An Amicable Controversy with a Jewish Rabbi, on The Messiah's Coming / With an Entirely New Exposition of Zechariah, on the Messiah's Kingdom

What! another Commentary on Zechariah! the reader is ready to exclaim. Have we not a Lowth and a Blayney? What can learning, talent, or research effect, that has not been effected already? In a word, I answer—nothing. But, on the other hand, I ask, what have they effected? With the exception of particular passages, on which light has been thrown, the general scope of the prophecy remains as obscure as ever. Sufficient proof of this appears in the want of consistency in the plan of interpretation, which in one verse looks to future events, and in another to events long past, for explanation; in one part supposes the prophet [pg iv] to offer a connected series of consecutive predictions; in the next supposes him to be carried away by a transport into a digression bordering upon incoherency; varying, moreover, continually in the principle of exposition, which is literal or figurative, political or spiritual by turns. Surely this is not legitimate exposition, but rather bespeaks some latent error, some radical defect in the plan, or principle of investigation.

To point out that defect, which the writer fancies he has discovered, is the object of the present attempt; whether he be right or wrong, the reader must decide. The traveller who mistakes his road, only goes the farther astray the more he prolongs his journey. So the commentator on prophecy, who labours to force the text to a sense which it was not intended to bear, the more learning and ingenuity he employs, the more he becomes involved in intricacy and obscurity.

In expounding the prophecies relating to the Jews, commentators have had chiefly in [pg v] view their temporal and political state; whereas the writer conceives, that their moral and religious, that is, their spiritual condition, is really the main purport of those which relate to the restoration of Israel. Let any one read the description of the New Jerusalem in the 21st chapter of Revelations, and ask himself, if this can possibly apply to a literal city, or political state. It evidently cannot; and yet it must apply to some state of the Jews on earth; for the Messiah's kingdom is always described as a kingdom on earth; and, therefore, if the description does not apply to their temporal, it must to their spiritual condition.

The Messiah's kingdom is allowed to be the chief subject of these prophecies; but if Christ be the Messiah, his kingdom is a spiritual one, and what relates to it must be spiritually understood. We marvel at the blindness which prevents the Jews from perceiving in prophecy the numerous intimations of a spiritual Messiah, all of which appear to us [pg vi] to have been distinctly fulfilled in the person of Christ; and yet that very blindness to their spirituality is what prevents ourselves from understanding other prophecies relating to the same subject. Let this be steadily and uniformly kept in view, and most of the difficulties will vanish; and an interpretation will unfold itself, not only historically minute, and chronologically accurate, but which is, moreover, as far as scriptural language admits, literal; for in what relates to spiritual affairs, the spiritual is the most literal interpretation. This, then, is the principle of the following exposition, and when it has been found necessary to correct the translation, it was not for the purpose of finding out more recondite meanings, but to bring back the words of the text to their ordinary and literal signification.

With regard to the controversial form under which the treatise appears, a word of explanation may be requisite. The writer having framed his views of prophecy on principles [pg vii] most at variance with those of the Jews, and being only a self-taught Hebraist, was anxious to know how far his exposition might be controverted by an acknowledged Hebrew scholar of the Jewish persuasion. Upon inquiry he was referred to his present opponent, as the fittest person for that purpose; and he had the satisfaction to find, that however they might differ in the plan of interpretation, yet his opponent could rarely challenge the accuracy or fidelity of his translation; which he acknowledged to be more in accordance with the Christian principle of exposition, than any he had previously met with.

At the same time he declared the views it unfolded, to contain nothing likely to have any weight with a Jew; and readily pledged himself to answer those views, should the writer ever be disposed to publish them. The views and the answer are now before the reader.

[Transcriber's Note: Single-word Hebrew quotations in the original book are often rendered here in the form “A (or B)”, with the same word rendered in “A” and in “B”, but with the letters stored in opposite orders. This is to allow the same e-book to render properly in both HTML and PDF. The full-paragraph quotations should appear correct in all formats.]

[pg 001]

Introduction.

“The testimony of Jesus in the spirit of prophecy.”

Few, perhaps, of those who read the Scriptures are fully aware of the extent to which the language of them abounds in metaphor; yet is this knowledge indispensable to the right understanding of both the Old and the New Testament, and especially the prophetic parts of these books.

Prophecy, though not the largest, is beyond question the most important part of Scripture, affording the only irrefragable proofs of God's moral government of the world, and of Christ's being the promised [pg 002] Messiah. These proofs depend upon no human testimony, but carry their evidence in themselves, not resting on man's credibility. Deposited in the hands of those, whose blindness understands them not, and whose prejudice would gladly pervert their meaning, they have been handed down to us, who are blinded by similar prejudices, and in expounding these prophecies are only a shade more enlightened than the Jews.

This rich mine of miraculous evidence, still remains, almost wholly unexplored, although it is to this testimony especially, that Christ himself appealed. Search the Scriptures, said he, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me. This testimony still remains to Christians of the present day, for the most part, a sealed book; for beyond a partially successful attempt, to point out in it, the prediction of a few leading events, fulfilled near two thousand years ago, and therefore now no longer miraculous evidence to us, but resting on the authenticity of historical records, all the rest is veiled from their sight.

The subsequent history of the progress of [pg 003] our religion, continued in these prophecies, in one uninterrupted series of predictions up to the present day; detailing the triumphant progress of the Gospel—the downfall of Judaism—the subversion of Paganism—the corruption of Christianity by the Gentiles—the long age of darkness consequent thereto—the rise and successful career of Mahommedism, which has supplanted nominal Christianity over half the globe—the exact boundary line, affixing a limit to the dominion of each of these grand apostacies—their co-existence and simultaneous downfall—and the revival of true Christianity—with other events, clearly foretold, and now fulfilling before our eyes, have all escaped the detection of the most learned commentators whether Jewish or Christian.

The inability to explain these prophecies thus tacitly acknowledged, which has accompanied their transmission to our hands, is in some degree a pledge that they have been faithfully handed down to us; for who would be at the pains to interpolate what none could pretend to explain or apply? At the same time, the cause of their remaining unexplained, and [pg 004] of their appearing inapplicable to passing events, becomes a highly interesting object of inquiry; and will be chiefly found to arise from the circumstance alleged at the outset, namely, the misinterpretation of the figurative language of Scripture and Prophecy.

The leading subject of prophecy is the Messiah's kingdom; a kingdom which the Jews expected to be a temporal one, and in this expectation, rejected Christ as a spiritual prince. Whence arose their error?—From their taking in a literal sense the language, in which the prophets had described that kingdom. The Apostles, and first disciples of our Lord were under a similar illusion; and had Christ at once undeceived them, and banished from their minds all hope of temporal dominion, it is probable they would to a man have deserted him. In fact, they did so desert him at his crucifixion; nor did they fully perceive their error, till after his resurrection, when they received the gift of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, and their eyes were at length fully opened to the spiritual nature of his reign.

[pg 005]

The Jews still remain under this illusion, continuing still to look for a temporal prince, and the literal fulfilment of prophecy. Thousands also of Christians, who look for the second coming of Christ, expect his personal advent; that is, that he will come in person to reign with the saints on earth for a thousand years. And the title of saints, whether assumed by, or bestowed upon the millenarians, seems to be fondly cherished by them, in anticipation of the share they expect in the glories of that reign now approaching, or, as they suppose, just at hand.

That there be any among these, who would, like the first disciples, desert their Lord, if robbed of this pleasing expectation, it were perhaps invidious to suppose. Whether, like the Jews, they are led into this hope of an earthly kingdom, by their misconception of the prophecies that relate to this period, it were premature as yet to enquire. But certain it is, that they are for the most part zealous advocates for the literal sense of prophecy; and equally adverse with the Jews, to what may be termed the spiritual exposition.

[pg 006]

The term spiritual has, however, been so much misunderstood, in regard to the interpretation of prophecy, that it may be well to explain here what is intended by it. No more is meant by this term, than that the prophecies relating to the Messiah's kingdom, which the Christian must allow to be of a spiritual nature, foretel events which regard the moral and religious, and not the political state of the world. In a word, that they foreshow the progress, and final establishment of true christianity on earth; this being the Messiah's kingdom, or his spiritual reign. In this subject, or the progress of our religion, we have a history abounding in events more diversified in their nature, and more interesting in their consequences, because more influential on the happiness of mankind, than any which political history can furnish. Their chronology and geography are in some points peculiar; but, rightly understood, even these admit of being marked with unerring precision, and present some of the most striking proofs of divine foreknowledge.

We have intimated that prophetic language abounds in metaphor; but this remains to be [pg 007] proved, as well as stated; and the nature of these metaphors requires to be pointed out and explained. This can only be done by citations from the prophecies themselves, which shall, however, be made with as much brevity as the subject will admit of. The passages shall all be taken from prophecies relating to the Messiah's kingdom; and while their purport is made manifest, it shall at the same time be shewn that they are uniformly employed in the same sense, when the Messiah's kingdom is the subject treated of, throughout the New as well as the Old Testament. We proceed to show the metaphorical nature of prophetic language.

When Isaiah (Ch. lxi.) uses such phrases as, trees of righteousness, garments of praise, garments of salvation, it is manifest that he cannot mean literal trees or literal garments; the figurative and spiritual import expressed by the epithet affixed to each, namely righteousness, salvation and praise, is the only one that can be given to them.

When the same prophet (Ch. lx.) foretelling the glory of the Messiah's reign, by the conversion of the Gentiles, says The abundance [pg 008] of the sea shall be converted unto thee; the forces of the Gentiles shall come unto thee, it is evident that the sea does not mean the literal sea, but figuratively the Gentile nations, as afterwards expressed.

When he styles the Messiah's kingdom, Zion, the city of the Lord, whose walls shall be called salvation, and whose gates praise; a spiritual and not a literal city must be intended. When, changing the metaphor, he calls the city a bride (Ch. lxii, 5,) or describes it as a woman in labour, and bringing forth a male child, (Ch. lxvi. 6. 8.) it is clear that all these expressions must be metaphorical; the mountain, the city, the bride and the mother, being alike used to express the same object; and that object, as the context declares, the spiritual glory of the Messiah's reign; splendid in righteousness, abundant in salvation.

Although the spiritual import of these expressions appears self-evident; while the context may satisfy the Christian that these chapters foreshow the nature of the Messiah's kingdom, metaphorically styled by the prophets, the Zion of God, His holy mountain, the heavenly Jerusalem, &c., terms which alone bespeak its [pg 009] spirituality; yet have we moreover the direct sanction and authority of the Apostles Paul and John for thus understanding them.

St. Paul, when comparing the advantages of the two covenants, and contrasting the rigorous severity of the law, with the indulgent mildness of the gospel, borrows these very metaphors from the prophets, calling the former Mount Sinai, and the latter Mount Zion. (Heb. xii. 18.) For ye are not come, says he, to the mountain that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness and darkness and tempest, &c.

But ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of Angels.

To the general assembly and church of the first-born, which are written in heaven, &c.

Here we see Mount Sinai, from which the law was delivered, figuratively used to signify the Old Covenant; and Mount Zion, and the Heavenly Jerusalem to signify the New Covenant,—called also the general assembly and church of the first-born; that is of the regenerate through Christ.

[pg 010]

In like manner St. John, when foreshowing the final establishment of true Christianity, uses the same metaphor of a city and a bride, that had been previously used by Isaiah. (Rev. xxi. 2.) And I, John, saw the holy city, new Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven prepared as a bride, adorned for her husband, &c.

But let it not be erroneously supposed that the figurative character of prophetic language consists merely in the use of these terms to express the Messiah's kingdom; or that the proof of its spirituality is confined to the employment, however frequent, of such phrases as trees of righteousness, waters of life, wells of salvation, &c.; the fact is, that every allusion to that kingdom is couched in terms, which admit only of spiritual interpretation: and where any lengthened description occurs, the language assumes the form of continued allegory, in which the moral and religious state of mankind is foreshewn in terms appropriate only to the physical world. As in Ezekiel xxxiv. 26.

And I will make them, and the places round about my hill a blessing; and I will [pg 011] cause the shower to come down is his season; there shall be showers of blessing.

And the tree of the field shall yield her fruit, and the earth shall yield her increase, and they shall be safe in their land, and shall know that I am the Lord.

When Jeremiah (xxxi. 12.) in similar language foretels the abundance of blessings promised in this kingdom, even the Rabbi admits that the figurative and not the literal sense is to be taken; and that spiritual, not temporal blessings are here intended by the prophet.

Therefore they shall come and sing in the height of Zion, and shall flow together for the goodness of the Lord, for wheat and for wine, and for oil, and for the young of the flock, and of the herd, &c.

But the main point aimed at in the following exposition; and what the writer wishes to be its distinguishing characteristic is, that of making scripture its own interpreter; for in every passage that has been referred to, and perhaps it may be said, in every one that can be referred to, there will be found in the context sufficient intimation of the purport of the figurative expressions employed.

[pg 012]

On this plan the boldest metaphors will be found to admit of easy explanation; and passages otherwise inexplicable will find their solution, upon one consistent and uniform principle of interpretation. A few examples will afford illustration of the proposed plan of exposition.

One of the boldest metaphors used by the prophets in reference to the Messiah's kingdom is, that which represents the establishment of this new order of things, promised in his reign, as a new heaven and a new earth; in fact as a new creation: a mode of expression, which has no doubt been often understood, by those who are not sufficiently conversant with the nature of prophetic language, as literally foretelling a change in the physical world, that we inhabit.

Nor is this error confined to the unlearned: it appears to have been fallen into by one who may perhaps be justly styled the most learned commentator on prophecy of the present age; and moreover the very writer who has pointed out the true principle of exposition.

The intelligent and profound Dean of Lichfield in his work on the Apocalypse, after [pg 013] pointing out the figurative sense of such passages, yet, strange to say, relinquishes this sense where it seems the most appropriate, and adopts the literal.

In allusion to the first establishment of the Jewish Theocracy, we find in Isaiah (li. 16.) the following figurative language.

When I have put my words in thy mouth, and covered thee with the palm of my hand, that I may plant the heaven, and lay the foundation of the earth.

Thus, selecting the Jews to be God's chosen people, and putting his words in the mouth of the prophet, are said to be planting the heavens and laying the foundation of the earth. And in conformity with this style, when the old Covenant was to be dissolved, and the new one to be established, new heavens and a new earth are said to be created. (Isa. lxv. 17.)

For behold I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former shall not be remembered nor come into mind.

When St. John, in the Rev. vi. 12. foretels the corruption of Christianity, in a prophecy which appears distinctly applicable to the events that occurred at the beginning of the fourth [pg 014] century; he borrows the same metaphors, and describes the loss or corruption of true religion as the departure of the heavens, and the darkening of the heavenly luminaries. (Rev. vi. 12.)

And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and lo there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;

And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth; even as a fig-tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together, &c.

The historical view of this period, taken by Dr. Woodhouse, exactly accords with the figurative sense of the prophecy—yet, to the manifest injury of consistent interpretation, it is here that he relinquishes the figurative, and adopts the literal sense, supposing the day of judgment to be here foretold.

While thus compelled to dissent from some particular views of this writer, I cannot pass by this opportunity of expressing the very high estimation in which I otherwise hold his most valuable publication. (Woodhouse on the Apocalypse.)

[pg 015]

Other commentators on prophecy, who have for the most part adopted the political in preference to the spiritual view, regard the heavens, as symbolizing the civil government or ruling powers in a state; and it is true that these expressions have not been always confined in prophecy to the prediction of spiritual events; but have been also used in foretelling the judgments of God upon political states and kingdoms.

But when the Messiah's kingdom is the acknowledged subject, to look to political events for its fulfilment, is surely to run into the error of the Jews, and to disregard the intimation expressly given by him; who declared that his kingdom was within us; or as the prophets had previously foreshewn—behold, I will put my law in their inward parts; and write it in their hearts.

One example more shall suffice, for shewing the superiority of the spiritual view, in affording the solution of passages, which upon any other must appear utterly inexplicable. It has been stated that Zion is also represented as a woman, and a mother; of which the most remarkable instance occurs [pg 016] in the following extraordinary passage in Isaiah lxvi. 7, 8.

Before she travailed she brought forth; before her pains came she was delivered of a man-child.

Who hath heard such a thing? Who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed she brought forth her children.

The Christian may perhaps suppose, as some have done, that Christ is the man-child here intended; but that cannot be. For Zion is the mother, and a mountain can never be literally understood to bring forth a man; the mountain is a figurative mother, and the child must be a figurative child.

What does the mother figuratively signify? is then the question most likely to lead us to the nature of the child. We have already seen that this term is constantly applied to Israel, and especially with reference to their spiritual state of regeneration through Christianity. Such we may presume, then, is the meaning of Zion here; and that the regeneration [pg 017] of the Jews through Christianity is the birth and parturition here spoken of.

Upon this view Judaism, or the Jewish Church will be the mother, and the Christian Church or Christianity her child—the man-child, who was ordained to rule all nations. Ps. ii.

The next question is, how the birth can be said to have preceded the labour-pains.

Mr. Lowth, to whom more than any other I feel indebted for much valuable assistance in explaining the Old Testament prophecies, supposes the labour-pains to be “the destruction of the Jewish Polity, making way for the growth of Christianity.” And this seems a plausible explanation, as these troubles of the Jewish Church followed the birth or promulgation of Christianity forty years.

But the solution is only plausible; for the growth is not the birth; or if it be taken as the birth, then it no longer precedes but follows the labour-pains, for whatever effect the destruction of Judaism had in promoting Christianity, this effect was subsequent and not prior to that event; and thus the solution fails in the main point.

[pg 018]

Moreover, upon the spiritual plan of exposition, it may justly be objected, that these troubles of the Jewish Church were rather of a political than a spiritual character; and certainly in no way essential to the birth of Christianity, and cannot therefore be considered as the labour-pains, or even as the after-pains of that birth.

This objection being valid, let a more spiritual view be taken, and the objection will vanish. Let the worldly feelings which prevented the Jews from receiving Christ as their Messiah, and the inward struggle required to overcome these, symbolise the pains of labour, and the connexion will be evident. For this very struggle and victory over worldly feelings constitute the regeneration through Christ; and this therefore is essential to the birth of Christianity, “the new birth unto righteousness.”

But with the first Christians this struggle could not precede the birth, for they received Christ, before they were aware of the spiritual nature of his mission; the Apostles did not look for a spiritual Messiah until after the day of Pentecost, and therefore the birth preceded [pg 019] the pains with them; but once aware of the sacrifice required, they cheerfully submitted to every species of persecution, and triumphed over all worldly feelings. And in every individual who receives Christianity, this struggle with worldly feelings must in some measure continue during their whole lives.

With the Jews, the prevalence of these worldly feelings, and the hope of a temporal Messiah, still prevent their receiving Christianity, or obstruct their regeneration. And when the evidence of its truth shall be forced upon them, it is probable that this conviction will precede rather than follow the entire conquest over worldly feelings; so difficult is it to change our habits and feelings at once. And in this we may perceive the sense of the remaining verse, cited above; Can the earth be made to bring forth at once? Can a nation be born in a day? For as soon as Zion travailed she brought forth her children.

The earth and the nation shew that a whole people, or race of men, are here spoken of; and the man-child of the former verse, we here [pg 020] find changed into children, in the plural number. Such appears to be the solution of the difficulty, on the spiritual plan of exposition.

If an equally satisfactory solution can be offered by reference to political events, this will no doubt be the best defence of that mode of exposition that can be offered. How, then, is the fact? The fact is, that such commentaries are obliged to consider nine-tenths of these prophecies still unaccomplished, although a period of two thousand five hundred years has elapsed since they were uttered; and most of this interval is thus left, to Christians as well as Jews, a perfect blank in this prophetic history of the progress of the Messiah's kingdom; without any proof, during this time, at least as drawn from these prophecies of the Old Testament, of God's foreknowledge of events, of his providence in the government of the world, or of his interposition in the disposal of human affairs. Some eight or ten verses, out of six chapters, are all that appear upon this plan to admit of explanation; whereas, by applying the prophecy to the progress of Christianity, as [pg 021] Christ's spiritual kingdom, and looking to spiritual instead of political events, all the leading occurrences in the history of our religion, from its first promulgation to the present day, already fulfilled, or now in the progress of fulfilment, will be found to be clearly foreshewn in one uninterrupted series of predictions, comprising every verse and every line in these chapters, except a few verses which are still veiled in futurity. Admitting the spiritual interpretation, being in fact equivalent to admitting that Christ is the Messiah, is the main point at issue between the Rabbi and the Author; but as many Christians still reject the figurative and spiritual exposition, it is hoped that to them also the foregoing remarks may be not altogether useless; nor an unsuitable introduction to the following new plan of expounding Zechariah's prophetic view of the progress of the Messiah's kingdom.

[pg 022]

Zechariah On The Messiah's Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter IX.

The subject of these chapters appears to be that, which, from its constant repetition by all the Prophets from the earliest to the latest, was evidently esteemed the most important to the interests of mankind; namely, the coming of the Messiah.

This great event, being promised as a blessing to the descendants of Abraham, and particularly to the house of Judah, it was natural that the Jews should expect to obtain by it peculiar advantages; and accordingly, whatever may be their views at [pg 023] this time, we learn from the writings of St. Paul, that their general expectation then was, that to their nation would the benefits of it be confined. The nature of these benefits was moreover expected to consist, chiefly, in the political supremacy to be conferred upon them by a great temporal prince, who should establish their dominion over all the earth.

Such were the expectations of the Jews; whereas the Christians who equally believe the prophecies which contain these promises, have been taught to interpret them in a very different manner. They conceive that these benefits will extend to all mankind; and understand them as having no reference to political power or temporal affairs, but as affording the means of obtaining advantages of a far higher and more permanent nature; even the blessings of eternal life, and eternal happiness. Not that these blessings were by the Messiah's coming to be directly and unconditionally conferred upon mankind; but that the means of obtaining them would thereby be afforded to all such as were disposed to seek after them. These means they conceive to be accomplished through the [pg 024] establishment of a kingdom on earth; a kingdom, however, not of a temporal, but of a spiritual nature; one which consists in the reign of true religion in the heart of man, a real Theocracy; by which man is enabled to overcome the world, that is, to rule and direct his passions and worldly propensities, and by making his future existence a paramount consideration, to render him meet to enjoy it. Such, according to the Christian's view, is the victory to be gained; such the kingdom to be established by the Messiah; and hence the apparent contradiction, that while battles and conflicts are spoken of, it is yet declared to be a peaceful kingdom.

But conceiving the prophecies which announce the coming of the Messiah to have been accomplished in the person of Christ, the Christian supposes this kingdom to be already established, and that Christ does actually reign in the heart of every true believer. That the numbers of such are comparatively small, and by no means to be estimated by the number of those who bear the name of Christian, is a lamentable truth; but it is a truth, which he was fully prepared [pg 025] to look for by the same unerring word of prophecy; which clearly announced, that a long period of darkness and apostacy would intervene between the appearance of the Messiah on earth, and the universal establishment of his kingdom.

It is true that the Christian finds the clearest annunciation of this long period of antichristian darkness, in books which are of no authority in the estimation of the Jew, in those of the New Testament, to wit; but if it can be shewn, as we conceive it can, that the same events are also clearly foretold by the Prophets of the Old Testament, the subject will then prefer an equal claim to the attention of both; to that of the Jew, as calling upon him, impartially to consider the evidence, which seems to prove that his Messiah has already appeared on earth; and to that of the Christian, as calling upon him carefully to examine how far the religion he professes may, both in doctrine and practice, still be tinctured with the corruptions of antichristianity.

This, then, is the point at issue; whether or not, we have in these six chapters of Zechariah, [pg 026] one of those Divine revelations, which displays a prophetic view of the coming of the Messiah; of his being rejected by most of his own nation, but received by the Gentiles; of the consequent abolition of Paganism, (then, except with the Jews, the universal religion of the world), and the substitution of Christianity in its stead; but which at the same time foretels the corruption of this religion by us the Gentiles; and the long reign of antichristian darkness which has since prevailed in the room of it; with all the most notable events attending these extraordinary revolutions in the human mind; events still fulfilling before our eyes, and open to the observation of all who think the subject worthy of their attention. Whether all this be clearly intimated in the chapters before us, and can be made out without violating grammatical construction in the translation of the Hebrew, or legitimate consistency in the interpretation of prophetic language, is the question we propose to consider. Frequent perusal and careful examination have satisfied the mind of the writer, that the subject of them is no other than an epitome of the prophetic history [pg 027] which was afterwards amplified in the Revelations of St. John; where we find, as occurs in other instances in which the predictions are repeated, that the events are unfolded with greater precision and minuteness as the period of their accomplishment draws nigh.

That no such subject distinctly appears, through the medium of the authorised translation contained in our Bibles, is most certain; nor was it to be looked for, that any passages, which admitted of different modes of construction, should be rendered in a way least acceptable to the expositor, in a translation which is almost wholly Jewish, being founded on the Masoretic punctuation. On the contrary, it appears, in not a few instances, that the usual and literal sense has been rejected for one more remote, but more consonant to the views and prejudices, of those who framed the punctuation. That this statement may not rest on the questionable ground of assertion or opinion, the reader will find, in the notes subjoined, a full statement of the reasons for all the changes proposed; and the Hebrew scholar will thus have full opportunity to challenge their validity, if he find [pg 028] occasion. It is the writer's wish that they should be freely canvassed; truth is the only object he has in view; and he asks no other conditions on entering the arena, than that of disclaiming the authority of the Masoretic punctuation. His reasons for this will appear sufficiently obvious. If, without the aid of the points, we obtain a meaning that is simple and satisfactory in many passages, which by them are rendered obscure or unintelligible;—if a connected and unbroken explanation of each verse be attainable without them, while only a few verses detached from the context have been explained by the ablest commentators through their aid; sufficient reason will surely appear for rejecting an authority which, instead of facilitating our progress, only encumbers the subject with unnecessary difficulties.

The reader need not, however, expect that every difficulty will be removed by the proposed alterations; or that even the amended translations will afford such an exposition as to admit of no possible objection. It were absurd to suppose that the strength of the argument can lie all on one side, where two are [pg 029] engaged in the controversy. For the Jew is in this case no man of straw, set up to be knocked down at pleasure, but a true Jew, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, an advocate as zealous in the cause he defends, as his Christian opponent. Each believes himself in the right; each expects to obtain the victory; and it is not improbable that the reader, who sits as umpire in the contest, may, after all, though unconscious of partiality, give judgment according to the bias of his feelings, whether he be Jew or Christian, rather than according to the abstract merits of the question.

Regarding the subject of the prophecy, as the coming of the Messiah, the introduction, which is comprised in the first eight verses of this chapter, appears to be the most appropriate that can possibly be conceived. It opens with a denunciation against worldly-mindedness, and a declaration of God's purpose to frustrate the schemes, and cut off the hopes of ambition, pride, and avarice, in the judgments pronounced against those cities, which were then the most conspicuous for their riches and power. This is immediately [pg 030] followed, as if by way of contrast, by a view of the spiritual nature of the Messiah's kingdom, founded in meekness and humility, and affording benefits of a very different kind, namely, the taking away of sin, and the redemption of mankind from a state of sin and perdition; benefits which were not to be confined to the Jews alone, but to extend to the Gentiles also, and that on terms of equal participation with the Jews.

The denunciations are contained in the first six verses as follow: Zech. ix.

The heavy burden of the word of the Lord against the land of Hadrach and Damascus; his sending down, (that is, the Lord's) for the Lord's is the eye of man, (the eye of the seer who receives the vision,) and all the tribes of Israel (whom it immediately concerns).

Hamath also shall have a limit set to her; Tyre and Sidon also, though she be very wise—(worldly-wise). For she hath built herself Tyre, a strong hold, and heaped up silver as the dust, and fine gold as the mire of the streets. Behold the Lord will cast her out, and smite her power in the sea, and she shall be devoured with fire. Ashkalon shall see it and fear, Gaza also shall see it and [pg 031] be very sorrowful; and Ekron, for her hope shall be dried up, and the king shall perish from Gaza, and Ashkalon shall not be inhabited, and a stranger shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.

These denunciations are chiefly directed against the Philistines, the cities enumerated being the most conspicuous of any they possessed, and no doubt, the pride of their nation. Here, then, appears sufficient reason for the Jews to interpret the prophecy, as altogether in their favour, denouncing judgments upon their enemies. But yet it is possible they may have viewed them too partially, and may even have overlooked the express objects of denunciation in the prophecy; which denounces their avarice and ambition, and declares that the pride rather than the cities of the Philistines shall be cut off. As for the cities themselves, heavy judgments are pronounced against them all. One, it is declared, shall not be inhabited; another, Sidon, is threatened with an overthrow, which it received not long after from Ochus, king of Persia, in precisely the manner here foretold; while Tyre, Gaza, and others, were [pg 032] taken by Alexander the Great; but if we keep to the letter of the prophecy, it is their avarice, ambition, and pride, that are distinctly marked as the objects of Divine displeasure; and even the judgments pronounced against them on this account, are immediately coupled with the succeeding promise of mercy and redemption, through the means of a meek and humble Messiah, who should take away sin and pollution, and speak peace to the heathen.

But why, it may be asked, were these offences condemned in the Philistines particularly? Were not the Jews also addicted to pride, avarice, and worldly ambition? No doubt they were so; and the prophecy being addressed to them, it appears that the admonition was expressly intended for their use.

Pride was even less excusable in the Jews, who could find no sanction for it in their religion; while this was the very basis of Pagan morality; the pedestal on which honour was erected; that idol of self-estimation, the highest of Pagan virtues. These vices were therefore more appropriately denounced in the Philistines, as peculiarly belonging to [pg 033] them, though spreading, by contagion, to the Jews; and if punishable in the former, how could they be excusable in the latter?

The mind of the Christian reader will naturally revert to the pride which revolted at the idea of a meek and humble Messiah, and caused the Jews to reject him. But that cannot be the question here; for the Jews are not here pointed out as the objects of Divine displeasure; nor is any intimation hitherto given of their offence; and that of its punishment could not surely precede it. The feeling might indeed be there, and a salutary warning of its being displeasing in the sight of Heaven, and of the fatal consequences about to result from it, seems here intended; but the penalty was not incurred till the overt act was committed, and to foretell the punishment before the offence itself was intimated, would have been a prophetical solecism. As we proceed, we shall find, in its proper place, due notice taken both of the one and the other.

In the next verse we find these denunciations, coupled with promises of mercy and redemption to the remaining Gentiles, verse 7, [pg 034] But I will take away his blood from out of his mouth; and his pollution from between his teeth; and he that remaineth, even he shall be for our God; that is, the remaining Gentiles shall have their sins forgiven, their pollution washed away, they shall be redeemed from the darkness of Paganism, and reclaimed to the worship of the true God;

And he shall be as a chief in Judah, Ekron, as well as the Jebusite; that is, he (the remaining Gentile) shall attain thereby to a full participation with the Jew, in all the spiritual blessings promised in the Messiah's kingdom.

The prophecy having now declared the admission of the Gentiles, promises that the Messiah's kingdom, thus established, shall ever enjoy Divine protection and support.

And I will encamp about mine house, against the army, against him that passeth over, and against him that returneth, and there shall no oppressor pass over them any more, for now have I seen with mine eyes.

In the following verse, the subject of the prophecy is so distinctly announced as the coming of the Messiah, that Jews as well as [pg 035] Christians concur on this point, though they have not perceived how the preceding verses refer to this kingdom.

Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold thy King shall come unto thee, just and having salvation; lowly and riding upon an ass, even a colt the foal of an ass.

The manner of the Messiah's coming being here so plainly foretold, and his character so distinctly described, we wonder how the Jew can deny that this was all fulfilled in the person of Christ. The reason is simply this; he disbelieves the facts. The books in which they are recorded, are of no authority in his estimation; he challenges their testimony on grounds too numerous to be discussed here. To answer his objections, every disagreement between the writers of the New Testament must first be reconciled; a task which appears to him to have hitherto failed with all who have attempted it. But this is not the only objection he has to urge. He charges the Christian with perverting the sense of prophecy; and this verse furnishes him with an instance. Thus, the Hebrew word rendered, [pg 036] “having salvation,” is really the past participle of the verb “to save,” literally “being saved;” and that too followed by the emphatical pronoun himself, “being saved himself.” Surely this point might be safely conceded by the Christian, who admits that Christ “was the first fruits of them that slept;” the first who rose from the dead, to everlasting life; and that through him we become partakers in that resurrection.

The peaceful nature of his kingdom, the participation of the heathen in its blessings, and the boundless extent of its dominion are next declared:

And he will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off; and he shall speak peace to the heathen; and his dominion shall be from the sea even to the sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth.

The Christian reader will find no difficulty in the interpretation of the verse which follows.

As for thee, by the blood of thy covenant, I have sent forth thy prisoners from the pit wherein is no water.

[pg 037]

The Messiah is spoken of throughout; who then but the Messiah can be apostrophised in the words, “As for thee?” Then follows “by the blood of thy covenant.” What blood but the blood of Christ? What covenant, but that sealed by his blood, can be alluded to? “I have sent thy prisoners forth.” What prisoners, but those who were in the bondage of sin? “from the pit wherein is no water.” What pit, but the darkness of idolatry, which had none of the waters of life? Surely this is a most clear and distinct intimation of the sacrifice of the Messiah, and of the benefits thereby conferred upon mankind in the redemption of the heathen world from the darkness of idolatry; thus opening the way to immortality, to the whole human race.

But the Messiah here appears to be promised to the Gentiles, having been previously promised to the Jews; were then these promises retracted? By no means. To the Jews he was promised, and to them he came, exclusively addressing himself to the house of Israel. Nor was it till after the majority of that nation had rejected and crucified him, [pg 038] that the calling of the Gentiles took place. The blessings he offered being refused by the former, appears to have been the immediate cause of their being given to the latter. Accordingly this seems to be the purport of the next verse, which intimates that there was some reason why these blessings could not be directly and unconditionally transferred to the Gentiles.

Return ye to the strong hold, my prisoners, wait thou unto the day I declare, that I will repay thee double; that is, wait for the day when these blessings will become yours, through the Jews' refusal of them.

Nor yet was the Messiah rejected by all the Jews; for the apostles were Jews; the disciples were Jews; by Jews was the Gospel preached and propagated; and to the Jews belongs the honour of the first triumph of true religion over Paganism, and what is more, over the passions and worldly propensities of man; and this triumphant progress of the Gospel seems to be the victory intimated in the verse which follows; wherein the reason is at the same time assigned why [pg 039] Christ did not address himself to the Gentiles.

For I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow Ephraim; and raised up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons, O Greece; and made thee as the sword of a mighty man.

The triumphs of Judas Maccabeus, generally supposed to be here foretold, cannot be the victories alluded to; for Ephraim, or the ten tribes, here declared as bearing a part in them, had already gone into captivity, and bore no share whatever in these subsequent wars of Judah. The true meaning appears to be that Judah was destined to have the honour of first establishing the Messiah's kingdom, as promised from the beginning.

How then could Ephraim, or the ten tribes, it may be asked, bear a part in the triumphs of the Gospel, having previously gone into captivity? The prophecy does not distinctly say so; if we keep to the letter, it is only said that Ephraim as well as Judah was prepared and marshalled for the spiritual conflict: the triumph is declared to Zion over Greece; that is, to true religion over Pagan idolatry; and [pg 040] in this warfare, though not in the wars of Judas Maccabeus, Ephraim did bear a part; for it is not to the apostolic age alone that we must look for the accomplishment of the great scheme of Providence for man's redemption. This was only one act in the great drama; which began under the Old Covenant, and is not yet finally completed under the New. In the former, or the Old Covenant, all the tribes of Israel bore their share, Ephraim as well as Judah; and the warfare not being finally concluded, who shall say but Ephraim may again appear, and bear a further part in it?

Having declared the union of the Gentiles with the Jews, and their joint participation in the blessings of the Messiah's kingdom, the prophecy goes on to promise the support and protection of Heaven, in terms alike applicable to both.

And the Lord shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning; and the Lord God shall blow the trumpet, and shall go forth with whirlwinds of the south. And the Lord of hosts shall defend them, and they shall devour and subdue with sling-stones; and they shall drink as wine, and they shall be filled like bowls, like [pg 041] the corners of the altar. (which were purposely so constructed as to receive the blood of the sacrifices).

That the whole of these expressions require to be taken figuratively and spiritually, no one conversant with scriptural and prophetic language can surely deny; or for a moment suppose that literal drunkenness and bloodshed are here intended.

Should any doubt remain that the Gentiles are included in these promises as well as the Jews, the next verse appears to decide the question.

And the Lord their God shall save them in that day, as the flock of his people.

If the Jews be called his people, who but the Gentiles can be meant by the other? But this is followed by the direct declaration that all distinction between them is on the eve of its abolition.

For the wall of separation is tottering over his land.

A remarkable and striking expression, but strangely perverted in our translation. Why the Jews have laboured to give a different turn to it, by seeking a more figurative and [pg 042] recondite meaning, we need be at no loss to conceive; nor why they apply these verses to themselves alone. See note to the translation of this verse.

But this view, which would limit the bounty of Heaven to a particular race, besides being at variance with the context, seems little calculated to call forth the feelings of adoration and praise with which this chapter concludes.

For how great is his goodness, and how great is his beauty. Corn shall make the young men cheerful, and new wine the maids.

Corn, wine, &c. in prophetic language ever signify the food of spiritual knowledge, to be henceforth freely bestowed on all, Gentiles as well as Jews.

[pg 043]

A Summary of the arguments for and against the antiquity and authority of the Vowel Points, is given at the beginning of the Second Vol. of Horne's Introduction to the Study of the Scriptures; from which the following considerations seem most entitled to selection. That the earliest traces of the points are to be found in the tenth century—that many of the oldest manuscripts now extant are without them—that the copies of the Jewish Scriptures now used in the Synagogue and esteemed peculiarly sacred, are without them—that the Samaritan letters which were the same as the Hebrew before the captivity, are without them—and the Samaritan Pentateuch is without them—that there are no traces of them to be found in the shekels (coins) struck by the kings of Israel—that the fathers, particularly Origen and Jerome, who treat of the Hebrew pronunciation, make no mention of them—that all the antient various readings of the Jews regard the letters only, [pg 044] not one of them relates to the vowel points—to which may be added, that there are five vowels in the Hebrew alphabet which are quite sufficient for reading the language, though they may not enable us to determine with precision the antient pronunciation. “These considerations,” says Mr. Horne, “have determined the majority of Hebrew scholars in the present day to reject their authority.” Still we may admit their utility in fixing the pronunciation, and perhaps also in facilitating the construction; but the main objection to them is, that by changing the vowels, they frequently alter the sense, as well as the sound, and that in passages where a Jewish interpretation is particularly open to suspicion. Thus in prophecies relating to the Messiah, both their prejudices and their feelings unfit them for becoming guides to a Christian expositor.

Verse 1. :משא דבר יהוה בארץ חדרך ודמשק מנחתו כי ליהוה עין אדם וכל שבטי ישראל

The heavy burden of the word of the Lord in the land of Hadrach, and Damascus shall be the rest thereof; when the eyes of man, as of all the tribes of Israel, shall be towards the Lord.

These are the words of the translation in our Bible; but the sense of them I must acknowledge my inability to unravel. Of what Damascus is to be the rest, or what period is intimated by the adverb of time when, I am at a loss to discover. The separation of Hadrach and Damascus by the insertion of a comma between them, evidently owes its origin to the supposed necessity for rendering the word מנחתו (or ותחנמ) the rest thereof. But if deriving it from נח (or חנ) or נוח (or חונ) does not afford [pg 045] any intelligible sense, we are naturally led to seek another derivation; and we find one in the verb נחת (or תחנ) to descend or send down, which without violating grammatical construction affords a meaning not only intelligible, but in perfect unison with the context. The Hemantiv מ prefixed, gives the thing sent down, while the suffix ו his, evidently refers to the Lord who sends the vision or denunciation. The English construction, of course, requires it should be rendered his sending down, that is, the Lord's denunciation, against Hadrach and Damascus, as well as the other cities which are mentioned afterwards; for ב here rendered in, may with more propriety be rendered against or upon. The verb נחת (or תחנ) to send down, occurs in Joel iii. 11 and elsewhere: but the writer freely acknowledges that he has no authority for the participial noun with the Hemantiv מ prefixed to signify the thing sent down, or the act of sending down, as the sense seems to require here. He therefore rests this construction solely on the ground of its being grammatically admissible, consonant to analogy, and in accordance with the context, as affording a satisfactory meaning. Let those who are not satisfied with such reasons furnish a better solution of the difficulty. In the next place, there is no necessity for rendering כי (or יכ) when, which more frequently signifies for; and when so rendered, it will be found to connect together the latter and the former part of the verse. For this, we only require to render the dative ל, as it frequently is rendered in Hebrew, as well as Greek and Latin, to denote possession; and the verse will run thus. For the Lord's is, or to the Lord belongs, the eye of man; to wit, the eye of the Seer, who receives the vision, and all the tribes of Israel, whom the vision chiefly [pg 046] concerns. Making the tribes a genitive case, by inserting of before them, is wholly uncalled for by the text.

Verse 2. :וגם חמת תגבל בה צר וצידון כי חכמה מאד

And Hamath also shall border thereby, Tyrus and Sidon though it be very wise.

תגבל (or לבגת) to set bounds to, in the Hiphil, occurs in Exod. xix. 12 & 23.—It here appears to be the Huphal or passive of Hiphil—signifying to be bounded, or to be set bounds to. It is only necessary to remark, that leaving aside the punctuation, the form of the future tense will be identical in both these voices. The sense as it stands is scarcely intelligible. What is meant by border thereby, it is not easy to conceive; but by discarding the points we readily obtain a meaning that is perfectly intelligible. תגבל (or לבגת) may then be rendered in the passive voice, instead of the active, and will signify to be limited, or have bounds set to; and בה (or הב) on or to her, which follows, accords with, and seems to demand its being so rendered. And Hamath also shall have bounds set to her; that is, her growing greatness shall be checked.

Tyre, and also Sidon though she be very wise, חכמה (or המכח), wise, no doubt, means here, worldly wise, or very subtle.

Verse 5. :תרא אשקלון ותירא ועזה ותחיל מאד ועקרון כי הוביש מבטה

Ashkalon shall see and fear, Gaza also, and she shall be very sorrowful, and Ekron for her expectation shall be ashamed.

[pg 047]

הוביש (or שיבוה) may be derived either from בוש (or שוב) to be ashamed, or from יבש (or שבי) to dry up, and whither as a plant for want of moisture. The latter seems preferable here, but it is not very material to the sense.

Verse 6. :וישב ממזר באשדוד והכרתי גאון פלשתים

A bastard shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.

ממזר (or רזממ) may be rendered a stranger, as well as a bastard, αλλογενεις in the Septuagint, which renders the sense more obvious.

And I will cut off the pride of the Philistines. These denunciations appear chiefly directed against the Philistines, in whom pride, avarice, and ambition, are specified as the great offences. The delivery of Ashdod into the hands of a stranger is the judgment pronounced against them in this verse, as the last means of their humiliation. But here the tone of the prophecy changes, and instead of further punishments, we find repeated promises of blessings and mercy; he that is left shall be for our God, and as a Governor in Judah,—and in the verse following—He (the Messiah being manifestly meant here) shall speak peace to the Heathen.—Whence then this change? We are led to seek, and naturally expect to find, some ground for it. And accordingly the next verse unfolds the reason, and explains the occasion of this change in the counsel of Heaven; a change resting not on their own merits, but on Divine Mercy. For such a construction will this verse bear, quite as well as the one usually put upon it; and this [pg 048] construction is far more in unison with the context, than the received one.

Verse 7. :והסרתי דמיו מפיו ושקציו מבין שניו ונשאר גמ-הוא לאלהינו והיה כאלף ביהודה ועקרון כיבוסי

And I will take away his blood from out of his mouth, and his abominations from between his teeth, and he that is left, even he shall be for our God, and he shall be as a Governor in Judah, and Ekron as a Jebusite.

With scarcely any alteration in the translation, the words, even as they stand, admit of a very different acceptation from that in which they are commonly taken; and instead of being a figurative expression, borrowed from the rescuing its prey from the jaws of a lion; in which sense the Jews take it, as a promise to themselves of deliverance from their enemies; the words more literally taken, will convey the promise of mercy and redemption to the remaining Gentiles: whose sin and pollution are to be taken away, who are to be reclaimed to the worship of the true God, and admitted to a full participation in all the blessings, promised to Israel by the coming of the Messiah.

The Gentiles were esteemed polluted by eating things unclean, which were prohibited to the Jews. Certain animals—things strangled—and the blood in particular were among the forbidden food. The new covenant removed this prohibition, thereby taking away the pollution from between his teeth, as it ceased to be a cause of pollution. The command given to St. Peter, Acts x. 14, to kill and eat, where all manner of food was presented to him, was expressly [pg 049] received by him as a command to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, or to admit them into the Messiah's kingdom; and this admission was unaccompanied with any such prohibition, nor was it subsequently given.

Eating things sacrificed to idols was another cause of pollution which the New Covenant removed, by taking away the cause in the abolition of idolatry. This literal fulfilment of the words of the prophecy may, however, be figuratively understood, to foreshew the remission of sins through Christ, and the admission of the Heathen nations to the hopes of everlasting life founded on the Gospel.

The only change required in the English version is to read But, for And, which are expressed alike by the Hebrew ו, and to understand שקציו (or ויצקש) his abominations, in the sense most appropriate to it, as alluding to the worship of idols, and we have the sense already expressed, which perfectly harmonizes with the context. Whereas, taken in the other sense, what becomes of the antithesis? Who is he that is left, that shall be for our God, and as a chief in Judah? Surely it cannot be the Jew, who shall be as a Jew. But the next words are decisive, declaring that Ekron and the Jebusite, both Gentiles, are here intended.

And Ekron as a Jebusite. This mode of rendering leaves, indeed, the force of these words rather ambiguous; but there can be no intelligible sense put upon the כי (or יכ), but that of in like manner as, or, as well as; that is, Ekron as well as the Jebusite, shall both be as Governors in Judah.

Verse 8. :וחניתי לביתי מצבה מעבר ומשב ולא יעבר עליהם עוד נגש כי עתה ראיתי בעיני

[pg 050]

And I will encamp about mine house because of the army, because of him that passeth by, and because of him that returneth; and no oppressor shall pass through them any more: for now have I seen with mine eyes.

It is not certain, though probable, from 1 Sam. xxvi. 5-7, that the Jews had entrenched camps; if so, the passage would be clearer by rendering וחניתי (or יתינחו) I will entrench instead of encamp; though the sense is sufficiently obvious, as meaning to afford protection against the army, &c. The house of God, to which protection is promised, is his Temple, figuratively denoting true religion purified from idolatry; the great spiritual adversary constantly warring with Israel, and, as we learn from Scripture, frequently prevailing; which is probably the warfare here alluded to. But if taken literally, this passage conveys the promise that the Messiah's kingdom should put an end to oppression and injustice. The exact import of the expression, for now have I seen with mine eyes, is not very evident; but may imply God's foreseeing the unfitness of the Jews to receive a spiritual Messiah; who, in consequence of their rejection of him, would be given to the Gentiles.

Verse 9. :גילי מאד בת ציון הריעי בת-ירושלם הנה מלכך יבוא לך צדיק ונושע הוא עני ורכב על חמור ועל עיר בן אתנות

Rejoice greatly, Daughter of Zion, shout, oh Daughter of Jerusalem, behold thy King cometh unto thee; he is just and having salvation, lowly and riding upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.

[pg 051]

There is no ambiguity in the purport of this verse, which is the coming of the Messiah, as all commentators allow; but I can in no wise agree with Lowth and others, that this verse is a rhapsodical digression from the subject of the rest of the chapter, in which the Prophet being wrought up to the highest pitch of enthusiasm, breaks off from the immediate object of his vision to foretel the coming of the Messiah, and then returns back to his former subject. On the contrary, I can see nothing like digression here, but one connected and consistent object throughout; this verse being the keystone of the arch, which binds together those which precede and those which follow it, forming the whole into one united and compact body. Instead of a digression from the subject, I regard this verse as the clue to guide us through the labyrinth, by fixing and determining the subject of all the rest.

Behold thy King cometh unto thee: יבוא (or אובי) is really the future tense, literally shall come, and changing it to the present, cometh, seems unnecessary, if it does not in some degree interfere with the chronological order of the events predicted afterwards.

Just and having salvation. This is certainly an ambiguous rendering of נושע (or עשונ) the past participle of the verb ישע (or עשי) to save, which literally signifies being saved, and the emphatic הוא (or אוה) himself, following it, more strongly marks the sense, as having obtained salvation himself.

Riding on an ass, and a colt, the foal of an ass. The connective ו and, should certainly be rendered here by even, or, to wit, and not by and, which makes it appear that the Messiah was to ride upon two asses.

[pg 052]

Verse 11. :גם את בדם בריתך שלחתי אסיריך מבר אין מים בו

As for thee, by the blood of thy covenant, I have sent forth thy prisoners, from the pit wherein is no water.

That the Messiah is apostrophized in these words, cannot, surely, admit of doubt or dispute; and words more forcible, or more pregnant with meaning, upon the Christian's view of them, it is not easy to conceive. שלחתי (or יתחלש) I have sent forth, is really the perfect tense, though written several centuries before the coming of Christ; but it is not at all unusual in prophetic language to use this tense, which represents as already accomplished, what is determined in the Divine purpose, although the fulfilment be still future.

The writer is well aware of a formidable objection presented by the Hebrew punctuation, against the application of this verse to the Messiah, as the pronoun “thee” את (or תא) is by the pointing made to be of the feminine gender. This is one of many instances in which the punctuation tends to embarrass instead of elucidating the subject of the prophecy—instances which have mainly contributed to the determination of the writer to disregard the points. It remains for those who regard them as of paramount authority, to offer a solution of this and other passages equally clear and satisfactory, and equally consistent throughout. If “thee” be meant to apostrophise the daughter of Zion, what blood—what covenant—what prisoners—what pit, are here alluded to? Upon the view here offered, the event foreshewn is the death of the Messiah, an event wholly at variance with the expectations of the Jews, but [pg 053] here distinctly announced, along with the most striking particulars attendant on that event; such as the frustration of the hopes of temporal advantages expected from his coming—the nature of the spiritual blessings which it was really intended to impart; namely, the remission of sins, and the redemption of the Gentile world from idolatry. Along with these is stated the personal character of the Messiah, and the express manner of his coming; not in glory as expected, but in meekness and humility—the peaceful nature of his kingdom—its boundless extent, destined to embrace all nations—yet in apparent contradiction, his death is intimated, but also his resurrection whereby he becomes “the first fruits of them that slept.” These are all clearly intimated in this chapter; and of these, how many have former commentators, with or without the aid of points, been able to make out? At most, only three or four verses, as where he is mentioned as riding into Jerusalem on an ass; and here, according to Blaney, the text requires to be altered, to shew that he was a Saviour, נושע (or עשונ) being saved, being altered into משע (or עשמ) a Saviour; while, according to Lowth, all that here relates to the Messiah is to be regarded as a rhapsodical digression from the subject of the context.

Verse 12. :שובו לבצרון אסירי התקוה גם היום מגיד משנה אשיב לך

Return to the strong hold, ye prisoners of hope, even today do I declare that I will repay you double.

Such is the received translation, nor as it now stands, does the sense appear at all ambiguous, signifying, Return to your prison-house until the day of your promised liberation arrives; [pg 054] that is, the day of the Messiah's coming. There can be no doubt who are meant by the prisoners, but the change of number in the personal pronoun, from plural to singular, makes it not improbable that the latter part of this line is addressed to the Messiah, who was apostrophized in the verse preceding. Upon this view the word אסירי (or יריסא) may be rendered, my prisoners, instead of prisoners of hope, which is rather obscure; and התקוה (or הוקתה) as the imperative hithpael of the verb קוה (or הוק) to wait. And the sense will then be as given in the text; Return to the strong hold, my prisoners: wait thou till the day I declare that I will repay thee double.

Verse 13. :כי דרכתי לי יהודה קשת מלאתי אפרים ועררתי בניך ציון על בניך יון ושמתיך כחרב גבור

When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow Ephraim, and raised up thy sons, Oh Zion! against thy sons, Oh Greece! and made thee as the sword of a mighty man.

Here כי (or יכ), which signifies for, is rendered when, thus imposing a future signification on the verbs that follow. This has, no doubt, arisen from a supposed allusion to the subsequent wars of Judas Maccabeus. But Ephraim, or the ten tribes, having no share in those wars, militates against that supposition; and it seems more probable that this verse, instead of designating the time when the promised blessing would be conferred upon the Gentiles, here declares the reason why the Messiah could not be sent to them directly and unconditionally; namely, because he was previously promised to Israel. For I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow Ephraim; that is, I have chosen [pg 055] Israel as my people, and appointed them my instruments for the overthrow of paganism. And, accordingly, to the house of Israel he came, and was by some of them received; nor until the great body of that people declined the office, were the Gentiles called in to fill up the ranks, and carry on the spiritual warfare; a warfare which was thenceforward carried on by both in conjunction, for the first Christians still were Jews, though blindness came in part over Israel.

Verse 14. :ויהוה עליהם יראה ויצא כברק חצו ואדני יהוה בשופר יתקע והלך בסערות תימן

And the Lord shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning; and the Lord God shall blow the trumpet, and shall go forth with whirlwinds of the South.

This and the following verse evidently contain promises of Divine protection, and of triumphant success; but to whom these promises are given may admit of a question. עליהם (or םהילע) over them, may mean the Jews last spoken of, or the Gentiles mentioned before, or it may apply to both. And if the triumph of true religion over Pagan idolatry be the victory here spoken of, as this was obtained by both in conjunction, during the Apostolic age at least, so both must be included in the promises. Nor can any construction, worthy of the subject, or adequate in dignity and importance, be put upon the expression, the sons of Zion, and the sons of Greece, but that which refers to the religion of each. The triumph of true religion over idolatry was one that affected the whole world, including every country, and extending to every age, and regarding the eternal as well as temporal interests of mankind.

[pg 056]

Verse 15. .יהוה צבאות יגן עליהם ואכלו וכבשו אבני קלע ושתו המו כמו יין ומלאו כמזרק כזוית מזבח

And the Lord of hosts shall defend them; and they shall devour, and subdue with sling stones; and they shall drink and make a noise as through wine; and they shall be filled like bowls, and as the corners of the altar.

To take these expressions in the literal sense, as promising to man the grossest of sensual indulgences, would surely be a strange misconstruction of prophetic language; המו (or ומה) which is rendered, and make a noise, is not preceded by the connective ו and; it may, therefore, be simply the personal pronoun they, being the nominative to the verb drink; they shall drink as of wine, &c. Who is intended by the pronoun they, if at all doubtful here, becomes sufficiently clear in the next verse, where it is repeated in a manner that leaves no ambiguity, at least as far as concerns the Gentiles.

Verse 16. :והושיעם יהוה אלהיהם ביום ההוא כצאן עמו כי אבני נזר מתנוססות על אדמתו

And the Lord their God shall save them in that day, as the flock of his people, for they shall be as the stones of a crown, lifted up as an ensign upon his land.

Here the pronoun them, in evident contradistinction with his people, shews that two nations are spoken of; otherwise the passage might be rendered, the Lord God, shall save as a flock, his people. But the antithesis marked by the pronoun them, is rendered still more obvious, if possible, in the next line. For the wall of separation is waving (or tottering) over his land. Such is the literal meaning of the Hebrew, when [pg 057] the words are taken in their primary and ordinary sense. Thus, אבני (or ינבא) in its usual sense means, stones, as the stones of a wall; but in a more remote and figurative sense, precious stones: נזר (or רזנ) in the primary sense, signifies, to separate, or, separation; occurring in this sense ten times at least in Numbers, ch. vi.; but in the secondary or more remote sense, a diadem, which separates or distinguishes the prince from the people: נסס (or ססנ) in the primary sense means to wave to and fro, as a flag, or as a wall before it is blown down by the wind; but, in a secondary sense it signifies, as some understand it here, to glitter or sparkle, as a diamond, when waved or moved. Thus we see the pains taken to avoid the plain and obvious sense of the passage; but the Hebrew scholar will judge for himself.

The concluding verse, in which the prophet breaks forth into expressions of adoration and praise for the goodness of the Lord, well accords with this view of his bounty being unlimited, and extending to all his creatures alike.

[pg 058]

The Rabbi's Exposition And Reply, Chapter IX.

As I conclude that the object of the Christian, who thinks he sees in this Prophecy a clear prediction of the coming of Jesus Christ, is to learn in what manner it is expounded by the Jews; it appears to me that the simplest way in which I can reply, will be to lay before him what I conceive to be the proper translation and interpretation. In doing this, it will be unnecessary to offer any further explanation or exposition, beyond what may be given in the form of comment on the translation; while he is at liberty to conclude with regard to those passages, where no comment or explanation [pg 059] is offered, not, assuredly, that I assent to his interpretation, but merely that I acquiesce in the reasons he assigns for my dissent; or that his anticipation of my argument has rendered its repetition superfluous, as is the case in verses 9 and 10. The following is my mode of translating this chapter and expounding it:—


Top of Page
Top of Page