1.09. Appendix Note 2
NOTE 2
“The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come, and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be.”—Genesis 49:10. With regard to this prophecy, the first thing I want to point out is that all antiquity agrees in interpreting it of a personal Messiah. This is the view of the LXX. version; the Targumim of Onkelos, Yonathan, and Jerusalem; the Talmud; the Sohar; the ancient book of “Bereshith Rabba;” and, among modern Jewish commentators, even of Rashi, who says, “Until Shiloh come, that is King Messiah, Whose is the kingdom.” The word שׁ֙בֶט֙, as already said, means more accurately the “Tribal Staff,” denoting tribal independence. Thus it is used in Genesis 49:16, in Judges 5:14 (Heb.), and in many other places in the Scriptures. Some modern Jews attempt to render it “rod of correction,” in order to manufacture for themselves an argument against the claims of Jesus, “for,” say they, “does not the rod of correction still lay heavily upon us? how can the Messiah have come?” But they entirely overlook that שֵּׁ֙בֶט֙ “sceptre,” must be parallel to מְחֹקֵ֖ק, “Lawgiver,” and must therefore imply a rod of authority and not of correction. This is endorsed by the Targum of Onkelos, and by almost every Jewish commentator and modern Jewish translations of the Old Testament.
“Nor a Lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come.”
Some Jews divide the passage and translate ֤עַד , “until,” “for ever,” rendering it thus, “Nor a Law giver from between his feet for ever, for Messiah” (Shiloh) “will come, and Him will the people obey.” But this rendering is contrary to the Targum of Onkelos, Aben Ezra, and a good many other ancient and modern Jewish commentators. And, besides, we have Scripture authority for saying that כִּֽי ֤עַד must be taken together, and that it signifies “until.” So it must mean in Genesis 26:13, “And the man waxed great and grew more and more until” (כִּֽי עַ֥ד) “he became very great;” Genesis 41:49, “And Joseph laid up corn as the sand of the sea, very much, until” (כִּי עַ֥דִ) “he left numbering;” 2 Samuel 23:10, “He arose and smote the Philistines until” (כִּֽי עַ֣ד) “his hand was weary.”
Some modern Jews, in common with rationalists, translate thus, “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, or a Lawgiver from between his feet, until he come to Shiloh;” but first, as already said, there is not a shred of evidence that the town of that name existed at all in the days of Jacob. It is not mentioned in the Pentateuch, and occurs first in Joshua 18:1, where the circumstances suggest that it was then, or subsequently, named Shiloh because the ark and the children of Israel rested there (compare Psalms 132:8).
Secondly, it is contrary to fact, for this rendering would imply that the leadership would devolve upon Judah until they came to Shiloh, while Judah’s supremacy never properly commenced till a long time after they reached Shiloh. Judah only was foremost in fighting, but Moses, who led Israel for forty years, was of the tribe of Levi; and Joshua, who brought them to Shiloh, was an Ephraimite.
Thirdly, it ignores wilfully that the prophecy was delivered by one who himself waited for the salvation of Jehovah (Genesis 49:18), and was distinctly announced by him as having reference to the הַיׇּמִֽים בְּאַחֲרִ֥ית, “last days” (Genesis 49:1), which, as already said, signifies the time of Messiah (see Daniel 2:28; Isaiah 2:2; Micah 1:1; Hosea 3:5).1 1 See Chapter 1, footnote 9.
Fourthly, it makes the whole passage unintelligible, for who is he, if Shiloh be not a person, to whom the peoples gather? And be it remembered that עַמִּֽים, “peoples,” here signifies the Gentile nations (compare Genesis 27:29; Exodus 15:14; Deuteronomy 32:8). Did the nations pay homage to Judah when he came to Shiloh? No amount of ingenuity or sophistry will make anything else of this passage but a prophecy which has been fulfilled in Jesus Christ; and the manner in which it has been handled by some Jews (who, in this respect, act contrary to the authority of their own traditions) and rationalists only proves the extremes to which those are driven who reject Him.
I purposely abstain from theorising upon the real or most likely significance and derivation of the word שִׁילֹה “Shiloh,” as nothing new can be said on it. Whether Shiloh is the same as Solomon, and signifies “Peace” (compare Micah 5:4-5), or whether, as Onkelos, Rashi, and others would have it, it signifies “Whose it is,” or “He to Whom it belongs,” both significations apply alike only to the Messiah, Who is the Prince of peace (Isaiah 9:6), and to Whom the universe and the kingdom of this world belong by “right” (Ezekiel 21:27). For more elaborate criticisms on this passage, and especially on the word “Shiloh,” see Hengstenberg, “Christology of the Old Testament,” who says, “With respect to the signification of the name, the analogy of the name שְׁלֹמֹֽה, ‘Solomon,’ which is formed after the manner of שִׁילֹה, ‘Shiloh,’ indicates that it has here an adjective signification, and, like Solomon, Shiloh denotes ‘the man of rest,’ corresponds to the Prince of ‘Peace’ (Isaiah 9:6), and, viewed in its character of a proper name, is like the German ‘Friedrich’—Frederick, i.e., rich in peace, or the peaceful one.” See also Pusey, “Lectures on Daniel,” p. 255, and McCaul, “Messiahship of Jesus,” who argues that Shiloh is a noun of the form שָׁלָה “and signifies peace, or the peaceful one.”