 |  |
participial noun, yatsar, is every whit as applicable to a fashioner of wood or metal as to
a fashioner of clay. The statement as to the presence of a "potter" in the house of the
Lord has no sanction from the Word of God. What material did the so-called "potter" of
Zech. 11: work in? The prophet was commanded to cast the silver he had received to this
craftsman, who was in the house of the Lord, and the context demands that this craftsman
was none other than a silversmith.
The prominence given to the gold and silver vessels in the Sanctuary, particularly in
that part of the book of Ezra that refers to the days of Zechariah, will suffice to account
for the presence of a silversmith or goldsmith in the house of the Lord. We need not,
however, go even so far afield as Ezra: we have but to turn to Zech. 6: 11 to see the
imperative necessity for some such craftsman being in attendance at the temple at that
very time:--
"Take silver and gold and make crowns, and set them upon Joshua the son of Josedech
the High Priest" (Zech. 6: 11).
This passage, moreover, is unique: it is the only place where a crown is ever said to
be made of silver.
Concluding this section, we observe that the LXX reads:
"Cast them into the
furnace", in both places where the A.V. has "potter".
We now deal positively with the passage in Matt. 27: 9, 10, ignoring all that has
been read into Zechariah to justify the reference to that prophet. Let us enquire where
there is a reference in Jeremiah to a command of the Lord to buy a field for silver.
"Thou hast said unto me, O Lord God, Buy thee the field for silver" (money)
(Jer. 32: 25).
"Men shall buy fields for silver" (money) (Jer. 32: 44).
Need we search further for the prophecy of Jeremiah which was fulfilled when the
potter's field was purchased for silver?
We now have to consider the parenthetical clause, viz., verses 9 and 10, of
Matt. 27: over which most of the trouble has arisen. Let us illustrate what we are
about to show is true in Matt. 27: by reference to quotations from Scripture
elsewhere. Matt. 1: 22, 23 quotes Isaiah's prophecy, but no one has any difficulty in
consequence of the insertion of the parenthetical and explanatory words: "which being
interpreted is, God with us", for they are very evidently added to the quotation by the
Evangelist himself. Again, in Matt. 21: 13 we read: "It is written, My house shall be
called the house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of thieves." If we prosecute a
search we shall discover that two separate passages are here quoted by the Lord: one
from Isa. 56: 7, and the other from Jer. 7: 11. Now supposing Matthew had said here:
"As it is written in the prophecy of Isaiah", would anyone refuse to admit the fact that
Jeremiah was also quoted? Let us see how the parenthetical words of Matt. 27:
would be understood if they had been otherwise worded. Supposing, for illustration, that