this prayer will result, after the capture of Jerusalem and the miraculous overthrow of the captors, in the conversion of Judah to Christianity. [VI.] Now, if the reader will refer to chap. vii., p. 320, suprà, he will find four distinct types selected, by which it is proved that Ezekiel's prophecy concerning Gog and Magog in chaps. xxxviii. and xxxix., and Zechariah's prophecy against "thy sons, O Greece” (chaps. ix. and x.), have reference to the same order or series of events. These four types are, 1. Each prophecy is referred to the latter days or Christian era for fulfilment. 2. Each series of events is described by each prophet as after a restoration of the Jews. 3. The deliverance of the Jews foretold by each is in consequence of miraculous interposition. 4. Each asserts that the deliverance he foretels will be followed by the conversion of the Jews. For these four good reasons we said that Ezekiel and Zechariah were foretelling the same order or series of events. But each of these types, or characteristics, or conditions is exactly met by Joel. applied and limited to these last days. of multitudes against restored Judah. miraculously overthrown in the midst of victory. 4. This overthrow is followed by Judah's conversion to Christianity. We infer, therefore, that Joel also, like Zechariah, foretels the same order or series of events as Ezekiel; and that, therefore, Ezekiel's Gog and Magog, Zechariah's "sons of Greece," and Joel's multitudes of "multitudes in the valley of decision," are different titles for the same military combination of northern people gathered together to war against Jerusalem. So "Alii putant hanc prophetiam implendam tempore Meschiæ, quem inani exspectant spe, quando Gog et Magog propè Jerusalem a Meschiâ interficietur." ("Critici Sacri," on Joel iii.) 1. His prophecy is directly 2. He foretels a confederacy 3. He says they will be The general important lessons deducible from the harmony of these and other prophecies will be pointed out, with God's permission, in a concluding chapter. But for the present certain valuable facts may be noted by comparing Joel's with Zechariah's. First. Joel prophesies especially for Judah, or the two, and we find scarcely an allusion to Israel, or the ten, unless at chap. iii. 2 and 16. It is plain from Joel, that, when this confederacy takes place, the two will be in possession of Jerusalem, but we can scarcely from him determine whether any members of the ten will be with them. Zechariah distinctly settles this, chap. ix. 13, upon which we have shown at p. 301 that Ephraim, or members of the ten, will fight under the leadership of Judah; this being like the bow, those as the arrow: and Ezek. xxxviii. 39 corroborates it. Second. We ventured to infer only from Zech. ix. 5, that the fighting he predicted would actually take place at Jerusalem (p. 299, suprà). Joel enables us distinctly to say that Jerusalem will be literally besieged, and taken, and pillaged: and the fighting at Jerusalem inferred from Zechariah's language is immediately accounted for and explained by Joel's. It was not necessary that on such a matter Zechariah, the later prophet, should be plainer when Joel had been so distinct. Third. While Zechariah depicts actual and most courageous fighting by Judah and Ephraim at Jerusalem (chap. v. 6), he also explicitly attributes their deliverance to the especial interposition of God (chap. viii. 14-16); whence we might infer, that the fighting itself, though glorious, was not efficient unto victory; Joel distinctly assures it shall be insufficient, for the city will assuredly be taken. According to Joel, the Most High delivers Judah at the very moment of defeat. Fourth. Zechariah tells us that Judah and Ephraim will fight, which Joel does not ; but Zechariah did not say that Judah would fast and pray publicly and nationally, which Joel does. Thus putting Zechariah and Joel together, we learn that when Joel's multitudes besiege the Holy City, it will be in the occupation of Jews united with various people of the ten; that in that siege they will fast, and pray, and supplicate the Most High for deliverance; that, notwithstanding, the city will be taken, taken notwithstanding fighting of the most noble and courageous character; but, that, when so taken, the power of God will be manifested towards them, and in the midst of victory their enemies be overthrown. And in concluding this chapter I observe that the unconditional character of the prophecy has been proved in the course of the arguments advanced to justify its present application; and as to its literal meaning, viz., that it speaks of the literal Jews, the literal Judea, the literal Jerusalem, I shall merely suggest the heads of arguments to prove it. First. The judgment of the siege (chap. ii. 1—11) is undoubtedly predicted against the literal Jerusalem; the blessings afterwards announced are affirmatively consequent upon that siege; therefore these blessings are to the literal Jerusalem and literal sons of Judah. Second. St. Peter (Acts ii. 16) has by inspiration certified the affirmative and literal meaning of chap. ii. 28-32, as the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon literal sons of Judah in the literal Jerusalem; but this prediction (vers. 28—32) is. but one part of the whole context (vers. 21-32), and essentially connected with it; therefore the whole paragraph (21-32), full of predictions of the choicest temporal and spiritual character, belongs to the literal sons of Judah in the literal Jerusalem. Third. It is admitted by all that chap. ii. does relate to the literal sons of Judah and the literal Jerusalem; and it behoves us to assign very excellent reasons before we presume to deprive those same sons of Judah of chap. iii. That is a vicious principle of interpretation which assigns the curses to the Jews, but complacently claims all the blessings for "the Church." Unless, indeed, the grand, real fact be acknowledged, that these blessings are for the Jews when by conversion they have become part of "the Church." Fourth. As certainly as the judgments in chap. iii. upon the Gentiles in the valley of Jehoshaphat are upon, or Gentiles as contradistinguished from the literal Jews, so certainly the blessings of deliverance and adoption resulting from that judgment are blessings bestowed upon literal Jews as contradistinguished from the Dia, or Gentiles. CHAPTER XI. "THE KING IN HIS BEAUTY."-ISAIAH XXXIII. 17. "THE subject of this and the four following chapters is the invasion of Sennacherib; the great distress of the Jews while it continued; their sudden and unexpected deliverance by God's immediate interposition in their favour; the subsequent prosperous state of the kingdom under Hezekiah: a part of Lowth's excellent summary of the contents of these five chapters, viz., Isaiah xxix.— xxxiii. (see his "Isaiah," vol. ii., p. 206), enabling us upon his high authority to treat them "as a collection of different discourses upon the same subject," in which "the prophet seldom goes far from his subject." A summary by this most excellent commentator, which is in the main correct; for, 1. The prophecy does predict an invasion, but also something more, viz., a siege of Jerusalem. 2. It does foretel the great alarm, and distress, and helplessness of the Jews while that siege lasts. 3. It does predict their sudden and unexpected deliverance by God's immediate interposition in their favour, and other matters of equal importance connected with and resulting from that deliverance. But, 4. It does not refer chiefly to Sennacherib; nor is Hezekiah, "the king," to be seen by rescued Israel "in his beauty." Our object on the present occasion, as in the chapter referring to the "sons of Greece," is not to deny that this may have some reference to Sennacherib, as that to Alexander's successors, but to prove that its chief and proper application is to other times and events, because its chief characteristics were not then fulfilled-just as the chief conditions of Zech. ix. 10 were not fulfilled under the Maccabees, nor nearly so. This connexion between the five chapters, xxix.-xxxiii., of Isaiah, thus asserted by Lowth, will become manifest to the plainest reader as we endeavour to harmonize their contents. But our first step in the present investigation will be based upon the connexion which is undoubtedly observable between chaps. xxx. and xxxi., each H H of which, the reader may remark, is alike a woe addressed to the house of Judah, as "rebellious children" that walk to go down into Egypt for help, and relied not upon the power and promises of God. (Chap. xxx. 1-7; and xxxi. 1-5.) : [I.] Of the thirtieth chapter the last verse is as follows :-"For Tophet is ordained of old; yea, for the king it is prepared; he hath made it deep and large: the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it." Let us imagine this verse submitted separately from its context for our consideration. Such remarks as follow would probably suggest themselves: Some place, called Tophet, perhaps a place and name well known by the Jews to whom Isaiah spake, is mentioned as having been appointed of old time the scene where somewhat, not particularly described, shall be destroyed by fire. But it is not stated plainly where this Tophet is; neither is it said what is to be destroyed, nor why. Since, however, it is affirmed that this Tophet has been ordained "of old," it would seem to be implied that He who ordained it is the Sovereign of Time, is the Lord the Creator, the Great God of Eternity who absolutely appoints events and the scenes of them by the counsels of his own will. The Lord, therefore, it would probably be inferred, is He who ordained Tophet of old. But He alone who ordained Tophet for a purpose could adapt it to the purpose for which it was ordained; therefore the Lord is He who " hath made it deep and large.” But since the Lord God was He who ordained Tophet and adapted it to its purpose a purpose necessarily of the Lord's own designing-it is suggested at once that the purpose of destruction for which Tophet is ordained, must have some relation to the Lord's spiritual purposes towards man, and, probably, relation towards those spiritual purposes as connected with the very people among whom Isaiah was prophesying; and that, therefore, the destruction foretold as by fire in Tophet has some connexion with the history of those people. But, at least, it must be considered manifest that He who ordained Tophet for his own purpose is the Lord; "He made it deep and large, and his breath, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it." And yet it is said, "For the king it is prepared; he hath made it deep and large." Is then, the verse suggests-is the Lord who ordained and prepared Tophet, is He also king? The reading seems to imply that He is : "Yea, for the king it is prepared; and he, 'the king,' hath made it |