Chapter III: Part 3

_And they shall be as mighty men who tread down their enemies in the mire of the streets in battle; and they shall fight because the Lord is with them, and they shall confound the riders on horses._

And while this triumph is promised to Judah, mercy and forgiveness are declared to Israel also, and their return from captivity is foretold.

_And I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph, and I will bring them again to place them, for I have mercy upon them, and they shall be as though I had not cast them off; for I am the Lord their God, and will hear them. And they of Ephraim shall be like a mighty man, and their heart shall rejoice as through wine, yea their children shall see it and be glad, their heart shall rejoice in the Lord._

The complete fulfilment of this part of the prophecy must still be future, whether we consider it as referring to the Jews now dispersed over different countries, or to the ten tribes who went into captivity.

In most countries of Europe and probably of Asia also, the usual mode of call to a person just within hearing is a shrill kind of hiss, which is the more readily noticed because differing from all other sounds. This expression is accordingly used in the prophecy to express the recal of Israel, whether spiritual or otherwise.

_I will hiss for them, and gather them, for I have redeemed them, and they shall increase as they have increased._

The next verse speaks of sowing them again among the people, which appears at first as if again declaring their dispersion; but on the spiritual view there is no reason to suppose that such is the meaning. Sowing them among the people, on this view will signify the blending together of Jews and Gentiles, by their embracing one common faith; whereby they at length become one race, and all distinction is lost under the common denomination of Christians. This also explains the rapid increase of their numbers here foretold, as well as their return from captivity, and their living again. The increase of numbers arising from the accession of converts; their return from captivity, signifying redemption from the bondage of sin; and their living, the resurrection to eternal life through Christ.

_And I will sow them among the people, and they shall remember me in far countries, and they shall live with their children, and turn again._

The spirituality of this return and gathering becomes still clearer as we proceed, signifying the flowing together of all nations, Gentiles as well as Jews, into the house of the Lord.

_And I will bring them again out of the land of Egypt, and gather them out of Assyria, and I will bring them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon; and place shall not be found for them._

This extraordinary increase of numbers, which is to overflow all countries, strongly favours the spiritual view, for the actual number of the Hebrew nation is avowedly diminishing, and becoming less and less likely to perform the wonderful changes next intimated. The sea and the isles were common expressions for the Gentile nations, (Gen. x. 5,) while the land signifies always the Jews, from Palestine or the Holy Land—see note. Rivers denote in prophetic language, the people residing on their borders. (Isaiah viii. 7.) _The_ river, in particular, signifies the Euphrates and the Eastern nations bordering upon it. This will serve as a key to the meaning of the next verse, which announces the subversion of Paganism in these different countries. Thus, _afflicting the sea and smiting the waves_, denote its extinction in the West; _drying up the depths of the river_, signify its extinction in the East; _and bringing down the pride of Assyria_, and _the departing of the sceptre from Egypt_ bespeak its further abolition.

_And he shall cause affliction to pass over the sea, and shall smite the waves of the sea: and all the deeps of the river shall dry up: and the pride of Assyria shall be brought down; and the sceptre of Egypt shall depart away._

Surely these expressions announce some greater changes than would result from the mere emigration from these countries of a race, poor, afflicted, and despised, as the Jews long have been. And small indeed is the likelihood that the literal subjugation of all these countries by that race, can be here intended. The following verse points out a far more probable and consistent solution of the problem, in the overthrow of their idolatry, and the turning of all these nations to the worship of the one true God.

_And I will strengthen them in the Lord, and they shall walk up and down in his name, saith the Lord._

NOTES TO CHAPTER IX.

Verse 1. :יהוה עשה חזיזים ומטר גשם

_So the Lord shall make bright clouds, and give them showers of rain._

The Hebrew here may be rendered (see Lowth and Parkhurst) _lightning_ instead of _bright clouds_, and the connexion with rain will then be much more obvious; especially with _heavy_ rain, as the Hebrew word literally signifies, which usually follow lightning. The construction will then be as proposed in the text.

_So the Lord causing lightning, shall bring heavy rain, &c._

Verse 3. :על הרעים חרה אפי ועל העתודים אפקוד כי פקד יהוה

_Mine anger was kindled against the shepherds, and I punished the goats, for the Lord, &c._

The apparently indiscriminate use of the past and future tenses, in scriptural and prophetic language, has perplexed the best Hebrew scholars. On the conversive power of the ו, Granville Sharpe’s is perhaps the best treatise. In the present case, unless the ו retain that power when disjoined from the verb, there is no reason for rendering the future אפקוד (or דוקפא) as a perfect, or, _I punished_, instead of _I will punish_. And, as Mr. Lowth observes, the כי (or יכ) which follows would be more properly rendered _But_ than _For_, and it will then be—_mine anger is kindled against the shepherds, and I will punish the goats; But the Lord of Hosts_, &c. The shepherds and the goats both signify leaders of the flock.

Verse 4. :ממנו פנה ממנו יתד ממנו קשת מלחמה ממנו יצא כל נוגש יחדו

_Out of him came forth the corner, out of him the nail, out of him the battle bow, out of him every oppressor together._

The words _corner_, _nail_, and _oppressor_, must be rather perplexing to the English reader, nor can the Hebrew scholar be certain of the precise meaning of each, though their general import is obvious enough. Thus פנה (or הנפ) _corner_, signifies in the root to _turn_, and as the _corner stone_ is a guide to the builder in laying the others, it comes to signify a guide or leader. So יתד (or דתי), _a nail_, signifies one on whom others depend. And נוגש (or שגונ), _an oppressor_, like the Greek τυραννος, signifies generally, _a prince_, as well as a _tyrant_. Thus these terms are each of them equivalent to a _chief_ or _leader_.

The verb יצא (or אצי), which follows, may be either past or future, but the latter accords best with the context, as in the proposed translation. _Out of him shall come forth the corner-stone, __ out of him the nail, out of him the battle bow, out of him every leader together._

Verse 8. אשרקה להם.—_I will hiss for them._

The word _hiss_, does not to the English reader convey the correct meaning here. In many parts of Europe, and, probably, in some of Asia, the common made of call is by a shrill sound, very different from either a hiss or a whistle. In some countries it is effected by pressing the tongue against the teeth with the lips open, and sounding the letters—tsz. In others, it is usual to begin with the lips compressed, and without closing the teeth, thus making the sound of the letters psh—but in both, the sibilant sound predominates, and is heard to a considerable distance, while its peculiarity instantly attracts attention from all that are within hearing; and this is no doubt the sense of the term, as here used. The Hebrew closely resembles, and probably gives the etymology of the English word, _shriek_. (See Parkhurst.)

Verse 11. :ועבר בים צרה והכה בים גלים

_And he shall pass through the sea with affliction, and shall smite the waves of the sea._

This mode of rendering gives a turn to the sense of the passage, which is wholly uncalled for, if not unwarranted by the original: which would be more literally translated: _And affliction shall come over the sea_, &c. But the Jew’s mode of rendering is equally correct, and better accords with the context, thus: _He shall cause trouble to pass in the sea, and shall smite the waves of the sea._ The latter expression amplifying and explaining the former.

What is meant by the expressions, the sea, the isles, and the land, is a point of no small importance. In prophetic language, the sea and the isles always signify the western Gentiles, or European nations; while the land signifies Palestine, or the Jewish nation. The Hebrew word ים (or םי) means either the sea or the west. As the sea extends along the whole western coast of Syria, sea and west came to be used synonymously. And as the European nations lay beyond the sea they obtained the name of the isles, or the isles of the Gentiles, as they are called in Gen. x. 5. Mr. Lowth observes, on Isa. xi. 11. “The islands, in the prophetic style, seem particularly to denote the western parts of the world, or the European nations; the west being often called the sea in the Scripture language.”

Thus, “_causing affliction, or trouble, to come over the sea_,” and “_smiting the waves of it_,” signify, as the Jew rightly explains, to cause confusion and dismay among the Gentile nations of the west.

Verse 11. :והבישו כל מצולות יאור

_And all the deeps of the river shall dry up._

That rivers are meant, in prophetic language, to represent the people residing on their borders, appears in various passages. See Isa, viii. 7. “_Now, therefore, behold the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river strong and many, even the king of Assyria and all his glory._” In like manner, the drying up of the Euphrates, is spoken of under the sixth vial in the Revelations, in allusion to the nations bordering upon that river.

THE RABBI’S REPLY, AND THE AUTHOR’S REMARKS UPON IT. CHAPTER X.

Contending, as the Jew does, that no part of the prophecy relating to the Messiah’s kingdom, has yet been accomplished, he cannot reasonably be expected to offer a particular interpretation of what, according to his view, is still unfulfilled. And, accordingly, his remarks on this chapter are restricted to an occasional correction of the received translation, and a few short explanatory notes; while his reply to my exposition, if reply it can be called, may be comprised in one short sentence, namely, that he considers the whole unaccomplished, and rejects altogether the spiritual exposition, admitting none but the literal.

In answer to this, I have to observe, that the literal acceptation, has already, in some instances, been shewn to be impossible; and will, hereafter, be so in many more; while the figurative exposition offered, is in perfect accordance with the style and language of prophecy in general, and is uniform and consistent throughout.

As I fully acquiesce in the Rabbi’s corrections, and in the only instance where we differ, have adopted his view in preference to my own, it is wholly unnecessary to offer his translation at length; but an objection which he makes to my exposition of verses 3rd and 4th of the last chapter, I feel called upon to notice.

In those verses, I adopted the view of Dr. Blayney, that the destruction _by fire_, there denounced, applies to Sidon rather than to Tyre.

The common version, “_For Tyre has built herself a fortress_,” being rendered by him, “_For she_ (Sidon) _has built herself a fortress, Tyre_;” the Sidonians being thus made the immediate object of denunciation, who are allowed to have been the builders of Tyre, which was thence called the daughter of Sidon.

Now the Jew’s objection is founded upon collateral prophecies, in which the burden cannot, as here, be shifted from Tyre to Sidon, the former being distinctly named in these; and in some, the precise mode of destruction specified, namely, by fire: Thus, in Amos i. 10, “_I will send a fire upon the wall of Tyrus, which shall devour the palaces thereof:_” see also Isa. xxiii., in which the whole burden is expressly on Tyre; and again, Ezek. xxvii. 32, “_and in their wailing, they shall take up a lamentation for thee, and lament over thee, saying, What city is like Tyrus, like the destroyed in the midst of the sea?_”

These, and similar passages, would, no doubt, be fatal to the exposition of Dr. Blayney, could they be shewn to foretel one and the same event; but against this, there are, what appear to me, conclusive objections. Two of these prophets not only wrote long before the time of Zechariah, but before the destruction of Old Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, which was therefore most likely to be the object of their predictions, and not New Tyre, which, at that time was not in existence, being built after Old Tyre was demolished; this then appears conclusive against the objection drawn from what occurs in Amos and Isaiah. With regard to Ezekiel, the case is somewhat different, and the answer must rest on other grounds.

Ezekiel did write much nearer to the time in question, and commentators appear undecided whether some of his predictions refer to the destruction of Old or New Tyre, or to both; for if he uttered this prophecy before the siege of Old Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, which can hardly admit of doubt, when he says, chap. xxvi. 7, “Behold I will bring upon Tyrus, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon;” still the expression of “_the destroyed in the midst of the sea_,” does seem peculiarly applicable to the insular situation of New Tyre. But if it be granted that the siege of this latter, by Alexander, be intimated in that remarkable expression; yet Ezekiel no where, that I can find, specifies _fire_ as the peculiar agent of destruction; therefore, it cannot be inferred from any thing he says, that in Zechariah’s prophecy, which appears to be directed against both Tyre and Sidon, this particular mode of destruction may not apply to Sidon, as the text certainly warrants that interpretation. Thus I see no reason to relinquish Dr. Blayney’s view, which I should give up with the more reluctance, as I have so rarely been able to go along with that learned commentator; while this exposition appeared to me a very happy solution of a difficulty presented by the received translation.

ZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH’S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER XI.

It was before stated, that we should find in its proper place, due notice taken of the pride and worldly-mindedness which led the Jews to reject the Messiah, as he offered no temporal advantages; and of their forfeiting thereby all claim to the blessings which his kingdom was calculated to afford. We are now come to that place. The introduction to this chapter announces the frustration of their hopes of worldly greatness built upon the promised Messiah; and distinctly states what portion of their nation would be blinded by such motives, and what portion would be exempt from them. The rulers, the rich, and the great are declared to be those who would mislead the flock; while the poor and the humble are stated to be those who would recognise the hand of God in his works, and perceive that this was the word of the Lord.

At the time of Christ’s coming, it is unquestionable, that a very general expectation prevailed among the Jews, that the period for their Messiah’s appearance was arrived; but so remote was the character of Jesus from what they expected in their prince, and so different were the advantages he offered from what they had hoped to obtain, that the majority of the people willingly yielded to the persuasion of their interested rulers, that he was not the promised Messiah; and thus the misguided flock for the most part entered into the views of their priests and rulers, and rejected Christ.

The motives for this rejection are manifest even to this day, in the backwardness of Israel to relinquish the hopes of a temporal Messiah, and in their blindness to the benefits offered them by a spiritual one; although the consequence has hitherto been to them the loss of even the temporal advantages they previously enjoyed, instead of the attainment of others which they expected. Small, however, in the Christian’s estimation, are these, in comparison with their loss, in a spiritual point of view, or their loss of the especial favour of Heaven; which from that time has not only withheld from them any further revelations, but, as we conceive, has even blinded them to the true spiritual import of those previously vouchsafed. Thus, in whatever light we view it, whether spiritually or politically, the humiliation of Israel from that time to the present, has been abundantly manifest; as declared in the prophecy, under the metaphor of the fall of the loftiest trees, the pride of the forest.

_Open thy doors, O Lebanon! that the fire may devour thy cedars. Howl, fir-tree, for the cedar is fallen, because the mighty is spoiled. Howl, O ye oaks of Bashan, for the forest of the vintage is come down. There is a voice of the howling of the shepherds, for their glory is spoiled. A voice of the roaring of young lions, for the pride of Jordan is spoiled._

This language is highly figurative, no doubt; yet is it interspersed with expressions, which almost preclude the possibility of its misapplication; for _the cedars of Lebanon_, and _the oaks of Bashan_, are next, by a change of metaphor, called, _the shepherds of the flock_; and soon after, dropping the metaphor entirely, it appears that they are the rich and the great, who sacrifice their flock to avarice and ambition. Their hopes, however, were frustrated, in the appearance of a spiritual, instead of a temporal prince, and an exultation over their disappointed ambition forms the exordium to this chapter, which may be explained as follows:—

Literally, the shepherds are supposed to howl for the loss of their rich pastures on mount Carmel, the forest of the vintage; and the lions to roar for the loss of their covert, the thickets on the banks of Jordan, the pride of the river, which, with other trees, are doomed to destruction; but the figurative meaning is, that the priests and rulers of Israel should be disappointed of their hopes of worldly greatness at the Messiah’s coming, and be deprived, under the new dispensation, of their power and influence.

The lamentation over their frustrated hopes, is next coupled with expressions of compassion for their misguided flock, whom they had doomed to the slaughter; that is, by depriving them of _the life which is in Christ_. This flock, the prophet is commanded to feed.

_Thus saith the Lord my God. Feed the flock of the slaughter, whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty. And they that sell them say, Blessed be the Lord for I am rich. And their own shepherds pity them not._

Avarice is thus foreshewn to be the vice which would lead the priests to reject Christ; the sending of whom is next declared to be the last act of Divine interposition in behalf of Israel; those who reject him being thenceforward left to themselves.

_For I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, saith the Lord, but, lo! I will deliver the men every one into his neighbour’s hand, and into the hand of his shepherd, and they shall smite the land, and out of their hand I will not deliver them._

But while further interposition is thus denied to those who reject Christ, being the rich and the great; spiritual food is expressly promised to those who receive him, who were the poor and the meek.

_But I will feed the flock of the slaughter, even you, O poor of the flock._

The food here promised to those who are willing to receive it, cannot be any other than spiritual food; that is, the knowledge to discern truth from falsehood, and the grace to make a proper election between right and wrong. To the poor, this was given, of whom Christ declared that “_Theirs was the kingdom of Heaven_:” to the rich it was not given, of whom he declared, “_That it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle_,” than for them to enter his kingdom.

We now come to the events to which this introductory matter is intended to lead us; and to render the prophetic annunciation the more impressive, it is typically represented by actions, as well as expressed by words. This is the most important part of the prophecy; that on which it may be said that the whole interpretation hinges. And yet it is here that the Christian is at fault, and that the Jew expects a certain triumph: nor without reason, when our ablest commentators disagree, or even acknowledge the difficulties to be insurmountable. Whether they are removed by the proposed exposition, the reader must decide; and to enable him to do so, we shall state them as briefly as possible.

The events alluded to will, with the Christian, scarcely admit of doubt, for the passage before us is cited in the Gospel of Matthew, though by some error, it is there ascribed to Jeremiah instead of Zechariah. But were the citation in question even supposed to be a marginal note, which had found its way into the text in transcribing, still the purport of the prophecy would be not the less manifest, for the connection of this with the context, and the unity of the whole, sufficiently declare the subject.

The events foreshewn, are the death of Christ; the dissolution of the old, and the founding of the new covenant; the rejection of this latter by the great body of the Jewish nation, and their immediate forfeiture of the benefits it affords; with other circumstances attending these events, such as the betrayal of Christ for thirty pieces of silver; the employment of this money in the purchase of the potter’s field; the separation of the Jews, who rejected Christ, from those who received him; and the evils entailed upon those who, having rejected the true, followed after false Messiahs. These are the circumstances shadowed forth in the prophecy; but to give a consistent explanation of every part of it, and to shew the exact adaptation of the events to the prediction, constitute the difficulty.

The typical actions of the prophet, consist in his taking two staves, or crooks; first affixing to each of them a significant denomination, and then breaking them in succession; accompanying this action with explanations, declaratory of the purport of his doing so. Yet is the whole highly mystical, and in parts so obscure, that Dr. Blayney acknowledges he cannot solve these difficulties; an avowal that would have been rendered unnecessary, had his predecessor Lowth been more successful. Their failure seems chiefly to have arisen from their misconceiving, in the first place, whom the prophet here personates in the character of the shepherd; and, in the next, what the staves are intended to represent; for the general purport of the whole, is rightly understood by both to be an allusion to the death of Christ, and the completion of his mission. Accordingly, Lowth supposes the shepherd to personate the Messiah, as the shepherd of his flock. But the Messiah is throughout the person spoken of, rather than the speaker, as will presently appear. Blayney also considers the prophet as a type of the Messiah; but supposes him sometimes to speak in his own name, as being himself the shepherd. Not to dwell on the want of consistency in this change of character, its avowed inadequacy to furnish the solution required, is alone a sufficient refutation of it.

That the prophet is the actual speaker is clear, but he speaks in the name of the Almighty, as is distinctly declared three times at least in the present chapter. The great Shepherd is then no other than God himself; and all mankind are his flock. Who are the staves, or crooks, we have next to inquire.

The staff, or crook, is the shepherd’s implement, with which he tends his flock, protecting them on the one hand, or correcting them on the other. Hence the two names adapted to the two-fold office, which might be rendered Pleasure and Pain, instead of Beauty and Bands; but there is no occasion to alter the translation, which is equally literal, and equally appropriate as it stands. It is, perhaps, worthy of note, that two staves were once in use for these different purposes. What are these staves then intended to represent? In a word, God being the Shepherd, and all mankind his flock, the staves appear to be typical of _Christ_ and _Israel_; these being the agents employed, the great instruments in the hands of God, in accomplishing the work of man’s redemption, from the darkness of idolatry to the light of true religion. One staff being _Israel_, with whom was founded the Old Covenant, the express object of which was the abolition of idolatry; a covenant which is continually called the “_bondage of the law_;” and the other staff, _Christ_, the founder of the New Covenant, called “_the beauty of holiness_” who declared that his yoke was easy, or pleasant; thus the name will be equally appropriate, whichever translation is adopted.

_And I took unto me two staves, the one I called __ Beauty, and the other I called Bands, and I fed the flock._

The parallelism between these two staves strikingly appears in the circumstance that the most remarkable prophecies, as the liiid. chapter of Isaiah, which the Christian conceives to be exactly fulfilled in the person and character of Christ, the Jew imagines to accord as perfectly with the circumstances and condition of the house of Israel. May we not suppose them to be designedly applicable to both? instrumental alike to the same great purpose, man’s redemption from idolatry.

One of the earliest acts of Christ, who, however, did every thing in the name of the Father, was his exposing the unfitness of the Jewish leaders, who were the priests, the scribes, and the elders, to be the spiritual guides of the flock. Their selfishness and hypocrisy he unsparingly denounced, as rendering them unfit for such an office; of which they were consequently deprived under the new dispensation. Such appears to be the purport of the following verse, as ably expounded by Lowth.

_Three shepherds also I cut off in one month, and my soul loathed them, and their soul also abhorred me._

_One month_, is an indefinite expression for a short time, as if the prophet had said, _at once_. When the people had been duly warned against these treacherous guides; those who chose to disregard that warning, had no reason to complain, if it pleased Heaven to leave them to their fate, as is next declared.

_Then said I, I will not feed you; that that dieth, let it die, and that that is to be cut off, let it be cut off; and let the rest eat every one the flesh of another._

The prophet next foreshews, by typical actions, accompanied by explanations declaratory of their purport, the death of Christ, and the dissolution of the Old Covenant.

_And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it asunder; that I might break my Covenant, which I made with all the people._

The Covenant with Moses promised protection against all nations, while Israel remained obedient. Israel disobeyed and the Covenant was broken. The Covenant with Abraham promised blessing to all nations through his seed. The Gospel of Christ was that blessing; refused by the Jews, and consequently given to the Gentiles; for a remnant only of Israel received the Gospel, and those were the poor of the flock.

_And it was broken in that day, and so the poor of the flock that waited upon me, knew that it was the word of the Lord._

“The poor had the Gospel preached unto them,” and received it with gratitude; but the ingratitude of their leaders towards the Great Shepherd, for the care he had so long taken of them; and the small estimation in which they held a spiritual Messiah, are aptly foreshewn by the prophet, in the name of the Great Shepherd, claiming his reward at their hands, and their offering the precise sum which was given for Christ, thirty pieces of silver.

_And I said, If ye think good give me my wages, and if not, forbear; so they weighed me for my reward, thirty pieces of silver._

The way in which this money was actually bestowed, is next foreshewn, by the Shepherd’s rejecting it scornfully, and desiring it may be given to the potter.

_And the Lord said unto me, cast it to the potter; a goodly price that I was valued at by them: so I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord._

The price they actually gave for Christ, aptly denotes the value they put upon God’s goodness in sending him, the Great Shepherd’s proffered remuneration. The house of the Lord, or the temple, is the supposed scene of action, shewing the spiritual import of the transaction. The money being given to the potter, foreshews how it would be actually employed, to wit, in the purchase of the potter’s field; in fact, it was given to the potter. If it be asked what the potter had to do in the temple? the answer is, he went there, as others did, to pray. His being there does not, as some suppose, imply that he was at work there.

Those who rejected and crucified Christ, are thenceforward rejected from being God’s chosen people. As Christ was cut off from natural life, so Israel was cut off from _the life in Christ_ as next intimated.

_Then I cut asunder my other staff, even Bands, __ that I might break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel._

The house of Jacob was from this time divided into Christians and Jews, who appear to be distinguished in the prophecy under the types of Judah and Israel; the former denoting those who received, and the latter those who rejected Christ. This distinction appears to be maintained till their promised re-union in the New Jerusalem.

The spiritual evils entailed on those who reject the true Messiah, to follow after false teachers, are next foreshewn.

_And the Lord said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd, for I will raise up a Shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut of, neither shall seek the young, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still, but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their hoofs asunder._

Israel is thus left to the mercy of these false shepherds, while spiritual blindness, infatuation, and utter helplessness, are the awful judgments denounced against the selfish and worldly-minded priesthood, who thus mislead and sacrifice their flock.

_Woe to the idol shepherd, that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye; his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened._

The spiritual blindness which has since darkened the mental vision of Israel, appears to the Christian to be here distinctly foretold.

NOTES TO CHAPTER XI.

Ver. 1. פתח לבנון דלתיך—_Open thy doors, O Lebanon, &c._

That Jewish writers have understood “_the forest_,” as metaphorically representing Jerusalem with her stately buildings, and “_Lebanon_,” as the temple itself, appears from the following note of Mr. Lowth, on this passage.

“By Lebanon, most interpreters understand the temple, whose stately buildings resemble the tall cedars of that forest. Thus the word is commonly understood,” Hab. ii. 17.

There is a remarkable story mentioned in the Jewish writers to this purpose. Some time before the destruction of the temple, the doors of it opened of their own accord; a circumstance mentioned by Josephus, Bell. Jud. 1. 7. c. 12. Then R. Johanan, a disciple of R. Hillel, directing his speech to the temple said, _I know thy destruction is at hand, according to the prophecy of Zechariah_, Open thy doors, O Lebanon, &c.

The passage in Josephus in my edition is, lib. 6, cap. 5, and a very remarkable one it is, containing many other portents preceding the destruction of the temple, besides the spontaneous opening of these massive doors, which were so ponderous as to require twenty men to open and shut them.

Ver. 2. כי ירד יער הבצור—_For the forest of the vintage is come down._

By the forest of the vintage, is understood Mount Carmel, which was partly covered with vineyards and rich pastures, for the loss of which the shepherds are said to howl, in the following verse. The shepherds metaphorically designate the leaders of the people; the different trees of the forest denoting the different classes and orders of men.

Ver. 3. כי שדד גאון הירדן—_For the pride of Jordan is spoiled._

By the pride of Jordan is to be understood, as Dr. Blayney observes, the woods and thickets on the banks of that river. These served as covert for lions, which often infested the country when driven from them by the rising of the river. These trees being along with others doomed to destruction, the lions roar for the loss of their shelter, as the shepherds howl for the loss of their rich pastures. The lions denote metaphorically the great and powerful among the people. Their disposition to prey upon and devour the flock, well accords with the character afterwards given to the shepherds also, and shews the consistency of the metaphorical language.

Ver. 6. כי לא אחמול עוד על ישבי הארץ—_For I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, &c._

The distinction between _the sea_ and _the land_, has been already pointed out in the note to ver. 11, of the last chapter, and is here too manifest to admit of doubt. Lebanon, Bashan, Carmel, and Jordan, clearly shew what land is here spoken of, which can be no other than Palestine.

Ver. 10. להפיר את בריתי—_That I might break my covenant, &c._

It might be supposed here that the two staves were typical of the two covenants; the Old and the New. But how is the parallelism then to be supported? If the breaking of one staff denotes the dissolving of the Old Covenant; what then is denoted by the breaking of the other staff? for the New Covenant was not also dissolved. By the proposed solution, the parallelism is maintained; Christ and Israel so exactly accord, that the prophecies seem, in many points, alike applicable to either. Both were instrumental to the great work of redeeming mankind from idolatry, and both were cut of; Christ from natural life; Israel from the life which is _in Christ_. To understand clearly the cutting of the staves, the most intricate subject perhaps in the whole prophecy, the reader has to keep in view two distinct points of consideration, the confounding of which will involve him in no little perplexity; these are, first the symbolical meaning, or the event foreshewn by the act of cutting; and secondly, the end or purport of the cutting; for along with the act, the prophet also declares the motive for the act, which must not be confounded with the act itself, being the effect or consequence that followed that act. Thus he says—_And I took my staff Beauty and cut it asunder, that I might break my covenant, which I had made with all the people._

Now the cutting of the first staff, Beauty, signifies or foreshews the death of Christ, or the cutting off of the Messiah. This is the symbolical meaning of the act. But the end or consequence of that act, was the cessation of the covenant of protection to Israel. “The covenant,” as it may be rendered, “concerning all the people.” From that time, the Jews ceased to be under the especial care and protection of Heaven; no more interpositions were manifested in their behalf; no prophet from that time appeared in Israel; these blessings being confined to the Jews who received Christ, or transferred to the Gentiles.

Next follows the cutting asunder of the second staff, Bands; and this in fact appears to be precisely the end or consequence of the cutting of the first staff; for the cutting of this staff symbolically foreshews the rejection of Israel, or the cessation of the Covenant of protection. Such appears to be the event symbolized by cutting the staff, Bands. But the effect or consequence of that event, or of the rejection of Israel, was as declared in the prophecy, a breach in the brotherhood, between Judah and Israel, or between the Jews who received and those who rejected Christ; in short, between Christian and Jew, who are here supposed to be symbolised by Judah and Israel. This division or breach was not the event foreshewn by the cutting of the staff, but the end or consequence of that act; and this distinction requires to be kept clearly in view.

It seems immaterial whether the symbolical meaning of cutting asunder the second staff, Bands, be expressed by the rejection of Israel, the breaking of the covenant of protection, or the abrogation of the law of Moses; for all these events are so closely connected, or so nearly identical, as scarcely to admit of their being disjoined or distinguished.

Ver. 12. הבו שכרי—_Give me my price._

From the failure of former commentators, in shewing how this can apply to the betrayal of Christ, when the word שכרי (or ירכש) is rendered, as it should be, _wages_ or _reward_, instead of _price_, the Jew seems to have been so confident of victory on this point, that on referring to his exposition which follows, it will appear that he must have written it without having read mine, to which it is any thing but an answer, as I have expounded the passage precisely upon his own mode of rendering. The correctness of this translation was acquiesced in by Dr. Blaney, who admitted the difficulty it involved, and candidly acknowledged his inability to solve it; nor while Christ is considered the speaker, as he and Lowth suppose, does the removal of it appear practicable. But when God himself is understood to be the Shepherd, and Christ, the staff Beauty, it appears no longer insurmountable.

Ver. 13. :ואקח שלשים הכסף ואשליך אתו בית יהוה אל היוצר

_And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord._

The word יוצר (or רצוי), is by the Jew changed into אוצר (or רצוא) the alteration of a letter being all that is required to substitute _the treasury_, in the room of _the potter_. But he cannot deny, that the word means potter in the original, and the Christian will find no occasion to alter it, to make sense of the passage. The objection, that the potter could not be at work in the temple, which was urged by the Jew, has been answered in the exposition.

Ver. 17. הוי רעי האליל—_Woe to the idol shepherd._

The _idol_ might be rendered, as Mr. Lowth observes, _worthless_, or of no value, as it is, Job xiii. 4, and so the Jew renders it. Though a shepherd, in the singular number, is here spoken of, yet a succession of such shepherds is clearly to be understood; and it is probable that the chiefs and rulers of Israel are intended here, as well as the false Messiahs who have from time to time arisen, and partially misled the people, being alike false guides, who have contributed to the destruction of the flock. A history of the false Messiahs, amounting to not less than twenty, who have at different times made their appearance; with an account of the numbers and destruction of their infatuated followers, being too long for insertion here, may be found by the reader in Dr. Jortin’s Remarks on Eccles. Hist.; presenting a lamentable picture of the blindness and infatuation of this wretched people.

THE RABBI’S TRANSLATION. CHAPTER XI.

1. Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars.

2. Howl, fir tree; for the cedar is fallen; because the mighty are spoiled; howl, ye oaks of Bashan; for the forest of the vintage is come down.

3. There is a voice of the howling of the shepherds, for their glory is spoiled; a voice of the roaring of young lions; for the pride of Jordan is spoiled.

4. Thus saith the Lord my God, Feed the flock of the slaughter.

5. Whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty, and they that sell them, say, Blessed be the Lord; for I am rich; and their own shepherds pity them not.

6. For I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, saith the Lord; but, lo! I will deliver the men, every one into his neighbour’s hand, and into the hand of his king, and they shall smite the land, and out of their hand I will not deliver them.

7. Yea, I fed the flock of the slaughter, truly an afflicted flock it was, and I took unto me two staves; the one I called Pleasant, and the other I called Painful, and I fed the flock.

8. And when I had cut off three shepherds in one month; then my soul loathed them, and their souls also abhorred me.

9. Then said I, I will not feed you; that that dieth, let it die; and that that is missed, let it be missed; and let the rest eat every one the flesh of another.

10. And I took my staff, the Pleasant, and cut it asunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made (for them) with all the nations.

11. And it was broken in that day, and so the afflicted flock, that waited upon me, knew that it was the word of the Lord.

12. And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my reward; and if not, forbear; and they weighed for my reward thirty pieces of silver.

13. And the Lord said unto me, Cast it into the treasury, the magnanimous, the precious, that I have withdrawn from them; and I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them into the house of the Lord, into the treasury.

14. Then I cut asunder my other staff, the Painful, to break the brotherhood between Judah, and Israel.

15. And the Lord said unto me, Take unto thee, yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd.

16. For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, who shall not remember those that are missed, nor seek the young, nor heal the broken one, nor feed that that stands still, but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their hoofs asunder.

17. Woe to the worthless shepherds, who leave the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be quite dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened.

THE RABBI’S EXPOSITION. CHAPTER XI.

Verse 1. This prophecy Christians cannot but consider impenetrable, and must be satisfied to break off a few fragments, which may serve to cement their religion; for in whatever manner they expound the import of the two staves, they must still be incompetent to link its various parts together, so as to shew that it refers to what they think it necessarily must, namely, the selling of the Messiah; an interpretation which an impartial examiner must find inconsistent with that passage even if disjoined from all the rest, since there, wages, or reward (not price) is spoken of; this being desired, or required of Israel, while with him who was sold it was quite the reverse; so far was he from wishing to be betrayed, that he tried and prayed to escape it. The Jew, however, considering the tenour of the whole, contends that this was no more than what had been already fulfilled at the time when it was delivered, the allusion here being historical and not prophetic.

It commences with predicting to other nations (who are compared to fir, and oak trees,) destruction inevitable, since the shepherds of Judah also (who are compared to the lions by the Jordan, to the vine and the cedar,) howl for having been spoiled of their glory. The prophet then goes on, in calling to the minds of his brethren the causes that brought them so low from their former exalted station, in order that this may serve them as a warning no more to deviate from the way in which they were instructed to walk: he also reminds them with what particular and providential care they had been continually led on by their God, in one or other of the different ways stated, the pleasant, or the painful, as by a tender shepherd, whose sole intent is to lead his flock to rich pastures, and good watering places. In this manner did God tend his flock, Israel, to accomplish their happiness, indulging them when obedient to his will, but chastising them, when otherwise, as an indulgent father would his children, in order to reclaim them. And when we consider the circumstances and condition of our fathers during the first temple, we may easily trace out both the times when they enjoyed uninterrupted peace and comfort, and those, when they were exposed to troubles and afflictions, which God in his wisdom saw fit to visit upon them. To these does the prophet refer, representing them by this beautiful metaphor of the two staves.

Ver. 5. The cruel shepherds denote the tyrants into whose hands Israel was delivered, who disdained to nourish that poor flock, but sold some to slavery, and gave up others to be slaughtered.

Ver. 6. And such as escaped the fury of their own kings were ravaged by their conquerors.

Ver. 7. _I fed the flock._—i. e. Since I have chosen them to me out of Egypt.

Ver. 8. _When I had cut off three shepherds._—The number three as well as seven is well known to be made use of in Scripture, instead of an indefinite number; this apparently refers to what is related in 2 Kings, ch. x. v. 32, that in those days the Lord began to be weary of Israel; it was after the kings of Judah and Israel were killed, the family of the one exterminated, and that of the other nearly so.

Ver. 10. _A covenant made for them with all the nations_; that is, that these nations should not disturb Israel, nor invade their land, but leave them to dwell there in safety, as was repeatedly promised to them. Exod. xxxiv. 24; Lev. xxvi. 5; Deut. xxviii. 10. But when under the divine displeasure, that covenant was suspended, and not only the land of the ten tribes, but also that of Judah was frequently invaded, and both were harassed by their enemies.

Ver. 12. The reward which God required of his people means, that for the many blessings he had conferred on them, they should be obedient to his commandments. Yet he left it to their choice, to forbear if disinclined, agreeably to the message sent to them by Ezek. ch. iii. v. 27; and accordingly some few remained faithful to him, and these answer to the thirty pieces of silver. Thirty as well as ten sometimes imply an indefinite number. See Dan, i. 20; Gen. xxxi. 7. They are named silver (כסף (or ףסכ)) as this originally meant desirable.

Ver. 13. They are to be cast into the treasury—יוצר (or רצוי), though translated the potter, stands for אוצר (רצוא), the treasury. And again, בית יהוה אל היוצר (or רצויה לא הוהי תיב) is the same as אל בית האוצר (or רצואה תיב לא) (Mal. iii. 10), or the storehouse of the Lord, viz. the temple. The frequent interchange of the אהרי (or יוחא) letters is well known to the Hebrew scholar. The temple is here indicated as the place where the pure ones, separated from the dross, should fix their eyes on the Most High, and with prayers appease his wrath, that he might yet avert the approaching calamities. יקרתי (or יתרקי) signifies _I have withdrawn_, not _I was prized at_. See Proverbs xxv. 17, where it means _withdraw thy foot_.

Ver. 14. _Cut asunder the other staff._ While the two kings lived in peace and harmony, the one was corrupted by the wickedness of the other, and therefore the chastening rod was applied for the purpose of breaking their brotherhood; but that staff was dispensed with, when by the dissolution of one of these kings, the cause for it ceased.

Ver. 16. _I will raise up a shepherd, &c._ Judah has likewise to lament to this day having been governed by foolish shepherds during both the first and second temple, who did neither remember the missed, nor heal the broken, and instead of feeding them that stood still, they fed upon them, and tore their hoofs asunder. Yet as the survivors stand to this day a living monument of the literal accomplishment of this prophecy from verse 15, it serves them as a sure pledge of the fulfilment of that which follows.

ZECHARIAH ON THE MESSIAH’S KINGDOM. INTERPRETATION: CHAPTER XII.

Of the occurrences which succeeded the crucifixion of Christ, one of the first in order, as well as importance, was the destruction of Jerusalem; an event which materially changed the condition of the Jewish nation, both as regarded their polity and their religion; to the full exercise of which the existence of their temple was indispensable. It was therefore to be expected that the prediction of this event would be eagerly sought for by Christian commentators, in a prophecy relating to the establishment of the Messiah’s kingdom, especially by those who chiefly look to political affairs for its fulfilment.

And accordingly this chapter appears to afford distinct intimation of such an event, as it opens with the express mention of the siege of Jerusalem. Yet is it mentioned in a way not a little embarrassing to the political exposition; for, instead of the destruction, the prophecy declares the triumph of Jerusalem; and, with the exception of one or two ambiguous expressions at the commencement, this triumph forms the whole subject of the chapter. But Jerusalem really was taken and destroyed, nor have the Jews since been able to rebuild either their city or their temple, nor has any thing approaching to a triumph, in the ordinary acceptation of the term, occurred to them from that time to the present. How then shall we explain the victory and triumph foretold in the prophecy?

The solution appears to be this; that the event here foretold is no political, but a spiritual siege; namely, the warfare of worldly feelings against true religion, for this is the spiritual Jerusalem. The abrogation of the law, and the promulgation of the Gospel, are foreshewn under the types of the Old and the New Jerusalem; which symbolically signify the Old and New Covenant, or Judaism and Christianity, the one abolished and the other established, in reality at the coming of Christ, but ostensibly at the destruction of the city and temple, which is probably on this account employed symbolically, to represent the spiritual change.

The prophecy, however, does not declare the destruction of the old Jerusalem, but merely the repeopling of it, in verse 6; and in the spiritual sense it was not destroyed, though merged in the superior splendour and greatness of the New City; for Christianity is built on the foundation of Judaism. The new Jerusalem here spoken of, is then, the new Covenant, or Christianity, the spiritual City, the building of which began at this time, whatever may be the period required for its completion.

In the spiritual sense also must be understood the triumph of Judah, which was the triumph of the Gospel; and her salvation, spoken of in verse 7, which was eternal salvation. Her victory was the victory over the world, which every true Christian has to gain, but which was first gained by Judah, for the first Christians were Jews; although the Gentiles were subsequently admitted into the Church of Christ, and became the principal inhabitants of the spiritual Jerusalem, when deserted, for the most part at least, by its former inhabitants the Jews. The Gentiles from this time became Israelites by adoption, and the distinction between Jew and Gentile converts, or lineal and adopted Israelites, is marked in the prophecy, as might be expected.