am not filled with
compassion for you.'" The import of the [Hebrew: li], viz., that God
could exalt that which was low, the believer saw, in a type, in David;
and there is no doubt that the prophet was anxious indirectly to
refer them to this type, and thereby to strengthen their faith in
the promise, which appeared almost incredible. He (David) had been
a native of the humble, little Bethlehem, the youngest among his
brothers, without power, without renown. In order that the [Hebrew: li]
might become the more evident, the Lord, at his election, gave such a
direction to the circumstances, that this, his natural lowliness, might
be most strikingly exhibited. It was God who raised him from being a
shepherd of lambs, to be a shepherd of nations.

In contrast with the Messiah's human and lowly origin. His divine and
lofty dignity is prominently brought out in the last words of the
verse,--a contrast similar to that in the case of Bethlehem, to which
the prophet thereby refers. Here also, the prophet has so clearly
expressed the contrast by the words themselves, that, upon the _homines
bonae voluntatis_ among the interpreters of all ages, it has most
forcibly impressed itself. Thus, _e.g._, _Chrysostom_, _demonstratio
adv. Judaeos et Gentiles, quod Christus sit Deus_, opp. T. V., p. 739:
"He exhibits both Godhead and manhood. For in the words, 'His goings
forth are from the beginning, from the days of eternity,' His existence
from all eternity is revealed; while in the words, 'Shall come forth
the ruler who feeds My people Israel,' His origin according to the
flesh is revealed." A more minute inquiry into the meaning of these
words must begin with the investigation of [Hebrew: mvcativ]. The
greater number of interpreters agree in this, that [Hebrew: mrcah],
the feminine form of the more common [Hebrew: mvca] here denotes the
action of the going forth. But this is opposed by the following
considerations. 1. The use of the plural. Those especially [Pg 487] who
here think of the eternal going forth of the Son from the Father,
cannot by any means Justify it. Several among them consider it as
_plur. majest._ Thus, _e.g._, do _Tarnovius_ and _Frischmuth_, in the
_Dissert. de Nativitate Messiae_, in the remarks on this passage, Jena
1661. But although such a plural exists, indeed, in Hebrew, and many
traces of it are to be found (compare my _Dissertations on the
Genuineness of the Pentateuch_, i. p. 267 ff.), it could appear here,