« PreviousContinue »
communed with me said unto me, Cry thou, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts : I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy. And I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction. Therefore thus saith the Lord ; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies; my honse shall be built in it, saith the Lord of hosts; and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem. Cry yet, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts: My cities through prosperity shall yet be spread abroad; and the Lord shall yet comfort Zion, and shall yet choose Jerusalem.”— Vs. 12–17. In the second allegoric picture, which, in this case, immediately follows the first, the restoration is brought out in strong and lively colors by the representation of four carpenters or builders fraying the four horns that scattered Judah. The meaning of both is explained. It is apparent that, with two totally different first senses, the second sense is the same. The prediction is a manifest example of double allegorical representation.
The prophecy of the four chariots, ch. vi., may be regarded as delivered only in the form of a single allegory. It is, however, the only example of the kind which occurs in the thoroughly symbolic prophecies of the Old Testament. We exclude from present consideration Daniel's prophecy, ch. viii., for a reason which will be afterwards stated. Yet, even here, the nucleus of a second allegory may be discovered in the interpretation. This says, “These are the four spirits of the heavens (or, better, as the marginal read
ing has it, these are the four winds of the heavens) which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth." The angel here delivers the interpretation in the form of a new representation of "four winds of the heavens," which words cannot possibly be understood literally, and which may therefore be regarded as forming at least the nucleus of a new allegory. It is true the angel immediately lays the symbol aside, and takes up the former one of the chariots and horses, or rather, of the horses, for he makes no allusion to the chariots. But, in his words from vs. 5 to 8, he, in every respect, redelivers the prediction, stating it with greater detail. This, be it observed, is not an unusual feature of the repetition. See ch. i., Dan. ii. and vii., and Gen. xxxvii. 6-9. Whether this be accepted as a case of double representation or not, it is unquestionable that the whole of the angel's answer to the question of Zechariah, “What are these, my lord ?” is couched in hieroglyphic language, and forms, in effect, a second and more full symbolical representation. Had the angel followed out the symbol of "the winds," instead of reverting to the horses, his words would really have formed the second allegory. It is obvious, that the winds cannot be described or individualized, and, it may be concluded with sufficient probability, that for this reason the symbol was laid aside. As it is, this instance is to be held a redelivery, or a double version, with the same allegory, while there is a partial development of a second. What is to be regarded as the first regularly con
structed symbolic prophecy in sacred writ exhibits the form of a double allegory. The earliest specimen of the art, that which, in respect of antiquity, stands at the head of the list, and is the forerunner of successors extending through a long series of ages, exhibits the double form. The antiquity of this example, as well as of another, to which reference will immediately be made, is important, inasmuch as it shows that duplication is a fundamental principle, and not a mere after-developinent of the art. We refer to the prophecy delivered to the youthful Joseph, regarding his future greatness. Joseph tells to his brethren his first dream thus :
“For behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and behold, your sheaves stood round about, and made obeisance to my sheaf.”—Gen. xxxvii. 7.
He dreams a second dream, and relates it thus:
Behold, I have dreamed a dream more: and behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.”-v. 9.
Here, in the two allegories, with a slight addition in the second, one prediction is delivered, viz., that of Joseph's exaltation in worldly rank above his kindred. It forms a very neat and compact specimen of the double allegory; in the first version of it, the sheaves of corn do obeisance to Joseph's sheaf; in the second, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars, perform to him obeisance. It is one prophecy delivered in two sets of symbols, which have a totally
different first sense, but of which the second sense is precisely the saine.
The above examples, which comprehend almost the whole of the fully developed and regularly constructed symbolic prophecies of the Old Testament, with two exceptions, one of which enforces the rule, and which will both be considered presently, may be regarded as sufficient to establish the conclusion, that the normal form of a symbolic prophecy is two first representations bearing one second sense. If the prophecy of the four chariots of Zechariah be regarded as constructed in the single form, it will simply be an exception to the rule. The prophecy of Daniel, ch. viii., is necessarily excluded from the operation of the law, for a special reason, which will be stated immediately.
But the following prediction, which, on account of its very important bearing on the law, we have reserved to the end of the catalogue, is not only an eminent example of its operation, but it may be regarded as laying down the law itself while it states the reasons for it. There is thus the law established by a series of precedents, and there is also a distinct enunciation and promulgation of it. The prediction in question, is that delivered to Pharaoh, concerning the seven years' famine in Egypt. It is delivered in two dream-allegories to Pharaoh. The Egyptian king relates the first thus :
“In my dream, behold, I stood upon the bank of the river: And behold, there came up out of the river seven kine, fat-fleshed, and well-favoured; and they
fed in a meadow: And behold, seven other kine came up after them, poor, and very ill-favoured, and lean-fleshed, such as I never saw in all the land of Egypt for badness: And the lean and the ill-favoured kine did eat up the first seven fat kine: And when they had eaten them up, it could not be known that they had eaten them; but they were still ill-favoured, as at the beginning. So I awoke.”—Gen. xli. 17– 21.
He relates the second thus :
“ And I saw in my dream, and behold, seven ears came up in one stalk, full and good: And behold, seven ears, withered, thin, and blasted with the east wind, sprung up after them: And the thin ears devoured the seven good ears.” —vs. 22–24.
Upon hearing this account of his dreams, “ Joseph said unto Pharaoh, The dream of Pharaoh is one," that is, as is plainly the meaning, the two dreams of Pharaoh have one second or real sense, and constitute one divine revelation. The sense is very evidently this. But what follows has a inost important bearing upon the subject in hand: “God hath showed Pharaoh what he is about to do.” The connection of the words plainly shows the meaning to be, that a double representation with one sense, is a sign of a divine communication. This, however, is still more plainly stated in the words, with which Joseph concludes his interpretation of this twofold allegory, submitted to the mental eye of Pharaoh, where a farther reason for the doubleness is added. He there says:
And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharaoh