came to the conclusion that a peculiar blessing must necessarily be awarded to every tribe in Jacob's address. But the announcement made to Simeon did not appear to contain any such blessing. They did not allow this, however, to disconcert them; especially as the apparent curse on Levi, contained in the same verse, had been changed into a blessing. With regard to the special purport of the blessing on Simeon, they thought that it must be somewhat analogous to that on Levi, since the same announcement of dispersion in Jacob was made to both of them. Hence they shared the vocation of teacher between the two tribes of Levi and Simeon. The later Jews placed the tribe of Simeon in a subordinate position. Jarchi, for example, was of opinion that none but clerks and schoolmasters were chosen from this tribe. We need hardly say that there is nothing whatever in history, to indicate that this vocation was ever allotted to the Simeonites.

The key to a correct explanation may be easily obtained, if we determine the precise position of the family of the Shimeite. We can do this with certainty from Num. iii. 17 sqq. Levi had three sons, Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. Gershon had two sons, Libni and Shimei. In ver. 21 the family of the latter is called ypu np, the family of the Shimeite, just as in the passage before us. It is evident, therefore, that one particular family of the tribe of Levi, and that a subordinate one, is mentioned in connexion with the whole tribe. If this be correct, then, it may be regarded as certain that by the family of Nathan we are not to understand the descendants of the prophet, who lived in the time of David; still less, the prophetic order; for the prophets did not spring from Nathan, and therefore could not be represented as his family. The family of Nathan must be a branch of that of David, just as the family of Shimei was a branch of that of Levi. It may be taken for granted, then, that the prophet alludes to the family of Nathan, a son of David who is mentioned in 2 Sam. v. 14, and Luke iii. 31, and that he introduces the name of Nathan, for the same reason as that of Shimei, because he was merely the head of a subordinate branch of the family. We have thus the two leading families in the early theocracy, the royal and the priestly; and with these there are associated two minor subdivisions, to show that the conver

sion would entirely pervade every family from the highest to the lowest of its members. The prominent position taken by women in the gospel history, from the daughters of Jerusalem in Luke xxiii. 27 sqq. to the weeping Mary in John xx. 16, answers to the peculiar emphasis laid upon the women here.

Chap. xiii. 1. “At that time there will be a fountain opened to the house of David, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness."

The penitential grief of Israel will not be in vain. In fact, it cannot be so; for it has been produced by the Lord himself, who has poured out the spirit of supplication upon his people. (Chap. xii. 10). A fountain is shut up, as long as it is hidden in the rock, and opened when it breaks forth; see Is. xli. 18, &c., xxxv. 6. That "the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem" are to be understood as denoting the whole nation, is evident from chap. xii. 12, where the land is referred to. In the expression," for sin and for uncleanness," there is an allusion to Num. xix. 9 sqq., where we find the following passage, with reference to the holy water, which contained the ashes of the red heifer, that had been offered as a sin-offering, "and it shall be kept for the congregation of Israel for waters of uncleanness, (), it is a sin-offering. He that toucheth a corpse, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel, because the water of Niddah was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean, his uncleanness is yet upon him." Even under the Old Testament, Levitical uncleanness was regarded as a type of sin, and the outward purification as a symbol of the inward (see Ps. li. 19, and the remarks on Is. lii. 14 in vol. ii. p. 268). The water in this case must be healing water, if it is founded upon the atoning blood. The communication of forgiveness rests upon the atonement; compare 1 John v. 6, "this is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ, not by water only, but by water and blood." The legal symbol leads to the same conclusion. The sprinkling, prescribed in Num. xix., could only be performed with water containing the ashes of the red heifer, which had been sacrificed as a sin-offering. A comparison of the passage in Isaiah, upon which this is based (Is. lii. 13 sqq.), leads to the same conclusion. Christ is there represented as the

VOL. III.

G

sacrifice for sins, and according to ver. 14, the sprinkling of many nations is rendered possible by his atoning death. This is also indicated in chap. xii. 10, where the saving look at the pierced one is referred to. As we have an allusion in the passage before us to Num. xix., so have we, in the verse just mentioned, to Num. xxi. 9," and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, he looked at the brazen serpent and lived." Michaelis, therefore, is quite correct in saying, "Christ himself has been opened as a fountain." The blood, which forms the back-ground of the water, has in fact been mentioned with sufficient distinctness in the context: viz., in the expression, "they pierced," and the funereal lamentation in chap. xii. 10. Hence we have an intimation here of the fact, which is expressly stated in 1 John i. 7, "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin." That the fountain for sin and uncleanness was opened to the inhabitants of Jerusalem immediately after the death of Christ, is evident from Acts iii. 19, where Peter says to the Jews: "repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," and from Acts v. 30, where Peter and the apostles say in the presence of the Sanhedrim, "the God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew, and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel (chap. xii. 10) and forgiveness of sins."

The consequence of the forgiveness of sins is a new life in righteousness and holiness, a removal, under the help of the Lord, of every thing opposed to his will.

Ver. 2. "And it shall come to pass in that day, saith Jehovah of hosts, that I cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered; and also I cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.”

In order to express the idea of the removal of every form of ungodliness from the forgiven people, the prophet selects two specific examples, idolatry and false prophecy, which had been most rife in the earlier times, particularly in the days of Jeremiah, in whose prophecies Zechariah "lived and moved." We can draw no conclusion from this, as to its prevalence in the prophet's own times, or in the future which he describes. The peculiar manifestation is merely an accident; the essence is un

godliness, which is always the saine, whether it assume the form of idolatry, of false prophecy, or of pharisaism. Such an assumption need cause the less difficulty here, on account of the many striking examples we have already had, of descriptions of the future under the forms of the past or the present, which may differ in appearance but are essentially the same. The expres sions "to cut off the names," and "that they be no more remembered," denote the most complete extermination; compare Hosea ii. 19. With regard to the latter Calvin has well observed, "his meaning is, that the hatred of superstition will be so great, that the people will shudder even at the very name."-That we have no ground for inferring, as Eichhorn, Rückert, and others have done, that we have here an announcement of the cessation of the gifts of prophecy, but that it is rather the removal of false prophets which is here predicted, is evident from the fact that the prophets are classed with idols on the one hand, and with an unclean spirit on the other; from the expression, "I will cause to pass out of the land," which indicates a forcible extermination of something bad in itself, and a pollution to the land; and from the further expansion given afterwards, where two different kinds of false prophets are mentioned, namely those who speak in the name of the Lord, and those who combine false prophecy with idolatry. The unclean spirit presents a contrast to the spirit of grace, spoken of in chap. xii. 10 as afterwards to be poured out, on the one hand, and to the fountain opened for the cleansing away of uncleanness, on the other. The special allusion to idolatry and false prophecy, particularly the latter, is evident from the connexion. From the fact that a spirit of uncleanness is referred to, it follows that the false prophets, as well as the true, and possibly the worshippers of idols, as well as those of the true God, were under the dominion of a principle external to themselves, to whose power they had given themselves up by an act of free will. This is also apparent from 1 Kings xxii., where, in accordance with the character of the vision, the spirit of prophecy is introduced in a personal form, and offers to deceive Ahab, by putting false prophecies into the mouths of the prophets of the calves. It follows from this, that the false prophets, as well as the true, were subject to an influence from without,—a doctrine, which is confirmed by the New Testament view of the kingdom

of darkness and kingdom of light, as being both equally in possession of the minds of those who belong to them (compare, for example, the parable of the tares). In Luke xi. 25 the "unclean spirit" (an expression taken from this passage) is a power existing apart from the individual, and is contrasted with the Holy Spirit (ver. 13). The same remark applies to the three unclean spirits in Rev. xvi. 13.1

Ver. 3. "And it cometh to pass, if any still further prophesieth, his father and mother, that begat him, say to him, Thou shall not live, for thou hast spoken lies in the name of the Lord. And his father and mother, that begat him, pierce him through, when he prophesieth."

The prophet has here expressed in his own pictorial style the thought, that, in that day, love to God will be manifested with unbounded energy. If the pictorial character of the verse be overlooked, difficulties of various kinds immediately arise; though any one may see at once that they do not really exist. In Deut. xiii. 6-10, which formed the basis of the prophet's drapery, a judicial procedure is alluded to, and the nearest relations merely commence the execution. 727 in the passage before us, is supposed by many commentators to mean simply corporeal punishment and not a mortal wound. But the opposite of this is evident, both from the words "thou shalt not live," this being merely the execution of the sentence, and also from those passages in the law, which the prophet had in his mind. In the latter it is not punishment in general, but capital punishment, that is commanded. Compare Deut. xviii. 20, "but the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of strange gods, even that prophet shall die;" see also chap. xiii. 6—11, and Michaelis Mosaisches Recht. v. §. 252. The severest punishment also is best suited to express the

'I

1 In numerous passages of the Sohar the fulfilment of this prediction is assigned to the Messianic times. We quote a few of these. "Sin will not cease from the world till the king Messiah comes, as the Scriptures say, will cause the unclean spirit,' &c."- "The left side will have the upper hand, and the unclean will be strong, till the holy God shall build the temple and establish the world. Then will his word meet with due honour, and the unclean side will pass away from the earth. And this is what the Scripture saith, I will cause the unclean,' &c." (compare these passages in Schottgen, Jesus der wahre Messias, p. 407 sqq.)