Verse 11. :גם את בדם בריתך שלחתי אסיריך מבר אין מים בו

_As for thee, by the blood of thy covenant, I have sent forth thy

prisoners, from the pit wherein is no water._

That the Messiah is apostrophized in these words, cannot, surely, admit of

doubt or dispute; and words more forcible, or more pregnant with meaning,

upon the Christian’s view of them, it is not easy to conceive. שלחתי (or

יתחלש) _I have sent forth_, is really the perfect tense, though written

several centuries before the coming of Christ; but it is not at all

unusual in prophetic language to use this tense, which represents as

already accomplished, what is determined in the Divine purpose, although

the fulfilment be still future.

The writer is well aware of a formidable objection presented by the Hebrew

punctuation, against the application of this verse to the Messiah, as the

pronoun “thee” את (or תא) is by the pointing made to be of the feminine

gender. This is one of many instances in which the punctuation tends to

embarrass instead of elucidating the subject of the prophecy—instances

which have mainly contributed to the determination of the writer to

disregard the points. It remains for those who regard them as of paramount

authority, to offer a solution of this and other passages equally clear

and satisfactory, and equally consistent throughout. If “thee” be meant to

apostrophise the daughter of Zion, what blood—what covenant—what

prisoners—what pit, are here alluded to? Upon the view here offered, the

event foreshewn is the death of the Messiah, an event wholly at variance

with the expectations of the Jews, but here distinctly announced, along

with the most striking particulars attendant on that event; such as the

frustration of the hopes of temporal advantages expected from his

coming—the nature of the spiritual blessings which it was really intended

to impart; namely, the remission of sins, and the redemption of the

Gentile world from idolatry. Along with these is stated the personal

character of the Messiah, and the express manner of his coming; not in

glory as expected, but in meekness and humility—the peaceful nature of his

kingdom—its boundless extent, destined to embrace all nations—yet in

apparent contradiction, his death is intimated, but also his resurrection

whereby he becomes “_the first fruits of them that slept_.” These are all

clearly intimated in this chapter; and of these, how many have former

commentators, with or without the aid of points, been able to make out? At

most, only three or four verses, as where he is mentioned as riding into

Jerusalem on an ass; and here, according to Blaney, the text requires to

be altered, to shew that he was a Saviour, נושע (or עשונ) being saved,

being altered into משע (or עשמ) a Saviour; while, according to Lowth, all

that here relates to the Messiah is to be regarded as a rhapsodical

digression from the subject of the context.

An Amicable Controversy with a Jewish Rabbi, on The Messiah's Coming With an Entirely New Exposition of Zechariah, on the Messiah's Kingdom · 第 20 / 61 题