Zechariah is identified as the son of Berechiah and the grandson of Iddo. If Iddo is the priest who returned from Babylonian exile with Zerubbabel to the land of Judah, this would mean that Zechariah was a priest and comparatively young when called to be YHWH’s prophet. (Nehemiah 12:1, 4) His prophetic service began in the eighth Jewish month (mid-October to mid-November) of 520 BCE. This was in the second year of the reign of the Persian monarch Darius (also referred to as Darius the Great, Darius I, and Darius Hystaspes). (Zechariah 1:1)
At the same time as Zechariah carried out his prophetic service, Haggai served as YHWH’s prophet. Both men made known their divinely received messages to the people living in Jerusalem and the land of Judah. (Ezra 5:1) As evident from the book of Haggai, they did so in the city of Jerusalem. (Haggai 2:1-3) Before the start of their prophetic activity, unfavorable circumstances existed in the Jewish community. Enemy opposition had greatly interfered with the progress of work on the temple, and the enemies of the Jews finally succeeded in having the Persian monarch officially ban the rebuilding of Jerusalem. This brought a complete stop to the temple rebuilding work. (Ezra 4:4-24) Besides having to deal with the hostility of non-Israelites, many of the Jews suffered economically. Droughts, blight, mildew, and hail led to serious crop failures. As Haggai made clear to them, YHWH had withheld his blessing from them because of their failure to be wholeheartedly committed to rebuilding the temple. (Haggai 1:9-11; 2:17)
After a reference to the fourth year of King Darius (518 BCE), there is no additional dating found in the book of Zechariah. (Zechariah 7:1) From chapter 9 onward, the manner in which the prophetic messages are introduced differs, and there is no further mention of Zechariah, Zerubbabel, Joshua, the temple rebuilding work, visions, or angels. This has led to the widely held view that this section originated from another source or sources. Splitting the book into two parts, however, does not contribute anything significant to an understanding of the contents but has given rise to numerous conjectures (which will not be considered in this commentary).
The eighth Jewish month, Heshvan or Bul, corresponds to mid-October to mid-November. It was in this month during the second year of the reign of King Darius of Persia or in 520 BCE and about two months after Haggai proclaimed his first recorded message as YHWH’s prophet that the “word of YHWH” came to Zechariah (Zacharias [LXX]). (Haggai 1:1) It appears that Iddo (Addo [LXX]), Zechariah’s grandfather, was more prominent than his father Berechiah (Barachias [LXX]), for Zechariah (in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14) is called the “son of Iddo.” This may be regarded as a confirmatory indication that Zechariah was the grandson of the priest Iddo listed among those who returned with Zerubbabel from Babylonian exile about 17 years earlier. If this identification is correct, Zechariah (as did the priest Jeremiah more than a century earlier) began his service as a prophet when comparatively young. (1:1)
The Hebrew word naví’ and the corresponding Greek noun prophétes for “prophet” identify Zechariah as a proclaimer of the “word of YHWH” or the messages divinely revealed to him. While the messages included revelations regarding future developments, the predictive aspect was not the main focus of the declarations of the prophets. (1:1)
YHWH’s great anger with the “fathers” or ancestors of the Israelites who had returned from Babylonian exile is emphasized with the verb qatsáph and the corresponding noun qétseph (“YHWH was angry with your fathers [with] anger”). The Septuagint ends the sentence with the words “great anger.” Instead of being exclusively devoted to him, the “fathers” or forefathers had repeatedly disregarded his commands and the words he directed to them through his prophets. By their unfaithful conduct they made themselves the objects of YHWH’s great wrath. (1:2; see the Notes section.)
So that his contemporaries would not likewise anger YHWH, Zechariah was to urge them to return to “YHWH of hosts” (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]), the God with hosts of angels in his service. As the context and the prophesying of Haggai reveal, the return included resuming temple rebuilding. Upon their returning to YHWH as persons fully devoted to the doing his will, he would return to them, blessing them and their labors. (1:3; see the Notes section.)
Through Zechariah, YHWH appealed to the people not to be like their disobedient ancestors. To these forefathers the former prophets had proclaimed YHWH’s word to return from their “evil ways” and their “evil deeds,” abandoning their wayward course and then living in harmony with his commands. They, however, did not listen and refused to pay attention to YHWH. (1:4; see the Notes section.)
Those to whom the words of YHWH were directed knew the answer to the rhetorical questions. “Your fathers — where [are] they? And the prophets — do they live to limitless time?” The disobedient forefathers had died and had experienced the punitive judgments the prophets had announced in advance. Although the prophets also died, the word of YHWH through them did not become a dead word or a message that would never be fulfilled. (1:5)
The next question YHWH conveyed through Zechariah required those hearing it to respond. “But my words and my statutes that I commanded my servants the prophets [to proclaim], did they not overtake your fathers?” Those who heard this question are said to have “returned,” which may mean that they returned to YHWH in a repentant manner respecting their own failure in having been fully devoted to the doing of his will and then humbly acknowledged the justice of his dealings with them. “YHWH of hosts” (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]), the God with hosts of angels in his service, had dealt with them according to their ways and their deeds. (1:6)
The Septuagint rendering includes an appeal to those who heard the word of YHWH. “But accept my words and my statutes, which I command through my spirit to my servants the prophets. Did they not overtake your fathers?” Those who were addressed knew that YHWH’s words and the revealed consequences for failing to heed his statutes, commands, or regulations did overtake their forefathers. They experienced the punitive judgments that had been made known to them in advance through the operation of God’s spirit upon the prophets. Therefore, the people had good reason to be responsive to YHWH’s words and statutes. (1:6)
About two months later in the second year of the reign of King Darius (519 BCE), Zechariah received another divine revelation. It was then the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh Jewish month Shebat (mid-January to mid-February) and so would correspond to a day in the first half of February. The “word of YHWH,” as in verse 1, is said to have come to “Zechariah [Zacharias (LXX)] the son of Berechiah [Barachias (LXX)] the son of Iddo [Addo (LXX)], the prophet.” As the next verse indicates, the message came to Zechariah in a vision, for he referred to what he saw. (1:7; see verse 1 for additional comments.)
It was night when the prophet Zechariah saw a “man” mounted on a red (probably reddish brown like the soil) horse. Among the “myrtle trees” (Myrtus communis, aromatic evergreen shrubs that may attain a height of about 15 feet [c. 4.5 meters]) growing near the location where he found himself, the prophet could both see and hear this man (verse 10). According to the Septuagint (Rahlfs’ printed text), the man was positioned between “the two shaded mountains.” Verse 11 identifies this one as the “angel of YHWH.” (1:8; see the Notes section.)
Behind the “man” or the “angel of YHWH,” there were horsemen and their mounts, with the horses being of a different color — red (probably reddish brown), sorrel (perhaps chestnut or light reddish brown), and white. The three colors suggest the presence of three horses, but the Septuagint describes horses with four different colors — red, dapple gray, piebald or spotted, and white. Based on the context, the riders and their horses had returned from a reconnaissance mission and represent angelic forces. (1:8)
Puzzled by what he saw, Zechariah asked the angel who served as his guide and interpreter, “What [are] these, my lord?” The angel who communicated with him responded, “I will show you what these are.” (1:9)
Then the “man” or the angel of YHWH who was positioned among the myrtle trees (between the mountains [LXX]) answered Zechariah’s question. YHWH had sent out the horses with their riders to move about on the earth. As their report in the next verse reveals, the riders had been commissioned to observe developments there. (1:10)
The riders answered the angel of YHWH who was still among the myrtle trees (mountains [LXX]), telling him that they had found “all the earth sitting [dwelling or settled] and quiet” or undisturbed. This suggests that comparative peace and stability then existed in the lands under Persian control, with the earlier time of unrest and rebellion having ended. (1:11)
In Jerusalem and the former territory of the kingdom of Judah, however, evidence of the devastation from the Babylonian military campaigns remained. Therefore, the “angel of YHWH” asked “YHWH of hosts” (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]) about “how long” he would continue to have no mercy “on Jerusalem and the cities of Judah” against which he had been indignant “these seventy years.” With the temple still not rebuilt and extensive devastation visible in Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, it appeared that YHWH of hosts, the God with hosts of angels in his service, had not mercifully turned his favorable attention to his people and their cities but was still angry with them. The words “these seventy years” suggest that this period of years was drawing to a close, whereas the expected restoration of Jerusalem and the cities of Judah and the rebuilding of the temple had not materialized. (1:12; see the Notes section.)
YHWH’s response (that of the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]) to the angel who spoke to Zechariah in the capacity of his guide and his interpreter proved to be “good, comforting words.” They were words that conveyed a favorable message regarding Jerusalem and the temple. (1:13)
The angel who served as Zechariah’s guide and interpreter told him to call out or proclaim the message that YHWH had revealed. That message was, “Thus says YHWH of hosts [the Lord Almighty (LXX)], I am jealous [with] great jealousy for Jerusalem and for Zion.” Often Zion and Jerusalem are used interchangeably as parallel expressions. In this case, however, Jerusalem appears to designate the city as a whole, whereas Zion seems to denote the temple site. As the city YHWH had chosen, Jerusalem needed to be in a condition that properly represented him. (2 Kings 23:27) Therefore, his great jealousy or zeal for Jerusalem assured that he would see to it that it would be restored as a thriving city and cease to be an object of reproach in a state of ruin. The temple was his representative place of dwelling, and so his jealousy or zeal for Zion meant that the temple would be rebuilt. (1:14)
With “great anger” YHWH was angry with the nations that had contributed to the ruinous condition of Jerusalem. These nations are described as then being “at ease” (as “co-attacking” [LXX]) or in a state of security. It may be that the nations who are described in this manner designate the surrounding nations that opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem and could include the Persians, for the Persian monarch had officially banned the rebuilding of the city. (1:15; see Ezra 4:4-23.)
In expression of his anger against his unfaithful people, YHWH had permitted Jerusalem and the cities of Judah to be devastated and to remain in a state of ruin. He, though, was only angry to a limited extent — a “little.” His purpose was for Jerusalem and the temple to be rebuilt. The enemy nations, on the other hand, helped to bring about “evil,” calamity, or disaster. Their objective was to make sure that Jerusalem remained in a condition of permanent devastation. (Ezra 4:9-23) According to the Septuagint rendering, these nations had been guilty of “co-attacking for calamities.” They had joined in making an attack that was designed to keep Jerusalem in a state of ruin. (1:15)
“Therefore,” in keeping with his purpose, YHWH declared that he would “return to Jerusalem with mercies,” granting the city his favorable attention in expression of his compassion for his people. His “house” or temple would be rebuilt in the city. The “measuring line” would be “stretched out over Jerusalem.” This measuring would be required for the work of rebuilding walls, houses, and other structures in the city. That the city and the temple would not remain in ruins was a certainty, for YHWH of hosts (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]), the God with hosts of angels under his command, could and would unfailingly have the rebuilding accomplished. (1:16)
Zechariah was directed again to cry out or proclaim, “Thus says YHWH of hosts [the Lord Almighty (LXX)], My cities will again overflow with good [good things (LXX)], and YHWH will again feel sorry [have mercy (LXX)] for Zion and again choose Jerusalem.” The cities were in the land that YHWH had promised to give to the forefathers of the Israelites, and so they were his cities. These cities would overflow with “good” or “good things” upon being rebuilt and inhabited and then prospering. YHWH’s feeling sorry for, comforting, or showing mercy to Zion would be manifest in his having the city and temple rebuilt. He would again “choose Jerusalem” as the city of his representative place of dwelling, the site for his temple. (1:17; see the Notes section.)
Zechariah saw yet another vision. When he raised his eyes, he saw “four horns.” (1:18 [2:1])
Not knowing what the four horns represented, Zechariah asked the angel who had been communicating with him as his interpreter, “What [are] these?” The angel replied, “They [are] the horns that scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem.” Military campaigns against Judah and Israel resulted in scattering or dispersing the defeated people as exiles or as captives sold into slavery. In the Septuagint, Jerusalem is not included. The four horns could represent Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, and Persia, for all four powers had contributed to the devastation of the territory of Judah and Israel, as well as the city of Jerusalem (Egypt [1 Kings 14:25, 26; 2 Kings 23:29-35], Assyria [2 Kings 18:9-16], Babylon [2 Kings 24:10-16; 25:1-17], and Persia [Ezra 4:17-24]). Whereas Persia did not directly engage in scattering any of the people. The official ban on the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its enforcement doubtless caused those involved in the work to scatter or to leave the city. (Ezra 4:21-23) It appears more likely, however, that the “four horns” represent all the nations that participated in bringing ruin to Judah, Israel, and the city of Jerusalem, causing the people to be dispersed or scattered from their land. (1:19 [2:2])
Thereafter YHWH showed “four artificers” or craftsmen to Zechariah. As these “four artificers” cannot be linked to any four specific entities, this would lend weight to the explanation that the “four horns” represent all the enemy powers that fought against the Israelites. (1:20 [2:3])
Zechariah then asked what the four craftsmen “were coming to do.” The divine reply indicated that they would act against the horns that had scattered Judah to such an extent that no man raised his head. These artificers arrived to cause the horns to tremble, terrifying them, and they would then “cast down the horns” or powers of the nations that had “lifted up the horn” or power “against the land of Judah to scatter it.” The “horns of the nations” had come as attackers against the land and had caused the scattering of the Israelites as captives or as exiles. The four craftsmen, as representing the means YHWH would use against the enemy powers that had fought against his people, would smash those powers and thus bring an end to the humiliated state of his people and the desolate condition of their land and cities. (1:21 [2:4])
The Septuagint rendering indicates that the horns “scattered Judah and shattered Israel, and none of them raised the head.” The craftsmen came to “sharpen” the horns, the “four horns into their hands.” These “four horns” are then identified as the “nations that raised their horns against the land of the Lord to scatter it.” The reference to the sharpening of the horns suggests that the four horns or powers would come into the hands, or under the control, of the four craftsmen that would then, by sharpening them, transform them, thereby preventing them from using their power against the land of God’s people. (1:21 [2:4])
Notes
In verse 2, a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) preserves the last letter (he [H]) of the divine name (YHWH) in paleo-Hebrew script.
Of the three times the divine name (YHWH) appears in verse 3, the fragmentary text of a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) preserves the entire name for the second occurrence and the first three letters for the third occurrence. Instead of “Lord Almighty,” the scroll reading is, “YHWH of forces.”
The partially preserved text of verse 4 in a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) contains the first occurrence of the divine name (YHWH) in paleo-Hebrew script. Instead of the Greek word meaning “Almighty” (pantokrátor) found in the extant text of the Septuagint, this scroll reads “forces” (dynámeon [YHWH of forces]).
In verse 8 of the Greek text, the word “two” is missing in fourth-century Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. There is uncertainty about the Hebrew designation (metsulláh) for the location of the myrtle trees. One conjecture is that it refers to the bottom of a valley or a ravine in the vicinity of Jerusalem. The Septuagint translator appears to have understood the word to be related to tsel, meaning “shade” or “shadow.”
Extant evidence indicates that the period of 70 years mentioned in verse 12 may best be regarded as a round number. In his Against Apion (I, 20), the first-century Jewish historian Josephus, on the basis of the writings of Berosus (a Babylonian priest believed to have written his account in the third century BCE), listed the length of the reigns of the Chaldean monarchs — 43 years for Nebuchadnezzar, 2 years for Evil-Merodach (Amel-Marduk, Amil-Marduk, or Awil-Marduk), 4 years for Neriglissar (Nergal-sharezer), 9 months for Labashi-Marduk. After Labashi-Marduk was killed, Nabonidus began to rule. In the seventeenth year of the reign of Nabonidus, Cyrus the Persian with his forces came against Babylon.
In the next section (Against Apion, I, 21), Josephus indicated that a period of “fifty years” passed between the time Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple in Jerusalem and the second year of Cyrus when “its foundations were laid.” According to the biblical record, it was about ten years after Jehoiachin the king of Judah was taken into exile that the temple was destroyed. Then, in the thirty-seventh year of his exile, he received the favorable attention of Evil-merodach (Amel-Marduk). This was in the first year of Evil-merodach’s reign or about twenty-six years after the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem. At the time the temple was destroyed, about 25 years of Nebuchadnezzar’s forty-three year rule remained. Accordingly, the biblical account and the extant sources regarding the length of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign and the start of Evil-merodach’s rule are in agreement. (2 Kings 24:11, 12; 25:8, 9, 27-30)
Ptolemy’s Canon (originating in the second century CE) and the Uruk King List (tablet IM 65066 from a time after 225 BCE) agree with Berosus in assigning two years to the reign of Evil-merodach (Amel-Marduk). The Uruk King List is not clear regarding the rule of Neriglissar, but Ptolemy’s Canon indicates it to have been four years. Two stelae inscribed with the expressions of the mother of Nabonidus likewise support Berosus in attributing a reign of four years to Neriglissar. Ptolemy’s Canon does not include the short reign of Labashi-Marduk, and the Uruk King List indicates that it lasted three months. In the Uruk King List, the reference to the reign of Nabonidus is incomplete, but Ptolemy’s Canon indicates it to have been 17 years. Accordingly, based on extant ancient sources, the time between the end of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign and the second year of Persian King Cyrus is about 25 years (2 + 4 + less than 1 year [for Labashi-Marduk] +17 + 1). This also fits what Josephus wrote about the temple (Against Apion, I, 21). It lay in a “state of obscurity for fifty years” (about 25 years during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar and another some 25 years until the second year of King Cyrus when the foundations of the temple were laid).
According to Ptolemy’s Canon, Cyrus reigned for 9 years and Cambyses for 8 years. Darius succeeded Cambyses as king, and this would place the second year of Darius about 67 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (about 50 years from the destruction of the temple until the second year of King Cyrus and about 17 years from his second year until the second year of the reign of Darius). A period of about 67 years would fit when 70 years is regarded as a round number.
In verse 17, the extant Septuagint text opens with the words, “And the angel who spoke with me said to me, Cry out, saying, …”
Zechariah saw another vision. When he raised his eyes, he beheld a man with a measuring cord in his hand. According to verse 4 (verse 8), the man was young, possibly suggesting that he had the eagerness or impulsiveness often associated with youth. (2:1 [2:5])
Zechariah asked the young man, “Where are you going?” He replied that he was going to measure Jerusalem to determine the city’s breadth and length or the entire area. His apparent objective was to establish the boundary of the rebuilt Jerusalem. At the time of the vision, the city continued to be in a state of ruin, without its wall and its gates having been rebuilt. (2:2 [2:6]; compare Nehemiah 1:3; 2:3.)
According to the Hebrew text, the angel who had been communicating with Zechariah departed, and another angel who had arrived on the scene came to meet him. The Septuagint rendering represents the angel who had been talking to Zechariah as remaining where he had positioned himself, for the Greek verb appearing in the text is a form of hístemi, which word can mean “to stand.” (2:3 [2:7])
The angel who had arrived on the scene told the angel who had been Zechariah’s guide and interpreter to run and to say to the young man, “As open regions you will inhabit Jerusalem because of the multitude of men and animals in its midst.” This wording appears to indicate that there would be so many people and domestic animals in Jerusalem that the city would be without a wall to limit its boundaries. Open regions lying outside the walls of fortified towns and cities were not surrounded by confining walls. The Septuagint does not include this aspect but says that Jerusalem would be “fully inhabited.” It would be a city filled with a thriving population. (2:4 [2:8])
In a literal sense, Jerusalem, decades later, became a city with a rebuilt wall. (Nehemiah 1:3; 6:15) Therefore, the message conveyed in the vision appears to apply to a fuller extent to the “Jerusalem above” (Galatians 4:26), which heavenly city has no need for any fortifications. (2:4 [2:8])
Unlike ancient cities that relied on strong fortifications to protect their inhabitants from enemy invaders, Jerusalem would have a far superior arrangement for security. YHWH is represented as declaring that he would be a “wall of fire” around Jerusalem and be a “glory” in its midst. With YHWH as the protector comparable to a “wall of fire” and his glorious or magnificent presence in its midst, Jerusalem would be unassailable. This is especially the case with the heavenly Jerusalem, and all who have this city as their “mother” enjoy a state of matchless security. (Galatians 4:26) No power can deprive persons whom YHWH recognizes as his own of their citizenship in the “Jerusalem above” and the privileges and blessings associated therewith. (2:5 [2:9])
Although the opportunity to return to Jerusalem and the land of Judah had opened up during the reign of Persian king Cyrus, many did not choose to do so. Babylon lay to the east of Jerusalem, but an inhospitable desert stretched for many miles between the two locations. Therefore, the usual route that was taken to Jerusalem and the territory of Judah was first to travel miles to the north of Babylon and then to travel southward to the land of Judah, avoiding a hazardous journey through the barren desert. Therefore, Babylon or Chaldea was called the “land of the north,” for Babylonian forces invaded the land of Judah from the north. The word of YHWH to the Israelite exiles was, “Hey! Hey! Flee from the land of the north,” taking this action to return to Jerusalem and the land of Judah. According to the Hebrew text, YHWH had spread the people abroad to the “four winds of the heavens,” having allowed the Babylonian forces to invade and to conquer the realm of the kingdom of Judah with its capital in Jerusalem, resulting in scattering the surviving Israelites in all directions (the four compass points). The Septuagint rendering indicates that God would be gathering his people from all the directions to which they had been dispersed (“from the four winds of the heaven”). (2:6 [2:10])
The Israelites still in exile are addressed as a group and told, “Hey, [to] Zion! Escape, you the one dwelling with the daughter of Babylon.” In the Hebrew text, there is no preposition preceding Zion, but the Septuagint does have the preposition eis, which, in this context, may be rendered “to.” Babylon is here regarded as the “mother” of the Babylonians or Chaldeans When thus referred to as a woman, Babylon is called “daughter.” From Babylon, the Israelite exiles should “escape” (“deliver [themselves] from” [LXX]) and head to Zion or Jerusalem. The Hebrew text could also be understood to mean that Zion, representing the people, is to make an escape from Babylon. (2:7 [2:11])
After the imperative to escape from Babylon, the words that follow could be rendered literally to read, “For thus says YHWH of hosts [the Lord Almighty (LXX)], After glory he sent me to the nations plundering you, for the one touching you is touching [(is) like one touching (LXX)] the pupil [baváh] of his eye.” The “glory” could designate the glorious or magnificent name YHWH made for himself when Babylon fell and his exiled people were able to return to their land. This development fulfilled the word or message he had inspired his prophets to declare long in advance. After the “glory” that meant deliverance and restoration for God’s people, Zechariah was sent to the nations in the sense that he was commanded to declare the divine judgment against them for plundering the Israelites, the people whom God considered as being his own. As the book of Nehemiah (9:36, 37) reveals, the Israelites who had returned to Jerusalem and the territory of Judah were still subject to a foreign power and could still be regarded as the object of plundering. (2:8 [2:12]; for other ways in which “glory” could be understood, see the Notes section.)
The Hebrew noun baváh does not appear elsewhere in the Scriptures, and the meaning “pupil” has the support of Arabic, a cognate language. In the Septuagint, the corresponding noun is kóre, which in its primary sense means “girl” or “little girl.” Tiny images are reflected in the eyes, and these corneal reflections appear to be the reason the Greek term kóre, when linked to the eye, came to designate the “pupil.” The eye is a cherished member of the body, and any attempt to touch it or to do it harm would not be tolerated. Those whom YHWH recognized as his own people were very precious to him, and so anyone touching them or inflicting injury on them would be like one touching the pupil of his eye and would merit severe punishment. (2:8 [2:12)
YHWH is the one who is represented as shaking his hand to take action against those who would harm his people. On account of his punitive judgment expressed against them, these enemies to whom his people were once subject and who mistreated them would become spoils to them (their former slaves). This reversal from a state of slavery to one comparable to that of a master would constitute retributive justice. When this is fulfilled, the words of the prophet would be vindicated, establishing that “YHWH of hosts” (the Lord Almighty [LXX]) had sent him. (2:9 [2:13])
The “daughter of Zion” is called upon to cry out joyfully and to rejoice. When viewed as the mother of the people or her citizens and, therefore, as a woman, Zion or Jerusalem is referred to as “daughter,” and the people are the ones who would be rejoicing. The reason for the joy is that YHWH would be coming to Zion and taking up residence in the midst of the city, for the rebuilt temple would be his representative place of dwelling. In an even more direct manner, he would be residing in the midst of the heavenly Jerusalem, giving rise to great joy among all the children or citizens of the heavenly city. (2:10 [2:14]; Galatians 4:26, 27)
“In that day” or at the time YHWH would be dwelling in the midst of Zion, people from many nations would join themselves to him. They would attach themselves to YHWH as his devoted servants, and he would acknowledge them as his own people. Persons from many nations did become proselytes and went to the temple in Jerusalem for worship, particularly at the time of the annual festivals. In relation to the “Jerusalem above,” the prophetic words also have been fulfilled. Once the opportunity to become children of the heavenly Jerusalem opened up to non-Jewish peoples, persons from many nations availed themselves of the means to become children or citizens of this heavenly city. They did so by accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah, Anointed One, or Christ, the unique Son of God, and his sacrificial death for them so as to have their sins forgiven. (2:11 [2:15]; Acts 15:7-11; 26:16-18; Galatians 4:26; see the Notes section.)
The thought expressed earlier in verses 9 (13) and 10 (14) is repeated. YHWH would dwell in the midst of Zion or Jerusalem. The fulfillment of the prophetic words would establish that YHWH of hosts (the Lord Almighty [LXX]), the God with hosts of angels in his service, had sent the prophet to Zion (“you,” applying to Zion or Jerusalem as representing the people whom YHWH recognized as his own). (2:11 [2:15])
YHWH is portrayed as coming to inherit Judah as “his portion in the land of holiness.” The end of the desolate condition of the land, with the Israelites again residing there, would mean that YHWH had come to take possession of Judah. In this context, “Judah” may be regarded as applying to the people whom YHWH acknowledged as his own. They were his portion in the land. As the land of his own people and with his representative place of dwelling there in Jerusalem, it was a holy land. YHWH’s again choosing Jerusalem assured that the temple would be rebuilt as his representative residence. (2:12 [2:16])
The proper response “before the face of YHWH” or in his presence is one of reverential silence. This is expressed with the opening interjection that may be translated “hush.” In the Septuagint, the verse starts with a form of the verb eulabéomai, which word refers to one’s having reverential regard, wholesome fear, or respect. The directive to respond in this manner is universal. It is addressed to “all flesh,” indicating that there were to be no exceptions. The reason for reverential silence is that YHWH has “roused himself from the dwelling of his holiness.” This holy “dwelling” is his heavenly residence, and the act of rousing himself denotes that he is about to take action. The Septuagint rendering is more specific in identifying the dwelling as being heavenly. It refers to his rousing himself from his “holy clouds.” (2:13 [2:17])
Notes
There is a measure of ambiguity in the wording of verse 8 (12) in relation to “glory.” This has given rise to a variety of renderings. The entire verse has been translated as introducing the words that follow, and the “glory” has been represented as the glorious commission with which Zechariah was entrusted. “These are the words of the LORD of Hosts, spoken when he sent me on a glorious mission to the nations who have plundered you.” (REB) In other translations, the reference to “glory” has been omitted. “For thus said the LORD of hosts (after he had already sent me) concerning the nations that have plundered you.” (NAB) There are also renderings that could be understood to apply “glory” to YHWH himself or to the “angel of YHWH.” “For thus said the LORD of hosts (after his glory sent me) regarding the nations that plundered you.” (NRSV) “For Yahweh Sabaoth says this, since the Glory commissioned me, about the nations who plundered you.” (NJB)
YHWH has been represented as the one sending his angel against the nations, doing so for his own glory. This meaning is made explicit by capitalizing “Me.” “For the Lord of Hosts says this: ‘He has sent Me for [His] glory against the nations who are plundering you.’” (HCSB) Although capitalizing “Me” to apply to the angel, another translation renders “glory” as “shining-greatness” and applies the description to God. “For the Lord of All says, ‘The Lord of shining-greatness has sent Me against the nations which have robbed you in battle.’” (NLV) Another interpretation of the words “after glory” is to view them as meaning that the one sent would be seeking glory for God when sent against the nations. Commentators who understand the “angel of YHWH” to be the Son of God before he came to the earth have linked the words of this verse to future developments relating to him.
In verse 11 (15), the Septuagint says that many nations would be “fleeing to the Lord. These “nations,” or the people from many nations, would then be God’s own people, and they would reside in the midst of Zion.
By means of a vision, Zechariah was shown the high priest (literally, “great priest”) Joshua or Jeshua (Jesus [LXX]) “standing before the face of the angel of YHWH.” Standing at his right was Satan (“the resister”) or, according to the Septuagint, the devil (“the slanderer”) to resist, oppose, or accuse him. There is a measure of ambiguity about the one on whose right the adversary was standing. Since Joshua is the one against whom the adversary made his case, it may be concluded that he stood at Joshua’s right. A number of translations are specific in conveying this significance. “Satan was standing to the right of Jeshua. He was there to bring charges against the high priest.” (NIRV) “And there was Satan, standing at Joshua’s right side, ready to accuse him.” (CEV) Although not specifically stated, the context suggests that the adversary maintained that Joshua was unfit for the priestly office and that Jerusalem and the temple should remain in a devastated state. (3:1)
The angel of YHWH avoided involvement in a direct confrontation with the resister but made his appeal for YHWH to act, responding with the words, “YHWH rebuke you, Satan [devil (LXX)]; YHWH rebuke you, the One choosing Jerusalem.” According to the text, the angel, as the direct representative of YHWH and as one who thus spoke for him, is referred to as YHWH (the designation “angel” is not included). The expressions of the resister were in opposition to YHWH’s purpose and merited rebuke, and so the angel twice invoked YHWH to administer the rebuke. YHWH had chosen Jerusalem, indicating that it should cease to be in ruins and that the temple should be rebuilt. In this rebuilt temple, a high priest needed to carry out the required services, and Joshua, as the context reveals, would gain an acceptable standing before YHWH for this purpose. (3:2)
With apparent reference to Joshua, the question is raised, “[Is] this not [like (LXX)] a firebrand snatched from the fire?” Left in the fire, a firebrand would be consumed. Joshua, however, had escaped a fate that could have ended his life and had returned to Jerusalem as a survivor of the Babylonian exile, indicating that he was someone precious to YHWH and, therefore, should not have unwarranted accusations hurled against him respecting his functioning as high priest. (3:2)
Joshua did not appear in a presentable state before the angel of YHWH but was dressed in filthy (tsoh’) garments. The Hebrew adjective tsoh’ can apply to an item made filthy with excrement. In view of the neglect of the temple rebuilding work, the people were defiled from YHWH’s standpoint, and the high priest, as the one who represented the people before YHWH, would be the one to bear that uncleanness. (Leviticus 10:16, 17; Numbers 18:1; Haggai 2:14) Accordingly, the defilement that came to be attached to him is portrayed under the figure of filthy attire. This aspect could also serve to imply that the defiled appearance was part of the adversary’s accusation against Joshua. (3:3)
The angel of YHWH “answered” or responded concerning the unclean condition of Joshua’s attire. Based on verse 7, those standing “before the face” or in the presence of the angel were other angels who had close access to YHWH. These angels were directed to take off Joshua’s filthy garments. As representing YHWH, the angel of YHWH then said to him, “I have taken away your iniquity [transgressions; the plural form of the Greek word anomía, lawlessness (LXX)] from you.” This would be for him to be clothed with dignified garments (not common attire) or, according to the Septuagint, a garment reaching to the feet (a long, stately robe). (3:4)
Neglect of the temple rebuilding work had been the prevailing reason for the defilement of the people and of Joshua as the representative of his people. An official governmental ban on the rebuilding of Jerusalem had brought about a complete stop to all work on the temple, and that ban had been imposed by the Persian monarch, the supreme human authority. (Ezra 4:23, 24) Accordingly, God’s help would have been needed for the Jewish exiles to resume rebuilding the temple. The fact that in the vision angels were shown as involved in removing Joshua’s filthy garments may indicate that the cause of the uncleanness — the neglect of temple rebuilding — would be taken away with divine assistance. At the same time, the cooperative effort of the Jewish exiles in courageously resuming their labors and completing their work on the temple would put them in position to have their iniquity for previous neglect forgiven, as it would have been an evidence of their genuine repentance. This would also mean that YHWH then took away the guilt that Joshua had to bear as the representative of the people. With the uncleanness represented by the filthy garments having been removed, Joshua could be attired with the splendid clothing that was suitable for him to represent his people before YHWH. (3:4)
According to the Hebrew text, the next verse opens with the words, “And I said,” which may indicate that Zechariah was so emotionally moved by what he saw that it prompted him to want to see Joshua appropriately attired. The Vulgate, however, reads, et dixit (“and he said”), referring to the angel of YHWH. In the Septuagint, this opening expression is not included. The request was for Joshua to have a clean turban placed on his head. Based on verse 7, angels then put a clean turban on his head and dressed him with suitable garments. While they did so, the angel of YHWH stood by. (3:5; see the Notes section.)
YHWH’s angel solemnly declared (literally, “testified”) to Joshua a revealed message. This message indicated what YHWH expected from Joshua and the privileges he would enjoy by living up to the requirements for a high priest. (3:6; see the Notes section.)
The angel conveyed the words of YHWH of hosts (the Lord Almighty [LXX]), the God with hosts of angels in his service. “If in my ways you will walk and if my obligation [regulations (LXX)] you will keep, then you will judge my house and have guardianship of my courts [court (LXX)], and I will give you access among these who are standing.” For Joshua, walking in YHWH’s ways meant conducting himself in harmony with his commands. The obligation or charge applying to him included his faithfully carrying out all aspects of his duties as high priest or, as expressed in the Septuagint, the “regulations” associated with the priestly office. As one fully devoted to YHWH and loyally adhering to his law, Joshua would properly be representing him when rendering judgments respecting fellow Israelites, members of YHWH’s house or household. The “courts” (“court” [LXX]) that would be under Joshua’s watch were those of the temple. Being part of YHWH’s house, the courts were also his courts. (3:7; see the Notes section.)
The kind of approach to YHWH to be granted to Joshua would be comparable to his having access to his intimate presence like that of the angels that were represented as standing in the closest proximity. In the Septuagint, the wording obscures this aspect (“I will give you those staying in the midst of these standing ones”). (3:7)
After the temple would be rebuilt and all priestly services conducted according to God’s law, the time would come for the restoration of the royal house of David. This is the subject of the next message. Joshua the high priest (“great priest”) and his “companions,” associates, or fellow priests “sitting before his face” or being in his presence are directed to “hear” or to listen. These priests, as men carrying out their duties in the divinely prescribed manner, constituted a “sign” that the royal house of David would also be restored. YHWH would bring in his “servant Sprout” who, according to Zechariah 6:13, would be both king and priest. The name “Sprout” reflected the situation that then existed. Whereas descendants of David had returned from Babylonian exile, no member of the family of David ruled as king. Therefore, a “sprout” had to appear in the royal line that would come to exercise kingly rule. (Compare Isaiah 11:1-5.) This one proved to be Jesus, the Anointed One, Messiah, or Christ in the royal line of David, and a member of the tribe of Judah serving in the capacity of both king and high priest. (3:8; Hebrews 1:8, 9; 7:14-17, 26-8:6; see the Notes section.)
The context is not specific enough to identify the “stone” that YHWH “set before the face of Joshua” and upon which stone were “seven eyes” or seven pairs of eyes. Based on Zechariah 4:7, it could refer to the stone that would complete the rebuilt temple, with the “seven eyes” or seven pairs of eyes representing the full attention that YHWH would be giving this stone as the last one, assuring that the temple rebuilding work would come to a successful conclusion. The reference to his “engraving” the “engraving” of this stone could indicate that, as the stone in the topmost position, it would be specially marked. (3:9)
In view of the earlier mention of YHWH’s “servant Sprout,” the stone could designate the future Messiah or Christ (Jesus), which is an application found elsewhere in the Scriptures. (Psalm 118:22, 23; Isaiah 8:14; Matthew 21:42, 43; Romans 9:32, 33; 1 Peter 2:4-9) YHWH’s eyes were upon him as his dearly beloved Son, and the “engraving” could represent the high honors bestowed on him after his resurrection. He was exalted to the position of King of kings and Lord of lords, with all authority in heaven and on earth. (3:9; Matthew 28:18; Philippians 2:9-11; Revelation 19:16)
During the time the people had neglected the temple rebuilding work, they were defiled from YHWH’s standpoint. Upon the completion of the temple and the priestly services being fully carried out there, that unclean condition would be rectified. Then, as “in one day,” YHWH would remove the “iniquity of the land,” granting forgiveness to his people for their error. With the people no longer being defiled, the land also ceased to be unclean. (Compare Numbers 35:33, 34; Jeremiah 2:7.) A far grander deliverance from sin is enjoyed by all who accept Jesus as their Lord and his sacrificial death for them as the basis to be forgiven of their transgressions. (3:9; John 8:34-36; Acts 15:7-11; 26:18; see the Notes section.)
As a forgiven people, the returned Jewish exiles would enjoy YHWH’s blessing. The prosperous and secure circumstances they would experience “in that day” or at that time, according to the utterance of YHWH of hosts (their God with hosts of angels in his service), is likened to their being under their own grapevine and under their own fig tree. While individually in this peaceful setting, they would be able to call out to one another. All who have Jesus, the promised Messiah, as their king may especially be described as blessed with security and peace. (3:10)
Notes
In Rahlfs’ printed text of the Septuagint of verse 5, the order is reversed. Joshua is clothed and then has the turban placed on his head. A Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr), though only fragmentary for this verse, follows the wording of the extant Hebrew text. This scroll preserves the last two letters (waw [W] and he [H]) of the divine name (YHWH) in paleo-Hebrew script.
In verse 6, a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) preserves the last letter (he [H]) of the divine name (YHWH) in paleo-Hebrew script.
The partially preserved text of verse 7 in a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) contains the divine name (YHWH) in paleo-Hebrew script and the expression associated with the name may be rendered “forces” (YHWH of forces).
In verse 8, the Septuagint rendering for the Hebrew word translated “sign” is the plural of teratoskópos, an expression that designates an observer of wonders or signs and can refer to one who interprets signs. In case of the Hebrew word rendered “sprout,” the corresponding term in the Septuagint is anatolé, which word can also apply to sunrise or to dawn.
For the concluding part of verse 9, the Septuagint translator read the Hebrew text in a different manner. The rendering is, “Look! I am digging [a verb akin to engraving] a pit [Hebrew, engraving], says the Lord Almighty, and I will search out [Hebrew, remove] all the injustice of that land in one day.”
Zechariah needed to be fully alert to see and to a comment about the vision that would be shown to him. Therefore, the angel who had been talking to him, serving as his guide and interpreter, returned and roused him as one would wake up a man who is asleep. The account does not disclose whether, as in the case of Daniel (Daniel 8:27; 10:8-10), Zechariah needed to be roused because of being exhausted by what he had seen in previous visions. (4:1)
The angel asked Zechariah, “What are you seeing?” In response, the prophet described seeing a lampstand, “all of it” being of gold. Positioned on top of the stand were a bowl and seven lamps (containers with a wick to burn a liquid to provide illumination). The reference to “two olive trees” in the next verse indicates that olive oil filled the bowl. Through “tubes” from this bowl, the olive oil flowed to the individual lamps. After the Hebrew word for “tubes” or “pipes,” the text literally reads, “seven and seven.” This has been variously understood as meaning 14 tubes (7 plus 7), 49 tubes (7 times 7), seven, even seven (a repetition for emphasis), or that for each of the seven lamps there was one of the seven tubes through which the oil flowed to the lamp. The Septuagint does not contain the expression “seven and seven,” but says that there were “seven funnels” (the plural of eparystrís, referring to a vessel for pouring oil and so could apply to a pipe, tube, or funnel through which the oil flowed.) From the standpoint of a visionary representation, Zechariah would have more readily comprehended seven lamps with seven tubes than a larger number of tubes, and this is probably the preferable significance. (4:2)
Along with the lampstand, the prophet saw two olive trees. One was on the right side of the bowl on top of the stand and the other one on the left side. These trees would have been a dependable source of oil in the bowl for supplying the seven lamps. (4:3)
Zechariah did not understand the import of the vision and in response to what he saw asked the angel who had been speaking to him, “What [are (included in the LXX)] these, my lord?” The expression “my lord” functioned as a respectful manner of address. In the Septuagint, the pronoun “my” is not included. (4:4)
The angel appears to have been surprised about Zechariah’s not grasping the significance of what he had seen. This angel who had been speaking to the prophet then asked him, “Do you not know what these [are (included in the LXX)]?” Zechariah replied, “No, my lord,” again using the respectful manner of address. The Septuagint, as in verse 4, does not include the pronoun “my.” (4:5)
In answer to Zechariah, the angel made known to him the basic message of the vision. “This is the word of YHWH to Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might [great might (LXX)] and not by power, but by my spirit, says YHWH of hosts [the Lord Almighty (LXX)].” The people of the Jewish community then in Jerusalem and the land of Judah had no military might that would have made it possible for them to rebuild Jerusalem when faced with what appeared to be insurmountable obstacles. They had no power, for they were subject to Persian rule and the Persian monarch had officially banned the rebuilding of Jerusalem and, therefore, also the temple. Moreover, surrounding peoples were bitterly opposed to any restoration of Jerusalem. (Ezra 4:4-24) Yet Zerubbabel was assured that the will of YHWH of hosts, the God with hosts of angels in his service, would be carried out, with his spirit being the irresistible power that would cause the rebuilding work to be brought to a successful finish. His spirit would fill the Jewish community with the needed courage to press on with the work, confident that they would have YHWH’s unfailing backing. (4:6)
“Before the face of Zerubbabel,” the barrier in the way of rebuilding the temple — an obstacle in the form of governmental ban and opposition from neighboring peoples — loomed like a great or massive mountain. Nevertheless, he was assured that what appeared like a mountain would prove to be but a level area, posing absolutely no obstacle to completing the temple rebuilding. He would be the one to bring forth the top or chief stone, the crowning stone that would finish the project. This would take place amid the shouts of the people respecting this stone. They would cry out, “delightful, delightful” (chen, chen). The Hebrew word chen has been defined as “favor,” “grace,” or “charm.” The repetition of chen seems to express the kind of delight and approval associated with the exclamation “bravo, bravo.” (4:7; for the Septuagint rendering, see the Notes section.)
Zechariah next referred to a “word” or message of YHWH as coming to him. That “word” focused on Zerubbabel’s role in rebuilding the temple. (4:8)
In the second year after the Jews returned from Babylonian exile, the builders laid the foundation of the temple. (Ezra 3:8-10) The biblical account does not specifically say that Zerubbabel laid the first stone. Either because he personally participated in actually laying the initial stone or because he, in his capacity as governor, directed that this be done, the laying of the “foundation of the house” or temple was an act of his “hands.” Just as his “hands” had laid the foundation, so would his “hands” bring the rebuilding of the temple to completion. He would be exercising oversight or would be personally involved in placing the capstone in position. When this would occur, the people would “know” or have it confirmed to them that “YHWH of hosts,” the God with hosts of angels in his service, had sent Zechariah as a prophet to them. (4:9; see the Notes section.)
The reference to whoever may have “despised the day [days (LXX)] of small things” may apply to anyone who may have looked upon the “day” or time of the unimpressive initial efforts in rebuilding the temple as nothing when compared to the time of the former magnificence of the temple and the once flourishing state of Jerusalem. (Compare Haggai 2:3.) Nevertheless, persons who had regarded matters in this way would rejoice upon witnessing the completion of the work on the temple. They would see Zerubbabel actively involved in the temple reconstruction, with his hand holding the line from which “the stone, the tin” (probably referring to the weight or plummet as one made of tin) was suspended. Possibly he would be doing so for placing the capstone in position. (4:10)
The words “these seven [are (included in the LXX)] the eyes of YHWH which rove through all the earth” appear to identify the seven lamps as representing the fullness of YHWH’s vision. The eye functions like a lamp that by its light brings objects into view. (Compare Matthew 6:22.) A number of translations are explicit in linking “these seven” to the lamps. “Those seven lamps represent my eyes — the eyes of the LORD — and they see everything on this earth.” (CEV) “The seven lamps are the seven eyes of the Lord, which see all over the earth.” (GNT, Second Edition) “The seven lamps represent the eyes of the Lord that search all around the world.” (NLT) Nothing escapes YHWH’s attention and watchfulness. According to the Septuagint, his eyes “look upon” or look attentively at “all the earth.” In the vision shown to Zechariah, the primary focus was on God’s spirit and that spirit functions like God’s eyes. The psalmist acknowledged that there was no place to which he could escape or hide from God’s spirit. Even darkness would not conceal him. (Psalm 139[138]:7-12) With God’s spirit being fully operative in the case of those rebuilding the temple, they would have had YHWH’s full attention at all times. Therefore, up to the very end of the project nothing would stop the successful completion of the work. By means of his spirit, YHWH had the entire earth in full view and would never be caught off guard respecting any element that stood or came to stand in the way of the accomplishment of his purpose. (4:10)
Zechariah still wanted additional clarification respecting what he had seen. Therefore, in response to the words of the angel, he “said” (“asked” [LXX]) to him, “What [are] these two olive trees on the right of the lampstand and on its left?” (4:11)
Then Zechariah appears to have thought about other features of the vision concerning which he desired an explanation. So he responded to the angel’s comments a second time and said to him (“asked a second time and said to him” [LXX]), “What are the two branches (literally, “ears”) of the olive trees which [are] beside the two tubes of gold from which the gold [designating the olive oil because of its golden color] is poured out?” The question indicates that oil from the two olive trees entered the bowl on top of the lampstand through a tube from each tree. (4:12)
After the explanations he had already provided, the angel again appears to have been surprised that Zechariah had not fully grasped the significance of the features of the vision, saying to him, “Do you not know what these [are (included in LXX)]?” Zechariah answered, “No, my lord,” using the respectful form of address. In the Septuagint the pronoun “my” is not included. (4:13)
The angel replied, “These [are] the two anointed ones [literally, sons of oil] who stand by the Lord of all the earth.” Joshua the high priest and Zerubbabel the governor figured prominently in the visions that Zechariah had seen up to this point. They were “anointed ones,” for they had been divinely designated for the roles they would fill in connection with the rebuilding of the temple. Both men responded favorably to the messages that the prophets Haggai and Zechariah proclaimed, messages that were revealed to them through the operation of God’s spirit. (4:14[13])
In view of their responsiveness, Joshua and Zerubbabel were infused with strength through the operation of God’s spirit upon them. Despite the governmental ban on the project, they courageously set themselves to the task. On account of the leadership of Joshua and Zerubbabel, the rest of the people also responded, and God’s spirit impelled them to give wholehearted support to the work of temple reconstruction. Thus, through Joshua and Zerubbabel, the spirit flowed like oil to the Jewish community that then began to shine brightly with activity. Within the Jewish community, God’s spirit functioned as a set of lamps on a stand. That spirit transformed the stand, the Jewish community, from a lampstand that had shed no light on account of neglecting the temple rebuilding work to one that shone brightly with diligent labor on the reconstruction project. (4:14[13]; Ezra 5:1, 2; 6:14)
YHWH is the “Lord of all the earth,” the Supreme Sovereign whose purpose will never fail to be accomplished. Joshua and Zerubbabel would have demonstrated that they were standing by him when they revealed themselves to be fully devoted to carrying out his will. (4:14[13])
Notes
For verse 7, the Septuagint rendering differs somewhat from the reading of the Hebrew text. “What are you, O great mountain, to stand before the face of Zorobabel? And I will bring forth the stone of inheritance, the equal of favor, favor for it.” The rhetorical question could be understood to indicate that the mountainous obstacle would not remain or stand (literally, “be set up”) before Zerubbabel. God is the one to bring forth the stone for his temple. With the temple being the place of his representative place of dwelling, the stone could be designated as the “stone of inheritance,” that is, God’s inheritance. The obscure wording “equal of favor, favor for it” might be interpreted to suggest that the favor or delight with which the stone would be regarded would be equal to the favor that was divinely bestowed on it. In case the Septuagint translator read ro’sháh (the Hebrew adjective describing the stone as the “top” or “chief” stone) as the noun yerusháh, the meaning would be “inheritance.” The translator may have linked the plural noun teshu’óth (“shoutings”) to shaváh (“to be equal”), accounting for the rendering “equal.”
Verse 9 ends with the words, “And you will know that YHWH of hosts has sent me to you.” The Hebrew verb for “you will know” is second person singular (as also is the corresponding Greek word in the Septuagint) and may be understood as a collective singular referring to the people. “Then everyone will know that you [Zechariah] were sent by me [YHWH].” (CEV) When this happens, my people will know that it is I [YHWH] who sent you [Zechariah] to them.” (GNT, Second Edition) In the Hebrew text, the concluding “you,” applying to the people, is a masculine plural suffix, but the Septuagint contains the singular personal pronoun for “you,” which may be regarded as a collective singular and agrees grammatically with the singular verb for “you will know.”
Zechariah’s attention appears to have been drawn to another vision. He “turned” and, upon raising his eyes, saw a “flying scroll.” According to the Septuagint, he saw a “flying sickle.” Possibly the Septuagint translator read the Hebrew word megilláh (“scroll” [a roll anciently made from papyrus or leather, the surface of which was used for writing a document]) as maggál (“sickle”). (5:1)
The angel who had been Zechariah’s guide and interpreter said to him, “What are you seeing?” He replied, “I see a flying scroll [sickle [LXX]). Its length [is] 20 cubits and its breadth 10 cubits.” Zechariah must have had a mental picture of a 20-cubit length, for that was the width of the temple that had been destroyed but was then to be rebuilt. (1 Kings 6:2) It is likely that Zechariah had often been at the site of the temple, and so it would have been comparatively easy for him to determine that the scroll was 20 cubits (c. 30 feet; over 9 meters) long and 10 cubits (c. 15 feet; over 4.5 meters) wide. (5:2)
The angel probably anticipated Zechariah’s wanting to know the significance of what he saw and said to him, “This [is] the curse that goes out over the face of all the earth.” In flight, the scroll could pass over the whole land and bring a curse of punishment upon those who merited it. With apparent reference to one side of the scroll, the angel revealed that, “according to it” or according to the words written thereon, everyone who steals is “cleared” (naqáh). Then apparently regarding the other side of the scroll, he indicated that, “according to it,” everyone who swears falsely is “cleared” (naqáh). (5:3)
The Hebrew verb naqáh usually means to be innocent, exempt from punishment, or free from guilt. In the context of the curse, the sense could be that the curse would catch up with anyone who had escaped punishment for theft or swearing falsely. The lawless one would not remain free from punishment, for a person’s disobedience to God’s commands led to being cursed. (Deuteronomy 27:15-26; 28:15-68) According to the Septuagint rendering, the thief and the perjurer “will be punished unto death.” (5:3; see the Notes section.)
It appears that the two transgressions — stealing and swearing falsely — are representative of serious sins. The two sides of the scroll seemingly parallel the two tablets of stone on which the “Ten Commandments” were written and which contained both commands. Not taking up God’s name in vain included not misusing it as when swearing falsely in his name. (Exodus 20:7) This command would have appeared on one tablet, and the command not to steal (Exodus 20:15) would have appeared on the other tablet. (5:3)
“YHWH of hosts” (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]), the God with hosts of angels in his service, is represented as declaring that he would send forth the scroll or the curse. It would then enter the house of the thief and the house of the one swearing falsely in his name. As the curse would stay in the house, it would consume it entirely — both “its timbers and its stones.” (5:4)
To prepare Zechariah for another vision, the angel who had been speaking to him “came forth” or approached and told him to raise (“look up with” [LXX]) his eyes. He would then see the thing that “is going forth.” (5:5)
At this point, the prophet appears to have seen an object coming into view, and he asked the angel, “What [is] it?” The angel explained that it was the “ephah” (a container holding a quantity equal to an ephah [about 20 dry quarts or 22 liters]; a “measure” [LXX] or a container for measuring a quantity). Regarding this object, the angel continued, “This [is] their eye in all the earth” or land. The Septuagint rendering is, “This [is] their injustice [adikía] in all the earth.” (5:6)
In Hebrew, the letters yod (Y) and waw (W) are very similar. If the consonant yod in the Hebrew designation for “eye” (‘áyin) is replaced with a waw, the word is changed to ‘avón, meaning “iniquity” or “guilt.” This would explain the Septuagint rendering adikía, which may be translated “injustice,” “wrongdoing,” “unrighteousness,” or “iniquity.” The Vulgate, however, agrees with the reading of the extant Hebrew text. It contains the word oculus (“eye”). The Hebrew word ‘áyin can also mean “appearance,” as in Numbers 11:7. If ‘áyin is the original reading, possibly the meaning is that the container, including its contents, had a certain look or appearance identifying it as to what it was. The Septuagint rendering indicates that the container used for measuring represents the injustice, guilt, or iniquity of the people in “all the earth” or, in a more restrictive sense, of the people in Jerusalem and the land of Judah. (5:6)
Zechariah next saw a lead “round,” “oval,” or cover (a “talent of lead” [c. 75.5 pounds avdp., c. 91.75 pounds troy; over 34 kilograms], LXX) being raised from the container or ephah measure. A woman was sitting inside thereof. Based on what the angel did afterward (verse 8), he may have been the one who lifted the lid, making it possible for the prophet to see the woman who appears to have begun raising her head above the container. (5:7)
After identifying the woman as “Wickedness” or “Lawlessness” (LXX), the angel tossed her back into the ephah container. He then tossed the lead weight upon its “mouth” or its opening. According to the wording of the Septuagint, the angel threw the “stone of lead into” the woman’s “mouth.” (5:8)
Zechariah raised his eyes and saw “two women coming forth.” Their approach seems to have been swift, for they are described as having “wind in their wings.” Their wings were like those of “the stork, and they lifted up the ephah [container] between the earth and the heaven,” or between the land and the sky. That two women were the agencies that transported “Wickedness” (represented as a woman) may serve to indicate that wickedness or lawlessness should not to be regarded as an attribute linked particularly to women. There was no place for wickedness or lawlessness in the land of God’s people, and it needed to be taken away as quickly as possible as by the rapid flight of storks. With the aid of the rising air in thermals, storks will soar high enough to be able to leave a thermal and then to glide. With a minimum of wing flapping, they can then glide at speeds of over 40 miles per hour (nearly 70 kilometers per hour). (5:9; see the Notes section.)
Zechariah asked the angel where the women were taking the ephah [container]. Possibly as did storks when returning to their breeding grounds on their migratory flight over the land of Judah, the prophet saw the two women flying northward. The initial northerly direction would have been the usual route merchants and armies followed to the “land of Shinar” or Babylon mentioned in the next verse, for they avoided traveling eastward through many miles of inhospitable desert. (5:10)
Answering Zechariah’s question, the angel told him that a “house” would be built for the “ephah” container (“measure” [LXX]; a container for measuring a quantity) in the “land of Shinar” (“land of Babylon” [LXX]). When this house would be ready, the container would be deposited there on its fixed place. (5:11)
From very early times, the land of Shinar, with Babylon as the principal city, was known as a place of rebellion against God. (Genesis 10:8-10; 11:1-9) Through his prophets, YHWH revealed that Babylon would become a desolate location without any human inhabitant. Babylon would be transformed into a haunt for wild animals. (Isaiah 13:19-22; Jeremiah 50:1-3) So it would be fitting for “Wickedness” or “Lawlessness” to be permanently confined in a desolate area, far away from the “holy” or clean land where those whom YHWH recognized as his people resided. (5:11)
Notes
Modern translations commonly do not render the Hebrew word naqáh (in verse 3) according to its literal meaning “be emptied,” “leave unpunished,” “be exempt from punishment,” or “be held innocent.” “This is the curse that is gong out over the whole land; for according to what it says on one side, every thief will be banished [naqáh], and according to what it says on the other, everyone who swears falsely will be banished [naqáh].” (NIV) “This is the curse which goes out over the whole land; for according to the writing on one side every thief will be swept away [naqáh], and according to the writing on the other every perjurer will be swept away [naqáh].” (REB) “The writing on one side tells about the destruction [naqáh] of those who steal, while the writing on the other side tells about the destruction [naqáh] of those who lie.” (CEV)
In verse 9, the Hebrew word for “stork” is chasidháh, which designation is related to the noun chésed, meaning “graciousness,” “enduring loyalty,” “steadfast love,” and “mercy.” The kind of compassionate care and enduring loyalty associated with chésed can apply to the stork. Breeding pairs of white storks have commonly been thought to mate for life and do exceptionally well in caring for their young. According to more recent observations, however, white storks may change mates after returning from migration and do not migrate with their mates. The male storks arrive first at the breeding sites and generally return to the same nest.
The Septuagint rendering is épops, the “hoopoe.” In the Vulgate, the reference is to the kite (miluus). Neither one of these birds fits the context as well as does the stork.
Zechariah introduced the eighth vision that he saw with the words, “And again I raised my eyes and saw, and look!” Identical or similar wording introduced five of the seven previous visions. (1:18[2:1]; 2:1[2:5]; 5:1, 5, 9) The prophet saw four chariots coming from between two mountains. He described these mountains as mountains of copper or bronze. Verse 5 indicates that the chariots had departed from God’s presence. Accordingly, the heavenly realm appears to be portrayed as situated behind impenetrable metal mountains, with a passageway situated between them. (6:1)
Red horses were hitched to the first chariot, and black horses to the second one. At least two horses must have been pulling each chariot. Nothing in the context suggests that the colors of the horses had a symbolic significance. The colors probably serve to differentiate them. (6:2)
White horses pulled the third chariot. The plural forms of the Hebrew adjectives baród (dappled or spotted) and ’amóts (possibly skewbald) describe the horses hitched to the fourth chariot. This could mean that the horses were spotted with patches of white and another color other than black. The adjectives in the Septuagint are plural forms of poikílos (spotted) and psarós (dapple gray) and could indicate that the horses were spotted with varying shades of gray. In Hebrew, the consonants for the adjective ’amóts are the same as for the verb meaning “be strong.” This appears to be the reason for the Vulgate description of the horses as being varii (dappled) fortes (strong). (6:3)
Desiring an explanation for what he had seen, Zechariah asked the angel who had been speaking to him as his interpreter and guide, “What [are (included in LXX)] these, my lord?” The expression “my lord” is a respectful form of address. In the Septuagint, the pronoun “my” is not included. (6:4)
The angel answered the prophet’s question, telling him, “These [are (included in LXX)] the four spirits [plural of rúach] of the heavens going forth after stationing themselves before the Lord of all the earth.” In Hebrew, the noun rúach can mean either “spirit” or “wind.” The Septuagint translator chose as the rendering for the Hebrew word the plural form of the noun ánemos (“wind”). In view of the reference to the four having been standing before the “Lord of all the earth” (YHWH the Supreme Sovereign), the reference is more likely to be to “spirits” and, more specifically, to angelic spirits. Anciently, chariots were primarily used in warfare, and so the four horse-drawn chariots may well represent angelic forces that are prepared to carry out God’s will. Their having been stationed before him suggests that they received a commission from him, after which they would make their entrance on the earthly scene. In this case, the number “four” may be understood to denote a complete number of angelic hosts. With hosts of angels in his service, YHWH exercises full control over the whole earth and its affairs. Therefore, developments on earth take place either by his declared will or by his permission (which, according to his purpose, may often be temporary). (6:5; see the Notes section.)
The chariot with the black horses (literally, “which on it the black horses”) had the assignment to go to the “land of the north.” According to the literal reading of the Hebrew text and the Septuagint, “the white ones go after them.” A number of modern translations render the Hebrew words according to an emendation of the text, indicating that the white horses head westward. “The chariot with black horses goes toward the north, the chariot with white horses goes toward the west.” (CEV) “The chariot with the black horses is going to the land of the north, that with the white to the far west.” (REB) “The one with the black horses is going toward the north country, the one with the white horses toward the west.” (NIV) The chariot with the spotted horses was revealed as going to the “land of the south,” which would have been Egypt. (6:6)
With neither the Septuagint nor the Vulgate giving support to a rendering that supplies “west,” other translators have not chosen to include this direction. “The black horses are leaving for the land of the north; the white are following them, and the piebald are leaving for the land of the south.” (NJB) “The chariot with the black horses was turning toward the land of the north, the red [this color is not included in the Hebrew text nor in the Septuagint], and the white horses went after them, and the spotted ones went toward the land of the south.” (NAB) From the standpoint of Zechariah and his fellow repatriated Jews, the “land of the north” and the “land of the south” would have been the most significant regions, for to the west lay the Mediterranean Sea and to the east stretched a vast desert region. Therefore, the original text may never have included any reference to the east or to the west. Whereas the “land of the north” actually lay to the east, armies and merchants who started out from there made their way into the land of Judah from the north, avoiding travel through the arid desert. Accordingly, Babylonia was designated as the “land of the north” even though the city of Babylon lay east of Jerusalem. (6:6)
With their chariot, the “skewbald” (a possible meaning for ’amóts) horses or the dapple gray (psarós [LXX]) ones came forth. (See verse 3.) The reference to their seeking to go “to patrol the earth” appears to indicate that they were eager to carry out an assigned duty when moving about on the earth or the land. Verse 8 suggests that YHWH is the one who told them, “Go; patrol the earth.” “And they patrolled the earth.” The forms of the Hebrew verb halák are here rendered “to go,” “to patrol, and “patrolled.” This verb basically means “go,” “walk,” or “move about.” This would have been purposeful movement comparable to engaging in patrol duty. (6:7)
In view of the accomplishment of those who had gone forth from “the Lord of all the earth” (verse 5) to the “land of the north,” YHWH must be the one who cried out to Zechariah, saying to him, “Those going to the land of the north have given rest to my spirit in the land of the north.” Babylonia, the “land of the north” was then part of the Persian Empire. Through the activity of the angelic forces there, God’s spirit had come to rest. This appears to indicate that the spirit came to exercise a powerful influence in the “land of the north,” either in motivating the Jewish exiles still there to return to Jerusalem and the land of Judah (Ezra 7:1-8:35) or (especially in the context of Zechariah’s service as a prophet) in compelling the Persian monarch to lift the ban on rebuilding Jerusalem, decreeing that the work on the temple should continue, and giving full support to the Jews in their labors. (6:8; Ezra 5:1-6:15)
Again the “word of YHWH” came to Zechariah. This “word” was a message that revealed significant future developments. (6:9)
Zechariah would have had no problem in understanding the instructions he was given. The preserved wording of the Hebrew text, however, is somewhat ambiguous, and the Septuagint rendering provides no clarification. Zechariah was to “take” from the “exile” (gohláh). Just what he was to take is not specified, but the following verse indicates that it was “silver and gold.” The Hebrew text may be literally translated, “Take from the exile, from Heldai and from Tobijah and from Jedaiah, and go the same day, and go to the house of Josiah the son of Zephaniah, who have arrived from Babylon.” (6:10)
Possibly Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah had come from Babylon as representatives of the Jewish community still residing there and had been entrusted by the exiles with a contribution of silver and gold. Josiah the son of Zephaniah may have been their host in whose house they were staying. Although the Hebrew designation gohláh (“exile,” “captivity,” or “deportation”) could refer to the Jews still residing in Babylon, it may be understood to apply to those exiles who were then living in Jerusalem and the land of Judah. This would mean that Zechariah was to take silver and gold from the Jewish community that had returned from exile and from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah who had just then arrived from Babylon. Another way of viewing the text is to consider Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah as being described as men of the “exile” or as being exiles. This is a significance reflected in the renderings of a number of translations. “Take [an offering] from the exiles, from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have arrived from Babylon, and go that same day to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah.” (HCSB) “Take from the returned captives Heldai, Tobijah, Jedaiah; and go the same day to the house of Josiah, son of Zephaniah (these had come from Babylon).” (NAB) “Receive the gifts from the exiles Heldai, Tobiah, and Jedaiah who have returned from Babylon, and go the same day to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah.” (REB) (6:10)
The Septuagint does not include Heldai, Tobiah, and Jedaiah as the names of three men. It refers to taking “the things from the captivity, from the rulers and from its skilled people [literally, useful ones] and from the ones having come to know it [the captivity]. And you shall enter in that day into the house of Iosias [Josiah] the son of Sophonias [Zephaniah], the one having come from Babylon.” This could be understood to mean that either Josiah or Zephaniah is the one who had earlier come from Babylon. (6:10; for other ways in which the Hebrew text has been rendered, see the Notes section.)
From the silver and gold taken from the ones mentioned in the previous verse, Zechariah was to make “crowns.” The plural “crowns” may be a plural of excellence and designate a magnificent crown. Another interpretation found in a number of translations is that one of the crowns was to be placed on Joshua’s head. “Make crowns, and set the one upon the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest.” (Margolis) “Take silver and gold and make crowns. Place [one] on the head of High Priest Joshua son of Jehozadak.” (Tanakh) A rendering that is less likely to be correct is one that represents several crowns as being placed on Joshua’s head. “Take silver and gold, make crowns and place them on the head of Joshua son of Jehozadak, the high priest.” (HCSB) In the Septuagint, the plural of stéphanos is the rendering of the Hebrew word for “crown” and designates a victory wreath (like one that is placed on the head of a winner in an athletic contest). (6:11)
Although Zechariah was directed to make the “crown” or “crowns,” he probably arranged for the actual work to be done. The placement of a crown on Joshua’s head was a symbolic act that pointed to a future development. (6:11)
Zechariah was to tell Joshua, “Thus says YHWH of hosts [the Lord Almighty (LXX)], saying, “Look! The man whose name is Sprout; and from under him, he will sprout and he will build the temple of YHWH.” This declaration of YHWH, the God with hosts of angels in his service, links the crowning of Joshua with the sprouting (the rising [like that of the sun], LXX) of the man called “Sprout” (Dawn or Sunrise [anatolé], LXX). Therefore, the placing of the crown on the head of Joshua appears to have prophetically indicated that the man called “Sprout” would function as high priest in addition to ruling as king. (Verse 13) He would sprout from below as from a root, or from the ancestral royal line that had its start with David of the tribe of Judah. (6:12)
Jesus proved to be the Anointed One, Messiah, or Christ who “sprouted” from the royal line of David when it had been reduced to a level of obscurity comparable to a root in dry ground. (Compare Isaiah 11:1-5; 53:2.) He alone, as one who came through the royal line of David, is both high priest and king. (Hebrews 1:8, 9; 7:14-17, 26-8:6) The temple he builds is one composed of living stones, of his devoted disciples. These faithful followers of his form a congregation, a community, or a temple in which God dwells by means of his spirit. (Matthew 16:18; 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17; Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Peter 2:4, 5) Decades before Zechariah began serving as a prophet, Ezekiel saw in vision a temple that differed markedly from the one that was to be rebuilt. (Ezekiel 40:1-43:12) In this way, by means of a visual representation, it was divinely revealed that at a future time there would be a uniquely different temple (as is definitely true respecting the temple consisting of living stones). (6:12)
Apparently for emphasis, the thought that the man named “Sprout” would “build the temple of YHWH” is repeated. He is the one who would bear “splendor” or royal dignity and “sit and rule on his throne.” There would be a “priest on his throne,” and “counsel of peace” would be “between them both.” In the former kingdom of Judah, there were times when serious conflicts arose between the king and the Aaronic priest. This happened when the priest Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, publicly reproved the people, including the King Jehoash, for transgressing YHWH’s commands. Thereafter, at the order of the king, the people killed Zechariah by hurling stones at him in the courtyard of the temple. (2 Chronicles 24:20-22) No disastrous rift of this nature would be possible when the offices of king and high priest would be bestowed on one person. It would then be as if the king and the high priest were united in a peaceful understanding, adhering to counsel or advice that promoted peace between them. In the fulfillment relating to the Anointed One, Christ, or Messiah, to Jesus the “Sprout” who came from the royal line of David, the positions of king and high priest are combined. This aspect is not expressed explicitly in the prophetic word, but the focus is on the complete harmony in the functions of the two offices. (6:13)
In the Septuagint, the wording is even more specific than the Hebrew text in referring to two persons. It indicates that both the ruler and the priest would function unitedly in administering affairs among the people, with the priest giving full support to the ruler as one stationed at his right hand. The one called “Sprout” (“Dawn” or “Sunrise” [LXX]) is represented as gaining renown (literally, receiving “virtue” or “moral excellence” [areté]) and sitting and governing “on his throne.” “And the priest will be on his right, and counsel of peace will be between both of them.” In this context, the Greek word areté may denote the renown or good reputation of the virtuous ruler. (6:13)
Neither the high priest Joshua nor anyone else would wear the crown that had been placed on his head as a symbolic act. This crown would occupy a place in the completed temple of YHWH, serving as a memorial to Helem (Heldai), Tobijah, Jedaiah, and Hen (probably another name for Josiah the son of Zephaniah), apparently for their significant contribution to the temple rebuilding work and also for a testimony about the coming of a future ruler, the man “Sprout” from the royal line of David. (6:14)
As in verse 10, the Septuagint includes no reference to Heldai (Helem), Tobijah, and Jedaiah. It says that the “crown” or victor’s wreath (stéphanos) “will be for those who endure and for her [probably Jerusalem’s] skilled people [literally, useful ones] and for those who have known it [likely meaning the exile (based on the antecedent for the same expression in verse 10)].” This crown would also prove to be for a “grace” or a gracious reward to the son of Sophonias (Josiah the son of Zephaniah) and for a “psalm” or a tangible expression of praise to God in his temple (in the “house of the Lord”). (6:14)
Those “far away”or “far from them” (LXX) could designate Jews who were then residing in lands far away from Jerusalem and the land of Judah. They would be prompted to return to the land of Judah and offer assistance for the rebuilding of YHWH’s temple. Upon witnessing this development, the people would know, or have it confirmed to them, that YHWH of hosts (the Lord Almighty [LXX]), their God with hosts of angels in his service, had sent the prophet Zechariah to them. If they listened, truly listened (literally, “to hear, you will hear”) to the “voice of YHWH” their God through his prophet, acting in harmony with the message proclaimed to them, all that had been made known to them would take place. (6:15)
Notes
In verse 5, the Septuagint rendering indicates that the four winds “go forth to attend to,” or to render service to, “the Lord of all the earth.”
The measure of obscurity in the Hebrew text of verse 10 has given rise to a variety of renderings, including ones that adopt parts of the Septuagint reading. “Take silver and gold from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who were captives in Babylon. Go that same day to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, who came from Babylon.” (NCV) “Take the gifts given by the exiles Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, and go at once to the home of Josiah son of Zephaniah. All of them have returned from exile in Babylonia.” (GNT, Second Edition) “Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah will bring gifts of silver and gold from the Jews exiled in Babylon. As soon as they arrive, meet them at the home of Josiah son of Zephaniah.” (NLT) “Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah have returned from Babylonia. Collect enough silver and gold from them to make a crown. Then go with them to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah and put the crown on the head of the high priest Joshua son of Jehozadak.” (CEV)
The “word of YHWH,” a new message, came to Zechariah in the fourth year of the reign of King Darius. It was then the fourth day of the ninth Jewish month, Chislev (corresponding to mid-November to mid-December). Based on ancient sources that list the length of the reigns for Babylonian and Persian monarchs, the fourth year of King Darius was 518 BCE. This Persian ruler is also referred to as Darius the Great, Darius I, and Darius Hystaspes. (7:1)
From the town of Bethel (located about 11 miles or 17 kilometers north of Jerusalem), Sharezer and Regem-Melech, together with a delegation of other men, had been sent to entreat YHWH (literally, to “appease the face of YHWH”) or to obtain a divinely approved response in answer to their concern. The last part (Melech) of the compound name “Regem-Melech” means “king,” and this is the apparent reason for the rendering of the Septuagint. Whereas the Hebrew text may be understood as indicating that the delegation came from Bethel to Jerusalem, the Septuagint represents a delegation as having been sent to Bethel. “And Sarasar [Sharezer] and Arbeseer the king and his men sent out to Baithel [Bethel] to propitiate the Lord.” The word for “sent out” in the Septuagint is exapésteilen, which is a third person singular verb, but those doing the sending are more than one individual — Sarasar and King Arbeseer and his men.
(7:2; see the Notes section.)
The delegation asked “the priests of the house of YHWH of hosts [the house of the Lord Almighty (LXX)] and the prophets” (probably Haggai and Zechariah), “Shall I weep in the fifth month and fast as I have done for many years?” In Rahlfs’ printed text of the Septuagint, the Greek rendering is not expressed as a question and differs from the Hebrew text. “The holy offering [a possible rendering for the Greek word hagíasma] has come in here in the fifth month, as I have done already many years.” (7:3)
The Babylonian forces destroyed the temple of YHWH in the fifth Jewish month (Ab, corresponding to mid-July to mid-August). (2 Kings 25:8, 9; Jeremiah 52:12, 13) The mourning and fasting of the fifth month in which the people (represented by the collective first person singular verbs) engaged for many years commemorated this calamity. Their concern was whether they should continue to observe this mourning and fasting. (7:3)
In response to the inquiry of the delegation, the “word of YHWH of hosts” (the “word of the Lord of forces” or hosts [LXX]) came to Zechariah. The manner in which the prophet received the message from YHWH, the God with hosts of angels in his service, is not disclosed in the account. (7:4)
Through Zechariah, YHWH directed a question to “all the people of the land and to the priests.” “When you fasted and wailed in the fifth [month] and in the seventh for these 70 years, [was it] for me that you fasted?” This question was meant for more than the delegation that had come to inquire whether this fasting should be continued. Everyone (the people then living in the land from which they had been exiled and the priests who would be carrying out their assigned duties at the rebuilt temple) needed to give serious consideration to the question. (7:5)
When the people and their priests accompanied their fasting with lamenting or loud wailing, or beat themselves upon their breasts (as the rendering of the LXX suggests), they commemorated the destruction of the temple in the fifth month (2 Kings 25:8, 9; Jeremiah 52:12, 13) and, in the seventh month, the assassination of Gedaliah, the appointee of Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar as governor, and which assassination prompted Israelite survivors of the conquest to flee to Egypt because of fearing Babylonian reprisal for this seditious act. (2 Kings 25:25, 26; Jeremiah 41:1-3; 42:19-43:3) If their fasting and wailing had been for YHWH, they would have done so out of deep sorrow and regret over having seriously transgressed his commands and disregarded his pleading with them through his prophets to repent and to abandon their wayward course. Their great sadness would not primarily have been on account of the calamities that had befallen them but would have been mainly over their flagrant wrongdoing that led to their loss of YHWH’s protection and blessing. As the rhetorical question and the one that followed implied, they did not really fast and lament for YHWH. (7:5)
The wording of the question indicates that the 70 years extended from the past to the then-present time. According to extant ancient sources that list the length of the reigns of Babylonian and Persian monarchs, the time between the destruction of Jerusalem and the fourth year of the reign of Darius was about 70 years. At the time of Jerusalem’s destruction, about 25 years remained of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. Evil-merodach (Amel-Marduk) ruled for 2 years, Neriglissar (Nergal-sharezer) for 4 years, Labashi-Marduk for less than a year, Nabonidus for 17 years, Cyrus for 9 years, and Cambyses for 8 years, and Darius succeeded Cambyses as king. The total number of years of Babylonian and Persian rule that ended in the fourth year of Darius extend from 587 BCE (the generally accepted year for the destruction of Jerusalem) to 518 BCE. (7:5)
The next rhetorical question served to highlight the answer to the previous rhetorical question. “When you would eat and when you would drink, would you not eat for yourselves and drink [for yourselves]?” The people and their priests knew that they ate and drank to satisfy their daily needs and that the main objective of their eating and drinking was not to bring praise to YHWH. Likewise, it had not been for YHWH that they had fasted and lamented annually in the fifth month and in the seventh month over the course of the decades that had passed since Jerusalem and the temple had been destroyed. (7:6)
By means of yet another question, the people and their priests were reminded about what the prophets had proclaimed before the destruction of Jerusalem and the desolation of the land of Judah. “[Were] not these the words that YHWH proclaimed by the former prophets when Jerusalem was inhabited and in prosperity, and her cities about her, and the Negeb and the Shephelah were inhabited?” YHWH’s words through his prophets had called attention to the transgressions of the people and their leaders, called upon them to repent, and warned them of the calamities that would come upon them if they persisted in following a lawless course. Therefore, they brought upon themselves the destruction of Jerusalem, the desolation of the land, and life as exiles far away from their own land. (7:7)
At the time the former prophets were active, all appeared well for the inhabitants of Jerusalem and of the surrounding cities or towns despite their failure to live up to YHWH’s commands. There were then inhabitants in the Negeb (the “mountain” or the mountainous or hilly region [LXX]), the area south of the mountains of Judah, and in the Shephelah or in the “lowland” (the land between the central mountain range of Judah and coastal plains bordering the Mediterranean Sea). (7:7)
Again the “word of YHWH” came to Zechariah. This “word” provided specifics regarding the message that the former prophets had declared and concerning the unresponsiveness of the people who heard what they said. (7:8)
The message the former prophets had proclaimed to the people was just as applicable to them as to those who had returned from exile if they were to benefit from YHWH’s aid and enjoy his blessing. “Thus says YHWH of hosts [the Lord Almighty (LXX)],” the God with hosts of angels in his service, “Judge with true judgment [righteous judgment (LXX)]; show compassion (chésed) and mercy [each] man to his brother.” Rendering true judgment required judging impartially and uprightly, refusing to accept bribes to pervert justice. The Hebrew word chésed may be defined as “graciousness,” “enduring loyalty,” and “steadfast love.” It is a compassionate care and loving concern that expresses itself in action. Dealing with compassion and mercy would mean responding generously and kindly to one’s “brother” or to one’s fellow in need. (7:9)
The message about what YHWH expected from his people continued. They were not to oppress or take advantage of the widow, the fatherless, the resident alien and the poor, making their difficult lot even harder to bear. In their “heart” or inmost selves, they were not to scheme some evil against a “brother.” This indicated that they needed to refrain from formulating a plan by which they could derive profit for themselves at the expense of a fellow Israelite. (7:10; see the Notes section.)
Instead of obeying the “word of YHWH,” the people refused to listen. They “turned a stubborn shoulder” or revealed themselves to be defiant. Not wanting to “hear,” listen, or obey, they made themselves totally unresponsive as if they had stopped up their ears. (7:11)
The people “made their heart like adamant,” a stone the ancients considered so hard as to be impenetrable. They made their “heart” or inmost selves so stubbornly unresponsive because they did not want to “hear” or obey the “law and the words that YHWH of hosts [conveyed] by his spirit through the former prophets.” According to the Septuagint rendering, the people made their “heart” or inmost selves “disobedient.” The “law” included all the commands that the nation of Israel received after departing from Egypt and before entering the land of Canaan. Because God’s spirit operated upon them, the prophets were able to impart the word of YHWH to the people, making clear to them the course they needed to follow to have his approval and blessing. The Septuagint refers to the “words that the Lord Almighty sent by his spirit by the hands of the former prophets.” The expression “by the hands of the former prophets” denotes “by means of” or “through” them. (7:12)
As a consequence of their defiantly disregarding the law and the messages the prophets proclaimed, “great wrath from YHWH of hosts” (the Lord Almighty [LXX]) came upon the people. YHWH, the God with hosts of angels in his service to accomplish his purpose, permitted the Babylonians under the command of King Nebuchadnezzar to destroy Jerusalem, devastate the land of Judah, and take survivors of the conquest into exile. (7:12)
YHWH of hosts (the Lord Almighty [LXX]), according to the words of Zechariah, is the one who had called out to the people, using his prophets to admonish them to abandon their lawless ways, and they did not listen. Therefore, when the threatened judgment for disobedience befell the people, “they called” or cried out for help, but he did not hear or respond to them. (7:13)
On account of what he permitted the Babylonian forces to do to his wayward people, YHWH is represented as saying that he “swept them way” (“cast them” [LXX]) “among all the nations that they had not known.” They then found themselves as exiles far away from their own land in unfamiliar surroundings among people speaking other languages, observing different customs, and worshiping a multitude of deities. Their own land was desolate after they had been ripped away from it. No one passed through it and no one returned to it. By their stubborn refusal to heed YHWH’s commands and the words of his prophets, the people had made the “desirable” (“choice” [LXX]) or pleasant land into a waste or an object of horror. (7:14)
Notes
According to another view reflected in the renderings of a number of translations (verse 2), “Bethel” is part of a compound name. “Bethelsarezer sent Regemmelech and his men to implore favor of the LORD.” (NAB) “Bethel-sharezer sent Regem-melech together with his men to entreat the favour of the LORD.” (REB) “When Bethel-sarezer, and Regem-melech and his men, had sent to entreat the favour of the LORD.” (Margolis)
In verse 10, the Septuagint expresses the thought of the last phrase in a way that differs from the extant Hebrew text. No one of the people was to bear a grudge in their “hearts” regarding a wrong “his brother” may have committed.
Again the word of “YHWH of hosts,” or a new message from YHWH for Zechariah to proclaim, came to him. The designation “YHWH of hosts,” which identifies YHWH as the God with hosts of angels in his service, is found 17 more times in this chapter (verses 2, 3, 4, 6 [twice], 7, 9 [twice], 11, 14 [twice],18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23). Each time the rendering in the Septuagint is “Lord Almighty.” (8:1)
The message from “YHWH of hosts” was, “I am jealous for Zion with great jealousy, and with great wrath I am jealous for her.” The Septuagint reads, “I have been jealous for Jerusalem and Zion,” with Zion possibly designating the temple site and Jerusalem the rest of the city. YHWH’s jealousy may include his desire to have the honor of the humiliated and devastated city restored and to have it and the temple rebuilt to represent him properly as his city with his temple. His jealousy would not permit any interference with the successful completion of the construction work. YHWH would be jealous with great wrath against all who might seek to obstruct the completion of the project. They would become the objects of his anger. (8:2)
YHWH promised to return to Zion, particularly the temple upon its being completely rebuilt. He would then take up residence in the midst of Jerusalem as his representative place of dwelling, more specifically in the Most Holy of the rebuilt temple. Jerusalem would then be called the “city of truth” or “trueness,” or the city that was true or faithful to YHWH. With the temple finished as YHWH’s representative place of residence on its elevated site in the city, Jerusalem would be the “mountain of YHWH of hosts, the holy mountain.” As the holy God, he acknowledges that which is “holy” or pure from his standpoint as his own. (8:3)
Jerusalem would be a secure city, enjoying YHWH’s protection and blessing, and the inhabitants would thrive. With many residents attaining advanced age, old men and old women would be seen sitting in the squares or in the streets. To aid them when walking, the aged would have a staff in their hand. (8:4)
There would also be many children in Jerusalem. The squares or streets would be full of boys and girls, enjoying themselves at play. (8:5)
For the remnant of the Israelites who had returned from exile, the transformation of Jerusalem from a city that had been devastated to a thriving metropolis filled with children and many men and women who had attained advanced age would have appeared “extraordinary,” too difficult, or “impossible” (LXX). Through the prophet Zechariah, YHWH raised the rhetorical question, “Should it be extraordinary [impossible (LXX)] also in my eyes?” (8:6)
The obvious answer to the rhetorical question previously raised is, No, it would not be extraordinary or impossible for YHWH of hosts. This question is then followed by his assurance, “Look! I am delivering my people from the land of the rising [of the sun] and from the land of the setting of the sun.” From all the countries in which they may have been scattered, whether lands situated in the east or in the west, YHWH would deliver his people. He would make it possible for them to return to their own land. (8:7)
YHWH would bring exiled Israelites back and have them dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. As persons upon whom he looked with approval, they would become his people, and he would be their God, “in truth and in righteousness.” They would be devoted to him in truth, sincerity, or faithfulness and would live upright lives. He would prove true to his promises to them and reveal himself as the ultimate standard of righteousness in the execution of his judgments and in his just dealings with them. (8:8)
The encouragement from YHWH of hosts for the “hands” of the people to be “strong” was to incite them to be fearless and courageous in the temple rebuilding work despite enemy opposition. The people are referred to as those hearing “these words in these days from the mouth of the prophets.” These “words” related to the rebuilding of the temple, and the prophets Haggai and Zechariah did make them known. Since the day the “foundation of the house of YHWH of hosts” was laid, the words of YHWH remained the same, expressing his purpose for the temple to be rebuilt. (8:9; see the Notes section.)
“Before those days” probably means before the time the rebuilding of the temple resumed. As evident from the prophesying of Haggai (1:4-6, 9-11), neglect of the temple rebuilding work led to the withdrawal of YHWH’s blessing, and this resulted in extremely disappointing harvests. As expressed through Zechariah, there were no wages for man nor for beast. This suggests that the yield of the ground — the produce from the labor of people and their animals — proved to be so meager that there was not enough for the people and the domestic animals to eat to satisfaction. The Septuagint rendering indicates that the wages of the people did not benefit them (apparently on account of being insufficient to procure necessities) and that there were no wages for the animals. (8:10)
Likely on account of the enemies who opposed and hindered the rebuilding work, great insecurity existed in Jerusalem and the surrounding area. This insecurity produced fear among the people, and so no one went out and no one came in. There was no safety from the foe, and the returned exiles appear to have been seriously divided in their views as to how they should proceed respecting rebuilding. As YHWH permitted this situation to develop, he is represented as saying that he set every man “against his fellow” or neighbor. According to the Septuagint rendering, there would not be “peace from tribulation” or distress “for the one going out and the one coming in.” Regarding God, the Septuagint says that he would send all “men” or all people away, “each one against his neighbor.” (8:10)
YHWH of hosts promised that he would not “deal with” (LXX) the remaining ones of his people (the Israelite remnant that had returned from exile) as he had in the former days. During the period of their neglecting the temple rebuilding work, he had not blessed them, and they found themselves facing hard times on account of repeated crop failures. (8:11)
The reference to a “seed of peace” may indicate that the seed that would be sown would do well, leading to an abundant harvest. Another possible meaning is that the sowing would be done in peace, with nothing to threaten the security of those doing the work. Agriculture would thrive. The grapevine would yield its fruit, and the ground would produce its increase from the seed that was sown. (8:12; see the Notes section.)
Dew is essential for there to be a good harvest. During the dry season, the moisture from dew during the night compensates for the moisture that is lost through evaporation on hot days. From the perception of the ancient observer, the dew came from above. Seemingly for this reason, the heavens are spoken of as giving “their dew.” (8:12)
When YHWH’s judgment was expressed against them on account of their failure to carry out his will, the Israelites experienced serious lack. With his blessing, the remnant of his people (the ones who had returned from exile) would enjoy security and abundant crops (“all these things”) as their inheritance from him. (8:12)
During the time of their being in exile and in view of the distressing circumstances in which they found themselves, the people ended up becoming a “curse among the nations.” Their plight caused people of the nations to look upon the “house of Judah” and the “house of Israel” (the Israelites as a whole) as cursed. YHWH promised to deliver them from this undesirable state, causing them to become a “blessing.” Their flourishing condition would make it clear to others that they were a people whom their God had blessed. Having been given YHWH’s assurance that the distressing circumstances of the past would end, they were not to be afraid. According to the Septuagint rendering, they were to “be courageous.” As action was required from them, they were to let their “hands be strong.” Although surrounding peoples opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the temple and the official ban on the rebuilding work was still in effect, they were not to be afraid of boldly going ahead with the reconstruction. Their “hands” needed to be “strong,” indicating that they were to press on courageously with their labor. (8:13)
The “fathers” or ancestors of the Israelites then living in Jerusalem and in the surrounding area had angered YHWH of hosts by disregarding his commands and the admonition he conveyed through his prophets. For this reason, he purposed to do “evil” to them or bring calamity upon them, and he felt no regret about doing so. (8:14)
Just as YHWH had purposed to bring calamity upon his lawless people and did so by allowing the Babylonian forces to desolate the land and take survivors of the military campaign into exile, he purposed (was “prepared” and had “purposed” [LXX]) in the then-present time (“these days”) to do good to Jerusalem and the house of Judah. This assured that the people would once again prosper in their land. They were to look confidently to the future and move forward with the rebuilding of the temple, not giving in to fear on account of opposition. According to the Septuagint, they were to be courageous. (8:15)
If the returned exiles were to prosper, they needed to live in harmony with God’s commands. He required that they speak the truth to one another (their companion or neighbor), shunning any kind of deception that could harm fellow Israelites. Judgments were rendered in the “gates” or in the open areas adjacent to the city gates. With reference to the manner in which the judging was to be done, the expression appearing in the text is, “truth and judgments of peace.” This suggests that the decisions elders made respecting cases brought before them were to reflect truth or to be truly just, honest, or impartial. Others should have been able to recognize that justice had been upheld and that the decisions rendered promoted peace (unlike corrupt decisions that did not end disagreements but gave rise to serious conflicts). (8:16)
In their “heart” (their minds or their inmost selves), the people were not to plot “evil” against one another, not scheming to benefit themselves at the expense of fellow Israelites. To advance a deceptive scheme or to commit fraud, dishonest persons would swear to a lie. The Israelites, however, were not to love false oaths and what could be gained from them. All the things previously mentioned were practices that YHWH hated, indicating that those who engaged in them would incur his anger. (8:17)
Again the “word of YHWH” came to Zechariah. The new message related to the joy that would replace the mourning and fasting over past calamities. (8:18)
The “fast of the fourth [month]” probably commemorated the time the Babylonian armies breached the walls of Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:2-4; Jeremiah 52:5-7); that of the “fifth” month, the destruction of the temple (2 Kings 25:8, 9; Jeremiah 52:12, 13), and that of the “seventh” month, the assassination of Gedaliah and the subsequent flight to Egypt out of fear of Babylonian reprisal. (2 Kings 25:22-26) One of two developments may have occasioned the fast of the “tenth” month, either the start of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:1; Jeremiah 39:1; 52:4) or the time the report concerning the fall of Jerusalem reached the people who were already in Babylonian exile. (Ezekiel 33:21) These fasts and associated mourning over past calamities would, according to the word of YHWH, be transformed into times of joy and rejoicing and “good appointed times” or festivals. With the city of Jerusalem rebuilt and a rebuilt temple, the Israelites had no reason to mourn and fast to commemorate calamities that had resulted on account of disregard for YHWH’s commands and the admonition he provided through his prophets. It was a time for them to “love truth,” being honest or truthful, and to love “peace” or everything that promoted harmony or security and prevented serious conflicts. (8:19)
The rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, as YHWH’s representative place of dwelling, would be the site to which “peoples and the inhabitants of many cities” would come. This development is expressed as a certainty, for it is introduced with the words, “thus says YHWH of hosts.” (8:20; see the Notes section.)
Inhabitants of one city would go to another city, saying to the people there, “Let us go now [literally, let us go to go] to entreat the face of YHWH and to seek YHWH of hosts. I also will go.” The objective for going to the temple in Jerusalem would be to be recipients of YHWH’s favorable attention as persons wanting to do his will. Those who would be inviting others to go with them would express their determination to do so. According to the rendering of the Septuagint, the inhabitants of five cities would come together in one city and speak to this effect. (8:21)
Israelites would not be the only ones coming to Jerusalem, seeking YHWH of hosts as people desiring his approval and blessing. “Many peoples and strong [many (LXX)] nations” would also be coming to seek him there and to “entreat the face of YHWH.” Those coming would include people from “strong nations” or the dominant populous nations. (8:22)
“In those days,” or at the time, when people from many nations would be seeking YHWH, “ten men from the nations of every tongue” (people speaking languages other than Hebrew) would take hold of the skirt of the garment of a “Jew,” saying, “We will go with you, for we have heard [that (LXX)] God [is (LXX)] with you.” During the centuries that followed the completion of the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, people from many nations did choose to become proselytes and went to Jerusalem for worship, especially for the annual festivals. They recognized that the Jews were the only ones who worshiped the true God, YHWH, and that the Jews were his people. By their choosing to identify themselves as worshipers of YHWH in association with the Jews, people of the nations could be regarded as taking hold of the garment of a Jew and declaring their desire to go with the Jewish people. (8:23)
An even more remarkable fulfillment of the word of YHWH of hosts through the prophet Zechariah began after Jesus’ resurrection and ascension to heaven. The Israelites who became Jesus’ disciples, recognizing him to be the promised Anointed One, Messiah, or Christ and the unique Son of God, constituted the Israel of God. Individually, they were true Jews or Israelites. Observing the evidence that God was with them as evident from the operation of his spirit among them, people from many nations responded to the message about Jesus Christ that they proclaimed and chose to become his disciples. Thus, in ever-increasing numbers, people of the nations took hold of the skirt of a Jew, determined to be identified with the Israel of God as followers of Jesus Christ. (8:23)
Notes
There is a measure of obscurity in the text of verse 9, including that of the Septuagint. This has resulted in a number of varying interpretive renderings in modern translations. “Take heart, all who now hear the promise that the temple is to be rebuilt; you hear it from the prophets who were present when foundations for the house of the LORD of Hosts were laid.” (REB) “Think about the message my prophets spoke when the foundation of my temple was laid.” (CEV) “You are now hearing the same words the prophets spoke at the time the foundation was being laid for rebuilding my Temple.” (GNT, Second Edition) “Listen to the words that were spoken by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah. They spoke to you when the work on my temple started up again. Let your hands be strong so that you can rebuild the temple.” (NIRV)
In verse 12, The Septuagint opens with the words, “But I will show peace,” indicating that YHWH would assure the peace, well-being, or security of his people.
The partially preserved words of verse 20 in a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) contain the first letter (yod [Y]) of the divine name (YHWH) and refer to YHWH as “YHWH of forces” or of hosts.
The first word of the Hebrew text is massá’. In the Septuagint, this noun is rendered lémma, which word basically denotes “something that is received” and so may be understood to mean a “received message.” The Vulgate rendering for massá’ is onus (“load” or “burden”). Renderings of massá’ found in modern translations include “burden,” “oracle,” “word,” “message,” “prophecy,” and “pronouncement.” (9:1)
The message is designated as the “word of YHWH.” It appears that the “word of YHWH” is referred to as coming to have a resting place “in the land of Hadrach and Damascus.” A number of translations render the preposition preceding “land of Hadrach” as “against,” which is a possible significance. In the Septuagint, however, the preposition is translated “in,” and that is also the reading of the partially preserved text in a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr). The rendering “in” may be the preferable choice, for the phrase where the preposition appears may then be translated, “In the land of Hadrach and Damascus, the word of YHWH [will have] its [Hebrew, ‘his’ (to agree with the masculine gender of the noun ‘word’)] resting place.” This could indicate that the “word of YHWH” would from then onward have a direct bearing on people beyond the former borders of the land of Israel as if it had taken up residence “in the land of Hadrach and Damascus.” From this standpoint, YHWH may also be regarded as actively present in this region. (9:1; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint reading and the fragmentary Greek scroll [8HevXIIgr].)
The “land of Hadrach” appears to have been a district in Syria, where Hadrach was the principal city. Hadrach has commonly been identified with the Hatarikka that is mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions and has been linked to Tell Afis, a site southwest of Aleppo in Syria. Damascus lies much farther to the south of Tell Afis. The reference to Damascus probably also includes the district surrounding the city. (9:1)
A measure of obscurity exists regarding the concluding phrase, which many have emended to read “cities of Aram” instead of “eye of man.” This emendation does not find any support in either the Septuagint (kýrios ephora anthrópous kaí pásas phylás tou Israel [the “Lord watches men and all the tribes of Israel”]) or the Vulgate (oculus hominis et omnium tribuum Israhel [“eye of man and all the tribes of Israel”]). The fragmentary text of this verse in a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr), though missing some of the letters, reads, “eye of men and all the tribes of Israel.” It appears preferable, therefore, to follow the reading of the extant Hebrew text. A literal rendering of the concluding phrase then would be, “for to YHWH the eye of man and all the tribes of Israel.” This could be understood to mean that the eye of man (a collective singular) or the eyes of non-Israelite people and all the tribes of Israel would be directed to YHWH, looking to him as their God. (9:1)
Hamath is referred to as “bordering on it” (literally, “on her” (a feminine suffix), probably meaning on the “land” (’érets [a noun in the feminine gender]) that was mentioned in the preceding verse. Likely the designation “Hamath” includes the district in which it was the major city, a site on the Orontes River and nearly 120 miles (c. 190 kilometers) north of Damascus. As principal cities, Tyre and Sidon may well represent all of Phoenicia. Regarding these cities, the verse concludes with the words, “for she is [they are (LXX)] very wise.” This wisdom could relate to the outstanding success in commercial activity, with Tyre especially being noted for its skilled seamen and craftsmen. (9:2)
When linked to the words of verse 1, Hamath, Tyre, and Sidon would also experience YHWH’s active involvement in their affairs, for they would be affected by his word or his expressed will and purpose. According to the Septuagint rendering, God’s watching would include his doing so over “Emath [Hamath] in its borders, Tyre and Sidon.” (9:2)
The city of Tyre had made itself secure, having built a “rampart” or “fortresses” (LXX). In his Anabasis of Alexander (II, xxi), the historian Arrian, writing in the second century CE, referred to a section of the walls of Tyre as being 150 feet (46 meters) in height and built of large stone blocks held together with mortar. Through its profitable trade, Tyre had “heaped up silver like dust and gold like the mud of the streets.” (9:3)
Tyre’s immense wealth and strong fortifications could not provide real security. This is because the “Lord” had purposed to “strip” Tyre and to “cast her wealth [cháyil] into the sea.” Tyre itself would be “consumed by fire.” The Hebrew word cháyil can designate either “wealth” or “power.” According to the Septuagint rendering, the Lord would come to possess Tyre and “strike its power into the sea.” (9:4; see the Notes section.)
Historically, Alexander the Great conquered the city in 332 BCE after a siege that lasted from January to July. In the first century CE, Quintus Curtius Rufus wrote the following about the fate of Tyre after the conquest of Alexander the Great: “The extent of the bloodshed can be judged from the fact that 6,000 fighting-men were slaughtered within the city’s fortifications. It was a sad spectacle that the king’s fury then provided for the victors: 2,000 [Tyrians], by the killing of whom the rage subsided, now hung fastened to timbers all along the huge expanse of the beach.” (9:4; for pictures of and comments about Tyre, see Tyre.)
The inhabitants of the Philistine city of Ashkelon, upon “seeing” or learning about the fall of Tyre, would become fearful. In relation to the conquest of Alexander the Great, this fear would have been justified, for he and his forces did come to Philistia. In the Hebrew text, the choice of words is poetic (tere’ (“will see”), tiyra’ (“will be afraid”) (9:5)
In view of the fate of Tyre, the people of the Philistine city of Gaza would share the fear of the inhabitants of Ashkelon and writhe in anguish. The conquest of Alexander the Great resulted in ruin for Gaza and great pain for the inhabitants. After Alexander’s warriors succeeded in entering the city, the men of Gaza stood together and fought. All of them were slain in the place where “each man had been stationed.” Alexander sold the surviving women and children into slavery. (Arrian [historian in the second century CE] in his Anabasis of Alexander, II, xxvii) (9:5)
The object of the “expectation” or “hope” of Ekron would be put to shame, indicating that there would be no help coming from any quarter to which the inhabitants had looked to assist them in a successful defense of their city. In this manner, the object of their hope would be “put to shame” or be revealed as a disappointment. According to the Septuagint, Akkaron (Ekron) “was put to shame over its transgression.” This suggests that the people of Ekron, having been put to shame or humiliated on account of their record of wrongdoing, would be afraid like Ashkelon and Gaza. (9:5; see the Notes section.)
As a conquered city, Gaza would no longer have a local “king.” He would perish from the city. Conquest would reduce Ashkelon to the state of an uninhabited city. (9:5)
The Hebrew noun mamzér can designate an illegitimate son. As the word relates to the Philistine city of Ashdod, it may be understood to mean that a foreign population would replace the native population. This is the significance conveyed in the Septuagint. “Foreigners will reside in Azotus [Ashdod].” On account of the devastation that would come upon Philistia, YHWH is represented as saying that he would “cut off” or bring an end to the “pride” of the Philistines (allophyles [people of another tribe], LXX). (9:6)
The time would come when a remarkable change would take place among the remnant of the Philistines that would survive the foretold judgment, and that astonishing transformation is represented as something YHWH would bring about. According to a literal translations of the Hebrew text, YHWH declared, “I will take away his blood from his mouth and his abominations from between his teeth.” The singular masculine suffixes in the Hebrew text may be understood as collective singulars that refer to the Philistines. In the Septuagint, the pronouns are plural. “I will remove the blood from their mouth and their abominations from the midst of their teeth.” These words reveal that the Philistines would cease to eat blood or the meat of animals that had not been properly bled. (Compare Genesis 9:4.) The “abominations” that would no longer stick to their teeth would be the meat of unclean animals (as thus classified in the law given to the Israelites [Leviticus 11:1-23; Deuteronomy 14:3-21; compare Daniel 1:8]). A number of translations are specific in conveying this in their renderings. “I shall stop them eating flesh with the blood still in it and feeding on detestable things.” (REB) “No longer will the Philistines eat meat with blood in it or any unclean food.” (CEV) (9:7)
It is also possible that the reference is to the end of practices relating to the worship of nonexistent deities. Idolaters commonly ate part of the meat of animals that were offered as sacrifices, and the animals included ones that were unclean according to the terms of the law given to the Israelites. Accordingly, the Philistines would have eaten meat along with the blood that had not been drained from the sacrificed animals. Both the meat from the sacrifices and the source of that meat would have been abominable or unclean as food. (9:7; compare Isaiah 65:4; 66:17.)
The next phrase (“he also will be remaining for our God”) indicates that a remnant of the Philistines would become worshipers of YHWH. As such, this Philistine remnant would become like a “chieftain” (’allúph) in Judah. In the Septuagint, the corresponding noun for ’allúph is chilíarchos, a term that applies to a commander of a thousand men. This suggests that the translator linked the noun ’allúph to ’éleph, meaning “thousand.” For the Philistine remnant to become like a “chieftain” suggests that they would be fully incorporated as part of the people whom YHWH recognized as his own and have an equal standing with them. This has taken place in connection with the “Israel of God” or the true “seed of Abraham,” among whom all former distinctions that divided people on the basis of race, nation, tribe, social standing, or sex do not exist. (9:7; compare Galatians 3:28, 29; 6:15, 16.)
The incorporation of a Philistine remnant with God’s own people is expressed in still another way. “Ekron [will be] like the Jebusite.” People of the Philistine city of Ekron are hereby portrayed as becoming like the Jebusite. After Jerusalem was seized from the Jebusites during the reign of King David, a remnant of the Jebusites continued to live among the Israelites. This is evident from the fact that King David purchased the future temple site from Araunah (Ornan) the Jebusite. (2 Samuel 24:18-24; 1 Chronicles 21:15-25) Just as Araunah or Ornan was treated with dignity by King David, so a remnant of the Philistines would gain the same dignified standing among the people whom God recognized as belonging to him. (9:7)
The expression “my house” designates the temple of YHWH. He is represented as encamping at his “house” like a guard or a garrison, stopping all from passing through and returning either as attackers or as defiled persons. The Septuagint rendering may be understood to indicate that God would “set up an encampment” for his house. He would not permit his people to be the object of one passing through as an attacker or as an oppressor. According to the Septuagint, no one would “come against them to drive them out.” This is expressed emphatically with two Greek words for “not,” indicating that it would by no means take place. The words attributed to YHWH (“for now I see with my eyes”) reveal that he is fully aware of developments and is always prepared to protect his people. (9:8)
At the time these words were recorded, the Israelites had no king in the royal line of David from the tribe of Judah but were subject to a foreign power. In the future, however, the king from the royal line would come to Zion or Jerusalem. The expressions “daughter of Zion” and “daughter of Jerusalem” are parallel designations and apply to the people who would be able to cry out joyfully. Zion (or the people) is called upon to rejoice greatly. In the parallel expression, Jerusalem (or the people) is invited to shout or to cry out joyfully. This is because the king would be coming to Zion or Jerusalem. (9:9)
The king is described as “righteous and saved,” also “humble and riding on a donkey, on a young donkey, the offspring [literally, son] of a jenny” (“on a beast of burden, even [on] a young foal” [LXX]) His being “righteous” may point to the fact that he is rightfully king by God’s appointment and not a king who has seized rulership by corrupt means. He would also be righteous or just when administering affairs. His being “saved” could point to his coming to Jerusalem as if saved from battle or as victorious. Another possible meaning is that he is one whom YHWH saves to be king. Unlike monarchs with a proud bearing, this king is “humble,” unassuming, kindly and gentle. He does not make his entrance on a war mount, but on a donkey or an animal used for carrying burdens or for peaceful agricultural labor. (9:9)
Centuries later, the prophetic words regarding this king came to be recognized as applying to Jesus when he rode into Jerusalem on a young donkey on which no one had previously ridden. At that time many acknowledged him as the “son of David” or as the promised Anointed One, Messiah, or Christ in the royal line of David. (9:9; Matthew 21:1-9; Mark 11:1-10; John 12:12-16)
Indicating that the kingship of the one coming to Jerusalem would be rooted in peace, YHWH is represented as saying, “I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the horse from Jerusalem.” Here Ephraim represents the former kingdom of Israel and Jerusalem the kingdom of Judah. The chariot and the horse were associated with warfare, and their being cut off could indicate that the former hostilities between Israel and Judah would cease and both would be united and benefit from the peaceful rule of the future king. YHWH would also “speak peace to the nations,” granting them the opportunity to submit willingly to the future king without his having to gain dominion over them through battle. This king’s realm is portrayed as greater than existed in the time of David. It would extend “from sea to sea” (the Mediterranean Sea to the Dead Sea) and “from the River” (the Euphrates) to the “ends of the earth.” (9:10)
According to the Septuagint, the future king is the one who would “destroy chariots from Ephraim” and “cavalry from Jerusalem.” Also the “bow of warfare” would be destroyed. The Septuagint rendering appears to limit the peace to the land of God’s people, for “abundance and peace” are represented as being away “from the nations.” As to the reign of the king, it is portrayed as over “waters as far as the sea and the estuaries of the rivers of the earth.” (9:10)
The singular personal pronoun “you” (’at) is feminine gender. This pronoun refers to Jerusalem (verse 9), the “mother” of God’s people, as still having “children” in captivity, imprisonment, or exile. According to the Hebrew text, YHWH would “send” the captives or prisoners “out of the waterless pit” (a dry cistern used as a prison), setting them free from the place of their exile. The basis for deliverance is linked to the “blood of your [Jerusalem’s] covenant,” meaning the covenant that God concluded with his people as represented by their “mother” Jerusalem. (9:11; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
According to Exodus 24:3-8, the “blood of the covenant,” or the blood of sacrificed animals, validated the law covenant or put this covenant in force. In his capacity as mediator, Moses splashed half of the blood of the sacrificial victims on the altar. Then, after reading the law that had been divinely revealed to him and which he recorded, he sprinkled blood from the sacrificial victims on the people. On the basis of the covenant that was thus put into effect, the Israelites came to be YHWH’s people, and this covenant relationship assured that YHWH would free his people who were still captives. (9:11)
In relation to the king who would be coming to Zion, the new covenant provides the basis for a grander liberation. This new covenant was put in force when Jesus, the promised Messiah or Christ in the royal line of David, died a sacrificial death, with his shed blood making possible a deliverance from slavery to sin and the condemnation to which sin leads. (9:11; compare Jeremiah 31:33, 34; Matthew 26:28; Luke 22:20; Hebrews 8:8-13; 9:11-28.)
The “prisoners of hope” would be those of God’s people still in exile who had the hope that they would be liberated. They are told, “Return to the stronghold.” This stronghold may be Zion or Jerusalem. YHWH’s promise to these prisoners is that he would restore double of what they had before their state of imprisonment or exile. This promise is expressed emphatically with the words, “Today I declare.” In the Septuagint, the restoring of the people is portrayed as their being compensated double for a single day of alien residence. (9:12; regarding the first part of the Septuagint rendering, see the Notes section.)
In the case of those liberated from sin, the stronghold to which they can return as “children” or citizens is the “Jerusalem above.” (Galatians 4:26) What they receive as God’s approved people in the form of guidance and blessing is indeed comparable to a “double” reward. (9:12)
YHWH is represented as treading the bow, as if placing his foot in the middle of a bow to bend it so as to string it (tying the unattached string to the opposite side). Judah is identified as this “bow,” suggesting that the people of Judah are readied in YHWH’s hand for battle. Ephraim, representing the rest of the people of Israel, appears to be referred to as the one with whom YHWH “fills” the bow. This suggests that the people would be like an arrow in the bow, ready to be launched against the enemy. The attack is portrayed as one against the “sons” or people of “Javan” or Greece, with YHWH wielding the “sons” or people of Zion like the “sword of a warrior” against them. (9:13; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
Under the leadership of the Maccabees in the second century BCE, Jewish forces succeeded in gaining remarkable victories. The prophetic words, however, have been even more outstandingly fulfilled in the case of the members of the true Israel of God, those who acknowledge Jesus as their Lord and King. Despite their seemingly defenseless state and being submitted to vicious attacks, no power of the enemy has succeeded against them. (Compare Luke 10:19.) As in the case of their Lord and King, they have proved to be unconquerable, remaining firm in their devotion to God with the help of his spirit and not succumbing to the corruption of a world at enmity with him. (9:13; compare John 16:33; 1 John 5:3, 4.)
In the first century CE, the apostle Paul and other loyal disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ waged spiritual warfare, demolishing views or opinions that conflicted with God’s ways, exposing them as worthless and injurious. The battle was against things that were high and raised up against the knowledge of God, which could include everything that defiant humans had exalted as a bulwark against what God had revealed to be his will and purpose. Paul fought hard to triumph over all wrong thoughts, reducing them to the helpless state of captives in subjection to Christ. Like bound captives, these wrong thoughts were deprived of all power to do harm. (2 Corinthians 10:4, 5)
Through his prophet, YHWH is identified as the defender of his people. “And YHWH will appear over them,” manifestly as their protector. His defensive action is portrayed in terms of ancient warfare. The “arrow” shot from his bow would go forth “like lightning,” moving speedily and striking like a bolt of lightning. The Lord YHWH (Lord Almighty [LXX]) is represented as blowing on a shofar (a ram’s-horn trumpet), sounding a signal for battle. He is then referred to as going with the “tempests of the south.” Winds from the south pass over arid regions, bringing with them a heat wave that can dry up vegetation and proving to be very destructive. The mention of tempests or storms suggests that, in this depiction, the lightning bolt is the arrow and thunder is the sound of the shophar. (9:14; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
“YHWH of hosts [the Lord Almighty (LXX)],” the God with hosts of angels in his service, can and will “cover,” protect or defend his people. They would then, manifestly with his aid, defeat their foes as if “devouring” and “treading down” the “sling stones” that the enemy warriors had hurled. According to the Septuagint, God’s people are the ones who would consume the enemies and “overwhelm them with sling stones.” (9:15)
The reference to drinking “like wine,” or as if it were wine, may be a figurative way of expressing total defeat of the enemies as if the victors were imbibing their blood and then becoming “boisterous” as one would from drinking wine. In view of the link to the “corners of the altar,” the reference to the people becoming “filled like a bowl” appears to refer to being filled like a bowl that is full of the blood from a sacrifice. According to the law, the priest used his finger to put blood on the four horns of the altar, but the majority of the blood would be poured at the base of the altar. (Exodus 29:12; Leviticus 4:18) So it would appear that the corners of the altar would be the corners at the base where the largest quantity of blood was poured. A number of modern translations contain renderings that specifically refer to the bowl as being filled with blood. “They will drink and shout like drunk men. They will be filled like a bowl used for sprinkling blood at the corners of the altar.” (NCV) “They will shout in battle like drunk men and will shed the blood of their enemies; it will flow like the blood of a sacrifice poured on the altar from a bowl.” (GNT, Second Edition) “They will shout in battle as though drunk with wine, shedding the blood of their enemies. They will be filled with blood like a bowl, drenched with blood like the corners of the altar.” (NLT) The Septuagint rendering may indicate that God’s people would “drink” their enemies “like wine,” consuming them, and would fill an “altar” as one might fill “bowls.” (9:15)
On “that day,” the time when he would be acting as the defender of his people, “YHWH their God” would save them. They are described as being “like the flock of his people” or comparable to a flock of sheep under his care as a shepherd. The Septuagint specifically refers to saving his people “like sheep.” They will be very precious to YHWH like the “stones” or jewels of a diadem, sparkling [nasás] “over his land.” There is a measure of uncertainty about the meaning of the form of the Hebrew word that has been linked to nasás. Other suggested meanings besides “sparkle” or “glitter” are “raised,” “lifted up,” or “conspicuous” (like a signal or a banner). The Septuagint rendering is a form of the verb for “roll.” It reads, “for holy stones will roll on his land.” In the Vulgate, the verb is translated “elevated” or “raised up,” and it also uses the expression “holy stones” (“holy stones will be elevated over his land” [lapides sancti elevantur super terram eius]). (9:16)
The elliptical opening phrase, (“for how his goodness and how his beauty”) may be variously understood. It could denote that everything will be good and beautiful. The Hebrew singular masculine suffix could apply to God. “For how great is his goodness, and how great his beauty!” (ESV) As a collective singular, the suffix could refer to the people. “How lovely and beautiful they will be!” (HCSB) Translators have also rendered the phrase so as to apply to the land. “How good and beautiful the land will be!” (GNT, Second Edition) With God’s blessing, the land would produce abundantly. The young men would thrive, as there would be ample grain for making bread to eat, and the maidens would be able to enjoy sweet wine on account of good grape harvests. (9:17; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
Notes
In verse 1, the Septuagint does not contain a word for “resting place” but says thysía (“offering” or “sacrifice”), seemingly representing God’s sacrifice as being “in Hadrach [Sedrach] and Damascus.” It appears that the rendering “offering” resulted from reading the consonants (mem [M], nun [N], heth [CH], taw [T], and waw [W]) of the Hebrew expression for “his [or its] resting place” as the consonants for “his offering” (mem [M], nun [N], heth [CH], he [H], and waw [W]). The only difference is one letter, he (H) instead of taw (T), and the Hebrew letters in the ancient scrolls are similar. A Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) does not read thysía (“offering”) but contains the partially preserved word katápausis (“resting place”). This scroll, like the Masoretic Text, includes the divine name (YHWH) twice, and it is written in paleo-Hebrew script.
In verse 4, the Masoretic Text contains the plural form of the word for “Lord,” which in this case would be a plural of excellence. This is one of the places where the ancient Jewish scribes replaced the divine name (YHWH) with the Hebrew word for “Lord.” Numerous Hebrew manuscripts do contain the divine name. It is also found partially preserved (the last two letters [waw (W) and he (H)] in the paleo-Hebrew script of a Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr).
A Greek Minor Prophets scroll (8HevXIIgr) starts verse 5 with the conjunction kaí, but the alpha (A) is not preserved. Also in this verse, the fifth-century Codex Alexandrinus, like the Hebrew text, does not say “transgressions.” The codex contains a form of the Greek word elpís, meaning “expectation” or “hope.”
The Septuagint rendering of verse 11 represents Jerusalem as sending forth her prisoners from the waterless pit by the “blood of the covenant.” It may be that the translator misread the Hebrew word “send” as a second person singular verb instead of a first person singular verb (“I will send”). Another possibility is that the manuscript that provided the basis for the translation lacked the final yod (Y) of the Hebrew word for “send.”
It appears that the Septuagint rendering of the first part of verse 12 resulted from misreading or from a defective reading of the Hebrew manuscript available to the translator. The Septuagint says, “You will sit in a stronghold, O you captives [bound ones] of the gathering” (or “you assembled captives”). If the Hebrew word for “return” (a form of shuv) was spelled like a form of yasháv, the meaning would be “dwell” or “sit.” The Septuagint translator appears to have taken the Hebrew word for hope tiqváh as a form of qahál (“gather” or “gathering”).
In verse 13, the Septuagint represents God as stretching Judah as a bow for himself and filling Ephraim. The words, “I have filled Ephraim,” do not, however, convey a comprehensible significance. This verse then concludes, “I will raise up your children, O Zion, against the children of the Greeks, and I will handle you like a sword of a warrior.”
The initial phrase of verse 14 in the Septuagint may be rendered, “And the Lord will be over [epí] them,” meaning that he would be over his people as their protector and defender. It is also possible to understand the Greek preposition epí to mean “against” (as in the verse 13). In that case, the opening words of verse 14 may be regarded as a continuation of the phrase about the “children of the Greeks” and express the thought that the “Lord will be against them.” The Septuagint does not contain the expression “tempests [or storms] of the south” but says “tempest of his threatening,” suggesting that the destructive tempest is a manifestation of God’s anger.
The rendering of verse 17 in the Septuagint conveys the basic sense of the extant Hebrew text. “For if anything of his is good and if anything from him is beautiful, [there will be] grain for young men and pleasant-smelling wine for maidens.” The things “of his” or “from him” could be understood to refer to the good and beautiful things that have God as their source and would include the yield of the ground. With his blessing, young men would have plenty to eat, for there would be abundant grain for baking bread. There would also be a good grape harvest. Therefore, the maidens or virgins would be able to partake of sweet wine.
During the time of their neglecting the temple rebuilding work, the people who had returned to the land of Judah from Babylonian exile experienced periods of serious droughts and poor harvests. The prophet Haggai made it clear to them that this was because YHWH had withheld his blessing from them. (Haggai 1:9-11; 2:15-19) With a rebuilt temple and the services functioning there according to the requirements of the law, the people were admonished to ask YHWH for the rain in the “time of spring rain.” For a bountiful harvest, the “spring rain” or “late rain” in March and April was especially vital for the maturing crops. The Septuagint also includes the early season, which would be the time for the autumn rain. (10:1)
The making of “storm clouds” (plural of chazíz) and the giving of “showers of rain to them” are attributed to YHWH. Since the people are the ones called upon to petition YHWH for the rain, the Hebrew pronoun for “them” apparently applies to the people. Also to each one of them, YHWH gives “the greenery in the field,” which would include barley and wheat. (10:1; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
Teraphim were images of deities (commonly households gods), and idolaters consulted them for omens. (Compare Judges 17:5; 18:14, 17, 20; 2 Kings 23:24; Ezekiel 21:21.) The manner in which the omens were revealed is not related in the passages where the teraphim are mentioned. In this verse, what the teraphim say, or what was perceived as revealed by those consulting them, is called ’áven, which (in this context) could mean “nothingness,” “deception,” or “nonsense.” The basic sense of the word ’áven is “trouble,” which is the significance of the corresponding noun in the Septuagint (kópos). According to the Septuagint, the “soothsayers have spoken troubles” or troublesome things. (10:2)
The “diviners see falsehood,” and so what, on the basis of their occult practices, they made known to those who inquired of them could not be trusted. They related “dreams of emptiness” or dreams that imparted nothing of value. These dreams proved to be untrustworthy to those who accepted them as providing guidance. The comfort or consolation these diviners gave with apparent reference to impending calamities was “vanity” or worthlessness. (10:2)
“Therefore,” those who believed the worthless utterances of diviners and other charlatans went off “like a flock” of sheep, wandering about aimlessly. Without a shepherd who looked after them and guided them aright, they ended up being “afflicted.” While the Hebrew text is not specific in identifying the people as the ones to whom the words apply about going off and not the diviners, this does appear to be the preferable meaning and is made specific in a number of translations. “For the household gods utter empty promises; diviners see false signs, they produce lies as dreams, and the comfort they offer is illusory. So the people are left to wander about like sheep in distress for lack of a shepherd.” (REB) “Household gods give false advice, fortune-tellers predict only lies, and interpreters of dreams pronounce comfortless falsehoods. So my people are wandering like lost sheep, without a shepherd to protect and guide them.” (NLT) “Idols tell lies; fortune-tellers see false visions and tell about false dreams. The comfort they give is worth nothing. So the people are like lost sheep. They are abused, because there is no shepherd.” (NCV) The Septuagint rendering could be understood to indicate that the soothsayers and diviners were taken away like sheep and mistreated, “because [there] was no healing.” (10:2)
YHWH’s anger was “hot” or intense (“incited” or “provoked” [LXX]) against the “shepherds,” leaders, or rulers who should have provided sound guidance and protection for the people but who failed to do so. These leaders are called “he-goats,” for they acted oppressively. YHWH decreed that he would “visit” them for the purpose of executing punishment. According to the Septuagint, he would visit the “lambs,” turning his favorable attention to the people who were like sheep in need of a caring shepherd. “YHWH of hosts” (“Lord God Almighty” [LXX]) would “visit” his “flock, the “house of Judah,” concerning himself about them and their welfare. He would make them “like his horse of splendor” or his magnificent horse “in battle.” This suggests that he would make his people of the “house of Judah” triumphant over all enemy powers to carry out his predetermined purpose. (10:3)
“Out of him,” or out of the “flock, the house of Judah,” would come a “cornerstone” (pinnáh). The Hebrew noun pinnáh basically means “corner” and may apply to a “cornerstone.” In this context, pinnáh is used metaphorically to designate a “leader” or a “chieftain.” When regarded as applying prophetically to one who would come from the “house of Judah,” more specifically from the royal line of David, this one would be the Anointed One, Messiah, or Christ. He would occupy a position comparable to the most important stone in an edifice. This is the role that Jesus, the Son of God, fills. (10:4; Luke 20:17, 18; Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Peter 2:4-8)
Also “out of him,” or out of the “flock, the house of Judah,” would come a “tent peg.” Like a peg that is essential for holding up a tent with the rope that is attached to it, the promised Messiah would provide the support and leadership that his followers need. As a protector and defender, the Messiah could be spoken of as a “battle bow” coming “out of him,” or out of the “flock, the house of Judah.” Seemingly, to indicate that there would be those who would share authority with the one who would be like a “corner” or “cornerstone,” a “tent peg,” and a “battle bow,” the prophecy refers to “every dominator together” as likewise “coming out of him,” or out of this flock. (10:4; see the Notes section for the Septuagint rendering and other comments.)
With seeming reference to “every dominator” that would come from the “flock, the house of Judah,” the prophecy indicates that these leaders would be “like mighty men,” or triumphant warriors, “trampling the mud of the streets” while engaged “in battle.” They would war successfully, including against riders on horses, for YHWH would be “with them.” Despite the seeming military advantage of having horses, the riders would be “put to shame,” experiencing humiliating defeat. (10:5)
When the prophetic words are understood to apply to those in the service of the Messiah or Christ, Jesus, they provide the assurance that no enemy power would succeed against them. They would be triumphant on account of remaining unconquerable. (10:5; compare Luke 10:19.)
YHWH would turn his attention to those belonging to the “house of Judah,” strengthening them for carrying out his purpose regardless of what opposition they might face. The “house of Joseph” included the dominant tribe Ephraim and here represents all Israelites not of the “house of Judah.” Their being “saved” appears to refer to their being delivered from exile. Those of the “house of Judah” and of the “house of Joseph” whom he recognized as his repentant people, YHWH would “bring back” to their land (“settle them” [LXX]) because of his having compassion on them (“loved them” [LXX]). With their being granted his favor, their circumstances would then be as if he “had not rejected them” in the past. As “YHWH their God,” he would “answer them” (“hear them” [LXX]), responding to their petitions for help and guidance. (10:6)
Ephraim, representing all the Israelites aside from those of the former kingdom of Judah, would then be “like a mighty man.” This appears to indicate that, as a restored people, they would cease to be in a state of humiliation like a defeated nation but would be in circumstances comparable to that of triumphant warriors. The Septuagint refers to them as being “like warriors of Ephraim” when victorious. The “heart” of the people, or they in their inmost selves, would rejoice like persons who experience the cheering effect from drinking wine. Their “sons” or offspring would “see” this development and also “rejoice.” Then their “heart,” or they in their inmost selves, would find joy in YHWH, attributing their happiness to everything that he had done for them. (10:7)
YHWH is represented as gathering his people to bring them back to their land, doing so as if he were to “whistle” (“signal” [LXX]) for them. His redeeming them refers to his liberating them from exile. As a people back in their own land, they would become “great” or “many” as they had been “great” or “many” in the past. (10:8)
YHWH allowed enemy powers to conquer his people and to scatter them on account of their unfaithfulness to him. Therefore, their being scattered (literally, “sown”) “among the nations” is attributed to him. And in the distant lands to which they had been exiled, the people would “remember” YHWH, repentantly returning to him as their God. They would then come to be alive “with their sons” or children. This could mean that, instead of remaining in the downcast state of exiles, they would be revived or infused with new life and would return to their land. Something similar happened to Jacob when he became convinced that his son Joseph was still alive. (Genesis 45:27, 28) The Septuagint says regarding the people that “they will rear their children and return.” (10:9)
Israelite exiles resided in the land of Egypt and in the region that Asshur (Assyria) or the “Assyrians” (LXX) had formerly controlled. From those areas, YHWH would make it possible for his people to return, thus bringing them back to their own land. He would bring them to the “land of Gilead [Galaaditis (LXX)],” the territory east of the Jordan River, and to Lebanon (either meaning the region west of the Jordan River or the northernmost region of the former Israelite territory). Seemingly, because the Israelites would become a numerous people, the prophetic word was, “and for them it will not be found.” This elliptical phrase may indicate that the land would become so populated with Israelites as to make it appear that it was filled to overflowing. According to the Septuagint, not a single one of the people would be left behind, probably meaning left remaining in involuntary exile. (10:10)
It appears that the return of the Israelites from exile is depicted as being like the departure from Egypt when, in the time of Moses, they crossed the Red Sea. The third person singular Hebrew verb for “pass through” may be understood as a collective singular and apply to the people. This has the support of the Septuagint, which does have a third person plural form of the verb for “pass through” (diérchomai). The people would “pass through” a “sea of distress” or, according to the Septuagint, a “hemmed-in sea.” Possibly because of its being an apparent barrier to their departure, this body of water is called a “sea of distress.” (10:11; see the Notes section.)
To be grammatically consistent, the third person singular Hebrew verb for “strike” and the corresponding third person plural Greek verb would also apply to the people. It could be that they are being portrayed as striking down the “waves in the sea” because the waves would come to be nonexistent for them when passing through the body of water. This significance has a measure of support from the reference to the drying up of “all the depths of the Nile” or the deepest water of the river. (10:11)
For the “pride of Asshur” or Assyria to be laid low and for the “scepter of Egypt” to depart would signify that the powers in both regions would no longer exercise authority over God's people. The kind of pride that Assyria once had when gaining repeated military victories and proving to be seemingly unstoppable would cease to exist. Pride would then be transformed into a state of humiliation. As a great power, Egypt had once wielded a royal scepter. The departing of that scepter indicated that its former power would pass away. (10:11)
YHWH would make his people strong. Their being made “strong in YHWH” signifies they would be enjoying his protective care. They would walk in “his name,” conducting themselves in a manner that he (the One represented by the name) approved. According to the Septuagint, the people would “boast” in God’s name, taking pride in having a relationship with him as their God. (10:12)
Notes
For verse 1 in the Septuagint, the rendering of the plural form of the Hebrew noun chazíz (“storm cloud”) is the plural form of phantasía, which may designate “manifestations” or “visible signs.” God’s making such could refer to his doing things by which he reveals himself. It appears that the Septuagint translator linked chazíz to chazáh, meaning “see.” For the Hebrew expression rendered “showers of rain” in this verse, the Septuagint translator described the rain with the adjective cheimerinós, thus identifying the rain as “winter” rain.
The Hebrew word that may be rendered “dominator” (in verse 4) is a participial form of the verb nagás, meaning “oppress,” “drive,” “tyrannize,” or “wield power over.”
In verse 4, the Septuagint reads quite differently from the extant Hebrew text. “And from him he has looked upon, and from him he has arranged, and from him [was] a bow in wrath; from him will go forth every one who is expelling at the same time.” As in the case of the Hebrew text, “from him” or “out of him” could refer to the “flock, the house of Judah.” The antecedent could also be “horse.” Since the “flock” is made like a horse in battle, the meaning would not really change. Based on verse 3, the “Lord God Almighty” would be the one who is acting, looking upon from a position with reference to the flock, arranging or setting in order, readying the battle bow for shooting in order to express his wrath, and sending forth all who would do the expelling or driving away.
The consonants for the Hebrew word pinnáh (translated “cornerstone” in verse 4) are the same as a third person singular form of the Hebrew verb for “turn” (in order to look), and this may explain the reason for the Septuagint rendering that may be translated “he has looked upon.” When the lamed (L, the second letter) of the Hebrew noun rendered “battle” is deleted, the remaining three letters after the deleted lamed are the consonants for the word meaning “wrath” (chemáh), which is the rendering in the Septuagint. Nevertheless, the reading of the Septuagint is difficult to explain.
In verse 4, the Hebrew words rendered “cornerstone,” “tent peg,” and “battle bow” are singular. A number of translators have interpreted the singular to be a collective singular. Therefore, they have rendered the singular nouns as plural, applying the entire verse to God’s people. “From this flock will come leaders who will be strong like cornerstones and tent pegs and weapons of war.” (CEV) “From them shall come cornerstones, from them tent pegs, from them bows of combat, and every captain shall also arise from them.” (Tanakh)
Translators have variously interpreted the third person singular verbs in verse 11, applying them specifically to the people, to God, and to both the people and God. “They will pass through the sea of Egypt and strike its waves; all the depths of the Nile will become dry.” (REB) “I [God] will cross over to Egypt and smite the waves of the sea and all the depths of the Nile shall be dried up.” (NAB) “My people will go through an ocean of troubles, but I will overcome the waves and dry up the deepest part of the Nile.” (CEV)
Lebanon is called upon to open its doors, making it vulnerable for the fire that would consume the cedars. In verse 10 of chapter 10, “Lebanon” either refers to all the land of Israel west of the Jordan River or to the region of the northernmost limit of the former territory of Israel. This may also be the meaning here. Possibly the prophetic words point to a future time when the land would again be desolated on account of the unfaithfulness of the people. (11:1)
If the message relates to the devastation of the land, the trees are here personified to portray the future state of ruin. With the majestic “cedar” having fallen, the less impressive beróhsh is told to “howl” or wail. One suggested meaning for beróhsh, based on the Akkadian word for burāšu is “juniper.” The corresponding Greek rendering here is “pine” (pítys) and the Latin rendering of the Vulgate is “fir” (abies). As a witness to the ruin of the majestic trees or the lofty cedars, the juniper, pine, or fir would, as if commanded to do so, give way to loud lamentation. The howling or wailing also suggests that less impressive trees would not be spared from devastation. (11:2)
Bashan, a region situated east of the Jordan River, was known for its large trees (’allón). The Hebrew noun ’allón may designate any large tree, including the oak. In the Septuagint, the corresponding Greek term is drys (“oak”), and the Latin word for “oak” (quercus) is found in the Vulgate. These large trees or oaks are told to howl or wail because the thick or dense (batsír) forest has “gone down” or been laid waste. The usual meaning of the Hebrew word batsír is “vintage,” which significance does not convey an intelligible significance. For this context, one of the meanings that lexicographers have assigned to the Hebrew word is “inaccessible.” In the Septuagint, the reference is to a thickly wooded forest, and this does fit the context. (11:2)
Not just the heights of Lebanon with their lofty cedars and the large trees or oaks on the mountain ridges of Bashan would be devastated. The low-lying regions would also be ruined, and so the directive is to “listen” for the effect this would have on shepherds and beasts of prey. Shepherds would howl or wail, “for their glory is despoiled.” This “glory,” “greatness,” or “majesty” could designate what the shepherds regarded as magnificent, and this would be lush pastures for their flocks. With the thickets (literally, the “pride” or “splendor”) along the Jordan River being laid waste, lions would roar on account of the ruin of their habitat. In the Septuagint, the greatness of the shepherds and the pride of the Jordan are portrayed as suffering misery, occasioning the sound of shepherds lamenting and the sound of lions roaring. (11:3)
Indicative of his personal relationship to God, the prophet referred to him as “YHWH my God.” The commission he received from YHWH was to “shepherd the flock” destined for “the slaughter.” In the capacity of a shepherd, the prophet would provide the sound guidance that was divinely conveyed to him — guidance that would benefit the people of Israel who would choose to follow it. At the same time, the reference to “slaughter” revealed that the time would come when the flock of Israel would experience harsh oppression and slaughter. (11:4; see the Notes section.)
As one whom YHWH had appointed, the prophet functioned representatively for him and, therefore, could also portray the circumstances that would exist when the shepherd of Israel, the promised Anointed One, Messiah, or Christ, would make his appearance among the people. (11:4)
The kind of mistreatment the people of Israel would experience is likened to their being bought like sheep that are then slaughtered. Those guilty of such cruel treatment would go unpunished. The ones represented as doing the selling of the sheep, knowing full well that they would come to a violent end, are portrayed as saying, “Blessed be YHWH, and I have become rich.” The buyers and sellers may be understood to represent the wealthy and influential ones among the people who enriched themselves at their expense. Though profiting from oppressing the people like helpless sheep, ignoring their obligation to observe God’s law that required them to be honest and just in their dealings, they would hypocritically bless YHWH, attributing to him the wealth they had amassed through unworthy means. (11:5)
Instead of looking out for the interests of the flock of Israel and rendering just decisions for the oppressed, the shepherds, leaders, or rulers had no pity for the abused people. When Jesus, the promised Messiah, labored as a shepherd among the people, he perceived them to be helpless and abused. Whereas he had compassion for the people, the leaders of the nation made their hard lot even more difficult. (11:5; Matthew 9:36; 11:28, 29; 23:4; Mark 8:2, 3; Luke 13:34)
YHWH revealed that he would no longer have pity for those inhabiting the land. The implied reason is that they would not respond to his care as represented by the good shepherd his prophet would portray. Ultimately, this divinely commissioned shepherd would be the promised Messiah whom the flock of Israel, with few exceptions, would reject. (Matthew 23:37) The consequence for not wanting YHWH’s appointed shepherd would be mutual ruin. Because YHWH would permit this to happen, he is represented as saying that he would cause the people (adhám, “earthling,” a collective singular designating the men or the people), each “man,” or each one of them, to fall “into the hand of his companion and into the hand of his king” (one exercising authority over him). They would then be dealt with severely. Those gaining the upper hand would “crush the land,” indicating that the people who would come under their control would experience great suffering. YHWH would then not deliver them from the “hand” or power of those who would afflict them. In the final days of Jerusalem, a faction within the city engaged in ruthless slaughter, and those who were trapped inside the city during the Roman siege looked in vain for divine deliverance from their distress. (11:6)
In keeping with his commission, the prophet began shepherding the “flock” destined for “slaughter,” with his primary concern being for the “poor” or the afflicted ones “of the flock.” (See the Notes section.) To discharge his responsibilities as a shepherd, he took two staffs for himself. One of these he called “Pleasantness,” which may have served to represent the essential guidance he would be providing for the flock. The other staff he called “Binders,” representing the action he would need to take to protect the flock and to keep it bound together, with none straying. He then went about shepherding the sheep. For members of the flock to stray from what he would be doing for them as YHWH’s appointed shepherd would prove to be harmful to them, just as sheep that stray from the flock become vulnerable for injury or attack. (11:7)
The Septuagint refers to the staffs as “Beauty” and “Line.” The Greek word translated “Line” is schoínisma and designates an area of land measured with a line or cord. In the context of shepherding, the thought could be that the shepherd would use the staff to keep the flock together within the confines of a certain area. According to the Septuagint rendering, YHWH is the one who would be pasturing the sheep with the two staffs.(11:7)
Apparently acting for YHWH and in the interests of the flock, the prophet eliminated “three shepherds in one month.” How he did this is not revealed nor are the shepherds identified. It is also not possible to be definitive as to whether “three” is a literal number or is representative of a complete number and as to whether the one month is literal or denotes a comparatively short time. (11:8)
The prophet appears to have reached the limit of his toleration with the shepherds. This seemingly is the sense of the form of the Hebrew verb qatsár that describes how he felt and, in other contexts, commonly means “be short.” Whereas the shepherds tried his patience, they “loathed” him. (11:8)
The Septuagint does not refer to the prophet but continues to represent God as the one speaking. His “soul,” or he himself, would be “weighed down by them” (the shepherds). They would be like a burden to him. Their “souls,” or they themselves, “roared” against him, not wanting to follow his direction. (11:8)
The developments pertaining to the shepherds find a parallel in the case of Jesus, the promised Messiah and caring shepherd. By his example, actions, and words, he exposed the shepherds or leaders as hypocrites who had no concern for the people, and he finally silenced them. (Matthew 22:15-46; 23:13-39; John 10:1-15) These men detested Jesus, maligning him as one who was an impostor and in league with the powers of darkness. (11:8; Matthew 12:23, 24; 27:62-64; John 7:45-52)
The implication is that the prophet’s shepherding was neither valued nor wanted, prompting him to say, “I will not shepherd you.” In Hebrew, the pronoun “you” is a masculine plural and may be understood to refer to the people. Without the benefit of his protection and care as a shepherd, the people (represented as sheep) would perish. The one “dying” or facing death, “let her [the sheep (feminine gender)] die.” And the one “being eliminated” (“failing” [LXX]) or about to be destroyed, “let her [the sheep (feminine gender)] be eliminated [let it fail (LXX)].” As to those remaining, “let them devour, each one the flesh of her companion [the sheep’s companion].” The end would thus come through mutual destruction. (11:9; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
When these words are applied to Jesus in his role as shepherd, they pointed to his ceasing to shepherd the unbelieving people, abandoning those who refused to accept him as the promised Messiah to the ruin that would befall them. At the time of the Roman siege of Jerusalem, the majority who were trapped in the city looked in vain for deliverance and perished from starvation, were slain by a faction in the city, or were slaughtered by the Roman soldiers. (11:9; Matthew 23:37, 38; Luke 19:41-44; 23:28-31)
The prophet had a covenant relationship with the people, which suggests that at the time YHWH called him to shepherd the flock he concluded a personal covenant with them to function in their interests. To illustrate that this covenant was broken, the prophet cut the staff “Pleasantness” in two. According to the Septuagint, God is represented as throwing his staff, the “beautiful one,” away to annul the covenant he had concluded with “all the peoples.” (11:10)
The action with reference to the staff appears to point to the future development when Jesus, the Promised Messiah, would cease to be in any covenant relationship with those who did not want him as their shepherd, ending any benefits to them from his guidance and care. (11:11)
“In that day,” at the time of the breaking of the staff, the covenant was annulled. The poor of the flock, the ones watching the prophet, knew or recognized that “it was the word of YHWH.” They realized that he had acted at YHWH’s direction to indicate tangibly that the covenant had been canceled. (11:11; see the Notes section.)
Although the covenant had been annulled, the prophet would have been entitled to wages for the shepherding service that he had rendered prior thereto. Probably to the representatives of the people, he extended the opportunity to make payment, saying to them, “If [it seems] good in your eyes, give [me] my wage; and if not, hold back [from doing so].” They “weighed out” his wage —“thirty shekels of silver.” Thirty shekels was the price for a slave (Exodus 21:32), and this payment reflected the low esteem in which they held the prophet’s shepherding and, therefore, also YHWH who had commissioned him. (11:12)
In the Septuagint, YHWH is the one represented as saying, “If it is good in your sight [literally, before you], give [me] my wage [after] having determined [it], or refuse [to pay].” According to this rendering, those who determined the wage to be “thirty silver pieces” showed how little they valued YHWH and his shepherding. (11:12)
In the case of Jesus, the promised Messiah and the divinely appointed shepherd, the leaders of the nation likewise made a low evaluation. For the betrayal, they prearranged to pay Judas “thirty silver pieces.” (11:12; Matthew 26:15)
The Hebrew participial form of the word yatsár preceded by the definite article may be defined as “the potter,” one who forms or fashions. Many have considered the Hebrew participle to be an error in the text. A footnote in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia suggests that the probable reading is ha-’ohtsár (“the treasury”). (11:13)
The significance “treasury” does not have the support of the Septuagint, which contains the word choneutérion, meaning “smelting furnace” or “smelter.” According to the Septuagint, the reason for casting the silver into the smelter was so that God might see whether it was pure. Thus the silver would be proved in the manner that YHWH had been “proved for them” (the people, particularly the leaders). Whereas smelting can be linked to things that are formed or fashioned, the designation “smelter” becomes problematic when the reference is to the prophet’s tossing the thirty silver pieces “into the house of the Lord, into the smelter.” No smelter would have been in operation on the temple grounds. One possible explanation for the words would be that the silver pieces that were tossed into the temple were later taken to a smelter. (11:13)
The Vulgate reads ad statuarium, which may be rendered “to the statuary,” a place where representations are made. This Latin translation reflects an underlying meaning of forming or fashioning, but does not fit any activity that would be associated with the temple. (11:13)
If the Hebrew text is regarded as elliptical, one may conclude that the potter ultimately received the silver pieces. The payment of thirty silver pieces, the price of a slave, was an insult to YHWH in whose service the prophet labored, and this wage is ironically referred to as the “lordly value” at which YHWH had been “valued” by them (the leaders of the people). As an insult to YHWH, the silver would not have been acceptable for the sacred temple treasury. Therefore, the silver pieces would more appropriately be tossed to the potter as being of no great worth. (11:13)
As the prophetic portrayal relates to Jesus, the Messiah and divinely appointed shepherd, the thirty silver pieces did pass to the “potter.” Judas, the betrayer, threw down the thirty silver pieces somewhere in the temple precincts. Because blood money was involved, the chief priests considered themselves legally bound not to put the silver pieces into the temple treasury. After conferring, they decided to use the money to buy a potter’s field (a property having little value) for use as a place to bury foreigners. (11:13; Matthew 27:5-7)
The rejection of the shepherding by the prophet whom YHWH had commissioned would have serious consequences for the people as a whole. This was tangibly represented when the prophet broke his second staff, the one he called “Binders” (“Line” [LXX]). (See the comments on verse 7 regarding the staffs.) His action served to indicate the annulling of the “brotherhood between Judah and Israel.” The people would be divided into factions and would come to be in the helpless and unprotected state of sheep that had no shepherd to care for them. The divisiveness that would come to exist among them would be like the rift that resulted when the ten northern tribes of Israel revolted against King Rehoboam, the grandson of David, and formed an independent kingdom with Jeroboam as their monarch. (11:14; 1 Kings 12:12-20)
According to the Septuagint, the prophet threw away the second staff (the one he called “Line”). This signified the dissolving of the binding tie between Judah and Israel. The people would not be like a united flock that a caring shepherd tends, a flock that is protected as if pasturing within the limits of an area established by a measuring line. (11:14)
When Jesus, the promised Messiah and the divinely appointed shepherd, was rejected, this proved to be calamitous for the flock of Israel. Whereas they could have been a united people benefiting from his care and guidance, they became like helpless sheep. The rod “Binders” was broken, and so there was nothing to keep them together safely as one flock under him as the one shepherd. This became especially evident when the Romans came against Jerusalem. A faction within the city engaged in vicious acts of violence, killing many. The majority perished either from famine or were slaughtered when the Romans entered the city. (11:14)
YHWH told the prophet yet again to take the equipment of a shepherd, but in this case the role would be that of a “foolish” or worthless shepherd. The personal equipment could include a bag for a supply of food (1 Samuel 17:40), an extra garment for wrapping himself during cold nights (Jeremiah 43:12), and possibly a tent for shelter. (Isaiah 38:12) To protect the flock, a shepherd would be prepared to use a sling and a rod and would guide his flock with a long curved staff. (1 Samuel 17:40; Psalm 23:4) For sick or injured sheep, he would need olive oil and bandaging material. (11:15)
As the verses that follow indicate, the emphasis is on the folly or worthlessness of the shepherd because of his failure to use what is available to him to care for and to protect the flock. The Septuagint refers to the shepherd as “inexperienced” or “unskilled” (ápeiros). While similar in meaning to “foolish” or ignorant, the word ápeiros applies primarily to the lack of ability to perform the essential work of a shepherd. The prophet’s portrayal of a “foolish” shepherd served to reveal the result from rejecting the shepherd of YHWH’s choosing and, ultimately, also YHWH who had appointed him. With foolish shepherds or leaders who had no concern for the flock of Israel, the people would suffer greatly. (11:15)
YHWH would permit the flock of Israel to experience mistreatment and oppression. For this reason, he is represented as saying that he would be “raising up a shepherd in the land,” a shepherd who cared nothing about the people. The actions of this shepherd are described in terms that express serious neglect and abuse of sheep. (11:16)
He would give no attention to the sheep about to perish nor would he search for the “young one” (ná‘ar). A young sheep was more likely to stray or to get separated from the flock, making it vulnerable for injury or attack by predators. The Septuagint rendering of ná‘ar here is the participial form of diaskorpízo (“scatter”) and refers to a sheep that has been scattered or has strayed. In the Septuagint, the shepherd’s failure to search for the vulnerable sheep is emphasized with two words for “not” and may be rendered “by no means.” (11:16)
The “foolish” shepherd would do nothing to heal the “broken” or injured sheep. He would not apply olive oil to injuries nor bandage broken limbs. (11:16; Ezekiel 34:4)
There is uncertainty about the significance of the participial form of the Hebrew word natsáv (“to stand,” “to be stationed,” or “to remain in position”), which describes a sheep that the foolish shepherd does not sustain or support. In view of the context that depicts sheep in need of the shepherd’s care and attention, it does not appear that the sheep is being designated as a “standing one” because of being in a sound or healthy state. There is a greater likelihood that the sheep is not moving because of being trapped, injured, sickly, or exhausted. Based on the Arabic word nasiba, the participial form of natsáv could here designate a weak, sick, or exhausted sheep that the foolish shepherd would ignore, providing no support or help. The Septuagint rendering, however, does provide a basis for the meaning “sound one,” for it says that the shepherd would “by no means guide” or lead a “whole one.” (11:16)
Instead of seeing to it that the sheep under his care are well fed by leading them to good pastures, the useless shepherd would feed himself. He would slaughter a fat sheep and consume its flesh (the “flesh of the choice ones” [LXX]). Perhaps for use as game pieces, the valueless shepherd would tear off the hoofs of sheep. According to the Septuagint rendering, he would dislocate the vertebrae of the animals. (11:16)
YHWH would be fully aware of any leaders of the people who conducted themselves like one whom he designated as “my shepherd of worthlessness.” This would be a leader who should have been in his service as one devoted to him and to the interests of the flock of Israel but who proved to be useless and a shepherd who abandoned the flock. Woe or calamity is pronounced upon this worthless shepherd. In the Septuagint, such worthless shepherds are described as the ones tending idle things and forsaking the sheep. (11:17)
The worthless shepherd is one who did not use his “arm” or his strength to benefit the sheep but used it to mistreat them, and his “eye” was not focused on them so as to see and then to provide what they needed. Therefore, YHWH decreed that a “sword” would be upon his “arm,” depriving him of all power. This sword would also be on his “right eye, his best eye that should have been watching out for the interests of the sheep. Thus the eye that was not used for a beneficial purpose would be completely deprived of sight. To emphasize that the strength would totally fail, the arm is described as withering to wither. The complete loss of sight in the right eye is highlighted by referring to it as being blinded to blind. (11:17)
Notes
In verse 4, the Septuagint does not include the reference to “my God” but opens with the words, “Thus says the Lord Almighty.”
The Hebrew words of verse 7 that may be translated “poor of the flock” are preceded by the Hebrew expression la-khen and may here mean “namely therefore,” which could then indicate that the “poor,” afflicted, or oppressed ones of the flock are the ones on whom the shepherding would be concentrated. A number of translations render the Hebrew text according to this significance. “So I pastured the flock marked for slaughter, particularly the oppressed of the flock.” (NIV) “So I shepherded the flock intended for slaughter, the afflicted of the flock.” (HCSB) “So I cared for the flock intended for slaughter — the flock that was oppressed.” (NLT) “So I fed the flock about to be killed, particularly the weakest ones.” (NCV)
The Septuagint translator (in verse 7) appears to have combined the letters of the Hebrew expression la-khen and the plural form of the adjective for “poor,” “afflicted,” or “oppressed” (‘aniy) differently, resulting in the rendering “in the Chanaanitis” or “in Canaan” (“And I will shepherd the sheep of slaughter in Canaan”). In certain contexts, Canaanite can designate a trader or merchant. A number of modern translations reflect this significance in their renderings. “So I became the shepherd of the flock to be slaughtered for the sheep merchants.” (NAB) “So I became a shepherd to the flock destined to be slaughtered by the dealers.” (REB) “Then I pastured for slaughter the sheep belonging to the sheep-dealers.” (NJB) “So I became a shepherd of those sheep doomed to be slaughtered by the sheep dealers.” (CEV) The renderings “sheep merchants,” “dealers,” or “sheep dealers” do not have the support of the Vulgate, which contains the words pauperes gregis, which may be rendered “poor of the flock.”
The wording of verse 9 in the Septuagint is much like that of the extant Hebrew text, but the one continuing to speak in the first person is YHWH, not the prophet.
As in verse 7, the plural form of the adjective for “poor,” “afflicted,” or “oppressed” (‘aniy) is found in verse 11. Translators who followed the Septuagint and regarded the designation Canaanite to mean “dealer,” “sheep dealer,” or “sheep merchant” in verse 7 have also done so in this verse. “That day it was broken off. The sheep merchants who were watching me understood that this was the word of the LORD.” (NAB) “So it was annulled that day, and the dealers who were watching me knew that this was a word from the LORD.” (REB) “When it was broken, that day the sheep-dealers, who were watching me, realized that this had been a word of Yahweh.” (NJB) “The sheep dealers who saw me knew right away that this was the message from the LORD.” (CEV) According to the Septuagint, the Canaanites (Chananites) would “know the sheep, the ones being watched, because it is a word of the Lord.”
The prophetic message is introduced in the same way as an earlier one (9:1). In the Hebrew text, the first word is massá’. The Septuagint rendering for massá’ is lémma, which word basically denotes “something that is received” and so may be understood to mean a “received message.” In the Vulgate, the corresponding noun is onus (“load” or “burden”). Renderings of massá’ found in modern translations include “burden,” “oracle,” “word,” “message,” “prophecy,” and “pronouncement.” (12:1)
The message is designated as the “word of YHWH concerning Israel” or about the people whom he recognizes as his own. He is represented as identifying himself as the Creator, the “one stretching out the heavens and founding the earth and forming the spirit of man [’adhám, ‘earthling’] within him.” “Heaven” or the celestial vault appears like a dome over the land. Therefore, the “heavens” are spoken of as being stretched out as a tent would be. The founding of the earth may be understood to refer to the establishing of the land area above the sea. As earthlings, humans owe their life to YHWH. He is the former of the “spirit,” imparting the life principle or life breath to the first man from whom all humans have descended. (12:1)
YHWH gave the assurance to his people that those attacking them would not succeed. He would make Jerusalem a “cup of reeling to all the peoples round about.” This would be when, besides besieging Jerusalem, they would come against Judah. The unsuccessful outcome from launching their attack would be comparable to their having to drink a cup of wine to the point of intoxication, causing them to reel or stagger. According to the Septuagint, the effect on the attackers would be like the shaking of thresholds or vestibules. This would be a violent shaking that is commonly associated with seismic activity. (12:2)
If understood to relate to those who are “children” or citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem (Galatians 4:26), the prophetic words indicate that all people who set themselves in violent opposition to these citizens would ultimately have divine anger expressed against them, causing them to stagger like a drunkard. (12:2)
“In that day,” or at the time that YHWH comes to the defense of his people, he “will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples” (a “stone being trampled upon by all the nations” [LXX]). All who would try to lift this stone would experience “scratching to be scratched.” The repetition of verb forms of the word meaning “scratch” indicates that the lacerations would be severe. According to the Septuagint rendering, those trampling upon Jerusalem (the “stone”) with “ridiculing will ridicule.” This rendering suggests that Jerusalem would be trampled upon and subjected to intense mockery. While the Septuagint refers to what the enemies would do, the Hebrew text highlights the harm that would come to those dealing with Jerusalem as attackers. Both the Hebrew text and Septuagint, however, indicate that “all the nations of the earth [or land] will be gathered against” Jerusalem. (12:3)
Anciently, horses figured prominently in warfare. Therefore, “in that day” when his people would be attacked, YHWH (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]) is represented as declaring that he would strike “every horse” of the attackers “with confusion and its rider with madness.” Confused, the horses would be unmanageable and become useless in battle. In a state of “madness,” helpless and bewildered, the riders would be unable to function like alert and courageous warriors. When striking “every horse” (“all the horses” [LXX]) of the peoples with blindness,” making it impossible for the horses to be part of an effective military force, YHWH would open his eyes “on the house of Judah.” He would have his people in full view, coming to their aid when they needed it. (12:4)
These prophetic words may have an application to the citizens of heavenly Jerusalem. While on earth, they can depend on God to look out for them, responding to their needs and their appeals to him when facing enemy assaults. No enemy power will be allowed to succeed against them and to deprive them of their permanent place in the heavenly Jerusalem. (12:4; Luke 10:19; Galatians 4:26)
At the time God’s people would be facing enemy attack, the “chieftains of Judah” would “say in their heart” or to themselves, “By YHWH of hosts their God, those inhabiting Jerusalem [are] a strength to me.” This acknowledgment suggests that the chieftains or leaders would draw encouragement from all those dwelling in Jerusalem because of their trust in YHWH, the God with hosts of angels in his service. According to the Septuagint, the “chiliarchs” (commanders of a thousand men) would say, “We will find for ourselves those inhabiting Jerusalem [to be] in the Lord Almighty, their God.” As persons “in” or at one with the Almighty, they would be confident that he would help and safeguard them. (12:5)
The prophetic words can be applied to the “children” or citizens of heavenly Jerusalem. (Galatians 4:26) Because they rely fully on their God, they have proved to be a source of encouragement or strengthening aid to the “chieftains” or elders in their midst or, as expressed in the Septuagint, they have been found to be persons at one with God. (12:5; compare Romans 1:11, 12; Colossians 4:10, 11; 1 John 4:11-15; verse 4 of 2 John, and verses 3 and 4 of 3 John.)
“In the day,” or at the time YHWH delivers his people from their enemies, his promise is, “I will make the chieftains of Judah like a vessel of fire [a flaming firebrand ([LXX]) in woodlands and like a torch of fire among harvested grain.” The “chieftains” are thus portrayed as being unconquerable, triumphing as if they were transformed into a consuming fire in a forest or among sheaves of harvested barley or wheat. Like a fire, they are depicted as consuming “to the right and to the left all the peoples round about.” Whereas the enemies would fail in their attempts to destroy God’s people, “Jerusalem will yet be inhabited in her place.” This place may refer to the entire area of Jerusalem as being fully inhabited. In the case of the heavenly Jerusalem, all her “children” or citizens would come to have their permanent residence there, and no enemy power would be able to prevent this from taking place. (12:6)
The “tents of Judah” would be like an encampment outside the walls of Jerusalem. As those in the “tents of Judah” would be the first ones to face enemy attacks, they are also the first ones whom YHWH would deliver. In the Septuagint, the Lord’s saving of the “tents of Judah” is referred to as being like that “from the beginning” or from the earliest times when he delivered his people from their enemies. The reason given for being the first to be saved is that the “beauty” or “glory” (“boast” or “pride” [LXX]) of the “house of David” and the “beauty” or “glory” (“elation [LXX]) of “those inhabiting Jerusalem” would not be exalted over the beauty or glory of Judah. YHWH would not consider those in the “tents” as less precious than those within the protective walls of Jerusalem or those belonging to the royal “house of David.” As his approved people, they would be the first ones to benefit from his protective care. (12:7)
After the return from Babylonian exile, no member of the “house of David” ever ruled as king and, therefore, did not possess the “beauty” or “glory” that was formerly associated with the royal line that had its start with King David. When, however, the focus is on the heavenly Jerusalem, the prophetic words appear to fit. While on earth, the “children” or citizens of heavenly Jerusalem are without any protective walls but appear to be in vulnerable tents. From the standpoint of being beloved children of God and under his protective care, they have been the first to receive his saving aid so as to remain unconquerable despite all attacks launched against them. They also possess the same beauty or glory as do the heavenly members of God’s family. Angels regard them as fellow servants of God. (Revelation 22:9) Jesus, the promised Messiah or Christ of the royal house of David and the unique Son of God, is not ashamed to acknowledge them as his “brothers.” (Hebrews 2:11) Yet his “beauty” or “glory” as King of kings and Lord of lords is far greater than that of any former member of the royal house of David. (12:7)
“In that day,” or at that time when YHWH saves the “tents of Judah,” he will also defend those inhabiting Jerusalem as if putting a protective shield around them. As a result, the one stumbling among them, the “weak one” or “feeble one” (LXX), would prove to be like David, strong like a courageous warrior. The “house of David” would be mighty “like God [or like mighty ones (like a house of God [LXX])], like the “angel of YHWH before them” or at their head, leading them to victory. (12:8)
If related to heavenly Jerusalem, an application can be made to the citizens of the heavenly city who are still vulnerable because of being on the earth. They are assured of YHWH’s protection so that even the weakest ones among them would remain unconquerable like victorious King David. The “house of David” may be identified with its most prominent representative, the Messiah or Christ who would be leading the citizens of heavenly Jerusalem as a triumphant people. He would display power like that of God or like that of the angel of YHWH. (12:8)
In that day when YHWH effects the deliverance for his people, he “will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.” Whereas the nations cannot attack the heavenly Jerusalem directly, they can do so by undertaking hostile action against the citizens of the heavenly city while they are still on earth and as if outside any protective walls. (12:9)
The time would come for the fulfillment of the word of YHWH. “I will pour out upon the house of David and those inhabiting Jerusalem a spirit of favor and supplication.” This development is associated with their looking on the one whom “they have pierced.” According to the Hebrew text and the Septuagint, the one on whom members of the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem would look is YHWH (“on me”), the one who declared that he would pour out a “spirit of favor and supplication [compassion (LXX)].” (12:10)
The people could not directly “pierce” their God, but they could do so when “piercing” one whom he sent to them as his representative. This apparent sense is suggested by the reference to the wailing in expression of bitter lamentation as being for the one who was actually pierced (literally, “for him,” not “for me”). In the Septuagint, the rendering of the Hebrew verb for pierced appears to be a euphemism. It reads, “And they will look to me because they have danced.” (12:10)
According to John 19:34-37, a Roman soldier pierced the side of the dead Jesus, the Anointed One, Messiah, or Christ. This act served to make it possible for persons of the house of David and inhabitants of Jerusalem to look upon the one whom they had pierced. Accordingly, there is a basis for linking their receiving a “spirit of favor and supplication” subsequent to such looking. (12:10)
The book of Acts confirms this development. At the time of the first observance of the festival of Pentecost after Jesus’ death and resurrection, his disciples received the holy spirit. This became evident when they began to speak in the native tongues of Jews and proselytes who had come from various lands to Jerusalem for the festival. On that occasion, the apostle Peter presented the evidence to the thousands who listened to him that God made the Jesus whom they had crucified “both Lord and Christ.” Responsive ones were “cut to the heart,” coming to have within themselves a distressing awareness of their grave sin. They appear to have recognized their communal responsibility in having shared in the guilt of the representative leaders of the nation of Israel when they handed Jesus (the promised Messiah or Christ) over to Pilate for the purpose of having him crucified. Having been made fully aware of their guilt, they wanted to know what they could do. (Acts 2:22-37) Through his testimony, Peter made it possible for his listeners to look upon the one whom they had pierced in a way that would benefit them. (12:10)
The apostle urged them to repent and to be baptized in the name of Jesus for forgiveness of sins. Repentance called for them to regret their sins, including having shared in the communal responsibility for Jesus’ death, and to accept him as the promised Messiah or Christ and their Lord. Baptism in his name signified baptism in recognition of him as the Christ, the unique Son of God, and Lord. Immersion in water constituted the outward symbol of the repentance for sins and the accompanying faith in Jesus Christ. Therefore, by reason of their repentance and baptism, they were forgiven of their sins and received “the gift of the holy spirit,” just as Peter and the other disciples had. (Acts 2:38) In this way, responsive ones received a “spirit of favor,” being restored to an approved relationship with God and having his spirit imparted to them. According to the rendering of the Septuagint, it was also a spirit of compassion, one that marvelously demonstrated God’s mercy when he forgave their sins. The Hebrew text refers to it as a spirit of supplication. This could be understood to mean that, by what God had done for them through Jesus his Son, they came to have a new spirit or impelling force within them that motivated them to repentance and to petition him for forgiveness. (12:10)
In the prophecy, the repentance over having shared in the communal responsibility for the “piercing” appears to be represented as intense mourning over the pierced one — a wailing or lamenting like that for an only son (a “beloved one” [LXX]) who had died. It would be like the bitter weeping over the loss of a firstborn. At the time of Jesus’ death, there was much weeping and lamentation, and this aspect may also be involved in the fulfillment of the prophetic words. (12:10; compare Luke 23:28, 29)
“On that day,” or at the time the prophecy regarding the pierced one would begin to be fulfilled, there would be great “wailing” in Jerusalem. This wailing would be like the “wailing of Hadad-rimmon in the plain of Megiddo.” While there have been those who consider this wailing to denote a ritualistic mourning for the god Hadad-rimmon, this does not seem likely. It does not appear appropriate for a divinely disapproved practice to be used to illustrate the lamentation associated with the one who would be pierced. A preferable possibility is to regard Hadad-rimmon as a site in the plain of Megiddo, where godly King Josiah was killed in battle with Pharaoh Necoh. The premature death of the young king occasioned great lamentation. (12:11; 2 Kings 23:29; 2 Chronicles 35:24, 25)
According to the Septuagint, the lamentation over the pierced one would be like the mourning over a “pomegranate grove having been cut down in the plain.” In Hebrew, the word rimmóhn, which is part of the compound name Hadad-rimmon, means “pomegranate.” “Hadad” is thought to have been the principal deity of Syria. If this was known to the Septuagint translator, he may have chosen not to include the designation “Hadad” and then rendered rimmóhn according to its Hebrew meaning (“pomegranate”). (12:11)
When the wailing over the pierced one is linked to repentance and a recognition of the reason for his death, the lamentation must of necessity be an individual matter. Even persons who were members of the royal family or the priestly family in Israel would not be exempt from such mourning if they were to be forgiven of their sins. This appears to be evident from the reference to the wailing or mourning of each family by itself and the respective women of these families by themselves. Although the “land” (or the people residing on the land) is mentioned as wailing, “each family” would do so “apart” from the others or by itself (“tribes by tribes” [LXX]). The “family [tribe (LXX)] of the house of David” (descendants of King David) would mourn by itself, and the women belonging to that family would do so by themselves. If the “family [tribe (LXX)] of the house of Nathan” means the descendants of David’s son Nathan, this could indicate that the smaller family group within the larger family of David would lament by itself, and the women of the smaller family group would wail by themselves. (12:12)
The “family [tribe (LXX)] of the house of Levi” (the descendants of Levi, including the Aaronic priests) would wail by itself, and the women of that family would do so by themselves. The Shimeites were a family of Levites. (Numbers 3:21; 1 Chronicles 23:7, 10, 11) Yet they would lament by themselves, and the women of the “family of the Shimeites” would wail by themselves. The Septuagint translator appears to have understood the Shimeites to be members of the “tribe of Symeon” (Simeon), not of the tribe of Levi. (12:13)
As for “all” the remaining families (tribes [LXX]), each one would wail by itself. The women from each of those families would do so apart from their own family and apart from the women of the other families. (12:14)
“In that day,” or at a time subsequent to the wailing over the one who was pierced, a “spring” would be opened for the “house of David and those inhabiting Jerusalem.” That spring for “sin and uncleanness” would have as its purpose to cleanse the people from their sin and impurity. When Jesus, the promised Messiah or Christ, died sacrificially and his side was pierced, he made it possible for persons who put their faith in him and his sacrificial death to be forgiven of their sins. Thus it was as if a fountain had been opened up, a fountain that provided water to cleanse members of the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem (as representing all the Israelites) from their sins, including the uncleanness or impurity resulting from sharing in communal responsibility for the piercing of Jesus Christ and from any contact with defiled things. (13:1; Acts 2:36-40; 3:13-26; 13:25-39)
The Septuagint makes no reference to a spring for sin and impurity. It reads, “In that day, every place will be opened in the house of David.” The Hebrew word for “place” is maqóhm, and the designation for “spring” is maqóhr. With only the last letter being different (though somewhat similar in appearance in ancient script), this may explain why the word for “place” instead of the noun for “spring” appears in the Septuagint. Nothing in the immediate context, however, clarifies just what the places are that would be opened in the house of David. According to another rendering, “every place will be opened for the house of David,” but there is nothing in the context to indicate why the house of David would be so honored. One possibility is that a king from the house of David would be granted access to every place. (13:1)
“In that day,” or at the time when the opportunity for being cleansed from sin and impurity opened up, YHWH of hosts (the “Lord” [LXX]) purposed to “cut off [destroy (LXX)] the names of the idols from the land.” A cleansed people who had been forgiven of their sins would then be in a realm where idols do not exist. The names of the deities that the images represented would be cut off, never to be mentioned. Because YHWH, the God with hosts of angels in his service, effects the cleansing of his people, the cutting off of the names of the idols is attributed to him. Viewing the deities that the images represented as being nonexistent, the people whom YHWH approved would no more remember their names. He would also remove the “prophets and the spirit of uncleanness” from the land. The Septuagint identifies these prophets as “pseudo-prophets,” men in the service of nonexistent deities or men who falsely claimed to be prophets of YHWH. These false prophets would have maintained that there utterances came from a spiritual source. This source would not be God’s spirit but a “spirit of uncleanness,” one originating from the powers of darkness. (13:2)
Seemingly to emphasize that idolatrous practices would be completely eradicated from the realm of God’s people, parents are said not to shield their own son from severe judgment if he became a false prophet. His father and mother would say to him, “You shall not live, for you have spoken falsehood in YHWH’s name.” Such speaking of falsehood in God’s name would refer to representing deceptive words as having YHWH as their source. The man’s parents, the very people who were responsible for his birth, would then “pierce him through” (“bind him” [LXX]) for his false prophesying. (13:3)
“In that day” or at that time, it would come to pass that the false prophets would be ashamed, each one of them of “his vision” when prophesying or proclaiming what they claimed to be divine revelations. As an evidence of their shame, they would attempt to conceal their identity, no longer taking pride in their “visions” and in making them known. These men would not put on the “hairy garment” (a garment made from animal skin or leather to which the hair remained attached) that prophets customarily wore. (Compare 2 Kings 1:8.) Their formerly wearing the attire of a prophet was part of the deception. By identifying themselves as prophets, they deluded the people into believing that their utterances were divine revelations. (13:4)
The Septuagint expresses the thought about the hairy garment differently. It indicates that the false prophets would wear the garment “because they lied.” This rendering represents the rough hairy garment as denoting disgrace — an evidence that the false prophets had been exposed as liars. (13:4)
In response to any question regarding his occupation, a false prophet would deny being a prophet and claim to be a cultivator of the soil. To strengthen his false claim, he would say that a “man” made him (literally, “caused me to possess”) a cultivator of the soil since his “youth.” (13:5)
As part of their ritual when crying out to a deity, false prophets, in a state of frenzy, gashed themselves. (1 Kings 18:28) Evidence of wounds from such cuts on the body of a false prophet gave rise to the question, “What are these strokes [the wounds from strokes] between your hands?” Wounds between the hands would be wounds on the area of the body between the hands and the arms, either on the back or on the chest. The false prophet would not admit to the truth but would say that the wounds resulted from having been beaten in the “house of my beloved ones” or close friends (“in my beloved house” [LXX]). This answer could be understood to mean that he had been beaten for rowdiness while drunk. (13:6)
YHWH of hosts (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]), the God with hosts of angels in his service, is represented as calling upon a “sword” to awake against his “shepherd.” In relation to YHWH, this “shepherd” is also referred to as a “man, my fellow” (“fellow citizen” [LXX]). With the awakened sword, the shepherd is to be struck, scattering the sheep under his care. YHWH is then quoted as saying, “I will turn my hand upon [‘al] the little ones.” (13:7; see the Notes section.)
On the final night with his disciples before his being seized, sentenced to die, and executed, Jesus Christ applied the words about the shepherd and the sheep to himself and his disciples, telling them that they would all be stumbled that very night, “for it is written, I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.” (Mark 14:27) After Jesus’ resurrection from the dead and ascension to heaven, one of the disciples, the apostle Peter, explained to fellow Jews that it was by God’s predetermined “counsel,” purpose or will that Jesus was “delivered up” (either referring to the seizure by the armed mob in the garden of Gethsemane or the action of the leaders of the nation when handing him over to the Roman governor Pilate as a lawbreaker deserving of death). (Acts 2:23) Since the suffering and death of Jesus served his purpose to provide the basis for forgiveness of sins, YHWH is the one to whom the awaking of the sword against his shepherd is prophetically attributed. (13:7)
On earth, Jesus was a man, but he was more than a man. He continued to be God’s unique Son, and this fits the fact that YHWH is represented as calling him “my fellow.” (13:7)
Jesus’ “sheep,” his disciples, did scatter at the time he was seized, abandoning him and fleeing out of fear. (Matthew 26:56) They also appear to be the ones prophetically spoken of as “little ones” or “insignificant ones,” for the leaders of the nation would have looked down upon them as uneducated and ordinary. (Compare John 7:48; 49; Acts 4:13.) The meaning of the preposition ‘al determines the sense in which YHWH turned his “hand upon the little ones.” Many translators have chosen to render this preposition as “against.” This could signify that the striking of the shepherd also meant that God’s hand was directed against the “little ones,” for they became fearful and scattered. Jesus, however, assured Peter that he had prayed for him so that his faith would not give out and that he would be able to strengthen his “brothers” or fellow disciples after he had recovered from personally having stumbled. (Luke 22:31, 32) Therefore, it appears likely that the turning of God’s hand “upon the little ones” may be regarded in a favorable sense. (13:7)
Subsequent to the striking of the shepherd, something of a very serious nature was to occur. According to the utterance of YHWH, two parts would be “cut off, perish” (“destroyed and perish” [LXX]) “in all the land,” and a “third” would “remain over in it.” While on earth, the focus of Jesus’ activity was on the “lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 10:6) The majority of the house of Israel, which could be represented by “two parts,” rejected him, and they were abandoned to experience the consequences of their rejection, which included the destruction of Jerusalem and the tremendous loss of life during and after the end of the Roman siege. As to the “third” that remained, this could represent the thousands who became Jesus’ disciples (Acts 21:20), for they were not abandoned and they escaped the terrible calamity that befell those in Jerusalem during the Roman military campaign. (13:8; compare Matthew 24:15, 16; Luke 21:20-22.)
The remaining “third” part would, however, not be exempt from suffering. Jesus’ loyal disciples would be subjected to verbal and physical abuse and even death as objects of hatred by people of all the nations. (Matthew 24:9; Mark 13:12, 13; Luke 6:22; 21:12-17; John 16:2) Since YHWH would permit this to take place, he is prophetically spoken of as putting the “third into the fire,” refining those of this third as one would refine silver and testing them as one would test gold. All who pass through the fire of suffering while remaining faithful to him would come to have a refined and tested faith and would be revealed as genuinely devoted to him. (13:9; compare 1 Peter 1:6, 7.)
The faithful ones (literally, “he” [a collective singular]) would call on God’s name, appealing to him (the person represented by the name) for his aid and guidance. He would then answer them (literally, “him”), providing what they needed to be sustained in their times of trial. Acknowledging that the approved people belonged to him, he would say, “It [is] my people.” Individually, they (literally, “he”) would say, “YHWH [is] my God.” (13:9; see the Notes section.)
Notes
In verse 7, the extant text of the Septuagint reads “my shepherds,” not “my shepherd.” These “shepherds” are not equated with the “man, my fellow citizen,” against whom the sword was also to awaken. After referring to the striking of the shepherds, the verse continues, “and remove the sheep, and I will bring my hand upon the shepherds.” According to this reading, the “shepherds” would be leaders among the people against whom God’s displeasure is directed. At the time these shepherds would be struck, the “sheep” or the people would be removed, possibly meaning that they would be seized like vulnerable prey.
In the Hebrew text of verse 9, the pronoun translated “it” (“It [is] my people”) is masculine gender. Like the other third person masculine pronouns in this verse, this pronoun is also a collective singular referring to people.
At a coming “day” or time, a “day” (“days” [LXX]) when YHWH purposes to take action, his people would be facing great distress. Jerusalem, representing God’s people, would come under vicious assault. In the midst of Jerusalem, those who launched the attack would then divide the “spoil” (“spoils” [LXX]) they seized. (14:1)
YHWH permits the nations to attack Jerusalem and, therefore, he is represented as gathering “all the nations against Jerusalem for war.” The attackers then seize the city, plunder the houses, rape the women, and take half of the people of the city into exile. As for the remaining half of the people, “they will not be cut off from the city.” In the Septuagint, two words for “not” emphatically express that the remaining ones will by no means be destroyed. Historically, nothing that parallels the developments portrayed in this chapter has yet occurred. For this reason, it may be concluded that the prophetic words relate to a future time of great distress for God’s people. (14:2)
YHWH will come to the defense of his people, going forth to fight against the attacking nations as he would fight in a day of war. Having demonstrated themselves to be enemies who are determined to annihilate God’s people, these nations will not escape the execution of his judgment. (14:3)
As far as his people are concerned, YHWH is depicted as opening up an escape route for them. In that “day” or time when he takes action, he is represented as standing upon the Mount of Olives, which is located opposite Jerusalem “on the east.” On the eastern side of Jerusalem lies a chain of limestone hills with three prominent summits, and the middle one of these is commonly considered to be the Mount of Olives. (See Mount of Olives for pictures of and comments about the site.) When YHWH’s “feet” are depicted as standing on it, the Mount of Olives is split in two (literally, “in its midst”), from “sunrise” (the east) to the “sea” (the Mediterranean) or to the west. The splitting of the Mount of Olives then forms a very “great” or wide valley (“chasm” [LXX]), which provides an escape route from Jerusalem. Additionally, half of the Mount of Olives is said to move “to the north,” and the other half “to the south.” (14:4)
It appears that the newly formed valley is called the “valley of my [God’s] mountains,” and to this valley the people would flee (seemingly because the geographical change that is represented as having taken place at the Mount of Olives blocked all other routes). The “valley of the mountains” through which the people flee is said to “touch” or “reach” Azel (a location that has not been identified with any known site). Their flight would be like that at the time of the earthquake which occurred during the reign of Judean king Uzziah. (14:5; regarding the Septuagint rendering, see the Notes section.)
At the very time when it appears that his people could be facing annihilation, YHWH will come and “all the holy ones” with him (literally, “with you,” but “with him” in the Septuagint). These “holy ones” are his angels. (14:5)
The time for YHWH to take action with his angelic forces will prove to be a unique day. There “will be no light” (as if the sun did not then shine). According to the Masoreitc Text, also the “precious things” [a form of yaqár] will contract [qipa’óhn].” In Job 31:26, the Hebrew adjective yaqár (“precious”) is linked to the moon. This may provide a basis for understanding the “precious things” to be the moon and the stars. If the verb qipa’óhn is derived from the root qapháts, it could mean “contract” and so could indicate that the light of the moon and the stars would be contracted, diminished, or eclipsed. In this case, the unique day would be one without the light from the sun in the day and from the moon and the stars at night. It is also possible that the root for qipa’óhn is qapáh, which may mean “congeal,” “become rigid,” or “thicken.” This could suggest that the “pleasant things,” the moon and the stars, darken as if they were thickened or congealed. (14:6)
The Septuagint reads, “in that day [there] will not be light and cold and frost.” This could signify that there would be no sunshine in the day and no cold and frost during the night. In their interpretive renderings, translators often depart from the Hebrew text. “On that day there shall not be either cold or frost.” (NRSV) “On that day there shall no longer be cold or frost.” (NAB) “On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost.” (NIV) “On that day there will be neither heat nor cold nor frost.” (REB) “That Day, there will be no light, but only cold and frost.” (NJB) “In that day, there shall be neither sunlight nor cold moonlight.” (Tanakh) “It will be a bright day that won’t turn cloudy.” (CEV) In the verse that follows, the unique “day” is described as one with light at evening time. So it appears preferable to regard the words about there being no light to mean that the brightness of the day of deliverance for God’s people would prove to be so brilliant that it would appear as though the light of the sun and the light of the moon and stars had been eclipsed. (14:6)
The words there “will be one day” indicate that the unique day, a day “known to YHWH” as one belonging exclusively to him, is one of continuous brightness. There will not be a period of day followed by night, for at “evening time [there] will be light.” For God’s people, this unique day will result in relief from distress and bring blessings beyond measure. It will not be a day that will ever change to a time of darkness or gloom. (14:7)
The benefits of the special day or time will not be limited to God’s people who experience his deliverance. This is indicated by a development associated with Jerusalem. “Living waters will flow out from Jerusalem, half of them to the eastern sea [the Dead Sea] and half of them to the western sea” (the Mediterranean). That water will not dry up during the hot summertime, but it will continue to flow in “summer” and in “winter” (“spring [LXX]. Water is essential for vegetation to grow and flourish. With “Jerusalem” being identified as the place from which the “living waters” flow, this points to YHWH as their source. So the “waters” may be regarded as representing life-giving provisions that come from him. Whereas Jerusalem with its temple was YHWH’s representative place of dwelling, the heavenly Jerusalem is his true residence from where all blessings are destined to come to the earth. When linked to the heavenly Jerusalem, the “waters” would include everything that humans need for eternal life, a life of an enduring relationship with God as persons forgiven of their sins on the basis of Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death. (14:8; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
With all attackers of his people having perished, YHWH would become “king over all the earth.” This denotes that there would no longer be any competing sovereignties, but all would be subject to YHWH. In that “day” or time, “YHWH will be one and his name one.” He alone will then be acknowledged as God, and his name alone (not that of any other god) would ever be mentioned or invoked. (14:9)
From Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem, “all the land will be turned into a plain.” Geba is commonly identified with a site about 5.5 miles (c. 9 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem, and Rimmon with a location over 40 miles (c. 65 kilometers) southeast of Geba. The entire region between these two cities is hilly and mountainous. For the area to become a plain would refer to a transformation that does not occur within a short period. Therefore, the development may be understood to represent the exaltation of Jerusalem. This aspect appears to be referred to as the lifting up of Jerusalem, for the city would then rise high above the plain. Being the location of the temple, Jerusalem anciently was YHWH’s representative place of dwelling, and the transformation of the former hilly and mountains area to a level plain in relation to Jerusalem may point to the lofty place true worship would come to occupy. (14:10; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)
Jerusalem is said to “sit” or “remain” on its site, “from the Gate of Benjamin [probably on the north side] to the place of the first gate [possibly the Gate of the Old City on the northwest side of the city], to the Corner Gate [west of the Gate of the Old City], and from the Tower of Hananel [probably near the Corner Gate] to the wine vats of the king.” (14:10)
With specific locations for the perimeters of Jerusalem having been mentioned, the assurance is given that the city would be inhabited. No more would there be a curse in it. The city would not become a “devoted thing” (“anathema” [LXX]) or a place designated for destruction (as in the past on account of the sins of the people). Jerusalem would “dwell in security,” indicating that God’s people would not be in fear of any enemy power. (14:11)
All attempts to harm God’s people would fail. Would-be attackers would be choosing a course of self-destruction comparable to placing themselves in an environment that would result in their being infected with a fatal disease. YHWH is represented as striking “all the people who war against Jerusalem” with a deadly plague. While they are still “standing” on their “feet,” their flesh will rot, as will their eyes in their sockets and the tongues in their mouths. Thus the eyes that looked with contempt and hatred on God’s people would disappear, and the tongues that were used to speak abusively of them would cease to exist. (14:12)
“In that day” or time when an assault is directed against Jerusalem or his people, YHWH will cause great confusion to befall the attackers. Each man will then “seize the hand of his fellow and his hand will be raised against the hand of the other,” bringing about mutual destruction. (14:13)
At that time, “even Judah will fight at Jerusalem.” If this means that people of Judah would join those of the other nations in the battle, it may be understood to indicate that persons professing to be God’s people would align themselves with enemies against those who truly are God’s approved people (as represented by Jerusalem). (14:14; see the Notes section.)
The Hebrew text does not identify who will be collecting the “wealth of all the nations round about.” Probably the implied message is that the people of Jerusalem would pile up the “wealth” the attacking force leaves behind — the gold, silver, and garments “in great abundance.” (14:14)
A plague like that upon the attackers (mentioned in verse 12) will befall the horses, mules, camels, donkeys, and every other animal that may be in the enemy camps. It should be noted that the animals in the military camps included animals used in warring and for carrying burdens. This illustrates that the prophetic words are to be understood as conveying a message expressed in language reflecting the then-existing circumstances and should not be regarded as literally portraying future developments. (14:15)
Among the people of “all the nations” that are referred to as coming against Jerusalem there apparently will be those who do not support the hostile action and who will survive. These “remaining ones” are portrayed as acknowledging YHWH as their God. From year to year, they are said to go to Jerusalem to “bow down” in worship to the “King, YHWH of hosts” (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]), or to the Sovereign with hosts of angels in his service, “and to observe the festival of booths.” (14:16)
The festival of booths was observed in the seventh Jewish month known as Ethanim or Tishri (mid-September to mid-October). It served to remind the Israelites that their ancestors had lived in booths or tents during their wandering in the wilderness after their deliverance from Egypt. During the some 40 years of their life in the wilderness, YHWH had cared for them and sustained them in an inhospitable environment. (14:16; Leviticus 23:39-43; Deuteronomy 8:15-18; 16:13-15)
Moreover, the festival of booths was also a joyous occasion and a time for expressing thanksgiving for the products of the harvest — the threshed grain, the olive oil, and the wine. It was a time for the people to praise YHWH as the one who had made it possible for crops to grow and who had blessed them. (Deuteronomy 16:13-15) Appropriately, therefore, the “festival of booths” was also known as the “festival of ingathering” or “harvest.” (Exodus 23:16) For people of the nations to observe the festival of booths would reflect their appreciation for YHWH as their God who makes bountiful provisions for sustaining life and for life itself and all the blessings associated therewith. (14:16)
It appears that the people of the nations who are represented as annually observing the festival of booths are included in “all creation” that will share “in the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” (Romans 8:20, 21) That the prophetic words about them relate to developments on earth is seemingly evident from the later mention of those who do not choose to be devoted to YHWH. (14:16)
Whosoever from the “families of the earth” that does not go to Jerusalem to “bow down” in worship “to the King, YHWH of hosts” (the “Lord Almighty” [LXX]) forfeits his blessing. No rain will pour down for such ones, making it impossible for them to grow the crops essential for sustaining their life. According to the Septuagint rendering, “these [the ones who refuse to go up to Jerusalem to worship YHWH] will be added to those [the attackers from the nations who perished].” (14:17)
“If the family [tribe (LXX)] of Egypt” does not go up to Jerusalem for worship, there will be no rain for the Egyptians. Instead, there will be the “plague” (14:12) with which YHWH strikes the “nations that do not go up [to Jerusalem] to observe the festival of booths.” These words reveal that all who refuse to acknowledge YHWH as God and the giver and sustainer of life will face the same end as did those who attacked Jerusalem or God’s people. (4:18)
“This will be the sin of Egypt and the sin of all the nations that do not go up [to Jerusalem] to observe the festival of booths.” It appears that “sin” is here used to denote the consequence for the “sin.” Numerous translations are specific in conveying this significance in their renderings. “This horrible disaster will strike the Egyptians and everyone else who refuses to go there for the celebration.” (CEV) “This will be the punishment which befalls Egypt and any nation which does not go up to keep the feast of Tabernacles.” (REB) “Such will be the punishment for Egypt and the punishment for all the nations which fail to come up to keep the feast of Shelters.” (NJB) (14:19)
“In that day” or the time when people everywhere will be devoted to YHWH, his “holiness” or purity will be prominently acknowledged. Horses, once used primarily for warfare, will be instruments for proclaiming his holiness. Bells, probably suspended from the harnesses, will bear the inscription, “Holiness to YHWH.” According to the Septuagint, the inscription on the “bridle” will be “Holy to the Lord Almighty.” The inscription is the same one that appeared on the gold plate of the high priest’s turban (Exodus 39:30, 31), suggesting that even common things will be “holy” and testify to God’s holiness. Pots for general use in the “house of YHWH” would be sacred like the bowls used in connection with the service at the altar. (14:20)
“Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to YHWH.” This development would make it possible for the people to use their own pots for boiling meat from the animals that were sacrificed, eliminating the need for special pots. “In that day” or at that time, there will no longer be a “Canaanite in the house of YHWH of hosts” (“the house of the Lord Almighty” [LXX]) According to the Vulgate, the Canaanite is a merchant or trader (mercator). A number of translators have made this significance explicit in their renderings. “When that time comes, no longer will any trader be seen in the house of the LORD of Hosts.” (REB) “There will be no more traders in the Temple of Yahweh Sabaoth, when that Day comes.” (NJB) Any kind of commercial trafficking will not be permitted to defile the sacred precincts. It is possible that the reference to there being no Canaanite indicates that no unclean person would ever be found at the temple of YHWH, the holy God with hosts of angels in his service. (14:21)
The absence of traders has also been interpreted to mean that they would not be needed, as no one would have to buy any special pots for boiling the meat from animals that had been sacrificed. “Any one of the [pots] will be acceptable for boiling the meat of sacrificed animals, and there will no longer be a need to sell special pots and bowls.” (CEV) This meaning, however, is less likely, as commercial activity would defile the sanctity of God’s temple. (14:21; compare Mark 11:15-17.)
Notes
In verse 5, the Septuagint says that the “valley of my mountains will be blocked” and that the “valley of the mountains will be joined up to Iasol” and “will be blocked” as it was by the earthquake in the days of Uzziah, the king of Judah. A number of translations have basically followed this reading in their interpretive renderings. “The valley between the hills will be blocked, for the new valley between them will reach as far as Asal. It will be blocked as it was by the earthquake in the time of King Uzziah of Judah.” (REB) “And the valley of the LORD’s mountain shall be filled up when the valley of those two mountains reaches its edge; it shall be filled up as it was filled up by the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah.” (NAB) “The valley between the hills will be filled in, yes, it will be blocked as far as Jasol, it will be filled in as it was by the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah.” (NJB)
The Septuagint rendering of verse 8 refers to the “first sea” and the “last sea.” This appears to be because the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, making the “first sea” the Dead Sea (the eastern sea) and the “last sea” the Mediterranean Sea where the sun sets.
The Septuagint rendering of verse 10 suggests that the translator appears not to have understood the meaning of the Hebrew text. God is represented as “encircling all the land and the wilderness from Gabe [Geba] to Remmon [Rimmon] south of Jerusalem. But Rama will remain upon [its] place, from the Gate of Benjamin to the place of the first gate, to the gate of the corners, and to the Tower of Ananeel, to the wine vats of the king.”
The reference in verse 14 to Judah fighting “at Jerusalem” could mean that this would be to defend the city. This, however, appears to be less likely. YHWH is portrayed as dealing directly with the attackers, and there is no mention of warriors from Judah battling against the forces of the nations.