Commentary on Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah and Malachi John Calvin
MINOR PROPHETS
for God had spared the Jews, when yet all men exercised cruelty towards them with impunity; and when they were contemptible in the sight of all, he still had regarded their safety. As then they had been so ungrateful for so many acts of kindness, ought not God to have been angry with them? This is then the reason why the Prophet introduces here in God's name this threatening, Surely I will not spare them; that is, ``I have hitherto deferred my vengeance, and have surpassed all men in kindness and mercy; but I have misplaced my goodness, and now there is no reason why I should longer suspend my judgment.'' I will spare then no longer the inhabitants of this land
I will give, or deliver, he says, every man into the hand of his friend; as though he had said, ``They are no longer sheep, for they will not bear to be ruled by my hand, though they have found me to be the best of shepherds. They shall now tear and devour one another; and thus a horrible dispersion will follow.'' Now the Jews ought to have dreaded nothing so much, as to be given up to destroy themselves by mutual slaughter, and thus to rage cruelly against one another and to perish without any external enemy: but yet God declares that this would be the case, and for this reason, because he could not succeed with them, though willing to feed them as his sheep and ready to perform the office of shepherd in ruling them. 288
He concludes by saying, They shall smite the land, and I will not deliver from their hand. He intimates in the last place that ruin without any remedy was nigh; for he alone was the only deliverer of the people; but now he testifies that their safety would not be the object of his care; for should he see them perishing a hundred times, he would not be moved with pity, nor turn to bring them help, inasmuch as they had precluded all compassion. It now follows ---
Zechariah 11:7
7. And I will feed the flock of slaughter, even you, O poor of the flock. And I took unto me two staves; the one I called Beauty, and the other I called Bands; and I fed the flock.
7. Et pavi gregem occisionis, nempe (vel, ideoque) pauperes gregis: et sumpsi mihi duas virgas, unam vocavi Elegantiam (vel, Pulchritudinem;) et alteram vocavi
Funiculos (alii vertunt, Perditores; de hac voce dicemus;) et pavi gregem.
He resumes here the thread of the discourse, which he had shortly before broken off; for he sets forth what had not yet been sufficiently expressed --- that the ingratitude of the people, with which obstinacy was especially united, deserved entire ruin, and that now there was no hope of pardon; for the paternal care of God had been most basely and most shamefully repudiated, as well as the kind favor which he had manifested to the people.
288There is one phrase omitted, "and unto the hand of his king;" that is "Antiochus," says Grotius,—"Herod," says Drusius,—"Caesar," says Henderson. But no particular king seems intended, but a state of things is set forth, signifying the tyranny and oppression of the ruling power, which was verified in the condition of the Jews during a considerable period, until at last they were destroyed by one of the Caesars, the emperor of Rome. Inward discord, and the tyranny of those who ruled over them, characterised their history from the time of Antiochus Epiphanes until they were demolished as a nation by Titus and Vespasian. This seems to be the import of this prophecy. The singular number is used poetically: and this appears evident from the words which follow, "And they shall smite," or rather pound to pieces, "the land." The "king" is spoken of here as many — "they," so that a succession of tyrants is meant. — Ed.
JOHN CALVIN
God then complains that he fed the flock. Some apply this to Zechariah; but, as I have said, God relates the acts of kindness which he had uniformly showed to the people, until they became wholly unworthy of his favor. Let us however remember that the Prophet speaks of the remnant; for he does not here recount the benefits of God in ancient times, but describes the state of the people after their return from their exile in Babylon. God seemed before to have committed this office to Zechariah
--- to feed them; but as I have already said, the design of that was no other than to make it evident that the whole fault was in the people; for they had thrust from them the kindness of God, and in a manner carried on war frowardly with God, so as to prevent any access for his favor. There is therefore here an expostulation in God's name.
I have fed, he says, the flock of slaughter, even the poor of the flock. Some render
{,}לכןon account of; but it may be taken in an explanatory sense: or we may give this rendering --- ``therefore the poor,'' or, especially the poor. With regard to the meaning, God here intimates that he had manifested his care for the whole people, for he had hoped that there were a few sheep yet remaining worthy of having mercy shown to them. As then some poor sheep might have been found among the impure flock, God says, that having this hope, he did not deem it grievous or burdensome to undertake the office of a shepherd in ruling the people. I have then fed the flock of slaughter, even for this reason, he says, because there were some miserable sheep among them: I was therefore unwilling to forsake them, and preferred to try all means rather than to cast away even one little sheep, provided a single one were found in the whole flock. 289
He says that he took two rods, that he called one {,}נעםnom, ``Beauty,'' and that he called the other {,}חבליםchebelim, ``Cords,'' rendered ``destroyers'' by those who adhere to the Hebrew points; but as {,}חבלboth in the singular and plural, has the meaning of a rope or cord, the Prophet, I have no doubt, means by {,}חבלים chebelim, ropes or bindings. Grammar, indeed, does not allow this; but Zechariah did not set down the points, for they were not then in use. I indeed know with how much care the old scribes contrived the points, when the language had already ceased to be in common use. They then who neglect, or wholly reject the points, are certainly void of all judgment and reason; but yet some discrimination ought to be exercised; 290 for if we read here ``destroyers,'' there is no meaning; if we read ``cords,'' there is no letter changed, but only two points are altered. As then the subject itself necessarily demands this meaning, I wonder that interpreters suffer themselves to be servilely constrained, so as not to regard the design of the Prophet.
The Prophet then says, that he had taken two rods, that he might devote himself
289This sentence has puzzled many, but needlessly. [{[{לכזhas sometimes the meaning of ,[{]}כזcertainly, surely, in truth, Jeremiah 5:2; and it may be rendered here ``especially,'' as Calvin does. The simple [{]}כזis used in a similar sense in verse 11, in connection with the same words in part, as here: them, to consider them as ``the poor of the flock,'' and not ``the miserable sheep,'' as rendered by Henderson. The rendering of Newcome gives the same meaning---''because of the poor of the flock.'' He considers that [{]}לכזhere signifies the same with ,[{]}למעזwhich is given in one MS., and agrees with the Syriac. --- Ed.
290Grotius speaks in a similar strain of the Punctuists, and agrees with Jerome and others in regarding the word of a similar import with that stated by Calvin. The 14th verse is a sufficient confirmation. It is rendered "[{σχοινισμα}], bond,'' by the Septuagint, Agg. and Sym. --- ``funiculi, ropes or cords,'' by the Vulgate. --- ``devincientes, binders,'' by Drusius and Marckius; and as in our version, ``bands,'' by Newcome and Henderson
MINOR PROPHETS
in a manner not common to the office of a shepherd. Shepherds were satisfied with one crook; for by rods he means here the crook used by shepherds. As then every shepherd carried his own crook, the Prophet says here that he was furnished with two crooks, or pastoral staffs, because the Lord surpassed all men in his solicitude in the office of ruling his people. But the remainder I must defer until tomorrow.
Prayer
Grant, Almighty God, that as thou hast hitherto so kindly showed thyself to be our Shepherd, and even our Father, and hast carefully provided for our safety, --- O grant, that we may not by our ingratitude deprive ourselves of thy favors, so as to provoke thy extreme vengeance, but on the contrary suffer ourselves to be gently ruled by thee, and render thee due obedience: and as thine only-begotten Son has been by thee set over us as our only true Shepherd, may we hear his voice, and willingly obey him, so that we may be able to triumph with thy Prophet, that thy staff is sufficient for us, so as to enable us to walk without fear through the valley of the shadow of death, until we shall at length reach that blessed and eternal rest, which has been obtained for us by the blood of thine only Son. --- Amen.
Lecture One Hundred and Fifty-eighth
We said yesterday that the word {,}חבליםchebelim, the name given by Zechariah to the second rod, could not be rendered ``destroyers,'' as all the Hebrews do; for God teaches us that he had fully and faithfully discharged the duties of a shepherd, so that the people perished through their own fault; and since God undertook the office of a shepherd, it could not have been said that he took a staff to destroy them: and there is also no doubt but that he connects this word with the other, {,}נעםnom, ``beauty.'' And he says in the last place, that this rod called {,}חבליםchebelim, was broken, in order to show that the brotherhood between Judah and Israel was come to an end. Now what affinity can there be between destroying and uniting? It is then clear that the word {,}חבליםchebelim, is to be taken here for ropes, or cords.
Let us now see why the Prophet calls one ``Beauty,'' and the other ``Ropes.''
Some think that the law of nature is designated by {,}נעםnom, and by {,}חבלים chebelim, the law of Moses, and those who render the word ``Lines,'' such as Jerome, who gives here the right version, think that as the law was a hard yoke on the ancients, the rod was so called because it bound them fast. Others, as Jerome also does, refer to this passage of Moses, ``When the Lord cast his line, he chose a place for Israel, and when the Highest divided the nations,'' etc. They then think that a line is taken for an inheritance. But the first interpretation is too remote and distorted; with regard to the second, as the Prophet puts the word in the plural number, it cannot be suitably taken for an inheritance, and, as we said yesterday, the following clause shows that the idea of union is included in it.
The meaning of the Prophet then is, that God had so performed his office of a shepherd towards his people, as to rule them in the best manner; this I understand by the word {,}נעםnom, beauty, for nothing could have been more perfect in beauty than the government which God had exercised over the Israelites; and hence he compares here his pastoral staff to beauty, as though he had said, ``The order of things was so arranged that nothing could be imagined better.'' He then mentions