Page images
PDF
EPUB

nearer to our purpose) God would not permit them to have horses and chariots of war for their defence; not because they were useless in war, since the strength of the ancient militia consisted in them; and God, in the book of Job, describes the horse as if made for the day of battle. But this was the very reason why he suffered not his people to use it for a defence. He wanted neither horse nor foot to fight his battles: proofs of this given, from the Exodus and from the victories of Joshua, who is commanded to destroy the horses. These observations give light to a general precept of the law, in which every prince of Israel was concerned, and on which the prophecy before us depends; he should not multiply horses to himself: &c. Deut. xvii. 16. The true reason of this law expressed in Deut. xx. 1. This law therefore was to be a standing trial of prince and people, whether they had confidence in God their deliverer. In this view there is sense in it: in any other it is unaccountable. It is shown that this law was observed for near four hundred years, to the end of David's reign, and in part of Solomon's. The mention sometimes made of chariots and horses alludes to regal state and times of peace: see Jer. xvii. 25. During the above mentioned period, it is remarkable that the people never suffered for want of force and strength in war, though they were sometimes punished for their idolatry, &c. David also carried the kingdom to its highest pitch of prosperity, yet he himself rode on a mule, and provided no better equipage for his son on the day of his coronation : 1 Kings i. 33. 34. In the reign of Solomon things altered, and he had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen : 1 Kings iv. 26. His successors followed his example. What ensued from such a state of things? Troubles soon overtook him the Edomite and the king of Damascus insulted him; and at his death, to humble the pride of Israel, a division of the kingdom took place: hence wars between them, subjection to Egypt, and the captivities of Assyria and Baby

lon. During this period God oftentimes gave them signal deliverances; but these were not effected by their great forces, but by his interposition; see 2 Kings xviii. 23. It appears then that David was the last of the rulers over Israel who observed the law against multiplying horses; and he was the last who pretended to be a deliverer of the people. This truth seen by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews xi. 32-34. But it may be asked, were the kings of Judah and Israel punished for having horses and chariots in their armies? does not Scripture charge them with idolatry and other crimes? Answered, true it does: but was it not a crime thus to mul tiply horses and chariots? The shortest answer to the question will be to examine what their own prophets say with respect to this cause of their ruin: see Isaiah ii. 6. 7. xxxi. 1. Hosea xiv. 3. Having seen then what the law, and the prophets, and the experience of ages had taught the Jews to think of their princes and their martial preparations, let us look back to the prophecy relating to the Messias, Zech. ix. 9. Here the king foretold was to save the people. Consider what sort of a king it was probable that God would send to save them. Would he be like those who had undone them, or those who had been deliverers of their country? The king foretold was also to be just, meek, and lowly could he have deserved this character had he appeared in the pomp of war, with horses and chariots, in opposition to God's law? Or could he bring salvation by those means which God had forbidden? Hence it may be seen how essential it was to the character of such a king of Israel to come as he was foretold. If any doubt remain, see what immediately follows: and I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem. To the same purpose speaks Hosea i. 7. and Micah v. 10. 11. These passages support each other, and show what the prophet Zechariah had in view. It is shown that there is nothing in all this to excite the ridicule of unbelievers. Some reflexions hence

arise. First, the law given to the kings of Israel, considered with the history of that nation, forms a very strong presumption for the divine original of the law of Moses: this explained. Secondly, we may collect from hence the nature of David's crime in numbering the people: this explained. Thirdly, it may be a doubt whether king Josiah was not guilty of the same fault in his warlike preparations against the king of Egypt: this also explained.

DISSERTATION IV.

CHRIST'S ENTRY INTO JERUSALEM.

THE circumstances of this piece of Scripture history are well known, and not less to those who despise than to those who receive the gospel. My intention is to consider the prophecy relating to this fact, as it stands in Zechariah, chap. ix. ver. 9.; and though the subject of this dissertation has no immediate relation to the preceding discourses, yet it may not perhaps be improper to subjoin to them the explication of a passage, which is sure always to find its way into every conversation or controversy on this subject of prophecy.

There is indeed no circumstance relating to the Messiah that has given occasion to more profane wit and ridicule than this now before us. We reckon an ass to be a contemptible creature; and a man, especially a man of character, riding on an ass, to be a ridiculous figure. These are prejudices of our time and country; and when they who look no farther than to the manners and customs which are before them, examine this part of sacred story by the standard of modern prejudices, they see, or think they see, something quite inconsistent with the gravity and dignity of the person pretending to be king of the Jews, when Christ is represented entering in triumph into Jerusalem mounted on an ass.

But contemptible as an ass, or a man riding on an ass; may be at present, from the beginning it was not so. In many countries, and particularly in Judea, persons of the highest distinction were usually so mounted. The governors of Israel are described in the song of Deborah as riding on white asses: Judg. v. 10. And the thirty sons of Jair, who was judge and prince over Israel twenty-two years, are said to ride on thirty asses: Judg. x. 4. And another judge of Israel is recorded to

have had forty sons and thirty nephews that rode on seventy ass colts: Judg. xii. 14.

Were it at all necessary, it would be easy to confirm this observation with many more authorities; but this passage of Scripture will furnish other inquiries, and of a more serious consideration.

For supposing it to have been a usual thing to ride on an ass, how comes this usual thing to be mentioned in relation to the Messiah as a mark of distinction? Might not the prophet on this supposition as well have said, he should come walking on foot? And would he not have been as well known by one character as by the other? Besides,

If you turn to the book of Zechariah, where this prophecy is to be found, you will see the person there described to be a king, a just king, and one having salvation: and what is there in this character of riding on the foal of an ass that is peculiar to a king, to a just king, and to one who was to bring salvation and deliverance to his people?

If we look into the present or into the ancient world, we shall not find reason to appropriate this character to kings: those of Egypt, Assyria, and of other nations neighbors to Judea, rode in another manner: much less shall we be able to find any connexion between the justice and ability of a prince to save his people, and this circumstance of riding on the foal of an ass.

Since then this prophetical character can never be accounted for by considering the state and condition of kings in general, there must needs have been something very peculiar in the circumstances of a king of Israel, on which the propriety of this character is founded.

I shall therefore endeavor to trace out this peculiar circumstance, and to set this prophecy in a proper light; which has been very greatly abused, and, perhaps, only because it has been very little understood.

If we look into the history of the rise and fall of nations, we shall generally find that their prosperity and success have borne some proportion to their force and power, and to the conduct and ability of their leaders; but with the Jews, who from slaves in Egypt, became a great and powerful people, the case

« PreviousContinue »