John Calvin Commentary Genesis 49:10

"The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler`s staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh come: And unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be." — Genesis 49:10 (ASV)

The scepter shall not depart. Although this passage is obscure, it would not have been very difficult to discern its genuine meaning if the Jews, with their usual malice, had not tried to envelop it in obscurity. It is certain that the Messiah, who was to spring from the tribe of Judah, is promised here.

But while they should willingly run to embrace him, they deliberately grasp at every possible subterfuge by which they might lead themselves and others far astray onto winding side-paths. It is no wonder, then, that the spirit of bitterness and obstinacy, and the desire for contention have so blinded them that, in the clearest light, they have continually stumbled.

Christians, too, with a pious diligence to proclaim the glory of Christ, have nevertheless revealed some excessive zeal. For when they place too much emphasis on certain words, they achieve nothing more than giving the Jews an opportunity for ridicule, whom it is necessary to confine with firm and powerful arguments from which they will be unable to escape.

Warned, therefore, by such examples, let us seek the true meaning of the passage without contention. First, we must keep in mind the true purpose of the Holy Spirit, which, until now, has not been adequately considered or explained with sufficient clarity. After he has endowed the tribe of Judah with supreme authority, he immediately declares that God would show his care for the people by preserving the kingdom's stability until the promised happiness should reach its peak.

For the dignity of Judah is maintained in such a way as to show that its intended purpose was the common salvation of all the people. The blessing promised to the descendants of Abraham (as we have seen before) could not be secure unless it flowed from one head. Jacob now testifies to the same thing: namely, that a King would come, under whom that promised happiness would be complete in every aspect.

Even the Jews will not deny that while a lesser blessing rested on the tribe of Judah, the hope of a better and more excellent condition was presented in this. They also freely grant another point: that the Messiah is the sole Author of complete and solid happiness and glory. We now add a third point, which we can also do without any opposition from them: namely, that the kingdom which began with David was a kind of prelude and shadowy representation of that greater grace which was delayed and held in suspense until the coming of the Messiah.

Indeed, they have no appetite for a spiritual kingdom; therefore, they prefer to imagine for themselves wealth and power, and look forward to sweet rest and earthly pleasures, rather than righteousness, newness of life, and the free forgiveness of sins. Nevertheless, they acknowledge that the happiness to be expected under the Messiah was foreshadowed by their ancient kingdom. I now return to the words of Jacob.

Until Shiloh come, he says, the scepter, or the dominion, shall remain in Judah. We must first see what the word שילוה (Shiloh) means. Because Jerome interprets it as “He who is to be sent,” some think that the text has been fraudulently corrupted by substituting the letter ה (he) for the letter ח (cheth); this objection, though not strong, is plausible.

The supposition of some Jews, namely, that it denotes the place (Shiloh) where the ark of the covenant had long been deposited—because, a little before the beginning of David’s reign, it had been laid waste—is entirely without reason. For Jacob does not predict here the time when David was to be appointed king; rather, he declares that the kingdom would be established in his family until God would fulfill what he had promised concerning the special blessing of the descendants of Abraham.

Besides, the expression “until Shiloh come,” if taken to mean “until Shiloh comes to an end,” would be harsh and forced. Other interpreters far more correctly and consistently take this expression to mean “his son,” because among the Hebrews a son is called שיל (shil). They also say that ה (he) is put in place of the relative ו (waw); and most agree with this meaning. But again, the Jews entirely disagree with the patriarch’s meaning by referring this to David.

For (as I have just hinted) what is promised here is not the origin of the kingdom in David, but its absolute perfection in the Messiah. And truly, such a gross absurdity does not require a lengthy refutation. For what can it mean that the kingdom should not come to an end in the tribe of Judah until it has been established?

Certainly the word depart means nothing else than to cease. Furthermore, Jacob points to a continued succession when he says the scribe shall not depart from between his feet. For it is fitting for a king to be so placed upon his throne that a lawgiver may sit between his feet. Therefore, a kingdom is described to us which, after it has been established, will not cease to exist until a more perfect state succeeds it; or, what amounts to the same thing, Jacob honors the future kingdom of David with this title because it was to be the token and pledge of that happy glory previously ordained for the descendants of Abraham.

In short, he declares that the kingdom which he transfers to the tribe of Judah will be no ordinary kingdom, because from it, eventually, will proceed the fullness of the promised blessing. But here the Jews haughtily object that the outcome proves us wrong. For it appears that the kingdom by no means lasted until the coming of Christ; but rather that the scepter was broken from the time the people were carried into captivity.

But if they believe the prophecies, I wish, before I answer their objection, that they would tell me how Jacob here assigns the kingdom to his son Judah. For we know that when it had scarcely become Judah's secure possession, it was suddenly torn apart, and nearly all its power was possessed by the tribe of Ephraim.

According to these men, has God promised here, by the mouth of Jacob, some fleeting kingdom? If they reply that the scepter was not broken then, even though Rehoboam was deprived of a great part of his people, they can by no means escape by this quibble, because the authority of Judah is expressly extended over all the tribes by these words: Your mother’s sons shall bow down to you. Therefore, they bring nothing against us that we cannot immediately, in turn, retort upon themselves.

Yet I confess the question is not yet solved; but I wanted to state this first, so that the Jews, setting aside their tendency to slander, may learn to examine the matter itself calmly with us. Christians are commonly accustomed to connect perpetual government with the tribe of Judah in the following way.

They say that when the people returned from exile, in place of the royal scepter was the government that lasted until the time of the Maccabees. Afterwards, a third mode of government followed, because the chief power of judging rested with the Seventy, who, it appears from history, were chosen from the royal line.

Now, this authority of the royal line was so far from having fallen into decay that Herod, having been summoned before it, escaped capital punishment with difficulty because he defiantly withdrew from it. Our commentators, therefore, conclude that although the royal majesty did not shine brightly from David until Christ, some preeminence nevertheless remained in the tribe of Judah, and thus the prophecy was fulfilled.

Although these things are true, still more skill must be used in correctly discussing this passage. And, first, it must be kept in mind that the tribe of Judah was already established as chief among the others, preeminent in dignity, though it had not yet obtained dominion.

And truly, Moses elsewhere testifies that supremacy was voluntarily conceded to it by the remaining tribes from the time the people were redeemed out of Egypt. Second, we must remember that a more illustrious example of this dignity was shown in that kingdom which God had begun in David.

And although rebellion followed soon after, so that only a small portion of authority remained in the tribe of Judah, yet the right divinely conferred upon it could by no means be taken away. Therefore, at the time when the kingdom of Israel was filled with abundant wealth and swelling with lofty pride, it was said that the lamp of the Lord was lit in Jerusalem. Let us proceed further: when Ezekiel predicts the destruction of the kingdom (Ezekiel 21:26), he clearly shows how the scepter was to be preserved by the Lord until it should come into the hands of Christ: Remove the diadem, and take off the crown; this shall not be the same: I will overturn, overturn, overturn it, until he come whose right it is.

It may seem at first sight that Jacob’s prophecy had failed when the tribe of Judah was stripped of its royal ornament. But we conclude from this that God was not bound always to display the visible glory of the kingdom openly. Otherwise, those other promises which predict the restoration of the throne—which was cast down and broken—would be false. For it is written: Behold the days come in which I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof, and I will raise up his ruins (Amos 9:11).

However, it would be absurd to cite more passages, since this doctrine occurs frequently in the prophets. From this we infer that the kingdom was not so established as always to shine with equal brightness; but that, though for a time it might lie fallen and disfigured, it would afterwards recover its lost splendor.

Indeed, the prophets seem to make the return from the Babylonian exile the end of that ruin; but since they predict the restoration of the kingdom in the same way as they do that of the temple and the priesthood, it is necessary that the whole period, from that liberation to the coming of Christ, should be included. Therefore, the crown was cast down, not for only one day, or from only one single head, but for a long time and in various ways, until God placed it on Christ, his own lawful king. And truly, Isaiah describes the origin of Christ as being very remote from all royal splendor: There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots (Isaiah 11:1).

Why does he mention Jesse rather than David, except because the Messiah was about to come from the rustic hut of a private citizen, rather than from a splendid palace? Why from a tree cut down, having nothing left but the root and the trunk, except because the majesty of the kingdom was to be almost trampled underfoot until the manifestation of Christ?

If anyone objects that Jacob’s words seem to have a different meaning, I answer that whatever God has promised at any time concerning the external condition of the Church was to be restricted in such a way that, in the meantime, he might execute his judgments in punishing people and might test the faith of his own people.

Indeed, it was no light trial that the tribe of Judah, in its third successor to the throne, should be deprived of the greater part of the kingdom. An even more severe trial followed when the king’s sons were put to death in their father’s sight, when he, with his eyes gouged out, was dragged to Babylon, and the whole royal family was eventually handed over to slavery and captivity.

But this was the most grievous trial of all: that when the people returned to their own land, they could in no way perceive the fulfillment of their hope, but were compelled to remain in sorrowful dejection. Nevertheless, even then, the saints, contemplating with the eyes of faith the scepter hidden under the earth, did not falter or become broken in spirit, so as to abandon their course.

Perhaps I will seem to grant too much to the Jews because I do not assign what they call a real dominion, in uninterrupted succession, to the tribe of Judah. For our interpreters, to prove that the Jews are still bound by a foolish expectation of the Messiah, insist on this point: that the dominion of which Jacob had prophesied ceased from the time of Herod. It is as if, indeed, they had not been tributaries five hundred years previously; as if, also, the dignity of the royal line had not been extinct as long as the tyranny of Antiochus prevailed; and as if, lastly, the Hasmonean line had not usurped for itself both the rank and power of princes, until the Jews became subject to the Romans.

And the proposed solution is not sufficient: namely, that either royal dominion or some lesser kind of government is disjunctively promised, and that from the time the kingdom was destroyed, the scribes remained in authority. For I, in order to mark the distinction between a lawful government and tyranny, acknowledge that counselors were joined with the king, who should administer public affairs justly and in an orderly manner.

While some of the Jews explain that the right of government was given to the tribe of Judah because it was unlawful for it to be transferred elsewhere, but that it was not necessary for the glory of the crown, once given, to be perpetuated, I consider it right to agree in part with this opinion.

I say, in part, because the Jews gain nothing by this quibble, who, in order to support their fiction of a Messiah yet to come, postpone that subversion of royal dignity which, in fact, occurred long ago.

For we must remember what I have said before: that while Jacob wished to sustain the minds of his descendants until the coming of the Messiah, lest they faint from the weariness of long delay, he set before them an example in their temporal kingdom. It is as if he had said that there was no reason why the Israelites, when the kingdom of David fell, should allow their hope to waver, since no other change would follow that could correspond to the blessing promised by God, until the Redeemer should appear.

The fact that the nation was grievously harassed and was under servile oppression for some years before the coming of Christ happened through the wonderful counsel of God, so that they might be urged by continual chastisements to desire redemption. Meanwhile, it was necessary for some collective body of the nation to remain, in which the promise might receive its fulfillment.

But now, when for nearly fifteen centuries they have been scattered and banished from their country, having no system of government, by what pretext can they imagine, from Jacob’s prophecy, that a Redeemer will come to them?

Truly, as I would not willingly gloat over their calamity, so, unless they, being subdued by it, open their eyes, I freely declare that they deserve to perish a thousand times without remedy.

It was also a most suitable method for keeping them in the faith that the Lord would have the sons of Jacob turn their eyes to one particular tribe, so that they might not seek salvation elsewhere, and that no vague imagination might mislead them. For this purpose, also, the election of this family is celebrated when it is frequently compared with and preferred to Ephraim and the others in the Psalms.

To us, also, it is no less useful for the confirmation of our faith to know that Christ had not only been promised, but that his origin had been pointed out, as if with a finger, two thousand years before he appeared.

And unto him shall the gathering of the people be. Here he truly declares that Christ would be a king, not over one people only, but that under his authority various nations will be gathered, so that they might unite. Indeed, I know that the word rendered “gathering” is explained differently by different commentators; but those who derive it from the root (קהה) to make it mean the weakening of the people, rashly and absurdly misapply what is said of the saving dominion of Christ to the bloodthirsty pride with which they are puffed up.

If the word obedience is preferred (as it is by others), the meaning will remain the same as the one I have followed. For this is the way the gathering will be accomplished: namely, that those who before were carried away to different pursuits will unite in obedience to one common Head.

Now, although Jacob had previously called the tribes that would spring from him by the name of peoples for the sake of amplification, this gathering is nevertheless of still wider extent. For, while he had included the whole body of the nation by their families when he spoke of the ordinary dominion of Judah, he now extends the boundaries of a new king, as if he were to say: “There will be kings of the tribe of Judah who will be preeminent among their brothers, and to whom the sons of the same mother will bow down; but eventually He will follow in succession, who will subject other peoples to himself.”

But this, we know, is fulfilled in Christ, to whom the inheritance of the world was promised; under whose yoke the nations are brought; and at whose will those who before were scattered are gathered together.

Moreover, a memorable testimony is given here to the calling of the Gentiles, because they were to be introduced into joint participation in the covenant, so that they might become one people with the natural descendants of Abraham, under one Head.