of even
those proper names which consist of one word only. The two cases
mentioned by _Kimchi_ will serve as instances. "Jehovah my Banner" is a
concise expression for: "This altar is consecrated to Jehovah my
Banner;" [Hebrew: al alhi iwral] for: "This altar belongs to the
Almighty, the God of Israel." A number of other instances might easily
be quoted; one need only compare, in _Hiller's_ and _Simonis'_
Onomastica, the names which are compounded with Jehovah. Thus, _e.g._,
Jehoshua, _i.e._, Jehovah salvation, is a concise expression for:
Jehovah will grant me salvation; Jehoram, _i.e._, _Jehovah altus_, for:
I am consecrated to the exalted God of Israel. Most perfectly
analogous, however, is the name Zedekiah, _i.e._, the righteousness of
the Lord, for: He under whose reign the Lord will grant righteousness
to His people. This name, moreover, seems to refer directly to the
prophecy before us. Just as Eliakim, by changing his name into
Jehoiakim, intended to represent himself as he in whom the prophecy in
2 Sam. vii. would be fulfilled; so he who was formerly called Mattaniah
changed, at the instance of Nebuchadnezzar (who had, indeed, no other
object in view than that, as a sign of his supremacy, his name should
be different from that by which he was formerly called, and who left
the choice of the name to Mattaniah himself), his name into Zedekiah,
imagining that in a manner so easy, he would become the Jehovah Zidkenu
announced by Jeremiah, and longed for by the people. 2. The preceding
argument only showed that there is nothing opposed to the exposition:
He by whom and under whom Jehovah will be our righteousness. A positive
proof, however, in favour of it is offered by the parallel passage,
chap. xxxiii. 15, 16: "In those days and at that time will I cause a
righteous Branch to grow up unto David; and He worketh justice and
righteousness in the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and
Jerusalem shall dwell safely, and this is the name which they shall
give to _her_: Jehovah our righteousness." Here Jehovah Zidkenu by no
means [Pg 421] appears as the name of the Messiah, but as that of
Jerusalem in the Messianic time. In vain are all the attempts which
have been made to set aside this troublesome argument. They only serve
to show, that it cannot be invalidated. _Le Moyne_, "in order that no
way of escape may be left to the enemies," brings forward, p. 298 ff.,
five different expedients among which the reader may