As I fully acquiesce in the Rabbi's corrections, and in the only instance where we differ, have adopted his view in preference to my own, it is wholly unnecessary to offer his translation at length; but an objection which he makes to my exposition of verses 3rd and 4th of the last chapter, I feel called upon to notice.
In those verses, I adopted the view of Dr. Blayney, that the destruction by fire, there denounced, applies to Sidon rather than to Tyre.
The common version, “For Tyre has built herself a fortress,” being rendered by him, “For she (Sidon) has built herself a fortress, Tyre;” [pg 099] the Sidonians being thus made the immediate object of denunciation, who are allowed to have been the builders of Tyre, which was thence called the daughter of Sidon.
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 lamentation for thee, and lament over thee, saying, What city is like Tyrus, like the destroyed in the midst of the sea?”
These, and similar passages, would, no doubt, be fatal to the exposition of Dr. Blayney, could they be shewn to foretel one and the same event; but against this, there are, what appear to me, conclusive objections. Two of these prophets not only wrote long before the time of Zechariah, but before the destruction of Old Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, [pg 100] which was therefore most likely to be the object of their predictions, and not New Tyre, which, at that time was not in existence, being built after Old Tyre was demolished; this then appears conclusive against the objection drawn from what occurs in Amos and Isaiah. With regard to Ezekiel, the case is somewhat different, and the answer must rest on other grounds.
Ezekiel did write much nearer to the time in question, and commentators appear undecided whether some of his predictions refer to the destruction of Old or New Tyre, or to both; for if he uttered this prophecy before the siege of Old Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, which can hardly admit of doubt, when he says, chap. xxvi. 7, “Behold I will bring upon Tyrus, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon;” still the expression of “the destroyed in the midst of the sea,” does seem peculiarly applicable to the insular situation of New Tyre. But if it be granted that the siege of this latter, by Alexander, be intimated in that remarkable expression; yet Ezekiel no where, that I can find, specifies fire as the peculiar agent of destruction; therefore, it cannot be inferred [pg 101] from any thing he says, that in Zechariah's prophecy, which appears to be directed against both Tyre and Sidon, this particular mode of destruction may not apply to Sidon, as the text certainly warrants that interpretation. Thus I see no reason to relinquish Dr. Blayney's view, which I should give up with the more reluctance, as I have so rarely been able to go along with that learned commentator; while this exposition appeared to me a very happy solution of a difficulty presented by the received translation.
Zechariah On The Messiah's Kingdom. Interpretation: Chapter XI.
It was before stated, that we should find in its proper place, due notice taken of the pride and worldly-mindedness which led the Jews to reject the Messiah, as he offered no temporal advantages; and of their forfeiting thereby all claim to the blessings which his kingdom was calculated to afford. We are now come to that place. The introduction to this chapter announces the frustration of their hopes of worldly greatness built upon the promised Messiah; and distinctly states what portion of their nation would be blinded by [pg 103] such motives, and what portion would be exempt from them. The rulers, the rich, and the great are declared to be those who would mislead the flock; while the poor and the humble are stated to be those who would recognise the hand of God in his works, and perceive that this was the word of the Lord.