An Amicable Controversy with a Jewish Rabbi, on The Messiah's Coming Part 3

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 ?, and to understand ?????

(or ?????) _his abominations_, in the sense most appropriate to it, as alluding to the wors.h.i.+p 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 ant.i.thesis? Who is _he that is left_, that _shall be for our G.o.d_, 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 ?? (or ??), 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. :?????? ????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?????

_And I will encamp about mine house because of the army, because of him that pa.s.seth by, and because of him that returneth; and no oppressor shall pa.s.s 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 pa.s.sage would be clearer by rendering ?????? (or ??????) _I will entrench_ instead of _encamp_; though the sense is sufficiently obvious, as meaning to afford protection against the army, &c. The house of G.o.d, 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 pa.s.sage 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 G.o.d'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. :???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ??-?????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ???

_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 a.s.s, and a colt the foal of an a.s.s._

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_: ???? (or ????) 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 ???? (or ????) the past participle of the verb ??? (or ???) to save, which literally signifies _being saved_, and the emphatic ??? (or ???) _himself_, following it, more strongly marks the sense, as _having obtained salvation himself_.

_Riding on an a.s.s, and a colt, the foal of an a.s.s._ The connective ?

_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 a.s.ses.

Verse 11. :?? ?? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ??

_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. ????? (or ?????) _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 p.r.o.noun "thee" ?? (or ??) is by the pointing made to be of the feminine gender. This is one of many instances in which the punctuation tends to embarra.s.s 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 pa.s.sages 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 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 a.s.s; and here, according to Blaney, the text requires to be altered, to shew that he was a Saviour, ???? (or ????) being saved, being altered into ??? (or ???) 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. :???? ?????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??

_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_; 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 p.r.o.noun, 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 ????? (or ?????) may be rendered, _my prisoners_, instead of _prisoners of hope_, which is rather obscure; and ????? (or ?????) as the imperative hithpael of the verb ??? (or ???) 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. :?? ????? ?? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???

_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 ?? (or ??), 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 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. :????? ????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ????

_And the Lord shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning; and the Lord G.o.d 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. ????? (or ?????) _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.

Verse 15. .???? ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???

_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; ??? (or ???) which is rendered, _and make a noise_, is not preceded by the connective ? _and_; it may, therefore, be simply the personal p.r.o.noun _they_, being the nominative to the verb _drink_; _they shall drink as of wine_, &c. Who is intended by the p.r.o.noun _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. :??????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???????? ??

_And the Lord their G.o.d 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 p.r.o.noun _them_, in evident contradistinction with _his people_, shews that two nations are spoken of; otherwise the pa.s.sage might be rendered, _the Lord G.o.d, shall save as a flock, his people_. But the ant.i.thesis marked by the p.r.o.noun _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 the words are taken in their primary and ordinary sense. Thus, ????

(or ????) in its usual sense means, _stones_, as the stones of a wall; but in a more remote and figurative sense, _precious stones_: ??? (or ???) 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: ??? (or ???) 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 pa.s.sage; 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.

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 pa.s.sages, where no comment or explanation is offered, not, a.s.suredly, that I a.s.sent to _his_ interpretation, but merely that I acquiesce in the reasons he a.s.signs for my dissent; or that his antic.i.p.ation of my argument has rendered its repet.i.tion superfluous, as is the case in verses 9 and 10. The following is my mode of translating this chapter and expounding it:-

Zechariah, Chapter IX.

Verse 1. _The burden of the word of the Lord on the land of Hadrach, and Damascus, his residence; for to the Lord (will be) the eye of man, and (particularly that) of all the tribes of Israel._

This prophecy is directed against a king named Hadrach, and against Damascus his residence. According to some who have visited Syria, there is to this day, near the desert, a village bearing the name of that king, whose inhabitants a.s.sert that formerly a large district about it, that const.i.tuted a powerful kingdom, was called by the same name.

_For to the Lord_, saith the prophet, _will be the eye of man_, agreeably to what he further declareth, that the extermination of the wicked will precede the turning to G.o.d, the eyes of the residue of man.

Verse 2. _And also (on) Hamath which borders on her; (on) Tyre, and (on) Sidon, though she be very wise._ Verse 3. _And Tyre did build herself a strong hold, and heaped up silver as dust, and gold as mire of the streets._