the succession is by son after son; and when in some instances the reigning king was cut off, still his place is supplied by a son in the same line and order of descent, This is a fact strictly ascertained throughout the genealogy; and the evidence of it is. obtruded upon us by the recurring phrase at the end of so many reigns,-"his son reigned in his stead." According to what had been foretold, "There shall "not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the "throne of Israel*." Take then the entire circumstances of the two kingdoms. On the side of that of Israel, Three complete extirpations of the reigning familiest, each distinctly foretold; the deposition of the house of Jehu in the fourth generation, this also foretold; with other confusions of the order of the kingdom. On the side of Judah, One family, through a longer period of time, One line, to the end of the kingdom. There was therefore something stable and fixed in this comparative state of David's house, whilst it lay open to the inroad of the same causes of change; something which bespoke a protecting care. There was a security which even great transgression in its kings could not forfeit. Insurrection and conspiracy

could not subvert it.

Athaliah's sanguinary domes

tic treason could not defeat it. The confederacy of Syria and Ephraim, leagued to set up a new king

1 Kings viii. 25.

+ Extirpations πανωλεθρίᾳ πανοικεί. 2 Kings xxi. 24.

in Jerusalem, could not disturb it. The great flood of the Assyrian invasion could not overwhelm it*. These are facts; and they are facts in which the public annals of the two kingdoms could not be falsified. There was then a special Providence in the preservation of that one family and throne. It was upheld when ruin was around it. The fact of its preservation is a rock upon which Prophecy will rest.

Perhaps few persons read the history of these two kingdoms without some feeling of distaste and a painful repugnance: the general picture of it is so dark, so deeply charged with the crimes of bad princes, and a sequacious people; their bold sin, public unthankfulness, apostacy, wars, tumults, and treasons. In the midst of this confused scene, it is some relief to watch the stability of prophecy, and perceive that the disorders and commotions, otherwise so distasteful, contribute to authenticate the veracity of one promise of God. There is a fixed point, a spot of light, for the mind to revert to. It is that of a prophecy always under trial, and always confirmed. Add to that prophecy its singu lar connexion with Christianity, and its confirmation touches upon our Christian belief. For Christ

For these points, one by one, see the following passages: 1 Kings ix. 32; 2 Kings ix. 19; xxi. 24; xi. 3. Isaiah vii. 6; 2 Kings xix. 34.

is "the root and offspring of David ;" and the prophecies relating to both are in their evidence connected together.

To preserve the unity of the subject which we have in hand, it will be right to look forward here to the end of it. As this favoured kingdom rose upon the word of prophecy, its dissolution was marked in the same way. Jeremiah had one special mission to the house of the king of Judah. "Thus saith the Lord, Go down to the house of the "king of Judah, and speak there this word: and

say, Hear the word of the Lord, O king of Judah, "that sittest upon the throne of David." The burden of the prediction is the memorable text which follows; "O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the "Lord. Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man "childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: "for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon "the throne of David, and ruling any more in "Judah *."

The deep pathetic force of this chapter of prophecy cannot be unknown; but it must be read also in another view, as God's solemn revocation of the title to the earthly kingdom. It is his interdict laid upon the house of David; the withering of that sceptre which he had blessed. Why that invocation, "O earth, earth, earth! hear the word of the Lord;

66

* Jeremiah xxii. 29.

but to attest the departure of the favour and prerogative of his promise? Nothing but his former word, sealing the promise, could have created the appeal, or given the earth an ear to listen to that invocation. But what is there for the world to listen to, if it be not these promulgations wherein God explains his righteous government over the kings and families of the earth, and proclaims the repeal of his most distinguished favour, when the transgression of man has wrought the defeasance of it?

From the time when prophecy passed this sentence of deprivation upon the person of Coniah (or Jeconias,) there is an end of the power and lustre of the house of David; for as to the precarious and tumultuary reign of Zedekiah, who was set up for a few years by the king of Babylon, before the Captivity, or the transient delegated authority of Zerubbabel, after it, they make no exception of any moment to the perfect execution of that sentence. The people were restored, but not the kingdom. It fell, it lay prostrate, till Christ came, and repaired its ruins on a new foundation, in his greater kingdom*.

Calvin, upon the text in Jeremiah, says, "Gratia Dei ab"scondita erat et interrupta, non autem extincta; successu enim "temporis rursus emersit, partim in Zorobabele, sed præcipue in "Christo. Fœdus ergo Dei nunquam excidit." Which comment of that great writer is a warning example, to shew how far the desire of accommodating Scripture to an hypothesis may wrest

♦

The reign and success of the Maccabees, which intervened before the coming of Christ, make a bright epoch in the later history. But herein the removal of David's temporal throne was shewn the more, when the favour and glory of that

prosperous

its interpretation. For the temporal dominion of David's house lasted four hundred and fifty years; and it lay deprived, before the coming of Christ, for a longer period, even if the prosperous times of Zerubbabel be added to the former account. Consequently, we might as well say it was not given, as that it was not taken away. But the conditional tenour of it was made as clear as the most expressive language could make it. It runs thus: "There shall not fail thee a man to sit on the throne of "Israel, so that thy children take heed to their way that they "walk before me, as thou hast walked before me." 1 Kings, viii. 25; ii. 4. The event is consistent therewith; but the author was unwilling either to read the condition, or see the truth of the fact, however conspicuous.

The genealogy of Zerubbabel is not quite clear. The opinion which makes him by birth the grandson of Jeconias (Coniah) is adopted by a learned Prelate, the present Bishop of Winchester. "Zerubbabel, frequently called in Scripture Shashbaz"zar, was the grandson of Jeconias, and consequently descended "from David." Elements of Christian Theology. But that opinion is scarcely to be reconciled with the rigorous denunciation of Jeremiah, " Write this man childless." Under the conviction that this sentence was executed in the total excision of Coniah's offspring, and that he was written childless in the genealogies of Israel, if childless be the true sense of the word in the original, I would follow the idea of Grotius; viz., Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel; but Salathiel hæres Assiris, et Jeconiæ hæres legitimus, non naturalis.-Grot. in Luc. iii. 23. But see a further consideration of this point in a Note at the end of the Volume.