Part 2
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.
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 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 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 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.
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 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 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 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, 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 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 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 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 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 __ 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 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 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, _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 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, “_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._
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, 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 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.