ON CHAPTER II. 23.

"_And, ye sons of Zion, exult and rejoice in Jehovah your God; for He

giveth you the Teacher of righteousness, and then He poureth down upon

you rain, the former rain and the latter rain, for the first time._"

The words, "In Jehovah your God," are an addition peculiar to the sons

of Zion. In reference to the _earth_, which the locusts had devastated,

it was in ver. 21 said only, "Fear not, exult and rejoice." In

reference to the beasts, _i.e._, to the heathen world, which was kept

in subjection by the conquerors of the world, but which is delivered by

the great deeds of the Lord, it is in ver. 22 said only: "Fear not."

They are only the sons of Zion who know and love the Author of

Salvation, and who receive from Him special gifts, besides the general

ones.

There is considerable difference in the interpretations of this verse.

The words, את־המורה לצדקה, are, by the greater number of interpreters,

translated, "The Teacher of righteousness." Thus, _Jonathan_, the

_Vulgate_, _Jarchi_, _Abarbanel_, _Grotius_, and almost all the

interpreters of the early Lutheran Church translate them. Others take

מורה in the signification of "rain," and לצדקה as qualifying its nature

more accurately. Even in ancient times, this explanation was not at all

uncommon. Among the Rabbinical interpreters, it was held by _Kimchi_,

_Abenezra_, _S. B. Melech_, who explain it of a _timely_ rain.

_Calvin_, who rendered the לצדקה by _justa mensura_, defends it with

great decision, and declares the other explanations to be forced, and

unsuitable to the connection. It is translated by "rain" in the

English[1] and Genevan versions, and by many Calvinistic interpreters,

who differ, however, in the translation of לצדקה, and render it either:

"In right time," or "in right measure," or "in the right place," or

"for His righteousness," or "according to your righteousness."

_Marckius_ is of opinion that "rain" is necessarily required by the

context; but that, on account of לצדקה, this rain must be understood

spiritually of the Messiah with His saving doctrine, and His Spirit.

Among the interpreters of the Lutheran Church, _Seb. Schmid_ thinks of

"a rain in due season." [Pg 326] Among modern interpreters, the

explanation by "rain" has become altogether so prevalent, that it is

considered scarcely of any importance even to mention the other. לצדקה

is explained by _Eckermann_: "In proof of His good pleasure;" by

_Ewald_, _Meier_, and _Umbreit_: "For justification;" by _Justi_: "For

fruitfulness;" and by the others (_Rosenmüller_, _Holzhausen_,

_Credner_, _Rückert_, _Maurer_, and _Hitzig_) by: "In right measure."

We consider this explanation to be decidedly erroneous, and the other

to be the sound one; and this for the following reasons:--1. The great

difference, on the part of the defenders of the current opinion, as

regards the explanation of לצדקה certainly indicates, with sufficient

clearness, that, by this addition, a considerable obstruction is put in

its way. The most current explanation, by "_justa mensura_," "in right

measure," "sufficiently," is certainly quite untenable. Even the fact,

that it is not צדק but צדקה which is used here, must excite suspicion.

(On the difference betwixt these two words, compare _Ewald_ in the

first edition of his Grammar, S. 312-13.) But what is quite decisive is

the fact that these two words, which occur with such extraordinary

frequency, are never found in a physical, but always in a moral sense

only. The only passage in which, according to _Winer_, צדק signifies

"rectitude" in a physical sense, is Ps. xxiii. 3: מעגלי צדק which,

according to him, means: "Straight, right ways." But that verse runs

thus: "He restoreth my soul, He leadeth me in the paths of

righteousness for His name's sake." The path is a spiritual one; it is

righteousness itself, which consists in the actual declaration of being

just, and in justification, which are implied in the gift of salvation.

With regard to צדקה, _Holzhausen_ (S. 120) maintains that it is used of

a measure which has its due size in Lev. xix. 35, 36. The words are

these: "Ye shall not do _unrighteousness_ in judgment, in measure, in

division. Balances of righteousness, weights of righteousness, ephas of

righteousness, shall ye have: I am the Lord your God who brought you

out of the land of Egypt." Even the contrast--so evident--with the

_unrighteousness_, shows distinctly that balances, measures, and

weights of righteousness are here such as belong to righteousness--are

in harmony with it. Even the root צדק never occurs in a physical sense,

but always, only in a moral sense. To this it must be added, that the

explanation, "Teacher of righteousness," [Pg 327] is recommended by the

parallel passage in Hos. x. 12, where, also, teaching occurs in

connection with righteousness: וירה צדק לכם, "And the Lord will come

and teach you righteousness." This parallel passage is also opposed to

_Ewald's_ explanation, "for justification,"--the only explanation among

those mentioned to which, it must be admitted, no philological

objection can be raised. But the thought, "The early rain an actual

justification of Israel," would be rather strange, and so much the more

so, because the wrath of God had not manifested itself in a drought and

want of water, but rather in the sending of the army of locusts.

2. That the giving of the מורה, in the first hemistich of the verse,

must denote a divine blessing different from the giving of the מורה in

the second, is evident for this reason:--that, otherwise, there would

arise a somewhat meaningless tautology. They who assigned to מורה in

the first hemistich, the signification of "rain in general," have felt

how very unsuitable is the twofold mention of the early rain. To this

must be added the use of the _Fut._ with _Vav convers._, ויורד. By this

form, an action is denoted which _follows_ from the preceding one; but

according to the current explanation, one and the same action would

here be expressed, only in different words. It cannot be denied,

indeed, that the form occurs by no means rarely in a weakened sense,

and is used only to express a connection; and that for this reason,

this argument is not, _per se_, conclusive. Yet the original

signification so generally holds, that we can abandon it only for

distinct and forcible reasons. In addition to this, it must be

considered that the addition of גשם to the second מורה distinctly marks

out the latter as being different in its meaning from the former. It

must also be kept in mind that it is one of the peculiarities of Joel

to use the same words and phrases, after brief intervals, in a

different sense; compare _Credner's_ remarks on ii. 20, iii. 5.

3. The explanation by "Teacher" is far more obvious for the reason that

מורה always occurs with the signification of "teacher" (even in Ps.

lxxxiv. 7, where the right translation is: "With blessing also the

teacher covereth himself"), and never with that of "rain," or "early

rain." This is rather the meaning of יורה; and the verb also never

occurs in _Hiphil_, as it does in _Kal_, with the signification "to

sprinkle," "to water." [Pg 328] By this we are led to the supposition

that Joel, in the second hemistich, made use of the uncommon form מורה

with the meaning of "early rain," solely on account of the resemblance

of the sound to the מורה occurring immediately before, with its usual

signification; and that, at the same time, he added גשם for the purpose

of avoiding ambiguity. What serves to confirm this supposition, is the

circumstance that Jeremiah, alluding to the passage under

consideration, has, in chap. v. 24, put יורה in the place of מורה;

which proves that the second מורה in Joel ii. 23 has originated only

from its connection with the first, which is altogether wanting in

Jeremiah.

4. A causal connection, similar to that which exists here betwixt the

sending of the Teacher of righteousness and the pouring out of the

rain, occurs also in that passage of the Pentateuch which the prophet

seems to have had in view, viz., Deut. xi. 13, 14: "And it shall come

to pass, _if ye shall hearken unto my commandments_ which I command you

this day, that ye love the Lord your God, and serve Him with all your

heart and with all your soul, that I will give you the rain of your

land in due season, the first rain and the latter rain (יורה ומלקוש),

and thou shalt gather in thy corn, and thy must, and thine oil." Here,

as well as there, the righteousness of the people is the _antecedens_;

the divine mercies and blessings are the _consequens_. Since the former

does not exist, God begins the course of His mercies by sending Him who

calls it forth. This remark removes, at the same time, the objection,

that the mention of the Teacher of righteousness is unsuitable in a

connection where the prophet speaks of temporal blessings only, and

rises to spiritual blessings only afterwards, in chap. iii. There

existed for the Covenant-people no benefits which were purely temporal;

these were always, at the same time, signs and pledges of the divine

favour, which depended upon the righteousness of the people, and this,

in turn, upon the divine mission of a Teacher of righteousness.

5. The בראשון is also in favour of our explanation. It stands in close

relation to אחרי־כן in chap. iii. 1, ii. 28. The sending of the Teacher

of righteousness has two consequences;--_first_, the pouring out of the

temporal rain--an individualizing designation of every kind of outward

blessings, and chosen with a reference to the passage of the Pentateuch

which we have just [Pg 329] cited, but with special reference to the

description of the calamity, under the figure of a devastation by

locusts;--and, _secondly_, the outpouring of the spiritual rain--the

sending of the Holy Ghost. It needs only the pointing out of this

reference, which has been overlooked by interpreters,[2] to set aside

the manifold and different explanations of בראשון which are, all of

them, unphilological, or give an unsuitable sense.[3]

But if any doubt should still remain, it would be removed by a parallel

passage in Isaiah, which depends upon the text under review, in a

manner not to be mistaken, and which, therefore, must be regarded as

the oldest commentary upon it. Isaiah is describing the condition of

the people subsequent to their having obtained mercy, after a long time

of deep misery, in chap. xxx 20: "And the Lord gives you the bread of

adversity, and the water of affliction; and then thy _teacher_ (מוריך

is _singular_) shall no longer hide himself, and thine eyes shall see

thy teacher; Ver. 21: And thine ears hear a word behind thee, This is

the way, walk ye in it; do not turn to the right hand, nor to the

left." Accordingly, after they have put away what was evil, ver. 22:

"The Lord giveth the rain of thy seed, with which thou sowest thy

land," etc., ver. 23. The teacher is not a human teacher, but God.

_Human_ teachers had not concealed themselves; but that the Lord had

concealed Himself, is affirmed in the preceding verses. The words,

"Behind thee" (ver. 21), suggest the idea of a teacher of such a glory

that they could not look in his face (compare Rev. i. 10); and the

words, "Thine eyes see thy teacher," ver. 20, imply the idea of the

high majesty of the teacher, and suggest the idea of a revelation of

the glory of the Lord; compare Is. xl. 5, lii. 8. The Lord must first

manifest Himself as a Teacher, before He appears as a Saviour. In

Isaiah, the Lord Himself appears as the Teacher; as also in Hos. x. 12:

"It is time to seek the Lord, till He [Pg 330] come and teach you

righteousness;" while in Joel, on the contrary, it is the Lord who

giveth the Teacher. Both may be reconciled by the consideration, that

in the Teacher whom the Lord gives, the glory of the Lord becomes

manifest.

It now only remains to inquire who is to be understood by the Teacher

of righteousness. (Teacher of righteousness is equivalent to: "Teaching

them how they should fear the Lord," 2 Kings xvii. 28.) It is referred

to the Messiah, not only by almost all those Christian interpreters who

follow this explanation, with the exception of _Grotius_, who

conjectures that Isaiah or some other prophet is to be thereby

understood; but also, after the example of _Jonathan_, by several

Jewish commentators; _e.g._, _Abarbanel_, who says: "This teacher of

righteousness, however, is the King Messiah, who will show the way in

which we must walk, and the works which we must do." Even on account of

the article, it is not possible to refer it to a single human teacher;

and this argument may, at the same time, be added to those which oppose

the explanation of מורה by "an early rain." There can be only the

choice betwixt the Messiah as the long promised Teacher κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν,

and the _ideal_ teacher,--the collective body of all divine teachers.

But the latter view requires to be somewhat raised, before it can be

allowed to enter into the competition. That we have not here before us

an ordinary collective body, is shown by the parallel passage in

Isaiah, according to which the glory of the Lord is to be manifested in

the Teacher. And this is as little applicable to a plurality of human

teachers, as to a single individual. It is _further_ proved by the

fundamental passage in Deut. xviii. 18, 19, where, indeed, the

prophetic order is comprehended in an _ideal_ person. This, however,

has its reason only in the circumstance, that the idea of prophetism

was, at some future time, to find its realization in a _real_ person.

It is _further_ seen from the state of the Messianic hopes at the time

of Joel, and from the exceeding greatness of what is here connected

with the appearance of the Teacher of righteousness. In addition to the

allusion in Gen. xlix. 10 and Deut. xviii., the Messiah appears as a

Teacher in the Song of Solomon also, chap. viii. 2; and in Is. lv. 4:

"Behold, I give Him for a witness to the people, for a prince and a

lawgiver to the people;" as also in those passages of the second part

of Isaiah, in which He is declared to be the Prophet κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν. [Pg

331] When thus understood, the explanation of the _ideal_ teacher may

be preferable to the reference to Christ exclusively. In favour of such

a reference, there is the comprehensive character and the _ideal_

import which are, in general, peculiar to the prophecies of Joel. Such

a reference is, moreover, favoured by the expression itself, which

points out only that which Christ has in common with the former

servants of God, viz., the teaching of righteousness, and especially by

a comparison with the fundamental passages, Deut. xviii.

Footnote 1: The English version has "a teacher of righteousness," as a

marginal reading.--Tr.

Footnote 2: Since the appearance of the first edition of this work, it

has been acknowledged also by _Ewald_, _Meier_, and _Umbreit_.

Footnote 3: _Hitzig_ explains it: "In the first month." But altogether

apart from the consideration that it is only in a chronological

connection that "in the first" can stand for "in the first _month_,"

this explanation is objectionable on the ground that the early rain and

the latter rain cannot, by any means, belong to the same month. There

is the less difficulty in explaining it by "first," as בראשונה

undeniably occurs, several times, in this signification; compare,

_e.g._, Zech. xii. 7.

Christology of the Old Testament: And a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions, Vol. 1 · 第 37 / 74 题