originally posted 6/15/2015
The following is chapter 13 of John Gill's book The Prophecies of the Old Testament Respecting the Messiah. I have highlighted (and sometimes also made bold) some passages that support the Messiahship of Jesus and His Full Deity. The many typographical errors are probably due to uncorrected optical character recognition scanning errors. The entire book can be read at the following links. [HERE (recommended copy to read), or HERE (source of the copy below), or HERE, or scanned version HERE]
See also my blog: The Names of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit by Elmer L. Towns
The Prophecies of the Old Testament Respecting Messiah
By John Gill
Chapter 13
I thought to
have concluded this account of the prophecies of the Old Testament,
respecting the Messiah, with the preceding chapter; but observing
some prophecies left unconsidered, which contain some of the famous
names and titles of the Messiah, I thought it necessary to take
notice of them, and especially, seeing they are objected to, by the
enemies of Christianity: I have already, in the course of this work,
considered several of the names and titles of the Messiah, by which
he is called in the prophecies, as that of Shiloh, the
Savior or Peace-maker, Genesis 49:10 Immanuel, or
God with us, Isaiah 7:14 Messiah the Prince, Daniel
9:21 the desire of all nations, Haggai 2:7 all which several
titles serve to set forth the greatness of his person, as well as
his very great usefulness to mankind, as do also the following ones,
which I now intend to consider; and shall begin,
First,
With Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto
a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and
his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the
everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. The ancient Jews applied
this prophecy to the Messiah. Their ridiculous traditions, recorded
in their Talmud, of God’s desire to make Hezekiah the
Messiah, and Senacherib, Gog and Magog; and that saying of R.
Hillell’s, [1] "That
Israel should not have a Messiah, because they enjoyed him in
the days of Hezekiah," shew plainly that that they were under
a conviction of this prophecy’s belonging to him, though they
foolishly attempt to wrest it to Hezekiah, whom they are
therefore obliged to make the Messiah. The Targum manifestly
refers those words to the Messiah, as do also others of their
ancient and later [2] writers; though
others of them would have Hezekiah intended,
[3] who are herein followed by Grotius, and the
author of The Scheme of Literal Prophecy, who says "The words
are manifestly spoken of him;" but Hezekiah surely can
never be this rly this new-born
babe, as the word properly signifies, when he was at least nine
or ten years of age, when this prophecy was given forth; nor can any
reason be assigned, why he should, in such a peculiar and unusual
manner, be called ןb
a son; nor can it be said of him that he was that great light
which shined upon the inhabitants of Galilee; nor was his
birth the occasion of so great joy, as the birth of this child is
said to be; nor can it with any justness be said of Hezekiah,
that of the increase of his government and peace there was
no end, seeing his government extended only to the two tribes of
Judah and Benjamin his reign was but twenty-nine
years, and that for the most part attended with affliction,
oppression and war; besides, the august titles, here used, cannot be
ascribed to him, or to any mere creature whatever; for as R. Sol.
ben Melech on the place observes, they are
drbty lal µyywnb "the names of
the blessed God," which Kimchi and Jarchi
acknowledge, and therefore are forced to transpose the words thus,
and he who is the wonderful Counsellor, the mighty God, the
everlasting Father, shall call his name, The Prince of Peace; so
that only this last is the name of the child, and all the rest are
the names of God, who calls him so. But this reading is a violent
distortion of the text, and if such a method was allowed of, we
should be left to a very great uncertainty in the sacred writings.
"It is contrary to the use of the scripture, (as a learned man
observes, [4]) that the word
wmç, his name, should be
placed before the name of him that calleth, when every where else it
is placed between the name of him that calleth, and him that is
called; so that that name which follows the word
wtç, his name, is always
ascribed to him that is called, and not to him that calleth, as
appears from Genesis 16:15, Genesis 21:3, Genesis 23:14, Exodus
2:22, Ruth 4:17, 1 Samuel 1:20, 2 Samuel 12:5." This reading
is also contrary to the very syntax of the words, for if they
were to be read thus, there should have been
ta the sign of the accusative
case, before µwlç rç the
Prince of Peace, to have distinguished it from those several
nominatives; whereas there is not: It is moreover contrary to
the accents, for there is only a Tiphca on
r[ yba the everlasting Father,
which is no distinguishing accent, especially in propositions;
and often idle and does not distinguish at all, but serves only to
carry on the sentence to the next member. It would have appeared
more plausible, if the stop had been made at
rwbg la the mighty God; for
a Sakeph Katon is there, which is an accent of far greater
power, but this would not answer their end; for they would be under
an equal difficulty, in applying the title of the everlasting
Father to Hezekiah, as that of the mighty God.
Besides, what reason can be given, why the great God should have so
many titles and epithets given unto him, and that only at the giving
of a name to a young Prince? What was there in Hezekiah that
should require this, especially when we consider, that when God has
either given new names to persons, or changed their old ones, who
were as famous as ever Hezekiah was, and as much in the
divine favor, yet he never used such a way of speaking as this.
What the Jews
think will much help them in this sense and reading of the words,
is, that arqyw is in the
active, and not in the passive form, and therefore should
be rendered, and he shall call his name, etc. and not as we
render it, and his name shall be called, etc. on which
account, [5] they are ready to charge us
with a corruption of the text. To which I answer, it is true, the
word is in the active form; but yet, nothing is more frequent in the
Hebrew language, than for verbs active of the third person,
to be used passively, when the nominative is not expressed; and this
is the very manifest sense of this word in many places; see Genesis
16:14 2 Samuel 2:16 Isaiah 62:2. Besides, this word is rendered in
the passive sense, in this very text, both by the Targum, and
by several versions made by the Jews themselves;
[6] though, if we understand the word actively, it no ways
prejudices the application of those several names to the Messiah;
for it is very easy to supply the nominative case, either thus,
Jehovah, or God the Father shall call, etc. or thus, and
every one shall call his name Wonderful, etc.
From the whole
it appears, that all, and every one of those titles, belong to one
and the same person, even to the child or Son, here
spoken of, which Aben Ezra acknowledges to be the true sense
of the words; but how they can, with any justness, be applied to
Hezekiah, or be thought to be manifestly spoken of him, I
cannot apprehend; for will it be sufficient to say, with the above
same Jewish writer, that he was called Wonderful, because of
the miracles which God wrought in his days; Counsellor,
because he consulted with his princes about keeping the passover in
the second month, 2 Chronicles 30:2. the mighty God, because
he was strong and powerful; the everlasting Father, or Father of
Eternity, because the kingdom of the house of David was
continued somewhat longer for his sake; and the Prince of Peace,
because there was peace in his days? Surely it cannot be thought
sufficient to entitle him to the name of Wonderful, that God
did, in his days, and for his sake, cause the sun to return ten
degrees; nor could he be called so on the account of his eminent
virtues, which did not shine more brightly in him than in many
others. Nor is it enough to say, that he was the Counsellor,
because he took counsel with others, but was not a counsellor of
others, often wanted counsel himself, and therefore sometimes acted
a foolish part, as in the case of his shewing the ambassadors of
Babylon all his treasures; much less could he be called the
mighty God, or the strong One, because of his might,
power, and prowess in war, when we read but of one single exploit of
his, of this kind, which could be any indication of it, and that is,
his smiting the Philistines unto Gaza, and the borders
thereof; 2 Kings 8:8 Though afterwards we read, that the King of
Assyria came and took all his fenced cites, and obliged him to
pay a considerable tribute to him; nor ought he to be called the
everlasting Father, or Father of Eternity, who himself lived but
four and fifty years, and the regal power of his posterity, in a few
years, ended in Zedekiah; nor can I see how he can well be
called the Prince of Peace, who was frequently distressed and
oppressed by his enemies, his reign was chiefly spent in war, and
can be supposed only to enjoy peace towards the close thereof.
But now the
whole prophecy, and the several names given to this child, well
agree with the Messiah; it is he, whose conversation in Galilee
of the nations would make it glorious, as has been elsewhere
observed, at whose coming light would shine upon the inhabitants
thereof; whose birth would produce a joy like the joy in harvest,
and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil; whose deliverance
of people from the yoke of slavery, would not be effected in a
common way, but as in the day of Midian, when Gideon,
in such an incredible and extraordinary manner, delivered the
Israelites: for this victory which he, the Messiah, was to
obtain over all his enemies, would not be, like the victory of other
warriors, attended with confused noise, and garments rolled in
blood, but would be ça tlbam
hprçl htyhw like to the burning of devouring fire,
effected suddenly, in a moment, and without any noise, blood, or
wounds; which same person, being placed upon the throne of David,
would bear the government upon his shoulder, wield the scepter
in righteousness, and increase the peace of all his subjects. He
might well be called Wonderful, because he was to be born of
a virgin, Isaiah 7:14 Counsellor, because the spirit of
wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might,
was to rest upon him, Isaiah 11:2. the mighty God,
because the Adon, the mighty Lord, who sits at God’s right
hand, and rules in the midst of his enemies, having obtained a
compleat victory over them, Psalm 110:1, 2, 5, 6 the everlasting
Father, because he was to see his seed, and to prolong
his days, Isaiah 53:10 the Prince of Peace, because he
was to be the man, the peace, who was to speak peace to
the Heathen, abundance of which was to be in his days,
Micah 5:5, Zechariah 9:10, Psalm 72:3, 7.
Now, how well
also these names suit the Messiah, Jesus, is easy to observe, who
may well be called Wonderful, on the account of his
extraordinary and wonderful conception and birth, as well as on the
account of the many surprising miracles which were wrought by him;
and if we regard him both as God and man, having two natures, human
and divine, united in one person, he will appear to be
alp, a wonder, a miracle.
With as good reason also may he be called Counsellor
megalhv boulhv aggelov, the
angel of the great counsel, as the Septuagint reader it,
who was always with God; was privy to all his designs, counsels and
purposes; was consulted by him in all the works of his hands, as
creation and redemption; is the wisdom of God, and has all
the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hid in him, and therefore
a very proper person to give advice and counsel to his people. No
less does he deserve the title and character of the mighty God,
who has spoiled principalities and powers, subdued all
his and his people’s enemies, procured everlasting salvation for
sinners, and is able to save, to the uttermost, them that come
unto God by him; very agreeably may he be called, the
everlasting Father, or the Father of the age to come,
pathr tou mellontov aiwnov,
as the words are rendered by the Septuagint: for the
hbh µlw[ the world to come,
God has not put in subjection to angels, (Hebrews 2:5.) but
has made it the care and charge, and put it under the government and
conduct of his Son, Jesus Christ, at whose coming this new age,
or world, began, and therefore he may well be called
the Father of it. And, to conclude this, nothing can more fully
and aptly express the temper of his mind, the nature of his work,
and the diffusive blessings of his goodness to the sons of men, than
when he is called the Prince of Peace.
These things
being considered, the author of The Scheme of Literal Prophecy,
with Grotius and the Jews, will have little reason to
conclude, that these "words are manifestly spoken of
Hezekiah," but rather conclude, that they are manifestly
spoken of Jesus the Messiah; nor will the Jew have any reason,
[7] in that audacious and insulting
manner, to say, as he does, "That it is impossible that Jesus should
be called by those names; for, says he, how can his name be called,
Wonderful, Counsellor, when a foolish disciple of his knew
his counsels, even so as to deliver him unto his enemies? And how
can he be called the mighty God, who was slain? Moreover, how
can he be called the everlasting Father, who died before he
had lived out half his days? Besides, how can he be called the
Prince of Peace, in whose days there was no peace, for as he
himself testifies, saying, I am not come to give peace on earth,
but a sword?" all which, with what spite and malice, want of
truth, as well as with what folly and ignorance they are spoken, may
easily be collected from what has been already said concerning
Jesus, and the application of this prophecy to him. I proceed,
Secondly,
to consider, Jeremiah 23:6 where we have
an account of another of the Messiah’s names, the words are these,
In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely, and
this is his name, whereby he shall be called, the Lord our
righteousness. The person intended in those words, is undoubtedly
the same, who in the preceding verse is called, The Righteous
Branch, and is promised to be raised up unto David, which
not only the Targum understands of the Messiah, and therefore
thus paraphrases it, I will raise up unto David, Messiah the
righteous, but also many other Jewish writers.
[8] Grotius, indeed, would have Zerobabel
intended, but that cannot be, for though Zerobabel was a
branch of David’s family, yet he never was king over Judah
and Israel; nor were those people in such a very safe,
secure, and prosperous condition, in his days; and though he was no
doubt a righteous person, yet was he not so by way of
eminency, nor was his name The Lord our righteousness,
neither can any reason be given; why he should be called so. But
every thing agrees well with the Messiah, who was frequently
promised, and always expected as a king, in whose hand the
pleasure of the Lord should prosper, and by whom
justice and judgment should be executed in the earth; for
righteousness was to be the girdle of his loins, and
faithfulness the girdle of his reins; Israel was to be
saved in him with an everlasting salvation; he was to be
just, or righteous, in himself, and to bring in
everlasting righteousness for others, whereby he was to
justify many; so that it is no wonder, that his name
should be called, The Lord our righteousness, which name the
Messiah Jesus well deserves, seeing he is become
the end of the Law for righteousness, to every one
that believes, and is of God, made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.
Abarbinel
thinks that
wnqdx hwjy, The Lord our righteousness, is not the
name of the Messiah, but the name of God, who calls the Messiah the
righteous Branch; but this sense is contrary to the natural
position of the words, and can never be supported without a violent
torturing of the text. R. Saadiah Gaon is for separating
hwjy the Lord, from
wnqdx our righteousness; he
is willing to allow, that wnqdx
our righteousness, is the name of the Messiah, but then he would
have hwjy Jehovah to be the
name of God, who calls him so; but such a division of the words is
contrary to the accents, which R. Aben Ezra opposes unto him,
and says, that he would never hare attempted such a division of the
words, and had he observed that the accent Tiphca is upon
warqy he shall call him, or
he shall be called, which divides it from
hwhy, Jehovah, and that the
accent Merca is upon hwhy
Jehovah, which unites it to wnqdx,
our righteousness; this observation sufficiently confirms our
version of this text.
There is one
thing more I would just observe, before I dismiss this prophecy, and
that is, that the word warqy which
we translate passively, shall be called, is in the active
form, and may be rendered, shall call him, as it is both by
the Targum and Septuagint, though, as has been
observed on the preceding prophecy, verbs active of the third
person, when the nominative to them is not expressed, as here, are
often used passively; but if the active sense should be insisted on,
it is easy to supply it, either thus, everyone shall call him,
etc. or thus, God shall call him, etc. or thus, as
Kimchi and others, Israel shall call him, The Lord our
righteousness. From the whole it appears, that this prophecy
belongs to the Messiah, and admits of a very easy application to
Jesus.
Thirdly,
The next prophecy of this kind, which I shall
consider, is Zechariah 6:12. And speak unto him, that is, to
Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest,
saying, Thus speaketh the Lords of Hosts, saying, Behold the
man, whose name is the Branch, and he shall grow up out of his
place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord. The same person is
spoken of under the same title and character in chapter 3:8 For
behold I will bring forth my servant the Branch, which the
Targum paraphrases thus, Behold I will bring forth my servant
the Messiah; and has been so understood by many Jewish
interpreters. [9] I have, in considering
the former prophecy, observed, that the Messiah is called the
righteous Branch in Jeremiah 23:5. as he is also in chapter
33:15 and in Isaiah 4:2 it is said, In that day shall the Branch
of the Lord be beautiful and glorious; which the Targum
renders thus, At that time the Messiah of the Lord shall be for
joy and glory: and so Kimchi expounds it of him. Once
more, the Messiah is in Isaiah 11:1 called, a Branch, which
should grow out of Jesse’s root. Thus we see, that this name,
the Branch, is very frequently given to the Messiah, and
perhaps, some reference is made to this name in Psalm 132:17. where
it is said, There will I make the horn of David to bud; I hare
ordained a lamp for mine Anointed. And it is certain the Jews have
so understood it, [10] who, in their
prayers for the Messiah’s coming, frequently express themselves
after this manner, [11] "O God
make the horn of thy servant David to bud, and ordain a lamp
for the son of Jesse, thy Messiah, in haste, in our days."
The author of The Scheme of Literal Prophecy indeed says,
from Grotius to White,"That Esay, Jeremy, and
Zechary, do not, by their use of the term branch, mean
to signify the Messias; but the Jews in captivity in one place,
namely Isaiah 4:2. Hezekiah in another, Isaiah 11:1.
Zerobabel in three other places, namely, Jeremiah 23:5.
Zechariah 3:8 and 6:12." though he offers nothing in proof thereof.
As to Isaiah 4:2. it is much more likely that the Messiah is
intended than the Jews in captivity; for what great beauty and glory
appeared in them, even when they returned from thence? Nay, this
branch of the Lord, and fruit of the earth, is manifestly
distinguished from them that are escaped from Israel, and him
that is left in Zion. The beauty and glory predicted of this
branch, best agrees with the Messiah; as do also the blessings
promised in the following verses; such as the sanctification,
washing away the filth, purging the blood of God’s people, and the
protection and glory of them. That Hezekiah cannot be
intended in Isaiah 11:1. I have already proved in a preceding
chapter; for he must be born some years before this prophecy was
given forth; and that Zerobabel is not Jeremy’s righteous
Branch in chapter 23:5. I think I have sufficiently made appear;
and shall now attempt to prove, that the Messiah, and not he, is
intended by Zechary, when he says, Behold the man, whose
name is the Branch. The Targum reads it, Behold the
man, whose name is the Messiah. Jarchi says, there are some who
interpret it of the king Messiah; which interpretation R.
Abendana strenuously contends for; [12] and
which is the sense of some of their ancient writers;
[13] and that it is the true sense, may be pretty easily
collected from the context. This person was to be both a king and
priest; he shall sit and rule upon his throne, and he shall be a
priest upon his throne. Zerobabel was neither king nor priest,
the Messiah both. This person was to build the temple of the
Lord, and to bear the glory: Not a third temple, which
the Jews vainly expect; nor the second temple, built by
Zerobabel, from whence so much glory did not arise to the
builder of it, it being mean and contemptible, in comparison of that
of Solomon’s; but the church of God, which is the temple
of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth, which was to
be built in a very glorious manner, in the days of the Messiah, and
was to consist of Jews and Gentiles; for they that were afar off,
that is, the Gentiles, were to come and build
in the temple of the Lord, and so the counsel of peace
was between them both; that is, Jew and Gentile,
which was exactly fulfilled by the Messiah Jesus, who made peace
between them both, incorporated them both into one building, of
which he himself is the corner stone, in whom all the building fitly
framed together, groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: in whom ye
also, (Ephesians 2:14, 17.) that is, ye Ephesians, ye
Gentiles, are builded together, with the Jews, for an
habitation of God through the Spirit; and now he bears all the
glory of it. Once more, this person was not as yet grown up out
of his place, but it is promised that he should, which cannot be
true of Zerobabel, who was already grown up, and had been for
some time actually engaged in building the second temple, as appears
from Haggai’s prophecy. The Messiah then, and not
Zerobabel, is the person intended, whose name may well be called
the Branch, by way of eminency, he being the most glorious
branch of David’s family, who also was to spring from thence,
when that family was only like a root in a dry ground; all
which well agrees with the state of that family in the times of
Jesus, and with that very mean appearance, which he made, when he,
this branch, first budded forth from thence. The Septuagint
here render the word hmx, the
Branch, by anatolh, which
properly signifies the rising of the sun, or that part of
the heaven where the sun rises, and so may respect the Messiah
as the sun of righteousness, who was to arise with healing
in his wings. [14]
Hence Zacharias in his song, calls the Messiah Jesus
(Luke 1:78.) anatolh ex uyouv,
the day-spring from on high, who hath visited us: and
from hence, perhaps, Oriens was used for a name of the
Messiah: and it is not without some shew of reason, that some
[15] have thought this to be the meaning
of the word in Tacitus, when he says, [16]
Pluribus persuasio inerat, antiquis sacerdotum literis
continero, eo ipsi tempore fore, ut valesceret oriens, "many
were persuaded that in the ancient books of the priests were
contained a prophecy, that at that time the east should prevail." In
fine, the Messiah is the man whose name is the Branch, so
often spoken of by the prophets, so much expected by the Jews, and
who budded forth in the person of Jesus. I shall conclude all with
the words of Zacharias, (Luke 1:68 etc.). Blessed
be the Lord God of Israel, for he hath visited and redeemed his
people, and hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house
of his servant David, as he spake by the mouth of all his holy
prophets, which have been since the world began: That we should be
saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us, to
perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy
covenant, the oath which he sware to our father Abraham, that he
would grant auto us; that we being delivered out of the hands of our
enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness
before him, all the days of our life.
|
|
 |
 |
|
ENDNOTES:
[1] Talmud
Sanhed. fol. 98 2. & 99. 1.
[2] Debarim
Rabba, fol. 196 col. 3. likewise R. Jose Galilaeus praefat, in Echa
Rabbati in Alix's Judgment of the Jewish Church, etc. p. 44 & Maimon.
in Maji Synops. Theolog. Jud. loc. 8 de Messia, p. 121. Vid,
Reuchlinum de aste Cabalae, lib. 1. p. 745.
[3] Jarchi,
Kimchi & Aben Ezra in loc. Lipmann. Carmen memor. vet. Nizzach, p.
87. R. Isaac Chizuk, Emun. par. 1. c.
[4]
Frischmuth. in Wagenseil. Carmin. Lipmann. Confut. p. 516
[5] Isaac
Chizuk, Emun. par 1. c. 21.
[6]
hymç yrqtaz Targ
kai kaleitai to onoma auto ,
Sept. kai eklhqh to onoma autou,
Aquila. kai klhqhsetai to onoma autou,
Symmach.
[7] Isaac
Chizuk, Emun. par. 1. e. 21. Much to the same purpose objects the
author of the old Nizzachon, p. 86
[8] Kimchi &
R. Sol. ben Melech in loc. R. Isaac Chizuk, Emun par. 1. c. 42. who
also interpret The Lord our righteousness, of the Messiah in verse 6
and so it is likewise understood by R. Jochanan in Talmud, Baba
Bathra, fol. 75. col. 2. by R. Aba bar Cahana in Echa Rabbati, fol.
58 col. 2. by R. Saadiah Gaon in Daniel 7:13. and by Bereshith Babba
in Genesis 25:6 in Galatin de Areanis, C. V. lib. 8 c. 3.
[9] Vid.
Kimchium & Aben Ezram in loc.
[10] Vid.
R. Sol. ben Melech. in Miclol. Yophi in loc. & Kimchium in loc.
[11] Seder
Tephillot, fol. 278, 1. & 285. 2. See Bishop Chandler's Defence of
Christianity, p. 221, 222.
[12] In
not. in Miclol Yophi in loc.
[13] Joshua
in Echa Rabati, 58 col. 2.
[14] Which
is understood of the Messiah by Kimchi, and R. Tauchuma, in Allix's
Judgment of the Jewish Church, p. 44, 64.
[15]
Hammond on Luke 1:78 Bishop Chandler's Defence of Christianity, p.
28, 246.
[16] Hist.
lib. 5. c. 13.
| |
