The Pulpit Commentary — Zechariah — Section 146

higher t,he Lnwgiver, the more this rensoning holds. The greater also, s11ch being the case, and that both in itself and also before him, is the offence of rebelling against him. And it is this "offence," this deadly "offence," that the mystical fountain here described in the first place-providing, as it does," a full, perfect, and snfficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world"-so entirely brings to an end. Bee how' emphatically this is taught generally in Rom. viii. 1 ; iii. 25. And see how the same appears to be taught Rpecially concerning Jerusalem and its inhabitants in the future in such passages as Isa. xl. 2; xliii. 25; Jer. I. 20 (see also Dan. ix. 24). Now their" iniqt1ities have separated," as described in Isa. !ix. 2, "between them and their God, and their sins have made him [margin] hide his face from them, that he will not hear." Then, through that "opened fountain," this will all be reversed. No longer separated or concealed from them, he will accept their prayers with "delight" (see John iv. 23, end; Prov. xv. 8). II. THE END OF ITS POLLUTION. Besides being an offence to God, sin is an injury to ourselves. Being altogether unworthy of us in every respect, it brings about, and that immediately, our own degradation and shame. It involves pollution, that is to say, as well as guilt. And it further involves, such being the case, in addition to the before-mentioned separation or alienation of God's favour from us, the separation or alienation of our nature from him. This second evil would seem to be described in our text (see margin) as "separation" for or by means of "uncleanness." How such alienation on man's part through the pollution of sin is evidenced, we may see in Gen. iii. 8; Luke v. 8; Isa. xxx. 11; Rom. i. 28, beginning; and also in that which is assumed respecting us in the gracious appeal of 2 Cor. v. 20. On the other hand, how entirely this second alienation can be overcome by the remedy of our text is seen in 1 John i. 7, end; John xii. 32. And how completely both this and the previously mentioned alienation are to be removed in the case of Judah and Israel at the last, as here described, we may perhaps see in Jer. xxxi. 31-34-, especially as quoted and summarized in Heb. x. 16, 17 and elsewhere. . u· this interpretation is accepted, we may learn hence for ourselves, in concluding: 1. The necessity of Christ's death. In all cases we see it is thus that God has appointed as to doing away with our sins. It is only by the "fountain" in this way provided, and not by any fountain of tears on man's part, however copious, however unexampled, however certainly due even to an influence from above (eh. xii. 10), that the "double cure" of sin can be wrought. "Could my tears for ever flow," eto. 2. The necessity of man's faith. The necessity, we mean, of course, where there is th1o capacity for faith in existence. Till that capacity for faith is exercised, no matter what the object of faith, what can it do'/ Till the" fountain" in this way be "opened" -in other words, be discovered and used-whom can it cleanse? (See Rom. v. 1 and Acts xv. 9 respectively for the two sides of this truth.) 3. The abundance of God's grace-whether to pardon or heal. It is not a cistern, not even a well, but a fountain, to which we find it compared (comp. Jer. ii. 13; John iv. 12, 13). No limitation as to supply. No limitation as to use (see Deut. xi. 10, 11).