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

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 y

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 u

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 a

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. The burden of the Lord is also touching Hamath, which was bordering on the former; also Tyre, and Sidon, which thought herself very wise; yet her wisdom availed her nothing, as was also foretold by Ezekiel, chap. xxvii. ver. 32. Verse 4. Behold the Lord will make her poor, and smit

In the same verse, the Rabbi's rendering of מנחתו (or ותחנמ) his residence , must, of course, stand or fall with the previous question, Whether Hadrach be the name of a man or a city? If it be that of a prince, whose residence was Damascus, I have only to observe, that no such person appears to have resided there at the time the prophet wrote, and this is the only time that can accord with the Rabbi's translation. With regard to the last line of this verse, which the Rabbi renders nearly in the

The present will be found to contain somewhat less variety of incident, with more of exhortations and promises than the preceding. These are more particularly addressed to the house of Judah, but their subsequent extension to “ them of Ephraim ” also, is a circumstance that calls for some explanation, without which it would be difficult to shew the chronological order of the events foretold. Ephraim, or the ten tribes, had gone into captivity long before the time when the prophecy was uttered, w

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

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 l

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, instea

“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 dest

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 m

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

But the time of Israel's spiritual restoration requires some explanation, being adverted to in this and the following chapter ten times at least, with the definite expression of “ in that day :” an expression which seems as little to accord with the time required for a whole nation or people to change their faith, as with that which would be requisite for their literal return from all parts of the world to be reunited in one city, as the Jews understand the prophecy. A literal day cannot therefo

This is certainly no violation of the text, as the relative pronoun is often understood in Hebrew. But still I hold it to be a rule not to insert a relative unless the sense requires it, and I see no such necessity here, as either of the preceding nominatives, namely, the burden of the prophecy , or the cup of trembling , may govern the verb shall be , and thus we have, as I have rendered it, and also upon Judah it shall be, in the siege against Jerusalem ; by which I understand the burden shall

The change of person clearly proves, that it is not he who was pierced, to whom they will look; but it must be considered as if it were והביטו על אשר דקרו (or ורקד רשא לע וטיבהו), or אלי על את אשר דקרו (or ורקד רשא תא לע ילא) particles are well known to be frequently omitted or exchanged. This may either allude to those who had been formerly slain for their bold admonitions and warnings; or to those who will hereafter be slain in battle. They who apply this to the Christian Messiah, have another

That day, as formerly explained, is to every one the day of his conversion to Christianity. The house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, here, as in the last chapter, symbolically represent the later converts to Christianity; as the house of Judah, which was first saved, signify the earlier Christians. The nature of the sin and pollution to be thus washed away, is next declared to be idolatry, and its abolition is foretold. And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord of hosts,

Verse 6. :ואמר אלין מה המכות האלה בין ידיך What are these wounds in thine hands? &c. Both Lowth and Blayney agree in regarding these words as an allusion to the custom of the idolatrous priests and prophets, of marking themselves in the hands. Their being challenged as the marks of Paganism, is a sufficient proof of their being so, and I have rendered it accordingly, marks instead of wounds . For if, as Blayney states, they were made by cutting and slashing themselves, still the marks, a

The conclusion of this chapter, and of the Prophecy, declares the final and complete establishment of the Messiah's kingdom; that happy period for which we are taught to pray in the words, “ Thy kingdom come. ” Concerning the nature of this kingdom, the Jew not only differs from the Christian, but Christians also differ from one another. Before I attempt to decide so difficult a question, I shall state the prevailing opinions, and what the prophets have said on the subject. The Jews expect, at t

Can such a state of the world, it may be asked, which shall be exempt from fanaticism on the one hand, and from infidelity on the other, be brought about without some miraculous interposition to alter the nature and constitution of the human mind? And does it comport with the usual ordinances of Providence, who seems to effect his purposes by natural means, to deviate in this instance, from the ordinary course of nature? It certainly does not appear so; and it would, no doubt, be more satisfacto