circumstances that\ndeclare the spirituality of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, and these are clearly\nintimated in the last chapter.\n\nThe present will be found to contain somewhat less variety of incident,\nwith more of exhortations and promises than the preceding. These are more\nparticularly addressed to the house of Judah, but their subsequent\nextension to \u201c_them of Ephraim_\u201d also, is a circumstance that calls for\nsome explanation, without which it would be difficult to shew the\nchronological order of the events foretold.\n\nEphraim, or the ten tribes, had gone into captivity long before the time\nwhen the prophecy was uttered, which was that of the building of the\nsecond temple; nor have these tribes since returned, (what is become of\nthem, or whether they be now in existence, being wholly unknown,) yet is\ntheir return from captivity here distinctly foretold. What, then, are we\nto understand by this return, or who is intended by \u201c_them of Ephraim_,\u201d\nis the question?\n\nOn the spiritual view, the captivity means the bondage of sin, and\nespecially of idolatry, into which Ephraim had fallen by their apostacy;\nand their return will mean their return to true religion, whereby they\nobtain the remission of their sins, and the gift of eternal life. But what\nis meant by \u201c_them of Ephraim_\u201d? Are we to understand thereby the original\nten tribes who revolted with Jeroboam, and whose descendants are not known\nto be now in existence? or the remnant of those tribes who returned to\nJerusalem, (2 Chron. xi. 16,) and who having joined the tribe of Judah\nhave since become mixed and identified with them?\n\nOn this latter view the prophecy may already in part have received its\nfulfilment, as some of this remnant, mixed with the tribes of Judah and\nBenjamin, in the apostolic age, were probably among the number of our\nLord\u2019s disciples, and were thus redeemed from the bondage of sin, and have\nalready shared in the triumphs and blessings of the Gospel. On the former\nview, supposing, what is not impossible, that these tribes are still in\nexistence, we must look chiefly to the future, as regards them, for the\naccomplishment of this part of the prophecy. But whichever view we\nembrace, as to those who constitute now the ten tribes, we must still look\nto the future, (and this is the point to be attended to,) for the full and\nperfect fulfilment of the prophecy; for so long as any of the house of\nIsrael remain unredeemed, so long must they be regarded, in the spiritual\nview, which is the view we embrace, as still remaining in the bondage of\nsin, and not yet returned from captivity.\n\nThis then is the essential point as regards the prophetic chronology, that\nwhere events are spoken of, which, like the restoration of Israel, are\ncontinuous from age to age, or destined to occupy many centuries in their\nfulfilment, there the prophetic view must needs accord with the nature of\nthe events, comprising at one glance the commencement, the continuance,\nand the completion of what is foretold; consequently these events not\nbeing limited to particular periods like the ordinary occurrences of\nhistory, like the fate of a battle or the fall of a monarchy, cannot be\ndated with chronological precision, except it be from the time of their\ncommencement. And precisely of this nature are the events which form the\nsubject of the chapter before us.\n\nThe first of these in order, as well as importance, is the progress of the\nGospel of Christ, or the triumph of Judah, which began with the apostolic\nage, and has since continued progressive, though with a fluctuating\ncareer, and unequal success, up to the present time, when it extends over\na large portion of the habitable world; but still without having attained\nto any thing like the universality announced in prophecy. This then is an\nevent, which being still progressive, is not limitable to a particular\nperiod, nor capable of being dated with precision except from its\ncommencement.\n\nNext to this, or to the triumph of Judah, is the promised restoration of\nIsrael, which cannot be deemed complete, while so many of the house of\nIsrael, dispersed over the nations of Christendom, still rest their hopes\non the covenant of the Law; a covenant which we as Christians believe to\nhave been annulled at the promulgation of the Gospel; but which from the\nfirst offered only temporal rewards, and unlike the covenant of grace,\ngave no distinct promises of eternal life. That the remaining Israelites\nwill ultimately awaken to a sense of these advantages, we may confidently\nexpect from this promise of restoration, and from the predicted\nuniversality of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom. This then is also an event yet\nimperfectly accomplished, or still in a state of progression, and\ntherefore yet incapable of being dated with precision.\n\nThe abolition of Paganism is another, which though nominally effected at\nthe beginning of the fourth century, is yet so far from being complete,\nthat Paganism still prevails over the largest portion of the globe; and\nconsequently this, like the former, is an event which can be dated only\nfrom its commencement. Bearing then in mind the nature of these events,\nand the impossibility of limiting the date of them to definite periods, we\nmay now proceed with the interpretation of the prophecy.\n\nAs the last chapter opened with denunciations of divine wrath against\nworldly-mindedness, which were followed by, and contrasted with the\nunfolding of the spiritual nature of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom, so the present\nchapter opens with exhortations to seek for spiritual blessings, and with\nthe promise of their abundant bestowal on those who ask for them.\n\n_Ask ye of the Lord rain in the time of the latter rain; so the Lord\ncausing lightning, shall bring heavy showers, and give to every one grass\nin the field._\n\nThis language is metaphorical, it is true, and so is invariably that which\nis employed in describing the plenteousness of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom,\nabounding in corn, wine, and oil, natural plenty signifying abundance in\nspiritual blessings. Were any one disposed to take such expressions in a\nstrictly literal sense, he would soon find it impossible, for, most of\nthem are mixed metaphors, such as _waters of life_, _trees of\nrighteousness_, _garments of salvation_, of which part at least must be\nfigurative; and the spiritual sense is in fact the most literal of any\nthat can possibly be affixed to them. _Ask ye of the Lord rain_, signifies\nseek the blessings of righteousness, and they shall be freely given to\nyou. When viewed in this light, we shall readily perceive the connection\nbetween this and the next verse, which contrasts the value of true, with\nthe worthlessness and deceitfulness of false religion.\n\n_For the idols have spoken vanity, and the diviners have seen a lie; and\ntold false dreams; they comfort in vain._\n\nThat is, the heathen priests and oracles promise blessings which they have\nno power to bestow, but delude their votaries with false hopes, leading\nthem astray, and leaving them to wander as a flock without a shepherd.\n\n_Therefore they went their way as a flock, they were troubled because\nthere was no shepherd._\n\nA religion like Paganism, which allowed the unrestrained indulgence of the\npassions, of pride, avarice, and ambition, was well calculated to seduce;\nand the Jews, in spite of the continual exhortations of their prophets, in\nspite of the many signal miracles displayed to them, and wrought in their\nbehalf, had frequently relapsed into idolatry. Nor can it be supposed that\nthe outward worship of idols was alone displeasing to God, and that the\nindulgence of the passions, which was the soul and spirit of idolatry, was\ndisregarded. The spirit was at least as likely as the form of Paganism to\nbe offensive to Heaven; and accordingly it was continually denounced by\nthe prophets, and had been frequently punished by signal acts of judgment.\nAnd in this did the Jewish priests and rulers still offend, by their\navarice and worldly-mindedness, and thus incur the displeasure of Heaven,\nas already intimated, and here repeated.\n\n_Mine anger is kindled against the shepherds, and I will punish the\ngoats._\n\nThe shepherds are the guardians, the goats the leaders of the flock; but\nthe Jewish shepherds and leaders misled their flock, and as their\nforefathers, under Jeroboam, had embraced idolatry, and were therefore\nallowed to be carried away into captivity, so their posterity, seduced by\nsimilar passions, rejected the blessings of the Gospel, and were suffered\nto remain in the bondage of sin. But the house of Judah having remained\nfaithful, to them was the Messiah promised; and given to those who were\nwilling to receive him.\n\n_But the Lord of hosts hath visited his flock, the house of Judah, and\nmade them as his goodly horse in battle. Out of him shall come the\ncorner-stone; out of him, the nail; out of him, the battle bow; out of him\nevery ruler together._\n\nTriumphant career and success are herein promised to Judah, but the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom having been already declared to be a peaceful one, we\ncannot suppose literal warfare to be here intended. The triumph of true\nreligion over Paganism is no doubt the warfare to be understood.\n\n_And they shall be as mighty men who tread down their enemies in the mire\nof the streets in battle; and they shall fight because the Lord is with\nthem, and they shall confound the riders on horses._\n\nAnd while this triumph is promised to Judah, mercy and forgiveness are\ndeclared to Israel also, and their return from captivity is foretold.\n\n_And I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of\nJoseph, and I will bring them again to place them, for I have mercy upon\nthem, and they shall be as though I had not cast them off; for I am the\nLord their God, and will hear them. And they of Ephraim shall be like a\nmighty man, and their heart shall rejoice as through wine, yea their\nchildren shall see it and be glad, their heart shall rejoice in the Lord._\n\nThe complete fulfilment of this part of the prophecy must still be future,\nwhether we consider it as referring to the Jews now dispersed over\ndifferent countries, or to the ten tribes who went into captivity.\n\nIn most countries of Europe and probably of Asia also, the usual mode of\ncall to a person just within hearing is a shrill kind of hiss, which is\nthe more readily noticed because differing from all other sounds. This\nexpression is accordingly used in the prophecy to express the recal of\nIsrael, whether spiritual or otherwise.\n\n_I will hiss for them, and gather them, for I have redeemed them, and they\nshall increase as they have increased._\n\nThe next verse speaks of sowing them again among the people, which appears\nat first as if again declaring their dispersion; but on the spiritual view\nthere is no reason to suppose that such is the meaning. Sowing them among\nthe people, on this view will signify the blending together of Jews and\nGentiles, by their embracing one common faith; whereby they at length\nbecome one race, and all distinction is lost under the common denomination\nof Christians. This also explains the rapid increase of their numbers here\nforetold, as well as their return from captivity, and their living again.\nThe increase of numbers arising from the accession of converts; their\nreturn from captivity, signifying redemption from the bondage of sin; and\ntheir living, the resurrection to eternal life through Christ.\n\n_And I will sow them among the people, and they shall remember me in far\ncountries, and they shall live with their children, and turn again._\n\nThe spirituality of this return and gathering becomes still clearer as we\nproceed, signifying the flowing together of all nations, Gentiles as well\nas Jews, into the house of the Lord.\n\n_And I will bring them again out of the land of Egypt, and gather them out\nof Assyria, and I will bring them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon; and\nplace shall not be found for them._\n\nThis extraordinary increase of numbers, which is to overflow all\ncountries, strongly favours the spiritual view, for the actual number of\nthe Hebrew nation is avowedly diminishing, and becoming less and less\nlikely to perform the wonderful changes next intimated. The sea and the\nisles were common expressions for the Gentile nations, (Gen. x. 5,) while\nthe land signifies always the Jews, from Palestine or the Holy Land\u2014see\nnote. Rivers denote in prophetic language, the people residing on their\nborders. (Isaiah viii. 7.) _The_ river, in particular, signifies the\nEuphrates and the Eastern nations bordering upon it. This will serve as a\nkey to the meaning of the next verse, which announces the subversion of\nPaganism in these different countries. Thus, _afflicting the sea and\nsmiting the waves_, denote its extinction in the West; _drying up the\ndepths of the river_, signify its extinction in the East; _and bringing\ndown the pride of Assyria_, and _the departing of the sceptre from Egypt_\nbespeak its further abolition.\n\n_And he shall cause affliction to pass over the sea, and shall smite the\nwaves of the sea: and all the deeps of the river shall dry up: and the\npride of Assyria shall be brought down; and the sceptre of Egypt shall\ndepart away._\n\nSurely these expressions announce some greater changes than would result\nfrom the mere emigration from these countries of a race, poor, afflicted,\nand despised, as the Jews long have been. And small indeed is the\nlikelihood that the literal subjugation of all these countries by that\nrace, can be here intended. The following verse points out a far more\nprobable and consistent solution of the problem, in the overthrow of their\nidolatry, and the turning of all these nations to the worship of the one\ntrue God.\n\n_And I will strengthen them in the Lord, and they shall walk up and down\nin his name, saith the Lord._\n\n\n\n\n\nNOTES TO CHAPTER IX.\n\n\nVerse 1. :\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05e2\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d7\u05d6\u05d9\u05d6\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05de\u05d8\u05e8 \u05d2\u05e9\u05dd\n\n_So the Lord shall make bright clouds, and give them showers of rain._\n\nThe Hebrew here may be rendered (see Lowth and Parkhurst) _lightning_\ninstead of _bright clouds_, and the connexion with rain will then be much\nmore obvious; especially with _heavy_ rain, as the Hebrew word literally\nsignifies, which usually follow lightning. The construction will then be\nas proposed in the text.\n\n_So the Lord causing lightning, shall bring heavy rain, &c._\n\nVerse 3. :\u05e2\u05dc \u05d4\u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05dd \u05d7\u05e8\u05d4 \u05d0\u05e4\u05d9 \u05d5\u05e2\u05dc \u05d4\u05e2\u05ea\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd \u05d0\u05e4\u05e7\u05d5\u05d3 \u05db\u05d9 \u05e4\u05e7\u05d3 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4\n\n_Mine anger was kindled against the shepherds, and I punished the goats,\nfor the Lord, &c._\n\nThe apparently indiscriminate use of the past and future tenses, in\nscriptural and prophetic language, has perplexed the best Hebrew scholars.\nOn the conversive power of the \u05d5, Granville Sharpe\u2019s is perhaps the best\ntreatise. In the present case, unless the \u05d5 retain that power when\ndisjoined from the verb, there is no reason for rendering the future \u05d0\u05e4\u05e7\u05d5\u05d3\n(or \u05d3\u05d5\u05e7\u05e4\u05d0) as a perfect, or, _I punished_, instead of _I will punish_.\nAnd, as Mr. Lowth observes, the \u05db\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05db) which follows would be more\nproperly rendered _But_ than _For_, and it will then be\u2014_mine anger is\nkindled against the shepherds, and I will punish the goats; But the Lord\nof Hosts_, &c. The shepherds and the goats both signify leaders of the\nflock.\n\nVerse 4. :\u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d5 \u05e4\u05e0\u05d4 \u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d5 \u05d9\u05ea\u05d3 \u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d5 \u05e7\u05e9\u05ea \u05de\u05dc\u05d7\u05de\u05d4 \u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d5 \u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 \u05db\u05dc \u05e0\u05d5\u05d2\u05e9 \u05d9\u05d7\u05d3\u05d5\n\n_Out of him came forth the corner, out of him the nail, out of him the\nbattle bow, out of him every oppressor together._\n\nThe words _corner_, _nail_, and _oppressor_, must be rather perplexing to\nthe English reader, nor can the Hebrew scholar be certain of the precise\nmeaning of each, though their general import is obvious enough. Thus \u05e4\u05e0\u05d4\n(or \u05d4\u05e0\u05e4) _corner_, signifies in the root to _turn_, and as the _corner\nstone_ is a guide to the builder in laying the others, it comes to signify\na guide or leader. So \u05d9\u05ea\u05d3 (or \u05d3\u05ea\u05d9), _a nail_, signifies one on whom others\ndepend. And \u05e0\u05d5\u05d2\u05e9 (or \u05e9\u05d2\u05d5\u05e0), _an oppressor_, like the Greek \u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2,\nsignifies generally, _a prince_, as well as a _tyrant_. Thus these terms\nare each of them equivalent to a _chief_ or _leader_.\n\nThe verb \u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 (or \u05d0\u05e6\u05d9), which follows, may be either past or future, but\nthe latter accords best with the context, as in the proposed translation.\n_Out of him shall come forth the corner-stone, __ out of him the nail, out\nof him the battle bow, out of him every leader together._\n\nVerse 8. \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8\u05e7\u05d4 \u05dc\u05d4\u05dd.\u2014_I will hiss for them._\n\nThe word _hiss_, does not to the English reader convey the correct meaning\nhere. In many parts of Europe, and, probably, in some of Asia, the common\nmade of call is by a shrill sound, very different from either a hiss or a\nwhistle. In some countries it is effected by pressing the tongue against\nthe teeth with the lips open, and sounding the letters\u2014tsz. In others, it\nis usual to begin with the lips compressed, and without closing the teeth,\nthus making the sound of the letters psh\u2014but in both, the sibilant sound\npredominates, and is heard to a considerable distance, while its\npeculiarity instantly attracts attention from all that are within hearing;\nand this is no doubt the sense of the term, as here used. The Hebrew\nclosely resembles, and probably gives the etymology of the English word,\n_shriek_. (See Parkhurst.)\n\nVerse 11. :\u05d5\u05e2\u05d1\u05e8 \u05d1\u05d9\u05dd \u05e6\u05e8\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d4\u05db\u05d4 \u05d1\u05d9\u05dd \u05d2\u05dc\u05d9\u05dd\n\n_And he shall pass through the sea with affliction, and shall smite the\nwaves of the sea._\n\nThis mode of rendering gives a turn to the sense of the passage, which is\nwholly uncalled for, if not unwarranted by the original: which would be\nmore literally translated: _And affliction shall come over the sea_, &c.\nBut the Jew\u2019s mode of rendering is equally correct, and better accords\nwith the context, thus: _He shall cause trouble to pass in the sea, and\nshall smite the waves of the sea._ The latter expression amplifying and\nexplaining the former.\n\nWhat is meant by the expressions, the sea, the isles, and the land, is a\npoint of no small importance. In prophetic language, the sea and the isles\nalways signify the western Gentiles, or European nations; while the land\nsignifies Palestine, or the Jewish nation. The Hebrew word \u05d9\u05dd (or \u05dd\u05d9)\nmeans either the sea or the west. As the sea extends along the whole\nwestern coast of Syria, sea and west came to be used synonymously. And as\nthe European nations lay beyond the sea they obtained the name of the\nisles, or the isles of the Gentiles, as they are called in Gen. x. 5. Mr.\nLowth observes, on Isa. xi. 11. \u201cThe islands, in the prophetic style, seem\nparticularly to denote the western parts of the world, or the European\nnations; the west being often called the sea in the Scripture language.\u201d\n\nThus, \u201c_causing affliction, or trouble, to come over the sea_,\u201d and\n\u201c_smiting the waves of it_,\u201d signify, as the Jew rightly explains, to\ncause confusion and dismay among the Gentile nations of the west.\n\nVerse 11. :\u05d5\u05d4\u05d1\u05d9\u05e9\u05d5 \u05db\u05dc \u05de\u05e6\u05d5\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea \u05d9\u05d0\u05d5\u05e8\n\n_And all the deeps of the river shall dry up._\n\nThat rivers are meant, in prophetic language, to represent the people\nresiding on their borders, appears in various passages. See Isa, viii. 7.\n\u201c_Now, therefore, behold the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the\nriver strong and many, even the king of Assyria and all his glory._\u201d In\nlike manner, the drying up of the Euphrates, is spoken of under the sixth\nvial in the Revelations, in allusion to the nations bordering upon that\nriver.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE RABBI\u2019S REPLY, AND THE AUTHOR\u2019S REMARKS UPON IT. CHAPTER X.\n\n\nContending, as the Jew does, that no part of the prophecy relating to the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom, has yet been accomplished, he cannot reasonably be\nexpected to offer a particular interpretation of what, according to his\nview, is still unfulfilled. And, accordingly, his remarks on this chapter\nare restricted to an occasional correction of the received translation,\nand a few short explanatory notes; while his reply to my exposition, if\nreply it can be called, may be comprised in one short sentence, namely,\nthat he considers the whole unaccomplished, and rejects altogether the\nspiritual exposition, admitting none but the literal.\n\nIn answer to this, I have to observe, that the literal acceptation, has\nalready, in some instances, been shewn to be impossible; and will,\nhereafter, be so in many more; while the figurative exposition offered, is\nin perfect accordance with the style and language of prophecy in general,\nand is uniform and consistent throughout.\n\nAs I fully acquiesce in the Rabbi\u2019s corrections, and in the only instance\nwhere we differ, have adopted his view in preference to my own, it is\nwholly unnecessary to offer his translation at length; but an objection\nwhich he makes to my exposition of verses 3rd and 4th of the last chapter,\nI feel called upon to notice.\n\nIn those verses, I adopted the view of Dr. Blayney, that the destruction\n_by fire_, there denounced, applies to Sidon rather than to Tyre.\n\nThe common version, \u201c_For Tyre has built herself a fortress_,\u201d being\nrendered by him, \u201c_For she_ (Sidon) _has built herself a fortress, Tyre_;\u201d\nthe Sidonians being thus made the immediate object of denunciation, who\nare allowed to have been the builders of Tyre, which was thence called the\ndaughter of Sidon.\n\nNow the Jew\u2019s objection is founded upon collateral prophecies, in which\nthe burden cannot, as here, be shifted from Tyre to Sidon, the former\nbeing distinctly named in these; and in some, the precise mode of\ndestruction specified, namely, by fire: Thus, in Amos i. 10, \u201c_I will send\na fire upon the wall of Tyrus, which shall devour the palaces thereof:_\u201d\nsee also Isa. xxiii., in which the whole burden is expressly on Tyre; and\nagain, Ezek. xxvii. 32, \u201c_and in their wailing, they shall take up a\nlamentation for thee, and lament over thee, saying, What city is like\nTyrus, like the destroyed in the midst of the sea?_\u201d\n\nThese, and similar passages, would, no doubt, be fatal to the exposition\nof Dr. Blayney, could they be shewn to foretel one and the same event; but\nagainst this, there are, what appear to me, conclusive objections. Two of\nthese prophets not only wrote long before the time of Zechariah, but\nbefore the destruction of Old Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, which was therefore\nmost likely to be the object of their predictions, and not New Tyre,\nwhich, at that time was not in existence, being built after Old Tyre was\ndemolished; this then appears conclusive against the objection drawn from\nwhat occurs in Amos and Isaiah. With regard to Ezekiel, the case is\nsomewhat different, and the answer must rest on other grounds.\n\nEzekiel did write much nearer to the time in question, and commentators\nappear undecided whether some of his predictions refer to the destruction\nof Old or New Tyre, or to both; for if he uttered this prophecy before the\nsiege of Old Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, which can hardly admit of doubt, when\nhe says, chap. xxvi. 7, \u201cBehold I will bring upon Tyrus, Nebuchadnezzar\nking of Babylon;\u201d still the expression of \u201c_the destroyed in the midst of\nthe sea_,\u201d does seem peculiarly applicable to the insular situation of New\nTyre. But if it be granted that the siege of this latter, by Alexander, be\nintimated in that remarkable expression; yet Ezekiel no where, that I can\nfind, specifies _fire_ as the peculiar agent of destruction; therefore, it\ncannot be inferred from any thing he says, that in Zechariah\u2019s prophecy,\nwhich appears to be directed against both Tyre and Sidon, this particular\nmode of destruction may not apply to Sidon, as the text certainly warrants\nthat interpretation. Thus I see no reason to relinquish Dr. Blayney\u2019s\nview, which I should give up with the more reluctance, as I have so rarely\nbeen able to go along with that learned commentator; while this exposition\nappeared to me a very happy solution of a difficulty presented by the\nreceived translation.\n\n\n\n\n\nZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH\u2019S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER XI.\n\n\nIt was before stated, that we should find in its proper place, due notice\ntaken of the pride and worldly-mindedness which led the Jews to reject the\nMessiah, as he offered no temporal advantages; and of their forfeiting\nthereby all claim to the blessings which his kingdom was calculated to\nafford. We are now come to that place. The introduction to this chapter\nannounces the frustration of their hopes of worldly greatness built upon\nthe promised Messiah; and distinctly states what portion of their nation\nwould be blinded by such motives, and what portion would be exempt from\nthem. The rulers, the rich, and the great are declared to be those who\nwould mislead the flock; while the poor and the humble are stated to be\nthose who would recognise the hand of God in his works, and perceive that\nthis was the word of the Lord.\n\nAt the time of Christ\u2019s coming, it is unquestionable, that a very general\nexpectation prevailed among the Jews, that the period for their Messiah\u2019s\nappearance was arrived; but so remote was the character of Jesus from what\nthey expected in their prince, and so different were the advantages he\noffered from what they had hoped to obtain, that the majority of the\npeople willingly yielded to the persuasion of their interested rulers,\nthat he was not the promised Messiah; and thus the misguided flock for the\nmost part entered into the views of their priests and rulers, and rejected\nChrist.\n\nThe motives for this rejection are manifest even to this day, in the\nbackwardness of Israel to relinquish the hopes of a temporal Messiah, and\nin their blindness to the benefits offered them by a spiritual one;\nalthough the consequence has hitherto been to them the loss of even the\ntemporal advantages they previously enjoyed, instead of the attainment of\nothers which they expected. Small, however, in the Christian\u2019s estimation,\nare these, in comparison with their loss, in a spiritual point of view, or\ntheir loss of the especial favour of Heaven; which from that time has not\nonly withheld from them any further revelations, but, as we conceive, has\neven blinded them to the true spiritual import of those previously\nvouchsafed. Thus, in whatever light we view it, whether spiritually or\npolitically, the humiliation of Israel from that time to the present, has\nbeen abundantly manifest; as declared in the prophecy, under the metaphor\nof the fall of the loftiest trees, the pride of the forest.\n\n_Open thy doors, O Lebanon! that the fire may devour thy cedars. Howl,\nfir-tree, for the cedar is fallen, because the mighty is spoiled. Howl, O\nye oaks of Bashan, for the forest of the vintage is come down. There is a\nvoice of the howling of the shepherds, for their glory is spoiled. A voice\nof the roaring of young lions, for the pride of Jordan is spoiled._\n\nThis language is highly figurative, no doubt; yet is it interspersed with\nexpressions, which almost preclude the possibility of its misapplication;\nfor _the cedars of Lebanon_, and _the oaks of Bashan_, are next, by a\nchange of metaphor, called, _the shepherds of the flock_; and soon after,\ndropping the metaphor entirely, it appears that they are the rich and the\ngreat, who sacrifice their flock to avarice and ambition. Their hopes,\nhowever, were frustrated, in the appearance of a spiritual, instead of a\ntemporal prince, and an exultation over their disappointed ambition forms\nthe exordium to this chapter, which may be explained as follows:\u2014\n\nLiterally, the shepherds are supposed to howl for the loss of their rich\npastures on mount Carmel, the forest of the vintage; and the lions to roar\nfor the loss of their covert, the thickets on the banks of Jordan, the\npride of the river, which, with other trees, are doomed to destruction;\nbut the figurative meaning is, that the priests and rulers of Israel\nshould be disappointed of their hopes of worldly greatness at the\nMessiah\u2019s coming, and be deprived, under the new dispensation, of their\npower and influence.\n\nThe lamentation over their frustrated hopes, is next coupled with\nexpressions of compassion for their misguided flock, whom they had doomed\nto the slaughter; that is, by depriving them of _the life which is in\nChrist_. This flock, the prophet is commanded to feed.\n\n_Thus saith the Lord my God. Feed the flock of the slaughter, whose\npossessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty. And they that sell\nthem say, Blessed be the Lord for I am rich. And their own shepherds pity\nthem not._\n\nAvarice is thus foreshewn to be the vice which would lead the priests to\nreject Christ; the sending of whom is next declared to be the last act of\nDivine interposition in behalf of Israel; those who reject him being\nthenceforward left to themselves.\n\n_For I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, saith the Lord, but,\nlo! I will deliver the men every one into his neighbour\u2019s hand, and into\nthe hand of his shepherd, and they shall smite the land, and out of their\nhand I will not deliver them._\n\nBut while further interposition is thus denied to those who reject Christ,\nbeing the rich and the great; spiritual food is expressly promised to\nthose who receive him, who were the poor and the meek.\n\n_But I will feed the flock of the slaughter, even you, O poor of the\nflock._\n\nThe food here promised to those who are willing to receive it, cannot be\nany other than spiritual food; that is, the knowledge to discern truth\nfrom falsehood, and the grace to make a proper election between right and\nwrong. To the poor, this was given, of whom Christ declared that \u201c_Theirs\nwas the kingdom of Heaven_:\u201d to the rich it was not given, of whom he\ndeclared, \u201c_That it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a\nneedle_,\u201d than for them to enter his kingdom.\n\nWe now come to the events to which this introductory matter is intended to\nlead us; and to render the prophetic annunciation the more impressive, it\nis typically represented by actions, as well as expressed by words. This\nis the most important part of the prophecy; that on which it may be said\nthat the whole interpretation hinges. And yet it is here that the\nChristian is at fault, and that the Jew expects a certain triumph: nor\nwithout reason, when our ablest commentators disagree, or even acknowledge\nthe difficulties to be insurmountable. Whether they are removed by the\nproposed exposition, the reader must decide; and to enable him to do so,\nwe shall state them as briefly as possible.\n\nThe events alluded to will, with the Christian, scarcely admit of doubt,\nfor the passage before us is cited in the Gospel of Matthew, though by\nsome error, it is there ascribed to Jeremiah instead of Zechariah. But\nwere the citation in question even supposed to be a marginal note, which\nhad found its way into the text in transcribing, still the purport of the\nprophecy would be not the less manifest, for the connection of this with\nthe context, and the unity of the whole, sufficiently declare the subject.\n\nThe events foreshewn, are the death of Christ; the dissolution of the old,\nand the founding of the new covenant; the rejection of this latter by the\ngreat body of the Jewish nation, and their immediate forfeiture of the\nbenefits it affords; with other circumstances attending these events, such\nas the betrayal of Christ for thirty pieces of silver; the employment of\nthis money in the purchase of the potter\u2019s field; the separation of the\nJews, who rejected Christ, from those who received him; and the evils\nentailed upon those who, having rejected the true, followed after false\nMessiahs. These are the circumstances shadowed forth in the prophecy; but\nto give a consistent explanation of every part of it, and to shew the\nexact adaptation of the events to the prediction, constitute the\ndifficulty.\n\nThe typical actions of the prophet, consist in his taking two staves, or\ncrooks; first affixing to each of them a significant denomination, and\nthen breaking them in succession; accompanying this action with\nexplanations, declaratory of the purport of his doing so. Yet is the whole\nhighly mystical, and in parts so obscure, that Dr. Blayney acknowledges he\ncannot solve these difficulties; an avowal that would have been rendered\nunnecessary, had his predecessor Lowth been more successful. Their failure\nseems chiefly to have arisen from their misconceiving, in the first place,\nwhom the prophet here personates in the character of the shepherd; and, in\nthe next, what the staves are intended to represent; for the general\npurport of the whole, is rightly understood by both to be an allusion to\nthe death of Christ, and the completion of his mission. Accordingly, Lowth\nsupposes the shepherd to personate the Messiah, as the shepherd of his\nflock. But the Messiah is throughout the person spoken of, rather than the\nspeaker, as will presently appear. Blayney also considers the prophet as a\ntype of the Messiah; but supposes him sometimes to speak in his own name,\nas being himself the shepherd. Not to dwell on the want of consistency in\nthis change of character, its avowed inadequacy to furnish the solution\nrequired, is alone a sufficient refutation of it.\n\nThat the prophet is the actual speaker is clear, but he speaks in the name\nof the Almighty, as is distinctly declared three times at least in the\npresent chapter. The great Shepherd is then no other than God himself; and\nall mankind are his flock. Who are the staves, or crooks, we have next to\ninquire.\n\nThe staff, or crook, is the shepherd\u2019s implement, with which he tends his\nflock, protecting them on the one hand, or correcting them on the other.\nHence the two names adapted to the two-fold office, which might be\nrendered Pleasure and Pain, instead of Beauty and Bands; but there is no\noccasion to alter the translation, which is equally literal, and equally\nappropriate as it stands. It is, perhaps, worthy of note, that two staves\nwere once in use for these different purposes. What are these staves then\nintended to represent? In a word, God being the Shepherd, and all mankind\nhis flock, the staves appear to be typical of _Christ_ and _Israel_; these\nbeing the agents employed, the great instruments in the hands of God, in\naccomplishing the work of man\u2019s redemption, from the darkness of idolatry\nto the light of true religion. One staff being _Israel_, with whom was\nfounded the Old Covenant, the express object of which was the abolition of\nidolatry; a covenant which is continually called the \u201c_bondage of the\nlaw_;\u201d and the other staff, _Christ_, the founder of the New Covenant,\ncalled \u201c_the beauty of holiness_\u201d who declared that his yoke was easy, or\npleasant; thus the name will be equally appropriate, whichever translation\nis adopted.\n\n_And I took unto me two staves, the one I called __ Beauty, and the other\nI called Bands, and I fed the flock._\n\nThe parallelism between these two staves strikingly appears in the\ncircumstance that the most remarkable prophecies, as the liiid. chapter of\nIsaiah, which the Christian conceives to be exactly fulfilled in the\nperson and character of Christ, the Jew imagines to accord as perfectly\nwith the circumstances and condition of the house of Israel. May we not\nsuppose them to be designedly applicable to both? instrumental alike to\nthe same great purpose, man\u2019s redemption from idolatry.\n\nOne of the earliest acts of Christ, who, however, did every thing in the\nname of the Father, was his exposing the unfitness of the Jewish leaders,\nwho were the priests, the scribes, and the elders, to be the spiritual\nguides of the flock. Their selfishness and hypocrisy he unsparingly\ndenounced, as rendering them unfit for such an office; of which they were\nconsequently deprived under the new dispensation. Such appears to be the\npurport of the following verse, as ably expounded by Lowth.\n\n_Three shepherds also I cut off in one month, and my soul loathed them,\nand their soul also abhorred me._\n\n_One month_, is an indefinite expression for a short time, as if the\nprophet had said, _at once_. When the people had been duly warned against\nthese treacherous guides; those who chose to disregard that warning, had\nno reason to complain, if it pleased Heaven to leave them to their fate,\nas is next declared.\n\n_Then said I, I will not feed you; that that dieth, let it die, and that\nthat is to be cut off, let it be cut off; and let the rest eat every one\nthe flesh of another._\n\nThe prophet next foreshews, by typical actions, accompanied by\nexplanations declaratory of their purport, the death of Christ, and the\ndissolution of the Old Covenant.\n\n_And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it asunder; that I might break\nmy Covenant, which I made with all the people._\n\nThe Covenant with Moses promised protection against all nations, while\nIsrael remained obedient. Israel disobeyed and the Covenant was broken.\nThe Covenant with Abraham promised blessing to all nations through his\nseed. The Gospel of Christ was that blessing; refused by the Jews, and\nconsequently given to the Gentiles; for a remnant only of Israel received\nthe Gospel, and those were the poor of the flock.\n\n_And it was broken in that day, and so the poor of the flock that waited\nupon me, knew that it was the word of the Lord._\n\n\u201cThe poor had the Gospel preached unto them,\u201d and received it with\ngratitude; but the ingratitude of their leaders towards the Great\nShepherd, for the care he had so long taken of them; and the small\nestimation in which they held a spiritual Messiah, are aptly foreshewn by\nthe prophet, in the name of the Great Shepherd, claiming his reward at\ntheir hands, and their offering the precise sum which was given for\nChrist, thirty pieces of silver.\n\n_And I said, If ye think good give me my wages, and if not, forbear; so\nthey weighed me for my reward, thirty pieces of silver._\n\nThe way in which this money was actually bestowed, is next foreshewn, by\nthe Shepherd\u2019s rejecting it scornfully, and desiring it may be given to\nthe potter.\n\n_And the Lord said unto me, cast it to the potter; a goodly price that I\nwas valued at by them: so I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast\nthem to the potter in the house of the Lord._\n\nThe price they actually gave for Christ, aptly denotes the value they put\nupon God\u2019s goodness in sending him, the Great Shepherd\u2019s proffered\nremuneration. The house of the Lord, or the temple, is the supposed scene\nof action, shewing the spiritual import of the transaction. The money\nbeing given to the potter, foreshews how it would be actually employed, to\nwit, in the purchase of the potter\u2019s field; in fact, it was given to the\npotter. If it be asked what the potter had to do in the temple? the answer\nis, he went there, as others did, to pray. His being there does not, as\nsome suppose, imply that he was at work there.\n\nThose who rejected and crucified Christ, are thenceforward rejected from\nbeing God\u2019s chosen people. As Christ was cut off from natural life, so\nIsrael was cut off from _the life in Christ_ as next intimated.\n\n_Then I cut asunder my other staff, even Bands, __ that I might break the\nbrotherhood between Judah and Israel._\n\nThe house of Jacob was from this time divided into Christians and Jews,\nwho appear to be distinguished in the prophecy under the types of Judah\nand Israel; the former denoting those who received, and the latter those\nwho rejected Christ. This distinction appears to be maintained till their\npromised re-union in the New Jerusalem.\n\nThe spiritual evils entailed on those who reject the true Messiah, to\nfollow after false teachers, are next foreshewn.\n\n_And the Lord said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a\nfoolish shepherd, for I will raise up a Shepherd in the land, which shall\nnot visit those that be cut of, neither shall seek the young, nor heal\nthat that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still, but he shall eat\nthe flesh of the fat, and tear their hoofs asunder._\n\nIsrael is thus left to the mercy of these false shepherds, while spiritual\nblindness, infatuation, and utter helplessness, are the awful judgments\ndenounced against the selfish and worldly-minded priesthood, who thus\nmislead and sacrifice their flock.\n\n_Woe to the idol shepherd, that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon\nhis arm, and upon his right eye; his arm shall be clean dried up, and his\nright eye shall be utterly darkened._\n\nThe spiritual blindness which has since darkened the mental vision of\nIsrael, appears to the Christian to be here distinctly foretold.\n\n\n\n\n\nNOTES TO CHAPTER XI.\n\n\nVer. 1. \u05e4\u05ea\u05d7 \u05dc\u05d1\u05e0\u05d5\u05df \u05d3\u05dc\u05ea\u05d9\u05da\u2014_Open thy doors, O Lebanon, &c._\n\nThat Jewish writers have understood \u201c_the forest_,\u201d as metaphorically\nrepresenting Jerusalem with her stately buildings, and \u201c_Lebanon_,\u201d as the\ntemple itself, appears from the following note of Mr. Lowth, on this\npassage.\n\n\u201cBy Lebanon, most interpreters understand the temple, whose stately\nbuildings resemble the tall cedars of that forest. Thus the word is\ncommonly understood,\u201d Hab. ii. 17.\n\nThere is a remarkable story mentioned in the Jewish writers to this\npurpose. Some time before the destruction of the temple, the doors of it\nopened of their own accord; a circumstance mentioned by Josephus, Bell.\nJud. 1. 7. c. 12. Then R. Johanan, a disciple of R. Hillel, directing his\nspeech to the temple said, _I know thy destruction is at hand, according\nto the prophecy of Zechariah_, Open thy doors, O Lebanon, &c.\n\nThe passage in Josephus in my edition is, lib. 6, cap. 5, and a very\nremarkable one it is, containing many other portents preceding the\ndestruction of the temple, besides the spontaneous opening of these\nmassive doors, which were so ponderous as to require twenty men to open\nand shut them.\n\nVer. 2. \u05db\u05d9 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d3 \u05d9\u05e2\u05e8 \u05d4\u05d1\u05e6\u05d5\u05e8\u2014_For the forest of the vintage is come down._\n\nBy the forest of the vintage, is understood Mount Carmel, which was partly\ncovered with vineyards and rich pastures, for the loss of which the\nshepherds are said to howl, in the following verse. The shepherds\nmetaphorically designate the leaders of the people; the different trees of\nthe forest denoting the different classes and orders of men.\n\nVer. 3. \u05db\u05d9 \u05e9\u05d3\u05d3 \u05d2\u05d0\u05d5\u05df \u05d4\u05d9\u05e8\u05d3\u05df\u2014_For the pride of Jordan is spoiled._\n\nBy the pride of Jordan is to be understood, as Dr. Blayney observes, the\nwoods and thickets on the banks of that river. These served as covert for\nlions, which often infested the country when driven from them by the\nrising of the river. These trees being along with others doomed to\ndestruction, the lions roar for the loss of their shelter, as the\nshepherds howl for the loss of their rich pastures. The lions denote\nmetaphorically the great and powerful among the people. Their disposition\nto prey upon and devour the flock, well accords with the character\nafterwards given to the shepherds also, and shews the consistency of the\nmetaphorical language.\n\nVer. 6. \u05db\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d0 \u05d0\u05d7\u05de\u05d5\u05dc \u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05e2\u05dc \u05d9\u05e9\u05d1\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5\u2014_For I will no more pity the\ninhabitants of the land, &c._\n\nThe distinction between _the sea_ and _the land_, has been already pointed\nout in the note to ver. 11, of the last chapter, and is here too manifest\nto admit of doubt. Lebanon, Bashan, Carmel, and Jordan, clearly shew what\nland is here spoken of, which can be no other than Palestine.\n\nVer. 10. \u05dc\u05d4\u05e4\u05d9\u05e8 \u05d0\u05ea \u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\u2014_That I might break my covenant, &c._\n\nIt might be supposed here that the two staves were typical of the two\ncovenants; the Old and the New. But how is the parallelism then to be\nsupported? If the breaking of one staff denotes the dissolving of the Old\nCovenant; what then is denoted by the breaking of the other staff? for the\nNew Covenant was not also dissolved. By the proposed solution, the\nparallelism is maintained; Christ and Israel so exactly accord, that the\nprophecies seem, in many points, alike applicable to either. Both were\ninstrumental to the great work of redeeming mankind from idolatry, and\nboth were cut of; Christ from natural life; Israel from the life which is\n_in Christ_. To understand clearly the cutting of the staves, the most\nintricate subject perhaps in the whole prophecy, the reader has to keep in\nview two distinct points of consideration, the confounding of which will\ninvolve him in no little perplexity; these are, first the symbolical\nmeaning, or the event foreshewn by the act of cutting; and secondly, the\nend or purport of the cutting; for along with the act, the prophet also\ndeclares the motive for the act, which must not be confounded with the act\nitself, being the effect or consequence that followed that act. Thus he\nsays\u2014_And I took my staff Beauty and cut it asunder, that I might break my\ncovenant, which I had made with all the people._\n\nNow the cutting of the first staff, Beauty, signifies or foreshews the\ndeath of Christ, or the cutting off of the Messiah. This is the symbolical\nmeaning of the act. But the end or consequence of that act, was the\ncessation of the covenant of protection to Israel. \u201cThe covenant,\u201d as it\nmay be rendered, \u201cconcerning all the people.\u201d From that time, the Jews\nceased to be under the especial care and protection of Heaven; no more\ninterpositions were manifested in their behalf; no prophet from that time\nappeared in Israel; these blessings being confined to the Jews who\nreceived Christ, or transferred to the Gentiles.\n\nNext follows the cutting asunder of the second staff, Bands; and this in\nfact appears to be precisely the end or consequence of the cutting of the\nfirst staff; for the cutting of this staff symbolically foreshews the\nrejection of Israel, or the cessation of the Covenant of protection. Such\nappears to be the event symbolized by cutting the staff, Bands. But the\neffect or consequence of that event, or of the rejection of Israel, was as\ndeclared in the prophecy, a breach in the brotherhood, between Judah and\nIsrael, or between the Jews who received and those who rejected Christ; in\nshort, between Christian and Jew, who are here supposed to be symbolised\nby Judah and Israel. This division or breach was not the event foreshewn\nby the cutting of the staff, but the end or consequence of that act; and\nthis distinction requires to be kept clearly in view.\n\nIt seems immaterial whether the symbolical meaning of cutting asunder the\nsecond staff, Bands, be expressed by the rejection of Israel, the breaking\nof the covenant of protection, or the abrogation of the law of Moses; for\nall these events are so closely connected, or so nearly identical, as\nscarcely to admit of their being disjoined or distinguished.\n\nVer. 12. \u05d4\u05d1\u05d5 \u05e9\u05db\u05e8\u05d9\u2014_Give me my price._\n\nFrom the failure of former commentators, in shewing how this can apply to\nthe betrayal of Christ, when the word \u05e9\u05db\u05e8\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05e8\u05db\u05e9) is rendered, as it\nshould be, _wages_ or _reward_, instead of _price_, the Jew seems to have\nbeen so confident of victory on this point, that on referring to his\nexposition which follows, it will appear that he must have written it\nwithout having read mine, to which it is any thing but an answer, as I\nhave expounded the passage precisely upon his own mode of rendering. The\ncorrectness of this translation was acquiesced in by Dr. Blaney, who\nadmitted the difficulty it involved, and candidly acknowledged his\ninability to solve it; nor while Christ is considered the speaker, as he\nand Lowth suppose, does the removal of it appear practicable. But when God\nhimself is understood to be the Shepherd, and Christ, the staff Beauty, it\nappears no longer insurmountable.\n\nVer. 13. :\u05d5\u05d0\u05e7\u05d7 \u05e9\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd \u05d4\u05db\u05e1\u05e3 \u05d5\u05d0\u05e9\u05dc\u05d9\u05da \u05d0\u05ea\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05d9\u05d5\u05e6\u05e8\n\n_And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them to the potter in the\nhouse of the Lord._\n\nThe word \u05d9\u05d5\u05e6\u05e8 (or \u05e8\u05e6\u05d5\u05d9), is by the Jew changed into \u05d0\u05d5\u05e6\u05e8 (or \u05e8\u05e6\u05d5\u05d0) the\nalteration of a letter being all that is required to substitute _the\ntreasury_, in the room of _the potter_. But he cannot deny, that the word\nmeans potter in the original, and the Christian will find no occasion to\nalter it, to make sense of the passage. The objection, that the potter\ncould not be at work in the temple, which was urged by the Jew, has been\nanswered in the exposition.\n\nVer. 17. \u05d4\u05d5\u05d9 \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d0\u05dc\u05d9\u05dc\u2014_Woe to the idol shepherd._\n\nThe _idol_ might be rendered, as Mr. Lowth observes, _worthless_, or of no\nvalue, as it is, Job xiii. 4, and so the Jew renders it. Though a\nshepherd, in the singular number, is here spoken of, yet a succession of\nsuch shepherds is clearly to be understood; and it is probable that the\nchiefs and rulers of Israel are intended here, as well as the false\nMessiahs who have from time to time arisen, and partially misled the\npeople, being alike false guides, who have contributed to the destruction\nof the flock. A history of the false Messiahs, amounting to not less than\ntwenty, who have at different times made their appearance; with an account\nof the numbers and destruction of their infatuated followers, being too\nlong for insertion here, may be found by the reader in Dr. Jortin\u2019s\nRemarks on Eccles. Hist.; presenting a lamentable picture of the blindness\nand infatuation of this wretched people.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE RABBI\u2019S TRANSLATION. CHAPTER XI.\n\n\n1. Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars.\n\n2. Howl, fir tree; for the cedar is fallen; because the mighty are\nspoiled; howl, ye oaks of Bashan; for the forest of the vintage is come\ndown.\n\n3. There is a voice of the howling of the shepherds, for their glory is\nspoiled; a voice of the roaring of young lions; for the pride of Jordan is\nspoiled.\n\n4. Thus saith the Lord my God, Feed the flock of the slaughter.\n\n5. Whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty, and they\nthat sell them, say, Blessed be the Lord; for I am rich; and their own\nshepherds pity them not.\n\n6. For I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, saith the Lord;\nbut, lo! I will deliver the men, every one into his neighbour\u2019s hand, and\ninto the hand of his king, and they shall smite the land, and out of their\nhand I will not deliver them.\n\n7. Yea, I fed the flock of the slaughter, truly an afflicted flock it was,\nand I took unto me two staves; the one I called Pleasant, and the other I\ncalled Painful, and I fed the flock.\n\n8. And when I had cut off three shepherds in one month; then my soul\nloathed them, and their souls also abhorred me.\n\n9. Then said I, I will not feed you; that that dieth, let it die; and that\nthat is missed, let it be missed; and let the rest eat every one the flesh\nof another.\n\n10. And I took my staff, the Pleasant, and cut it asunder, that I might\nbreak my covenant which I had made (for them) with all the nations.\n\n11. And it was broken in that day, and so the afflicted flock, that waited\nupon me, knew that it was the word of the Lord.\n\n12. And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my reward; and if not,\nforbear; and they weighed for my reward thirty pieces of silver.\n\n13. And the Lord said unto me, Cast it into the treasury, the magnanimous,\nthe precious, that I have withdrawn from them; and I took the thirty\npieces of silver, and cast them into the house of the Lord, into the\ntreasury.\n\n14. Then I cut asunder my other staff, the Painful, to break the\nbrotherhood between Judah, and Israel.\n\n15. And the Lord said unto me, Take unto thee, yet the instruments of a\nfoolish shepherd.\n\n16. For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, who shall not\nremember those that are missed, nor seek the young, nor heal the broken\none, nor feed that that stands still, but he shall eat the flesh of the\nfat, and tear their hoofs asunder.\n\n17. Woe to the worthless shepherds, who leave the flock! the sword shall\nbe upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be quite dried up,\nand his right eye shall be utterly darkened.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE RABBI\u2019S EXPOSITION. CHAPTER XI.\n\n\nVerse 1. This prophecy Christians cannot but consider impenetrable, and\nmust be satisfied to break off a few fragments, which may serve to cement\ntheir religion; for in whatever manner they expound the import of the two\nstaves, they must still be incompetent to link its various parts together,\nso as to shew that it refers to what they think it necessarily must,\nnamely, the selling of the Messiah; an interpretation which an impartial\nexaminer must find inconsistent with that passage even if disjoined from\nall the rest, since there, wages, or reward (not price) is spoken of; this\nbeing desired, or required of Israel, while with him who was sold it was\nquite the reverse; so far was he from wishing to be betrayed, that he\ntried and prayed to escape it. The Jew, however, considering the tenour of\nthe whole, contends that this was no more than what had been already\nfulfilled at the time when it was delivered, the allusion here being\nhistorical and not prophetic.\n\nIt commences with predicting to other nations (who are compared to fir,\nand oak trees,) destruction inevitable, since the shepherds of Judah also\n(who are compared to the lions by the Jordan, to the vine and the cedar,)\nhowl for having been spoiled of their glory. The prophet then goes on, in\ncalling to the minds of his brethren the causes that brought them so low\nfrom their former exalted station, in order that this may serve them as a\nwarning no more to deviate from the way in which they were instructed to\nwalk: he also reminds them with what particular and providential care they\nhad been continually led on by their God, in one or other of the different\nways stated, the pleasant, or the painful, as by a tender shepherd, whose\nsole intent is to lead his flock to rich pastures, and good watering\nplaces. In this manner did God tend his flock, Israel, to accomplish their\nhappiness, indulging them when obedient to his will, but chastising them,\nwhen otherwise, as an indulgent father would his children, in order to\nreclaim them. And when we consider the circumstances and condition of our\nfathers during the first temple, we may easily trace out both the times\nwhen they enjoyed uninterrupted peace and comfort, and those, when they\nwere exposed to troubles and afflictions, which God in his wisdom saw fit\nto visit upon them. To these does the prophet refer, representing them by\nthis beautiful metaphor of the two staves.\n\nVer. 5. The cruel shepherds denote the tyrants into whose hands Israel was\ndelivered, who disdained to nourish that poor flock, but sold some to\nslavery, and gave up others to be slaughtered.\n\nVer. 6. And such as escaped the fury of their own kings were ravaged by\ntheir conquerors.\n\nVer. 7. _I fed the flock._\u2014i. e. Since I have chosen them to me out of\nEgypt.\n\nVer. 8. _When I had cut off three shepherds._\u2014The number three as well as\nseven is well known to be made use of in Scripture, instead of an\nindefinite number; this apparently refers to what is related in 2 Kings,\nch. x. v. 32, that in those days the Lord began to be weary of Israel; it\nwas after the kings of Judah and Israel were killed, the family of the one\nexterminated, and that of the other nearly so.\n\nVer. 10. _A covenant made for them with all the nations_; that is, that\nthese nations should not disturb Israel, nor invade their land, but leave\nthem to dwell there in safety, as was repeatedly promised to them. Exod.\nxxxiv. 24; Lev. xxvi. 5; Deut. xxviii. 10. But when under the divine\ndispleasure, that covenant was suspended, and not only the land of the ten\ntribes, but also that of Judah was frequently invaded, and both were\nharassed by their enemies.\n\nVer. 12. The reward which God required of his people means, that for the\nmany blessings he had conferred on them, they should be obedient to his\ncommandments. Yet he left it to their choice, to forbear if disinclined,\nagreeably to the message sent to them by Ezek. ch. iii. v. 27; and\naccordingly some few remained faithful to him, and these answer to the\nthirty pieces of silver. Thirty as well as ten sometimes imply an\nindefinite number. See Dan, i. 20; Gen. xxxi. 7. They are named silver\n(\u05db\u05e1\u05e3 (or \u05e3\u05e1\u05db)) as this originally meant desirable.\n\nVer. 13. They are to be cast into the treasury\u2014\u05d9\u05d5\u05e6\u05e8 (or \u05e8\u05e6\u05d5\u05d9), though\ntranslated the potter, stands for \u05d0\u05d5\u05e6\u05e8 (\u05e8\u05e6\u05d5\u05d0), the treasury. And again,\n\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05d9\u05d5\u05e6\u05e8 (or \u05e8\u05e6\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4 \u05dc\u05d0 \u05d4\u05d5\u05d4\u05d9 \u05ea\u05d9\u05d1) is the same as \u05d0\u05dc \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d4\u05d0\u05d5\u05e6\u05e8 (or\n\u05e8\u05e6\u05d5\u05d0\u05d4 \u05ea\u05d9\u05d1 \u05dc\u05d0) (Mal. iii. 10), or the storehouse of the Lord, viz. the\ntemple. The frequent interchange of the \u05d0\u05d4\u05e8\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05d5\u05d7\u05d0) letters is well\nknown to the Hebrew scholar. The temple is here indicated as the place\nwhere the pure ones, separated from the dross, should fix their eyes on\nthe Most High, and with prayers appease his wrath, that he might yet avert\nthe approaching calamities. \u05d9\u05e7\u05e8\u05ea\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05ea\u05e8\u05e7\u05d9) signifies _I have withdrawn_,\nnot _I was prized at_. See Proverbs xxv. 17, where it means _withdraw thy\nfoot_.\n\nVer. 14. _Cut asunder the other staff._ While the two kings lived in peace\nand harmony, the one was corrupted by the wickedness of the other, and\ntherefore the chastening rod was applied for the purpose of breaking their\nbrotherhood; but that staff was dispensed with, when by the dissolution of\none of these kings, the cause for it ceased.\n\nVer. 16. _I will raise up a shepherd, &c._ Judah has likewise to lament to\nthis day having been governed by foolish shepherds during both the first\nand second temple, who did neither remember the missed, nor heal the\nbroken, and instead of feeding them that stood still, they fed upon them,\nand tore their hoofs asunder. Yet as the survivors stand to this day a\nliving monument of the literal accomplishment of this prophecy from verse\n15, it serves them as a sure pledge of the fulfilment of that which\nfollows.\n\n\n\n\n\nZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH\u2019S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER XII.\n\n\nOf the occurrences which succeeded the crucifixion of Christ, one of the\nfirst in order, as well as importance, was the destruction of Jerusalem;\nan event which materially changed the condition of the Jewish nation, both\nas regarded their polity and their religion; to the full exercise of which\nthe existence of their temple was indispensable. It was therefore to be\nexpected that the prediction of this event would be eagerly sought for by\nChristian commentators, in a prophecy relating to the establishment of the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom, especially by those who chiefly look to political\naffairs for its fulfilment.\n\nAnd accordingly this chapter appears to afford distinct intimation of such\nan event, as it opens with the express mention of the siege of Jerusalem.\nYet is it mentioned in a way not a little embarrassing to the political\nexposition; for, instead of the destruction, the prophecy declares the\ntriumph of Jerusalem; and, with the exception of one or two ambiguous\nexpressions at the commencement, this triumph forms the whole subject of\nthe chapter. But Jerusalem really was taken and destroyed, nor have the\nJews since been able to rebuild either their city or their temple, nor has\nany thing approaching to a triumph, in the ordinary acceptation of the\nterm, occurred to them from that time to the present. How then shall we\nexplain the victory and triumph foretold in the prophecy?\n\nThe solution appears to be this; that the event here foretold is no\npolitical, but a spiritual siege; namely, the warfare of worldly feelings\nagainst true religion, for this is the spiritual Jerusalem. The abrogation\nof the law, and the promulgation of the Gospel, are foreshewn under the\ntypes of the Old and the New Jerusalem; which symbolically signify the Old\nand New Covenant, or Judaism and Christianity, the one abolished and the\nother established, in reality at the coming of Christ, but ostensibly at\nthe destruction of the city and temple, which is probably on this account\nemployed symbolically, to represent the spiritual change.\n\nThe prophecy, however, does not declare the destruction of the old\nJerusalem, but merely the repeopling of it, in verse 6; and in the\nspiritual sense it was not destroyed, though merged in the superior\nsplendour and greatness of the New City; for Christianity is built on the\nfoundation of Judaism. The new Jerusalem here spoken of, is then, the new\nCovenant, or Christianity, the spiritual City, the building of which began\nat this time, whatever may be the period required for its completion.\n\nIn the spiritual sense also must be understood the triumph of Judah, which\nwas the triumph of the Gospel; and her salvation, spoken of in verse 7,\nwhich was eternal salvation. Her victory was the victory over the world,\nwhich every true Christian has to gain, but which was first gained by\nJudah, for the first Christians were Jews; although the Gentiles were\nsubsequently admitted into the Church of Christ, and became the principal\ninhabitants of the spiritual Jerusalem, when deserted, for the most part\nat least, by its former inhabitants the Jews. The Gentiles from this time\nbecame Israelites by adoption, and the distinction between Jew and Gentile\nconverts, or lineal and adopted Israelites, is marked in the prophecy, as\nmight be expected.\n\nBut the time of Israel\u2019s spiritual restoration requires some explanation,\nbeing adverted to in this and the following chapter ten times at least,\nwith the definite expression of \u201c_in that day_:\u201d an expression which seems\nas little to accord with the time required for a whole nation or people to\nchange their faith, as with that which would be requisite for their\nliteral return from all parts of the world to be reunited in one city, as\nthe Jews understand the prophecy. A literal day cannot therefore be\nunderstood; nor yet would the difficulty be removed by supposing it to\nmean a prophetic day, or a Jewish year of twelve months, being three\nhundred and sixty days; for this period would be alike inadequate to the\nevent in question.\n\nHow shall we then understand the expression, \u201c_that day_,\u201d so often\nrecurring in the prophecy? The answer appears to be simply this, that it\nmeans _one_ day to _each individual_, but not _the same day_ to _all\ncollectively_. As the earlier Christians did not all embrace Christianity\non one day, so neither have we reason to expect that the later Christians\nwill do so. History declares to the contrary, that some of the house of\nIsrael have been continually flowing into the Church of Christ in every\nsucceeding century, from the Apostolic age to the present time. And as\nsome understand the Day of Judgment to be to each individual the day of\nhis death, so to each will the day of his \u201c_Redemption_,\u201d in Scriptural\nlanguage, be the day of his receiving Christ. St. Paul in the 2 Corinth.\nvi. 2, says \u201c_Behold now is the accepted time, now is the day of\nSalvation_,\u201d and in the same light must it be viewed in the passages\nbefore us; that is, as one day to each individually, not as the same day\nto all collectively.\n\nThe opening of this chapter closely resembles that of the 9th, and may\nhelp to throw light on those parts of it which appeared obscure. Both\nbegin by declaring God\u2019s superintendance and control over human affairs,\nand both assert his right to the disposal of events on similar grounds:\nthere it was alleged, because all creatures belong to him, _for the Lord\u2019s\nis the eye of man, and all the tribes of Israel_; and here, because he\ncreated all things.\n\n_The burden of the word of the Lord upon Israel, saith the Lord, which\nstretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundations of the earth, and\nformeth the spirit of man within him._\n\nThere, the burden of the prophecy was laid on the Gentiles, but the\nadmonition meant for the benefit of Israel, to whom it was addressed;\nhere, the burden is upon Israel, but the admonition expressly intended for\nall nations, \u201c_all the people round about_;\u201d and of such was the new\nJerusalem, which is the subject of this chapter, chiefly composed after\nthe overthrow of their idolatry and their conversion to Christianity. This\nappears to be the spiritual warfare here intended, namely, the successful\nprogress of the Gospel against Paganism.\n\n_Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the nations\nround about, and upon Judah it shall be in the siege against Jerusalem._\n\nUpon Judah is the burden of the prophecy chiefly imposed, for to Judah was\nfirst committed the task of promulgating the Gospel. The Apostles, and\nalso the disciples of our Lord were all Jews, they were the founders of\nthis city. \u201c_A cup of trembling_,\u201d must not be here understood to signify\nan example by punishment inflicted, but as the Jew renders it, \u201c_a cup of\nastonishment_,\u201d or confusion to all nations; or, as it is next termed, \u201c_a\nburden-stone_,\u201d to crush its enemies; and such has been the Gospel of\nChrist, as the prophecy declares.\n\n_In that day, will I make Jerusalem a burden-stone for all people; all\nthat burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the\npeople of the earth be gathered together against it._\n\nThe people, here spiritually signifies their false religion, which was to\nbe abolished; and Jerusalem is here understood to mean Christianity, or\ntrue religion, which was triumphant. Confusion is then denounced against\nits enemies, while Divine protection and support are promised to the house\nof Judah, who received Christ.\n\n_In that day, saith the Lord, I will smite every horse with astonishment,\nand his rider with madness, but I will open mine eyes upon the house of\nJudah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness._\n\nThe blind rage of the heathen and the infatuated frenzy with which they\nstrove to extinguish the light of the Gospel, are here clearly foreshewn;\nbut the spiritual Jerusalem resisted all their efforts. And when the\nlineal Israelites abandoned their city, its gates were thrown open to the\nGentiles, who entered and repeopled it, and became thenceforward\n\u201cIsraelites by adoption.\u201d The new Jerusalem being Christianity, its\ninhabitants must mean the Christians; and who were they, after the Jews\nrejected Christianity, but the Gentile converts? Accordingly, they are so\nstyled in the next verse, as contradistinguished from the first Jewish\nconverts, who are called the governors of Judah, being the founders and\nbuilders of the spiritual city.\n\n_And the governors of Judah shall say in their hearts, The inhabitants of\nJerusalem shall be my strength, in the Lord of hosts their God._\n\nThe fitness of the expression, _Inhabitants of Jerusalem_, to symbolize\nthe Gentile converts, further appears in the fact, that the original\ninhabitants of the city, who were never expelled, were Gentiles. _The\ngovernors of Judah_ can signify no other than the apostles and disciples\nof our Lord, the first teachers of Christianity, or the founders of the\nnew City. These, when the Jews were no longer willing to hear them, turned\ntheir attention to the Gentiles, and directed all their efforts to effect\ntheir conversion. As the strength of a city lies in its inhabitants, so\nthe hope of strengthening theirs, from that time, rested in gaining over\nthe Gentiles: \u201c_The Governors of Judah say in their hearts, The\ninhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the Lord of hosts their\nGod._\u201d Does not this mean in the Lord of hosts _becoming_ their God? That\nis, in his becoming the God of the Gentiles by their conversion to\nChristianity?\n\nThe extraordinary success of the apostles and disciples, in converting the\nGentiles and repeopling the city, is foreshewn in the next verse.\n\n_In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire\namong the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf, and they shall devour\nall the nations round about on the right hand and on the left, and\nJerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem._\n\nIf the spiritual Jerusalem be Christianity, it was certainly the Gentiles\nwho repeopled this city, when the Jews deserted it. But still it was not\ndeserted by all the Jews, for the first Christians were Jews, as\nemphatically expressed in the next verse.\n\n_The Lord shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house\nof David, and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify\nthemselves against Judah._\n\nThe salvation of Judah here spoken of must be salvation through Christ;\nbut if Judah signify the first Jewish converts to Christianity, and the\ninhabitants of Jerusalem mean those from the gentile nations, who are _the\nhouse of David_, here spoken of, and classed with the inhabitants of\nJerusalem, as receiving their salvation subsequently to that of Judah? The\nhouse of David must surely mean those of the Hebrew nations, who did not\nat first receive Christ along with the house of Judah, but subsequently;\nor, the prophecy being still prospective, those who shall hereafter\nembrace Christianity must be also included. To this the Jew may probably\nanswer: How can a Christian believe that the house of David, the very\nhouse from which Christ came, still remains unredeemed? I answer, that we\nare nowhere assured that all of his own family believed in him; still less\nthe whole house of David, of which they were only a branch. To the fact,\nwhether any of that family be still left among the unredeemed of Israel,\nlet the Jew answer. If not, then where is their expected Messiah to come\nfrom? But if there be such, then have these not yet received the salvation\nwhich is through Christ; and as far as they are concerned, the words of\nthe prophecy yet remain to be fulfilled, however it may have received its\nfulfilment in regard to others. When it shall please God to remove the\nveil which is before their eyes, and to restore the spiritual strength\nwhich they have lost, then will the following words be accomplished in\nthem also, as it was to Judah in the apostolic age.\n\n_In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and he\nthat is feeble among them, at that day shall be as David, and the house of\nDavid shall be as God, as the Angel of the Lord before them._\n\nThe esteem and veneration with which the primitive Christians, and\nparticularly the apostles, would be regarded for their purity and\nholiness, and for their spiritual strength, notwithstanding that they were\ndesignedly chosen from the lowest and most illiterate class of men, is\nhere emphatically foretold. Their consequent success in preaching the\ngospel is next declared; the nations being destroyed, figuratively\nsignifies their false religion being overthrown.\n\n_And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord, that I will seek\nto destroy all the nations that come up against Jerusalem._\n\nThe next verse, which foretels _the pouring out of the Spirit_, so closely\nresembles the prophecy of Joel, of which St. Peter gave the interpretation\non the memorable day of Pentecost; and at the same time, coupled the\napplication with a reproach to the Jews for having crucified Christ (Acts\nii.), that the Christian can hardly fail to see that they refer to the\nsame event, though not here restricted to that particular day, as appears\nfrom \u201c_the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem_\u201d being\nmentioned; nor was the gift of the Spirit confined to the day of\nPentecost, but continued to all on whom the apostles laid their hands.\n\n_And I will pour out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of\nJerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look to\nme for him whom they pierced, and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth\nfor his only son; and be in bitterness for him as one that is in\nbitterness for his firstborn._\n\nThe most solemn fast almost universally observed throughout Christendom,\nin commemoration of Christ\u2019s crucifixion, is manifestly the event which\nwas here foretold, at least four centuries before its fulfilment. The\nprospect of its receiving a more evident accomplishment at any future\nperiod, seems to be rendered hopeless by the enumeration of the different\nfamilies that follows, all such distinctions being now lost among the\npresent race of Jews.\n\n_And in that day there shall be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the\nmourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon;_\n\n_And the land shall mourn every family apart, the family of the house of\nDavid apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan\napart, and their wives apart;_\n\n_The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family\nof the house of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;_\n\n_All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart._\n\nIf any thing more be intended by this emphatical repetition of the\nfamilies mourning apart, beyond the strong expression of the depth of\ntheir grief, and the sincerity of their repentance, may it not be to\nconvince the unbelieving Jews of the hopelessness of a more literal\nfulfilment after the loss of their genealogies?\n\n\n\n\n\nNOTES TO CHAPTER XII.\n\n\nVerse 2. :\u05d5\u05d2\u05dd \u05e2\u05dc \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d4 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4 \u05d1\u05de\u05e6\u05d5\u05e8 \u05e2\u05dc \u05d9\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05dc\u05dd\n\n_When they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against\nJerusalem._\n\nSuch is the translation in our version, a sense which can in no way be\nextorted from the words of the text, as every Hebraist must be well aware.\nThe Jew, by inserting the relative _who_, as understood after the word\nJudah, renders the passage thus,\n\n_And also upon Judah, who shall be in the siege against Jerusalem._\n\nThis is certainly no violation of the text, as the relative pronoun is\noften understood in Hebrew. But still I hold it to be a rule not to insert\na relative unless the sense requires it, and I see no such necessity here,\nas either of the preceding nominatives, namely, _the burden of the\nprophecy_, or _the cup of trembling_, may govern the verb _shall be_, and\nthus we have, as I have rendered it, _and also upon Judah it shall be, in\nthe __ siege against Jerusalem_; by which I understand _the burden shall_\nbe upon Judah also.\n\nVerse 3. :\u05d0\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd \u05d0\u05d7 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05dc\u05dd \u05d0\u05d1\u05df \u05de\u05e2\u05de\u05e1\u05d4 \u05dc\u05db\u05dc \u05d4\u05e2\u05de\u05d9\u05dd\n\n_I will make Jerusalem a burden stone for all people._\n\nHere the Jew may probably ask, How can Jerusalem, in the spiritual sense,\nas signifying true religion, become a burden stone, or a cup of confusion\nto the heathen? I answer, in every way. In the first place, by\nfrustrating, as it did, all their efforts to suppress and extinguish\nit;\u2014in the next place, by its opposing and outraging all their worldly\nfeelings, condemning their pride, and teaching humility, requiring them to\nreceive their religion from one whom they despised as the most degraded of\nhuman beings, a crucified malefactor;\u2014and, lastly, by stultifying all\ntheir previous notions, enjoining the restraint and control of the\npassions, instead of which their religion sanctified their indulgence as\nan act of devotion. Thus was Christianity, in every way, a cup of\nconfusion, and a stumbling-stone to the heathen nations.\n\nBut against the spiritual exposition of the Old and New Jerusalem, as\nsymbolizing the Old and New Covenant, the Jew may, perhaps, further\nobject, that he was never taught to look for a New Covenant, and that he\nfinds no intimation of it in the Prophets. This being a question of fact,\nrather than of reasoning, we must look to the Scriptures for the answer.\n\nWithout enumerating the many intimations of the sacrifices and ceremonies\nof the Old Covenant, not being _intrinsically_ acceptable to God, but of\nless estimation than the attributes of moral excellence, we find the\nfollowing direct declarations of a New Covenant to be established at the\nMessiah\u2019s coming, who is symbolically styled, _My servant David_. Thus in\nIsa. lv. 3, we find, _Incline thine ear and come unto me; hear and your\nsoul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even\nthe sure mercies of David._ Ezekiel also says, chap. xxxiv. 24, _And I the\nLord will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the\nLord have spoken it; and I will make with them a covenant of peace_, &c.\nAnd again in chap. xxxvii. 26, he says, _Moreover, I will make a covenant\nof peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them; and I\nwill place them and multiply them, and I will set my sanctuary in the\nmidst of them for evermore._ But Jeremiah still more expressly declares\nthe superseding of the Old, and the substitution of the New Covenant;\nwhile he describes the latter in terms equivalent to those used by Christ\nhimself, \u201cThe kingdom of God is within you.\u201d Thus Jer. xxxi. 31, _Behold\nthe days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a New Covenant with the\nhouse of Israel, and with the house of Judah. Not according to the\nCovenant that I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by\nthe hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which my Covenant they\nbrake, although I was an husband to them, saith the Lord. But this shall\nbe the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, After those\ndays, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write\nit in their hearts, and will be their God, and they shall be my people._\n\nHere we have clear intimation of a new law superseding the old, the\nspiritual nature of the new being contrasted with the ceremonial of the\nold, by its being written in the heart; while the stress laid by all upon\nits everlasting duration, implies that the one preceding it was only meant\nto be temporary.\n\nVerse 5. :\u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05e8\u05d5 \u05d0\u05dc\u05e4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d4 \u05d1\u05dc\u05d1\u05dd \u05d0\u05de\u05e6\u05d4 \u05dc\u05d9 \u05d9\u05e9\u05d1\u05d9 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05dc\u05dd \u05d1\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd\n\n_And the Governors of Judah shall say in their hearts, the inhabitants of\nJerusalem shall be my strength in the Lord of hosts their God._\n\n\u201cThis text,\u201d says Dr. Blayney, \u201chas been supposed corrupt, and many\nattempts made to amend it. But without any alteration, it well expresses\nthe sentiments of the men of Judah, concerning the interest they had in\nthe safety of Jerusalem and its inhabitants, on which their own safety and\nsecurity depended in a great degree,\u201d &c. I fully agree with Dr. Blayney\nin the literal meaning of the words, which involves no difficulty; but in\nlooking beyond the literal, to the symbolical and spiritual sense,\nconsiderable difficulty appears. A different solution from that I have\noffered at first occurred to me, which is this, that as _Judah_ means the\nearliest converts to Christianity, these being evidently contrasted with\n_the inhabitants of Jerusalem_, who were subsequently saved, the latter\nmight mean the yet unconverted Jews. Upon this view, the anxiety of\nChristians for the conversion of the Jews, would appear to be the subject\nintimated in the verse before us; and as this idea may occur to others as\nit did to myself, I think it right to state my reasons for relinquishing\nit. One objection to this view is, that in verse 10, the _unconverted\nJews_, if they be the inhabitants of Jerusalem, would here mourn the\ncrucified Saviour, which would be a complete solecism. Another objection\nis, that the abolition of idolatry in the next chapter, instead of being\nrepresented as opening the way for the admission of the Pagans to\nChristianity, which it certainly did, would then be represented as opening\nthe way to the conversion of the Jews, which it certainly did not, but\nrather had a contrary effect, as history declares. And, lastly, upon this\nview, the corruption of Christianity, leading to the loss of the spiritual\nJerusalem, mentioned at the beginning of chap. xiv., instead of being\nascribed to the Gentile church, would thus appear to be the work of the\nJews, either of those more recently converted to Christianity, or of those\nstill unconverted, both of which would be alike unreasonable. Such are the\nreasons which led me to reject that view, and adopt the one proposed in\nthe text. With respect to the house of David, as signifying the Jewish\nconverts who embraced Christianity subsequent to the Apostolic age, those\nobjections do not apply.\n\nVerse 10. :\u05d5\u05d4\u05d1\u05d9\u05d8\u05d5 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d9 \u05d0\u05ea \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d3\u05e7\u05e8\u05d5\n\n_And they shall look upon me whom they have pierced._\n\nBlayney considers the \u05d0\u05dc\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05dc\u05d0), as simply a preposition, not a\ncompound of \u05d0\u05dc with the affix pronoun \u05d9, the antecedent to \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 (or \u05e8\u05e9\u05d0),\nbeing understood, and renders the passage thus, _They shall look towards\nhim whom they pierced._\n\nThe Jew argues from the change of person, that our version cannot be\nright, and he renders it, _They shall look to me concerning him whom they\npierced._\n\nIn whatever way the passage be rendered, no doubt can remain in the mind\nof the Christian that Christ, who was pierced, is the person here alluded\nto; and this is the only point material to the present exposition. That\nthe Jew should admit this, is not to be expected.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE RABBI\u2019S EXPOSITION, AND THE AUTHOR\u2019S REMARKS. CHAPTER XII.\n\n\nIn the remaining chapters, I shall merely point out those parts in which\nthe construction of the original is, or may be, different from that of the\nEnglish version, as there seems no occasion to notice those passages where\nthey both agree.\n\nVerse 2. _Behold I will make Jerusalem a cup of confusion unto all the\npeople round about, and also upon Judah, who will be in the siege against\nJerusalem._\n\nBy this it appears that Judah, namely, those who will be without the city,\nwill likewise be greatly confused at their being compelled by the other\nnations to take part in the siege, and fight against their brethren.\n\nVerse 10. _And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the\ninhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications; and\nthey shall look unto me __(CONCERNING)__ whom they have pierced, and they\nshall mourn for him, &c._\n\nThe change of person clearly proves, that it is not he who was pierced, to\nwhom they will look; but it must be considered as if it were \u05d5\u05d4\u05d1\u05d9\u05d8\u05d5 \u05e2\u05dc \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8\n\u05d3\u05e7\u05e8\u05d5 (or \u05d5\u05e8\u05e7\u05d3 \u05e8\u05e9\u05d0 \u05dc\u05e2 \u05d5\u05d8\u05d9\u05d1\u05d4\u05d5), or \u05d0\u05dc\u05d9 \u05e2\u05dc \u05d0\u05ea \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d3\u05e7\u05e8\u05d5 (or \u05d5\u05e8\u05e7\u05d3 \u05e8\u05e9\u05d0 \u05ea\u05d0 \u05dc\u05e2\n\u05d9\u05dc\u05d0) particles are well known to be frequently omitted or exchanged. This\nmay either allude to those who had been formerly slain for their bold\nadmonitions and warnings; or to those who will hereafter be slain in\nbattle.\n\nThey who apply this to the Christian Messiah, have another difficulty to\nsolve, besides the one above mentioned, and that is, to explain how a\ndeath is to be lamented, which, as they believe, was indispensable to the\nsalvation of so many myriads of souls. And further, it may be asked, if it\nwas the especial will of God that this should be so accomplished, how\ncould the perpetrators of his death avoid it? And, lastly, what cause had\nthe house of David, comprising the Messiah himself, to supplicate for\nmercy on account of his death, in which they, being his own family, had\nsurely no share?\n\nVer. 8. \u05d5\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d3\u05d5\u05d9\u05d3 \u05dc\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd (or \u05dd\u05d9\u05d4\u05dc\u05d0\u05dc \u05d3\u05d9\u05d5\u05d3 \u05ea\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5) cannot mean, _and the house\nof David shall be as God_, but only as a powerful being, _as the Angel of\nthe Lord before them_. The witch of Endor, who saw \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd (or \u05dd\u05d9\u05d4\u05dc\u05d0)\nascending out of the earth, surely did not mean to say that it was God.\nAnd in many other passages we find \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd (or \u05dd\u05d9\u05d4\u05dc\u05d0) applied to mortals as\nwell as to God.\n\n                  \u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\u2010\n\nIn answer to the difficulties proposed by the Jew, the Christian may say,\nthat he does not mourn the death of Christ, but the sins that required\nsuch a sacrifice; and as to the free agency of those who crucified him, he\nwill say, that God\u2019s seeing fit sometimes to employ the wicked in\naccomplishing his purposes, does not imply that he first makes them wicked\nfor the purpose. When was there ever a time, that none could be found in\nIsrael who were ready to slay the prophets? And as to the difficulty in\nthe text of verse 10, it is one of the Jews\u2019 own creating, as the\nChristian finds none in receiving it as it stands without even the\nproposed alteration, an alteration admitted, but not proposed by him. The\nonly remaining objection, which regards the house of David, has been\nanticipated and answered in the interpretation of verse 7.\n\n\n\n\n\nZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH\u2019S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER XIII.\n\n\nThe progress of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom being regarded as that of\nChristianity, the next important step after the abolition of Judaism, was\nthat of Paganism, which is evidently the subject of the chapter now before\nus; but along with this is coupled in the prophetic view another event, no\nless important, which arose out of, and accompanied the nominal conversion\nof the Gentile nations. This was the corruption of Christianity by the\nPagan converts. For instead of relinquishing their former prejudices and\nsuperstitions, they retained, and brought most of them into the bosom of\nthe church; and thereby in a short time totally changed the character of\nthe religion which they professed to embrace.\n\nIt is true that this is a point of church history not always very\ndistinctly stated by ecclesiastical historians; who seem more inclined to\nrepresent the conversion of Constantine, and the events of the fourth\ncentury, as every way favourable to the Christian cause. But the truth is,\nthat precisely in proportion to the church\u2019s advancement in worldly\nprosperity and power, were its spiritual decline and degradation; in so\nmuch that the best historians admit, that from this period are its\ndegeneracy and corruptions most indubitably to be dated. So different is\nthe light under which the same event appears, according as it is viewed\nwith regard to its spiritual or its political import. Which of the two\nbest accords with the spirit of this prophecy, the reader will be at no\nloss to decide, when he sees that no prosperity is here spoken of, but on\nthe contrary, that the cutting off two-thirds of the inhabitants of the\nland, or their spiritual death, is the event which is coupled in the\nprophecy with the admission of the Pagans into the church of Christ. And\nsuch was truly the result that followed to the many; namely, the loss of\nthe true spirit of Christianity.\n\nBut if the abolition of Paganism be the subject of this chapter, it may be\nasked, how comes the purification of Israel to be announced in the opening\nof it? The answer is plain. Adopted Israel may be here understood. To\nlineal Israel indeed was the prophecy given; and with Israel, idolatry\nwas, and ever had been, the besetting sin; most nearly therefore were the\nJews also concerned in its abolition.\n\nViewed, however, in the more enlarged sense, idolatry comprises the\nindulgence of every evil propensity; for Paganism, by appointing a\npresiding Deity over each, had sanctioned the unrestrained gratification\nof every passion, in making it an act of devotion. Christianity, on the\ncontrary, enjoins the restraint and control of our passions, and thus\nbecomes the natural antidote to the poison of Heathenism: or the fountain\nof purification from the sin and pollution of idolatry, as the opening of\nthis chapter declares.\n\n_In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David, and\nto the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness._\n\nThat day, as formerly explained, is to every one the day of his conversion\nto Christianity. The house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem,\nhere, as in the last chapter, symbolically represent the later converts to\nChristianity; as the house of Judah, which was first saved, signify the\nearlier Christians. The nature of the sin and pollution to be thus washed\naway, is next declared to be idolatry, and its abolition is foretold.\n\n_And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord of hosts, that I\nwill cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall be no\nmore remembered; and also I will cause the prophets, and the unclean\nspirit to pass out of the land._\n\nIt may be worthy of remark, that _the names_ only _of the idols_, and not\nthe spirit of idolatry, is here declared to be cut off; and _from the\nland_, which in prophetic language, commonly means the land of Israel,\nhere, adopted Israel, or Christendom. Now, this nominal abolition took\nplace in the fourth century, from which time both Jews and Gentiles have\nbeen prohibited from the open worship of idols. But we have now reached\nthe nineteenth century without seeing the spirit of idolatry really\nextinct; if then the total abolition, which is yet to come, be here\nintimated, it must be symbolically foreshewn by the nominal abolition\nwhich then took place. _That day_, in regard to the inward and spiritual\npurification, is to be taken as the day of his regeneration to each\nindividual, not as the same day to all collectively; but regarding the\noutward and ostensible abolition, this occurred when the pains and\npenalties of the Theodosian code prohibited the open practice of Pagan\nrites. The prophetic view may, however, include both.\n\n_And it shall come to pass in that day, when any shall get prophesy, that\nhis father and his mother that begat him shall say, Thou shalt not live,\nfor thou speakest lies in the name of the Lord: and his father and his\nmother that begat him, shall thrust him through when he prophesieth._\n\nTo prophesy, or foretel future events, was the main purport of Pagan\nrites; no undertaking of any moment being entered upon until the priests\nand oracles had been previously consulted. This, in a superstitious age,\nformed a lucrative profession for the soothsayers and diviners, and was\nsuccessfully practised, till the darkness of Heathenism was dispelled by\nthe light of Christianity, as foretold in the next verse.\n\n_And it shall come to pass in that day, that the prophets shall be\nashamed, every one of his vision when he prophesieth; neither shall they\nwear a rough garment to deceive._\n\nThe Pagan, as well as the Jewish prophets, appear to have worn a distinct\ndress; but after Paganism was abolished, those who practised its rites in\nsecret, of course denied and sought to conceal it.\n\n_But he shall say, I am no prophet but a labourer; for a husbandman bought\nme from my youth._\n\nSlaves and bondmen frequently received a mark in their hands, to shew the\nmaster to whom they belonged; and persons attached to the Heathen temples\nwere sometimes marked in a similar manner; the worshippers of Bacchus, for\ninstance, were distinguished by the mark of an ivy leaf. (See Lowth in\nloco.) This explains the following verse.\n\n_And one shall say unto him, What are these marks in thine hands? Then\nshall he answer, Those with which I was marked in the house of my\nfriends._\n\nThus seeking to avoid the suspicion attached to the marks of Paganism,\nunder the pretext of their being the indication of bondage or servitude.\nBut this evasion denotes that the abolition of Paganism was ostensible\nonly, as it was still practised in secret. In reality the advancement of\nChristianity to the imperial throne, instead of promoting the sincere\nconversion of the Pagans, only served to complete what had already begun,\nnamely, the corruption of the Christians; whose character and conduct soon\ntotally changed, after the road to the acquisition of wealth and power was\nopened to them. In the contests for the attainment of these, which soon\narose, (witness the Donatist faction,) the majority of Christians in a\nshort time lost sight of the spirit of their religion; while the rancour\nand cruelty with which different sects persecuted each other, sprang from\nthe same source, or their rivalship in the struggle for worldly power, as\nMosheim declares. Such was the spiritual sword which undermined\nChristianity, and destroyed the life which is in Christ; as next foretold.\n\n_Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is next\nunto me, saith the Lord of hosts. Smite the shepherd and the sheep shall\nbe scattered; and I will turn mine hand against the little ones._\n\nThe sword is the symbol of strife and discord, warring against and\ndestroying spiritual life, or the life in Christ; for he is the shepherd\nwho is smitten by the sword, the person of Christ being here figuratively\nput for his doctrine or religion; the corruption of which is thus\nforeshewn by the dispersion and slaughter of his flock. The little ones\nsignify the new converts, who are yet weak in their faith and principles;\nand thence more liable to be misled.\n\n_And it shall come to pass that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts\nshall be cut off, and die; but the third part shall be left therein._\n\nThe history of the fourth century, here prophetically foreshewn, amply\ntestifies, that only the smaller number of Christians, amidst the general\ncorruption, resisted the allurements of avarice and ambition, and retained\ntheir purity; these having imbibed the true spirit of Christ\u2019s religion,\nas next declared.\n\n_And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as\nsilver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on\nmy name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people; and they shall\nsay, The Lord is my God._\n\nIt seems scarcely possible to give a more unequivocal intimation of the\nspiritual import of the whole, as not alluding to political events, but as\nregarding the progress of true religion, than is contained in those\nexpressions of the last verse, which declare, that the supplications of\nthe smaller number will be offered up in a manner acceptable to God, who\nwill hear and answer them. The particular period alluded to, is distinctly\nmarked by the nominal abolition of idolatry, and the general corruption of\nChristianity. The only difficulty, however, if there be any, regards the\nchronological order of the events; as the prophecy seems to foretel the\nentire abolition of Paganism, which has certainly not yet taken place; but\nthis difficulty will be in a great measure removed, by supposing the\nprophetic view to look forward from the partial to the total, from the\nnominal to the real extinction of idolatry.\n\nWith respect to the division of the flock into two parts, it must not be\nsupposed that any distinction of sects is here alluded to, for no one\ncould, more than another, claim the character of purity and holiness. True\nChristianity must be sought for in the heart, and not in the outward form\nof worship, or profession of faith.\n\n\n\n\n\nNOTES TO CHAPTER XIII.\n\n\nVerse 5. :\u05db\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd \u05d4\u05e7\u05e0\u05e0\u05d9 \u05de\u05e0\u05e2\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\n\n_For a man taught me to keep cattle from my youth._\n\nParkhurst, in his Lexicon, remarks upon this passage, as being _strangely_\ntranslated in our version; while Dr. Blayney agrees with him in the\ntranslation. _For a man bought me, __(OR OBTAINED POSSESSION OF ME,)__\nfrom my youth._ The Jew, while he acquiesces in the sense of \u05d4\u05e7\u05e0\u05e0\u05d9 (or\n\u05d9\u05e0\u05e0\u05e7\u05d4) signifying _to appropriate_, contends that \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd (or \u05dd\u05d3\u05d0) does not\nmean merely _a man_, but a _husbandman_, or labourer, and renders it, _For\na husbandman I was appropriated from my youth._ But neither the sense nor\nthe grammatical construction thus appearing clear to my apprehension, as\nthe verb is not in the first, but the third person with the suffix \u05d9 _me_,\nafter it; I propose to reconcile both by rendering the passage thus: _For\na husbandman bought or appropriated me from my youth._ But in fact the\ndifference is immaterial, as the sense, in whatever way expressed, is,\n_For I was a farmer\u2019s servant, and a bondsman from my youth._\n\nVerse 6. :\u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d9\u05df \u05de\u05d4 \u05d4\u05de\u05db\u05d5\u05ea \u05d4\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4 \u05d1\u05d9\u05df \u05d9\u05d3\u05d9\u05da\n\n_What are these wounds in thine hands? &c._\n\nBoth Lowth and Blayney agree in regarding these words as an allusion to\nthe custom of the idolatrous priests and prophets, of marking themselves\nin the hands. Their being challenged as the marks of Paganism, is a\nsufficient proof of their being so, and I have rendered it accordingly,\n_marks_ instead of _wounds_. For if, as Blayney states, they were made by\ncutting and slashing themselves, still the marks, and not the wounds,\nwould remain when healed.\n\nVerse 7. :\u05d7\u05e8\u05d1 \u05e2\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9 \u05e2\u05dc \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9 \u05d5\u05e2\u05dc \u05d2\u05d1\u05e8 \u05e2\u05de\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\n\n_Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my\nfellow, &c._\n\nIn supposing these words to have had no direct reference to the death of\nChrist in their original intention, notwithstanding their appearing from\nSt. John\u2019s Gospel to have been used by him, in forewarning his disciples\nof what was about to befal him, I offer no new opinion, for Dr. Blayney\ndeclares himself fully persuaded that they had not; and what gives weight\nto this opinion is, that it must have been founded on other grounds than\nthose which have led me to that conclusion. For as Dr. Blayney had not\nembraced the spiritual view in expounding the prophecy, he could not be\nled to this inference by the same train of reasoning as myself. The words,\n\u05d2\u05d1\u05e8 \u05e2\u05de\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9 (or \u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\u05de\u05e2 \u05e8\u05d1\u05d2) he renders, \u201cThe man that is next to me,\u201d which\nis certainly much nearer to the sense of the original than, _The man that\nis my fellow._\n\n_Two parts shall be cut of, and die._\n\nAn awful annunciation! foretelling the spiritual death of two-thirds of\nthe nominal Christian world. The corresponding passages in the Apocalypse\npredict the same event, and one of them in still stronger terms, for it is\nsaid, that \u201c_Every living soul in the sea died._\u201d Literally, this passage\ncannot be taken, for literally there are no _living souls_ in the sea. The\nsea means the Gentile nations, or Europe. _The life_ is life in Christ.\nThe loss of that life, or spiritual death is the loss of true\nChristianity: here extending over the whole sea, or comprising all the\nGentile converts; and the period of this death is yet scarcely elapsed,\nbeginning with the dark ages, and continuing to the millenium. What! is\nEurope then still, or has it so lately been in a state of spiritual death\nor perdition? Such is the language of prophecy, and its meaning cannot be\nexplained away or evaded. \u201c_Every living soul in the sea dies._\u201d The life\nin Christ is extinct. True Christianity no longer remains. Will _none_\nthen be _saved_? This the prophecy no where says. The Gospel teaches that\nmany may be saved who never heard of Christ. Are all Mahommedans, and they\nexecrate the name of Christian, doomed to perish? No Christian will surely\nmaintain this, and still less that all misguided Christians are doomed to\nperdition. But still the life in Christ is lost. True Christianity no\nlonger prevails. If then, without it, men may be saved, where, it may be\nasked, is the use of it? I answer, in every way, and every where it is\nuseful. Did true Christianity prevail, the myriads might be saved; the few\nonly would perish. Without it the few only can be saved, the many are left\nto perish. By Christianity, all are taught to live for the next world;\nwithout it, the many will live for this; few are those that will think of\nanother. Christianity not only diffuses peace and happiness on earth, but\nfits every man for enjoying eternal happiness hereafter. Such is the\nsaving virtue of Christ\u2019s religion, in affording to all the _means_ of\nattaining to eternal life and eternal happiness. But to return to the age\nin which we live, or from which we are just emerging. This period is\npeculiarly the age of infidelity\u2014all Europe bears testimony to the fact.\nBut are they who profess belief, really Christians? Look to conduct, and\nnot profession for the proof. Is this world, or the next, the object of\npursuit? If conscience whisper, that we who believe, lack the true spirit;\nhow can we expect it in those who disbelieve? Where then in true\nChristianity?\n\nAs this chapter, according to the Rabbi\u2019s view, remains unfulfilled, so he\noffers no particular exposition of it, but limits his remarks to a few\nemendations of the received translation. Of these the only one any way\nmaterial to the present discussion is that on verse 5, which has been\nalready stated in the note on that verse.\n\n\n\n\n\nZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH\u2019S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER XIV.\n\n\nThe corruption of Christianity, as foretold in the last chapter, is\nallowed to have been the means that prepared the way for those events\nwhich are announced at the opening of the present one. The ambition of the\nclergy, and the state of ignorance in which they purposely kept their\nflocks, had completely succeeded, before the end of the sixth century, in\nsubjugating the minds of the people, and in establishing the supremacy of\nthe priesthood in the west of Christendom, while the last of these causes\nserved to facilitate in the east the success of the Mahomedan imposture,\nwhich, as well as Papacy, was an offspring of the spurious form of\nreligion then prevailing under the name of Christianity.\n\nThese two usurpations under the mask of religion, divided, at the\nbeginning of the seventh century, what had once been the Christian world,\nbetween them; one occupying the western half of it, and the other the\neastern, according to our mode of expression; but as regards Palestine,\nwhere the Prophet wrote, this division is more accurately represented, as\nexpressed in the Prophecy, by northern and southern; the northern half\nengrossed by the Greek and Latin churches, which being essentially of the\nsame nature, are here taken as one; while Mahomedism usurped the place of\nChristianity in the countries lying for the most part south of Palestine,\nas Arabia, Egypt, India, Persia, and others. (See note on this.)\n\nSuch are the occurrences foreshewn in the opening of the present chapter;\nwhich _now_ does, if it did not previously, declare the capture and\npillage of the holy city, or the loss of the spiritual Jerusalem, true\nreligion; this being followed by a portent awfully expressive of the\nevents which succeeded this loss, namely, the cleaving asunder of Mount\nOlivet; (a symbol for nominal Christianity, Mount Zion signifying true\nChristianity, Mount Sinai Judaism;) one part of which moves northward, and\nthe other southward, leaving a deep valley between them for the escape of\nthose who are not involved in this spiritual captivity or destruction.\n\nAfter this follows the intimation of a period of spiritual obscurity,\nwhich is declared to be neither day nor night, neither clear day-light,\nnor utter darkness; but on the evening of that day, light is said to dawn\nagain, and living waters once more to flow out of Jerusalem. At length\nthis is to be succeeded by the restoration of Israel, and the universal\nestablishment of true religion in the new Jerusalem.\n\nWhile the loss of true religion is clearly foreshewn in the capture of the\nspiritual Jerusalem, with which this chapter commences; and while the rise\nof Papacy and Mahomedism is foretold in the cleaving of Mount Olivet; the\nChristian will readily perceive, in the day of obscurity that follows, the\ndark ages shadowed forth; and in the dawn of light that breaks forth at\nthe evening time, he will see intimation of the restoration of true\nreligion at the reformation, when living waters again begin to flow out of\nJerusalem.\n\nThe conclusion of this chapter, and of the Prophecy, declares the final\nand complete establishment of the Messiah\u2019s kingdom; that happy period for\nwhich we are taught to pray in the words, \u201c_Thy kingdom come._\u201d Concerning\nthe nature of this kingdom, the Jew not only differs from the Christian,\nbut Christians also differ from one another. Before I attempt to decide so\ndifficult a question, I shall state the prevailing opinions, and what the\nprophets have said on the subject.\n\nThe Jews expect, at the coming of their Messiah, the establishment of\ntheir political, as well as their spiritual supremacy over all the earth.\nThe Christians reject all idea of a political kingdom, but differ in their\nviews of it as a spiritual one. Some understand it to signify the\nuniversal establishment of true Christianity on earth, with the full\nenjoyment of all the blessings which it is calculated to afford; others at\nthis second advent, look for the personal appearance of Christ on earth,\nto reign with the saints, who will be raised from the dead, to receive the\nreward of virtue in his kingdom; while many regard his kingdom as\nsignifying a future state of happiness, having no connexion whatever with\nthe earth we now inhabit, but to be enjoyed in an eternal abode, of which\nthey have an indefinite idea as existing somewhere above the firmament.\n\nThis last, which is perhaps the most popular notion, seems least consonant\nto Scripture and prophecy; which distinctly speak of a kingdom _on earth_,\nas it is understood by the Jews; though not necessarily, as they suppose,\na political one. As this is the chief point on which I am at issue with my\nopponent, I shall presently state the manner in which this city, the New\nJerusalem, is spoken of by Isaiah and St. John. But previously I think it\nright to notice a fallacy in what I take to be the ground on which the\npopular notion of this kingdom rests; namely, because St. John in the\nRevelations gives intimation of a resurrection preceding, or accompanying\nits establishment. Now, we have, as I conceive, no just ground for\nassuming, in a vision, every other part of which is figurative, that this\npart alone is to be understood literally. Why, I should ask, may not this\nresurrection, like the rest, be also symbolical, or signify regeneration\nto newness of life? which our Saviour expressed by being _born again_;\nthat is, a total change in our nature and habits, such as was produced in\nhis apostles and disciples by the gift of the Holy Spirit. But even\nadmitting the literal resurrection to be here intimated, (and no Christian\ncan doubt the reality of a resurrection,) yet this would not be at all\nincompatible with a future existence on earth, a light in which it is\nviewed by many: we shall therefore inquire what the Prophets have said\nthat may throw light on the nature of this kingdom on earth.\n\nBoth Isaiah and St. John, in speaking of the New Jerusalem, use the\ntwo-fold metaphor of a City and a Woman. In Isaiah liv. 11, et seq. this\ncity is represented as having foundations of sapphire, windows of agate,\nand gates of carbuncle; and St. John, Rev. xxi. 16, describes it as built\nentirely of precious stones, having twelve gates, each of one solid pearl,\nand its streets paved with gold; being, moreover, equal in all its\ndimensions, that is, as broad as it is long, and as high as it is wide, to\nwit, twelve thousand furlongs, or fifteen hundred miles. This is surely\nvery unlike a literal city; but this City shortly becomes a Woman, in St.\nJohn, and is styled \u201cThe Lamb\u2019s Bride;\u201d while Isaiah, using the same\nchange of metaphor, says, \u201cFor thy Maker is thy husband.\u201d\n\nIf we now look to the context in Isaiah, for the purport of this\nfigurative language, we shall find that he says, chapter liv. 14, \u201cIn\nrighteousness shalt thou be established;\u201d and again, chapter lx. 19, \u201cBut\nthou shalt call thy walls salvation, and thy gates praise;\u201d and from chap.\nlxi. it appears throughout, that this description is intended to portray\n_the perfection of righteousness, the beauty of holiness_, and the _riches\nof grace_; these being, as declared, the ornaments destined to adorn the\nBride. It is with _a robe of righteousness_, and _a garment of salvation_,\nthat _she will adorn herself_, as Isaiah expresses it, chap. lxi. 10.;\nwhile St. John abounds in similar expressions; thus in Rev. xix. 9,\nspeaking of the Bride\u2019s apparel, he says, \u201cFor the fine linen is the\nrighteousness of the saints;\u201d and of the City, which nothing impure is\npermitted to enter, he says, chap. xxi. 23-27, \u201cFor the glory of God did\nlighten it, and the Lamb was the light thereof.\u201d Thus both, under this\nhighly figurative description, appear to signify no literal city, or\npolitical state, but one which is altogether spiritual; that is, the\nutmost possible degree of purity and holiness, which will constitute this\n_heaven upon earth_; the New Jerusalem.\n\nThis chapter opens with the denunciation of divine wrath about to fall\nupon mankind on account of the corrupt state of religion. The expression\nused to foretel this, belongs more peculiarly to the day of judgment,\ncalled the _day of the Lord_; but is often employed in prophetically\nforeshewing particular judgments on the world, as here:\n\n_Behold the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the\nmidst of thee._\n\n_For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city\nshall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished, and half of\n__ the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people\nshall not be cut off from the city._\n\nThe loss of the holy city, and the spiritual captivity of half its\ninhabitants, which is the bondage of sin, is the particular calamity here\nforetold; and this is followed by the punishment of those who were the\nauthors of this evil, the enemies of true religion, who war against\nJerusalem.\n\n_Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he\nfought in the day of battle._\n\nThe nations must signify here, as elsewhere, the Gentiles, or Pagans,\nwhose spiritual hostility against true religion was shewn, as before\nstated, by their corrupting and paganising Christianity; while the\njudgment denounced against them consists in God\u2019s permitting the rise of\nthe two great Antichristian usurpations, Papacy and Mahomedism. One, the\nman of sin, spoken of by St. Paul, (1 Tim. iv. 1, and 2 Thess. ii. 3,) a\nspiritual tyranny, enslaving the minds of men; and the other, the\nabomination of desolation, mentioned by Daniel, chap. viii. verses 10-12,\nand, as he expressly foretold, permitted _by __ reason of transgression_,\nor as a judgment on the world, its avowed object being the propagation of\nreligion by the sword. The division of the corrupt form of religion then\nprevailing, into these two Antichristian apostacies, is thus foreshewn.\n\n_And his feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is\nbefore Jerusalem upon the East, and the Mount of Olives shall cleave in\nthe midst thereof toward the East, and toward the West, and there shall be\na great valley, and half of the mountain shall move toward the North, and\nhalf of it toward the South._\n\nA mountain, meaning a place of eminence or power, in spiritual language\nsignifies religion; _Mount Sinai_, from which the Mosaic law was\ndelivered, means Judaism, and is contrasted in the Epistle to the Hebrews,\nchap. xii. 18-22, with Christianity, which is there called _Mount Zion_,\nand _the heavenly Jerusalem_. The Mount of Olives is neither of these, but\nhere symbolical of nominal Christianity, destined to be split asunder;\nleaving, however, a valley between the two parts for the escape of those\nnot involved in this spiritual destruction; from which may be inferred,\nthat true Christianity would not become utterly extinct.\n\n_And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains, for the valley of the\nmountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee like as ye fled in the\ndays of Uzziah, king of Judah, and the Lord my God shall come, and all the\nsaints with thee._\n\nThe true Christian is thus admonished to fly, or avoid the prevailing\napostacies; while divine favour and protection are promised to those who\nshun the general corruption. From the establishment of these two\nAntichristian dominations, a long day of spiritual darkness is declared to\nfollow; which was accomplished in the reign of ignorance and superstition,\nduring the period expressively denominated _the dark ages_. With God a\nthousand years are but as a day.\n\n_And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear\nnor dark;_\n\n_But it shall be one day, which shall be known to the Lord, not day nor\nnight, but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light._\n\nIn the return of light at the evening time of that long day of obscurity,\nwe see intimation of the revival of true religion at the reformation;\nwhich is still more clearly expressed as follows.\n\n_And it shall be in that day that living waters shall go out from\nJerusalem, half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the\nhinder sea; in summer and in winter it shall be._\n\nThe former and the hinder sea, or as Dr. Blayney proposes to render it,\nthe Eastern and the Western Sea, may literally signify the Dead Sea and\nthe Mediterranean; but figuratively the Eastern and Western Gentiles, who\nwill receive the benefit of the spiritual waters. The expression, in\nsummer and in winter it shall be, signifies literally, that they shall\nneither be dried up by the summer\u2019s heat, nor congealed by the cold of\nwinter; but figuratively must mean, that the purity of religion shall not\nagain be corrupted by the heat of fanaticism on the one hand, nor frozen\nby the cold of infidelity on the other. The universal prevalence of true\nreligion is then declared. (See note.)\n\n_And the Lord shall be king over all the earth; in that day shall there be\none Lord, and his name one._\n\nThe fulfilment of what now remains of the prophecy appears to be still\nfuture, and consequently it does not fall within the limits of our plan to\nattempt the particular exposition of each part of it; but sufficient, it\nis hoped, will be found in what is already accomplished, to convince the\nChristian reader of the general purport of the whole; and to warrant the\nstatement made at the outset, that these six chapters are not, as former\ncommentators have supposed them to be, a collection of unconnected\npredictions relating to different subjects, but one continued and\nuninterrupted prophecy, presenting a view of the progress of our religion,\nfrom its promulgation to its final establishment in purity and perfection.\n\nThat the evidence of this will be sufficient to convince the Jew, I am far\nfrom expecting, being well aware of the many objections he has still to\nurge against our exposition of prophecy, after those which are here\npresented, may have been removed. But it may possibly have some weight\nwith him, when he finds upon examination, the same view of the subject\noffered by Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others; which the Christian will\nfind more circumstantially displayed in the Revelation of St. John. In\nfact, my exposition of the Apocalypse, has furnished me with the clue to\nguide me through all the prophecies, that relate to the progress of the\nMessiah\u2019s kingdom; for I find that each succeeding prophet has helped to\nfill up the outline given by his predecessors; while the picture is\nfinally completed by St. John, the last of them all. But as a portrait is\nmost easily recognised when the likeness is complete; so the prophecy last\nuttered, being most perfect, is most easily interpreted, and naturally\nbecomes the key to all the others; that is, the last delivered ought to be\nthe first expounded, which is the order I have pursued.\n\nAs I have made no change in the translation of this chapter, few\nexplanatory notes are required; and the Rabbi\u2019s reply to this, as to the\none preceding, may be comprised in this single objection; that no part has\nyet been literally fulfilled, such being the only fulfilment which he\nlooks for or admits.\n\nThe impossibility of a more literal fulfilment has been shewn in many\nplaces, but especially at the beginning of chapter x.; and until the Jew\nanswers this, I must consider, what to me appears to be the main pillar of\nhis argument, as fairly overthrown. And the grand question, whether Christ\nbe the Messiah, resting upon this, namely, whether his kingdom be a\nspiritual or a temporal one, must be decided, as regards the present\nargument, by shewing whether the prophecies relating to it have regard to\nspiritual or temporal affairs.\n\nMany who object to the spiritual view, misconceive what is meant by the\nspiritual exposition; and consider it as setting aside altogether the\nhistorical fulfilment of prophecy; whereas the question is simply between\nreligion and politics, between church and state; in short, whether the\nspiritual or temporal history of the world should be looked to, for the\nfulfilment of those prophecies which foretel the progress of Christianity,\nor the Messiah\u2019s kingdom. By directing their view to temporal affairs, the\nablest expositors have hitherto discovered only an occasional allusion to\nChristianity in a few verses of particular chapters, and in others no\nallusion to it whatever; whereas, by adhering closely to the spiritual\nview, and understanding the prophecy as foretelling the progress of true\nreligion; the battles and conflicts foretold, representing the opposition\nwhich it has experienced, and the corruptions which it has undergone from\nthe evil passions and worldly propensities of man; we have been enabled to\nshew the historical fulfilment of the whole; not selecting, as others have\ndone, particular passages, but shewing that every chapter and every verse\nrelates to the same subject, and this subject, the progress of\nChristianity.\n\n\n\n\n\nNOTES TO CHAPTER XIV.\n\n\nVer. 4. _Half of the mountain shall move toward the north, and half of it\ntoward the south._\n\nAlthough this passage is left in the text as it originally stood, yet the\nwriter acknowledges a manifest inadvertency in supposing the division here\nspoken of into northern and southern to have reference to the position of\nthe prophet, any more than to that of the reader; with neither of which it\nhas any connection. It has been objected by a judicious friend of the\nauthor, that Mahommedism has prevailed, and still does prevail in\ncountries lying north of Judea, where the prophet wrote. The objection is\nperfectly just, not was it unperceived by the writer, though he did not at\nfirst see how to remove it, simple as is the solution of the difficulty,\nand striking as then appears the fulfilment of the prophecy.\n\nThe solution is\u2014that this division of the nominal Christian world here\nforetold, into two grand apostacies, Anti-christianism and Mahommedism,\nwhich were destined to occupy a position northward and southward, had no\nrelation to the prophet, but simply to each other\u2014that is, they were to be\nnorth and south of each other.\u2014Now let a line be drawn, such as might be\nexpected from the fracture of a mountain by an earthquake, extending from\nthe west of Europe to the east of Asia, over a surface of not less than\n180 degrees of longitude, and no where deviating more than 10 degrees of\nlatitude, and we shall find the Greek and Latin churches occupying the\nwhole portion lying to the north, while Mahommedism engrosses all to the\nsouth. And we shall find those parts only of Europe cut off which were\npre-ordained to fall under the Moslem yoke, as Spain, Sicily, Corsica, and\nSardinia, Calabria, Greece, and Turkey in Europe; while Russia forms the\nboundary line from all the Mahommedan nations lying to the south of it.\nThis line will be comprised between 40 and 50 deg. of nor. lat. Thus\nsingularly have the words of the prophecy been accomplished. And thus\nstrikingly is the will of Heaven, in the pre-ordination and disposal of\nhuman events, made manifest to the mind of man.\n\nVer. 8. _In summer and in winter it shall be._\n\nCan such a state of the world, it may be asked, which shall be exempt from\nfanaticism on the one hand, and from infidelity on the other, be brought\nabout without some miraculous interposition to alter the nature and\nconstitution of the human mind? And does it comport with the usual\nordinances of Providence, who seems to effect his purposes by natural\nmeans, to deviate in this instance, from the ordinary course of nature? It\ncertainly does not appear so; and it would, no doubt, be more\nsatisfactory, and be more likely to obtain belief, if natural means could\nbe pointed out, adequate to produce this marvellous change in the state of\nthe world, without calling for the necessity of miraculous interposition.\nLet us see then\u2014the most fertile source of infidelity will be found in the\nmysteries and dogmata invented by priestcraft, which reason revolts at and\nrejects. Are, these then, essential to true Christianity? is the question.\nIf not\u2014and Christ ever appealed to the reason of his hearers, advancing\nnothing that reason could gainsay\u2014then true Christianity requires only to\nbe taught, and Infidelity will have no ground left to stand upon. With\nregard to fanaticism, there can be no doubt that false ideas of religion\nengender this extreme; ignorance, encouraging the hopes of a sensual\nparadise on the one hand; and fear, inspiring the dread of eternal\ntorments on the other, as in the Mahommedan and Romish churches, have been\nmost fruitful in producing this extravagance. With just ideas of religion\nand the Divine beneficence, such feelings are incompatible. A religion of\nlove, and such is Christianity when justly appreciated, can never lead to\nfanaticism. We may love God with all our heart, with all our mind, with\nall our soul, and with all our strength, and it can never disturb our\nreason, or lead to any but the happiest and most rational frame of mind.\n\nThus, the dissemination of true Christianity, the just appreciation of its\nprecepts and their faithful practice, appears to furnish a remedy adequate\nto the removal of both these evils, without requiring the aid of any\nmiraculous interposition to effect this purpose.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE MILLENIUM.\n\n\nAs the view of Christ\u2019s kingdom, taken in the preceding exposition, is\nthat which regards it as not only that state or condition of man, which is\nmost calculated to prepare him for, and enable him to attain eternal\nhappiness hereafter; but also as that which is adapted to produce the\nhighest possible degree of felicity here on earth, it will be proper to\nconsider a few of the arguments that may be brought for and against this\nview of the Millenium, and to state the view itself more distinctly.\n\nThe happy state which the world may attain to, under the universal\nprevalence of true religion, it is more easy to imagine, than to describe;\nfor a volume would hardly suffice to enumerate all the blessings it is\ncalculated to afford. The cessation of foreign war, with all the miseries\nattending it; the end of all tyranny and oppression at home; of injustice\nand misrule, are the most distinctly announced, and their benefit perhaps\nthe most obvious. But their influence on society is limited in comparison\nwith the wide diffusion of happiness that would ensue from the improvement\nin private life, and the amelioration of individual character. Were the\nvices prevalent in each class of society banished from the world; ambition\nand ostentation from the higher, inordinate love of gain from the middle\nand commercial, idleness and improvidence from the lower class, such a\nchange would ensue, that the golden age of the poets would be revived.\nFortunes would no longer be squandered, and families be ruined by\nextravagance and dissipation; gambling speculation, extortion and\nchicanery would be unknown in trade; poverty and dishonesty would be\nbanished from the working classes. Thus, litigation and crime ceasing, the\ncivil and criminal code would become a dead letter, and every man would\nenjoy in security the fruits of his industry; while the peace and harmony\nof families would be insured by the increased prevalence of kindness and\nbrotherly love, forbearance and self-control, charity and benevolence,\nwith other domestic virtues.\n\nAmong the blessings promised in this state, is increased length of life;\nnor is this at all difficult to conceive or account for. The tormenting\npassions of ambition and avarice subsiding; the mind being no longer\ntortured by the cravings they occasion, nor the spirit broken by the\ndisappointments that attend them; the constitution being no longer worn\nout by the toils and cares they give rise to, the larger portion of\ndiseases incidental to man, (and more proceed from the mind than the body)\nwould be prevented.\n\nBut those arising from bodily causes, would likewise for the most part\nvanish, from a proper restraint on the indulgence of the passions and\nappetites.\n\nNor is diminution of disease the only cause that would lengthen life. The\nhealing art being more zealously studied, and more conscientiously\npractised, with more regard for the welfare of the patient, and less for\nthe emolument; it is not unreasonable to suppose that great improvement\nwould take place in every branch of it. And thus another source would be\nopened for producing increased length of days.\n\nBut with the moral and physical blessings, let not the spiritual pass\nunnoticed. Eternal life is the reward promised to those who strive to\nobtain it, and render themselves worthy of it. Surely then the universal\nprevalence of peace, charity and good-will among mankind is more likely to\nproduce a fitness for this state, than the present order of things. Thus\nour eternal and our temporal interests would be alike promoted by it.\n\nThe prophetic language, supposed to foretel this state being metaphorical\nits meaning may be questioned; and it may be objected, that reason and\nexperience are alike adverse to the supposition that the world will ever\nbe materially different from what it has been. Would not this argument, if\nurged two thousand years ago, have been then deemed conclusive against the\npossibility of events, having previously no parallel in the history of\nman, which nevertheless did afterwards take place. That any considerable\nbody of men should be found, who should prove themselves above the\nallurements of the world; despising wealth and honours; disregarding every\nthing before held most estimable by mankind; and braving ignominy,\ntortures and death:\u2014would not the argument, that such things had never\nbeen, have been deemed conclusive against the supposition that they ever\nwould be? And yet all this did occur in the apostolic age. If the past\nthen afford any presage for the future, it is not against, but in favour\nof the conclusion, that what has been, may be again.\n\nPerhaps it may be objected, that the purity and heroic virtue of the\napostolic age were transient, and can never be permanent; they were\npartial, but can never be general. This mode of reasoning is perhaps less\nphilosophical than it may at first appear. What has obtained amongst one\nrace of men, may obtain amongst others. What has continued for one\ngeneration, may continue for more. The life of man is no transient period,\nbut to each individual the longest period possible. A whole race is not a\npartial, but as regards them, a general prevalence. And if there be any\ntruth in history, the principles and practices of the early Christians\npervaded their whole race, and lasted during their whole lives.\n\nTrue Christianity has however vanished, it may be said; and what should\nrevive it? The evil passions of man have prevailed against it; and why\nshould they not again? I answer; the same causes that produced it, may\nrevive it; and the permanency of those causes, may render it permanent.\nConviction was the cause that produced it; that inward, heartfelt, active\nconviction, which never leaves the mind for a moment, and admits no shadow\nof doubt; not that inert, listless, passive form of belief, which assents,\nit knows not why; and believes, it knows not what.\n\nI have heard a distinguished churchman affirm his persuasion, that the\nmost prevalent evil in the church is infidelity. I would fain disbelieve\nit. It surely is not that bold and open infidelity which denies revealed\nreligion. If it prevail at all, it must be that secret wavering propensity\nto doubt, apt to arise in minds not fully satisfied of the truth, and\nwhich feel regret that its evidence is not more conclusive. This may be,\nand is much to be regretted. For such belief can never produce effective\ninfluence on the life and conduct; nor awaken that impassioned eloquence\nin the preacher, which animated the first teachers of Christianity, and\ncarried conviction to the hearts of their hearers. Whence arises this\nstate of mind? Are the proofs of Christianity then inconclusive? Far\notherwise. Though its prophetic proofs are clothed in metaphor, and\nrequire study to understand them; though its history is by no means free\nfrom contradictions; though time may have obscured some passages, and\ninterpolation thrown a doubt upon others; yet is there left sufficient;\namply sufficient to satisfy the mind of any who think the subject worthy\nof serious examination.\n\nBut here is the misfortune. Most men think otherwise. The laity are too\noften content to take their religion on trust; and the clergy for the most\npart want leisure for studies that demand so much time and attention;\nwhile their following hitherto in a beaten track, and paying undue\ndeference to the authority of the Masoretic punctuation, have encumbered\nthem with difficulties almost insurmountable. Hence it is, that as far as\nregards the prophetic evidence of our religion\u2014the elucidation of that\nmiraculous testimony to its truth, the force of which is ever\nprogressively increasing and which alone can place us on an equal ground\nof belief with the first Christians,\u2014the world has remained nearly\nstationary above a thousand years. Of learning there has been no want; of\ntalent abundance; of reading no end; but beyond verbal criticisms, the\nsettling of doubtful words and passages, for the improvement of the text,\nlittle has been done. The general scope, as well as the particular\ninterpretation of the Old Testament prophecies, the ultimate evidence of\nChristianity, has received little elucidation since the days of the\nApostles.\n\nHere is one fruitful source of conviction yet unopened. When fully opened,\nfrom more perfect conviction will flow more zeal in the teaching, and more\ninfluence on the minds of the hearers.\n\nIf it be doubted whether the most perfect religious instruction that can\nbe given, or the fullest conviction of an endless futurity of happiness or\nmisery when impressed on the mind, can suffice to control the passions and\npropensities of man; let the effect of training on the brute creation be\nconsidered. It will not surely be contended, that man has less power of\ncontrolling his propensities, or is less capable of culture than they. If\nthen we find that creatures the most opposite in disposition, and supposed\nto be natural enemies, may be trained to live together peaceably and\namicably; what may not be expected from man, having moreover the aid of\nreason to guide and assist him?\n\nLet adequate motives for controlling his passions be furnished; let true\nChristian principles be early inculcated; let religion be more practical\nand less doctrinal; let precept be enforced by example, and there is\nnothing foretold in this new order of things that may not be accomplished;\nnothing promised in it that may not be reasonably expected.\n\nFINIS.","title":"An Amicable Controversy with a Jewish Rabbi, on The Messiah's Coming: With an Entirely New Exposition of Zechariah, on the Messiah's Kingdom","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":38688}