Introduction to Haggai and Zechariah
IN HIS 1956 BOOK Everyday Life in Old Testament Times, E. W. Heaton provides an artistic illustration of the exiles of Judah marching under armed Babylonian guard through the famous Ishtar gate of Babylon.1 Underneath the picture is the caption: “The Closing Scene of Old Testament Times: The Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar.”2 This title captures the sentiments of many readers of the Old Testament, that after the destruction of Jerusalem the story of redemption fades into the haze of exile only to reappear with the birth of Christ in the New Testament. There is no question that most of the events of Israel that are fixed in the cultural consciousness of the church happened prior to the fall of Jerusalem in 587 B.C.,3 such as the call of Abraham, the rise of Joseph, the exploits of Samson, the victories of David, or the proclamations of Elijah.
The period in which Haggai and Zechariah lived and ministered, therefore, does not receive much attention in Christian circles. A preference for the earlier stories of Israel is apparent for several reasons. (1) With the fall of Jerusalem in 587 B.C. the Israelites did not regain independence from foreign powers until the Maccabean revolt. Even the province in which part of the Jewish remnant lived was a mere fraction of its size under David and Solomon. This does not make for great storytelling, although Daniel and Esther enjoy some popularity.
(2) The New Testament accounts of Jesus and Paul portray the leadership of the Jews (the Sadducees, Pharisees, and teachers of the law) in a negative light. These various groups arose in the period between the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and the birth of Christ, and thus the literature from this period is read through the lens of the New Testament critique of these groups. Books like Ezra and Nehemiah are disparaged for their close attention to the law.
(3) The rebuilding of the temple and the city of Jerusalem is seen as odd in light of Christ’s coming. Why rebuild the temple only to have it rejected by Christ in his ministry?
These factors introduce us to some of the major hurdles for preaching and teaching on Haggai and Zechariah. In order to appropriate the rich theology of these books for contemporary audiences, we need to overcome these challenges. The purpose of this introduction is to provide historical-literary, biblical-theological, and contemporary orientation for the interpreter of Haggai and Zechariah. We will begin with a basic orientation to the history and literature of these books, ending with a summary of the basic theological message to their ancient audience (Original Meaning). Then we will offer a biblical-theological orientation so that Christian readers can appropriate the truth of Haggai and Zechariah for their lives today (Bridging Contexts). Finally, we will survey key implications of the theology of Haggai and Zechariah for church and society today (Contemporary Significance). In this way my desire is to strike a balance between history and theology, always sensitive to the fact that the theological truth of the Scriptures has been delivered within particular historical contexts through particular literary forms.
Original Meaning
BECAUSE THE PREVAILING historical approach to the Scriptures in the modern era has often turned the Bible into a museum piece, theologians are increasingly abandoning historical context in their search for theological truth. This shift is challenged in Tom Wright’s parody of the prodigal son, in which the prodigal is the historical study of the Bible. Wright attacks theologians who have taken “off their historical sandals lest they tread on holy ground” and reminds us that “stripped of its arrogance, its desire to make off with half of the patrimony and never be seen again, history belongs at the family table. If theology, the older brother, pretends not to need or notice him it will be a sign that he has forgotten, after all, who his father is.”4 It will become evident throughout the commentary that I utilize a three-dimensional hermeneutic, one that seeks to interpret these texts in their ancient context (historical dimension) with sensitivity to their message encased in literary form (literary dimension), but also as texts with a relevant message appropriated by contemporary readers seeking to interpret and live faithfully as Christians (contemporary dimension). In this way my desire is to strike a balance between history and theology, always sensitive to the fact that the theological truth of the Scriptures has been delivered within particular historical contexts through particular literary forms
A. History of the Early Persian Period
NABONIDUS, ONE of the last emperors of Babylon, records a dream in which he receives instruction from the god Marduk to go to his mother’s temple in Haran (which was under the control of the Medes) and rebuild it:
In the beginning of my everlasting reign he made me to see a vision. Marduk, the great lord, and Sin, the light of heaven and earth, stood on either side. Marduk said to me: “Nabonidus, King of Babylon, haul bricks with your wagon-horses, rebuild E-hul-hul, and make Sin, the great lord, to take up his residence therein.” Reverently I spoke to the lord of the gods, Marduk: “The Medes have encompassed that house, which you did command to rebuild, and their forces are mighty.” But Marduk said to me: “The Medes of whom you have spoken—they, their country, and the kings who marched with them are no more.” On the approach of the third year they instigated Cyrus, King of Anzan, his petty vassal, to attack them, and with his few troops he routed the numerous Medes. He seized Astyages, King of the Medes, and took him as a captive to his own country. (It was) the word of the great lord, Marduk, and Sin, the light of heaven and earth, whose command can not be annulled.5
This dream assembles a fascinating trio of leaders who rose to prominence in the final phase of the Neo-Babylonian empire in mid-sixth century B.C.: Nabonidus of Babylon, Astyages of Media, and Cyrus of Persia. To set the stage for this dream and the impact of these characters on the Jewish community, we need to return to the beginning of the sixth century and the reign of an earlier Babylonian emperor, Nebuchadnezzar.
Probably the ancient emperor most familiar to us is Nebuchadnezzar, ruler of the Neo-Babylonian empire from 605–562 B.C.6 His father, Nabopolassar (626–605), in concert with Cyaxares of Media (625–585), wrested control of the ancient Near East from the Assyrians during an extended struggle that began in earnest with a three-month siege of Nineveh in 612. The following decade saw intense competition between the Babylonian-Median alliance and the Egypto-Assyrian coalition for supremacy in western Asia, with the Assyrians operating out of Haran, culminating in a famous battle at Carchemish in 609. The newly crowned Pharaoh Necho II had marched north to help the Assyrians retake Haran, but at Carchemish met the superior might of the Babylonian army.
The Babylonians, led by Nebuchadnezzar, routed the Egyptians first at Carchemish and soon after at Hamath. At that time Nebuchadnezzar received word that his father had died, so he returned to Babylon to secure the throne. Then he returned to his war along the Mediterranean coast, took the Philistine territory, and by the end of 601 B.C. pushed his way to the border of Egypt. A valiant Egyptian military force stopped him there.
The record of the reigns of the final kings of Judah reveals the impact of these larger movements on the ancient Near Eastern scene. King Josiah foolishly challenged Necho on his way to Carchemish in 609 B.C. and was killed in the battle (2 Kings 23:29–30). Necho’s brief control of western Asia (609–605) is reflected in his punishment of Josiah’s son Jehoahaz (23:32, 34) and the promotion of his brother Jehoiakim (Eliakim; 23:33, 35). Babylonian successes against Necho in 605 and the ensuing battles between the two world powers are reflected in Jehoiakim’s vacillation in allegiance, beginning under Necho, then switching to Nebuchadnezzar (24:1a), back to the Egyptians (24:1b), before being bullied by Babylonian allies (24:2–6). After Nebuchadnezzar marched to the border of Egypt (24:7), Jehoiakim died, leaving his son Jehoiachin to face the fury of the Babylonian monarch, who besieged Jerusalem, deported its leadership, and placed Zedekiah on the throne in 598 (24:8–17). Zedekiah’s disloyalty to Nebuchadnezzar, however, prompted his return in 587 to destroy the city (ch. 25).
These events had a devastating effect on the Jewish people. Many were killed, some fled to surrounding nations, some were exiled to Mesopotamia, while others remained in the land. Such disarray rendered doubtful any national hopes for the Jewish people.
Nebuchadnezzar ruled the ancient Near East until 562 B.C., but as is typical in the ancient world, greatness is followed by upheaval as three different kings reigned in the short space of 562–556: Nebuchadnezzar’s son Amel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach, 2 Kings 25:27–30), followed by Neriglissar (Amel-Marduk’s brother-in-law), and finally Neriglissar’s son Labashi-Marduk.
Such upheaval threatened the integrity of the empire, setting the stage for a strong leader. That man would be Nabonidus, who arose from the military ranks of the Babylonian army and whose dream was recorded at the outset of our discussion. As the dream indicates, when Nabonidus assumed power in 556 B.C. Astyages ruled as king in Media with control over the lesser kingdom of his grandson Cyrus in Persia. By 553, however, Cyrus revolted against Astyages, an action celebrated by Nabonidus because it freed him to rebuild his mother’s temple in Haran. During the next decade, Nabonidus installed his son Belshazzar as king in Babylon and moved his base of operations to the oasis of Teima in the Arabian desert. This action led to dissatisfaction among the populace in Babylon, especially among the priests of Marduk, whose New Year’s festival could not be held without the emperor.
While Nabonidus was in Teima, Cyrus was busy acquiring territory on the fringes of the Babylonian empire. In 547/546 B.C. he extended the former Median territories to the west, crossed the Halys river, and took control of Lydia from King Croesus, who was in alliance with Nabonidus. Then he turned to the east and extended his control to the Jaxartes river.
These actions prompted Nabonidus’s return to Babylon, but the situation was grave. In the final months of his rule the emperor transported many gods to Babylon, enraging the priests of the various shrines in southern Mesopotamia. Although he did participate in the New Year’s festival upon his return, his relationship with the priests was irreparable. In 539 B.C. Cyrus moved across the Zagros mountains, forded the Tigris at Opis, and marched with little resistance into Babylonia (see Dan. 5, esp. v. 39). At least in his mind, if not in reality, Cyrus was welcomed into the city of Babylon more as a liberator than a conqueror and assumed the territories of the Babylonians. A new day had dawned in the ancient Near East.
A key record of Cyrus’s triumph over Babylon is recorded on a clay barrel called the Cyrus Cylinder, found in an archaeological expedition in Mesopotamia. In it he claims that Marduk raised him up to conquer Babylon and that he did so to the delight of its citizens. This resulted in the submission of rulers throughout the Babylonian empire who came to Babylon to bow before Cyrus. Key to Israel’s destiny was his immediate move to reconstruct sanctuaries for the gods of his conquered nations and along with this to return their former inhabitants to their lands:
. . . As to the region from as far as Ashur and Susa, Agade, Eshnunna, the towns of Zamban, Me-Turnu, Der as well as the region of the Gutians, I returned to these sanctuaries on the other side of the Tigris, the sanctuaries of which had been ruins for a long time, the images which used to live therein and established for them permanent sanctuaries. I also gathered all their former inhabitants and returned to them their habitations. Furthermore, I resettled upon the command of Marduk, the great lord, all the gods of Sumer and Akkad whom Nabonidus had brought into Babylon to the anger of the lord of the gods, unharmed, in their former chapels, the places which make them happy. May all the gods whom I have resettled in their sacred cities ask daily Bel and Nebo for a long life for me and may they recommend me to him; to Marduk, my lord, they may say this: “Cyrus, the king who worships you, and Cambyses, his son [lacuna].” All gods I settled in a peaceful place. . . . I endeavoured to fortify/repair their dwelling places.7
This text attests Cyrus’s claim not only to a peaceful transition from Babylonian to Persian rule, but also highlights his shrewd politico-religious policies through which (he claims) he won the allegiance of the population.8
The mention of Cyrus in Isaiah 44:28; 45:1; 45:13 reveals the high expectations associated with him among the exilic Jewish community. Although the Cyrus Cylinder does not mention the exiled Jewish people in particular, it details the kind of policies reflected in Jewish writings of this period, especially in the proclamation of Cyrus in Ezra 1:1–4 (cf. 2 Chron. 36:22–23) and decree of Cyrus in Ezra 6:1–5.9 Ezra 1 describes an early response to Cyrus’s policies as a group of Jews returned to Palestine under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (539–537 B.C.). These Jews transported temple utensils that had been confiscated by Nebuchadnezzar in 587 B.C. and had been stored in a temple in Babylon (Ezra 1:9–11; 5:13–14) and “laid the foundations of the house of God” (Ezra 5:15–16).
Cyrus did not rule for long over his expansive realm. He was killed in 530 B.C. on a military expedition on the eastern frontier of the empire and with his death rule was transferred to his son Cambyses. The transition was relatively smooth and enabled Cambyses to carry out his father’s dream to invade Egypt, incorporating it into the empire in 525. While in Egypt, however, Cambyses’ hold on the home front was challenged when in March 522, one of the Magi in the court (Bardiya/Gaumata) rebelled and claimed he was Smerdis, the brother Cambyses had quietly killed before embarking for Egypt. Enticed by a promise of relaxed tax policies, the core of the empire supported this rebellion, forcing Cambyses to return to Mesopotamia. Unfortunately, he would never reach his destination, accidentally wounding himself with his knife en route.
One of Cambyses’ generals who was related to the royal family, Darius, assumed control of the Persian army. He returned to Media and, along with “the Seven” (representatives from the seven leading Persian families), conspired against Bardiya/Gaumata and killed him in September 522 B.C.10 This action set off further rebellions across the empire that consumed much of Darius’s energies in the first few years as he consolidated his power.
Rebellions in two areas of the empire are relevant to the study of Haggai and Zechariah. Babylon rebelled immediately under Nidintu-Bel (Nebuchadnezzar III), but this was crushed in December 522 B.C. by Darius himself, who subsequently remained in Babylon until June 521 in order to establish his control. Egypt revolted in 519, prompting Darius’s military expedition in 519–518 B.C., which returned Egypt to his dominion. After this Darius moved eastward and took the Indus valley, placing the three major river valleys of the ancient Near East (Nile, Tigris-Euphrates, Indus) under one ruler for the first time in history.
During this period Jews continued to return to Palestine, and in the early years of Darius built an altar, reintroduced sacrificial rites, restored the foundation of the temple, and completed the structure by 515 B.C. (Ezra 2–6). This was accomplished through the benevolent intervention of Darius amidst hostility from others in Palestine (Ezra 5–6).
The temple building activity described in Ezra is clearly in the background of the books of Haggai and Zechariah, which are dated early in Darius’s reign (520, 518 B.C.). During this period Zerubbabel, a descendant of David, returned to the land along with the high priest Joshua, a descendant of Zadok. Inspired by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, these leaders supervised the rebuilding of the temple and restoration of the worship of God in Jerusalem (Ezra 5:1–2).
The recent rebellions in the Persian empire can also be discerned behind the books of Haggai and Zechariah. Although the prophecies in Haggai are dated between the Babylonian and Egyptian revolts (520 B.C.), their vision of the reversal of worldly power before the Lord Almighty draws on recent experience that fueled Jewish expectation. The many allusions to Babylon in the visions of Zechariah (Zech. 1:15, 19, 21; 2:6, 7; 5:11; 6:8, 10) must be linked to Darius’s repression of revolts in that region in the early years of his reign. Although Cyrus had seized control of Babylon, he did not bring the expected devastation on that city (Ps. 137:8; Isa. 13–14; 47–48; Jer. 25:12–16; 50–51).11 But because of their rebellion after Cambyses’ death, the Babylonians were punished severely by Darius, actions closer to the prophetic expectation. While the books of Chronicles and Ezra link the end of exile and fulfillment of restoration with Cyrus’s reign, the visions of Zechariah (520) link them with Darius’s actions in 522–521.12
The appearance of Zerubbabel and Joshua in the early years of Darius’s reign must be related to the latter’s concern for the integrity of the empire. The fact that the emperor moved against the Egyptians in 519–518 B.C. suggests that Zerubbabel (and possibly also Joshua) may have been commissioned to restore order in the province of Yehud. Zerubbabel apparently served as governor of Yehud,13 which lay within the satrapy of Beyond the River. Once rebellions subsided in his empire, Darius restructured the empire politically and encouraged the development of local legal codes within the various provinces.
After 500 B.C. signs of trouble began to appear for Darius, mostly a result of his determination to extend Persian dominion into Europe. Typical of his problems was the famous battle of Marathon in 490, in which he was defeated by the Greeks. Immediately after this a rebellion arose in Egypt (486), but Darius died, passing the throne to his son Xerxes I.
The youthful Xerxes (486–465 B.C.) replicated the early reign of his father, returning Egypt to Persian control and suppressing two rebellions in Babylon. Also like his father, he had little success with the Greeks in his campaigns in Europe in 480–478. After his vast army defeated the handful of Spartans at the famous battle of Thermopylae, which opened the way for the sack of an empty Athens, his forces, under the direction of his general Mardonius, were defeated at Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale. After these losses Xerxes expended considerable energy on completing his showcase capital Persepolis. He was killed in his sleep by two of his closest officials in 465 and succeeded by his son Artaxerxes I (465–424).
Persian defeats in Europe and rebellions in Babylon and Egypt had an impact on Yehud. Ultimately the Persians established a series of fortresses in and around the province in order to solidify their European and Egyptian interests, but closer control of this key land link between Mesopotamia and Egypt was instituted from the beginning of the fifth century.14 Zerubbabel’s reign came to an end sometime in the last decade of the sixth century (ca. 510 B.C.). There are strong indications in Zechariah 11:4–16 that his tenure ended unsatisfactorily, but archaeological records reveal that he was succeeded by his son-in-law Elnathan, who had married Zerubbabel’s daughter Shelomith, therefore extending a leadership role for the Davidic line until around 490.15 After this point members of the Davidic line were present in Yehud but did not participate in provincial leadership (1 Chron. 3:17–24; Ezra 8:2).
Although the evidence is scanty, there are indications that the Jews who lived in Yehud during the reign of Xerxes and the early part of Artaxerxes’ reign experienced much opposition (Ezra 4:6–23). Although they sought to rebuild the city and fortify its walls, all efforts were thwarted by their enemies. Hope, however, was soon on its way, first in the form of a priestly scribe named Ezra, commissioned in 458 B.C. by the emperor to promulgate and administrate a legal code within the province of Yehud (Ezra 7–10; esp. 7:14, 25), and then in the form of a former cupbearer to the emperor named Nehemiah, commissioned in 445 B.C. as governor and empowered to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. 1–13).
B. Dating the Prophetic Books
THERE IS LITTLE DEBATE over the dating of Haggai and Zechariah 1–8, with most scholars placing the completion of these sections soon after the dates identified in the superscriptions: that is, the second year of Darius (520 B.C.: Hag. 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 23; Zech. 1:1, 7) and the fourth year of Darius (518 B.C.: Zech. 7:1).16 Meyers and Meyers, for instance, have linked the publication of these books with the dedication of the temple (since the dedication is not mentioned in Hag. 1–2; Zech. 1–8).17 This conclusion, however, is based on the conviction that these two prophetic sections were a unified body focused on the theme of temple rebuilding. Although most likely Haggai was completed for the foundation-laying ceremony, with a copy of the book encased in the foundation, this does not appear to be the case for Zechariah 1–8. The lack of mention of the completion of the temple in Zechariah 1–8 is most likely due to the fact that Zechariah’s interests are far broader than the physical restoration of the temple edifice, including especially the renewal of city and people, physically and spiritually. Nevertheless, there is no reason to date Zechariah 1–8 too long after the completion of the temple.
Dating the various parts of Zechariah 9–14 has been a challenge. These chapters provide no historical superscriptions, and proposals have run from the eighth to the second century B.C.18 The majority opinion has been that these texts arose in a period after Alexander’s Hellenistic subjugation of the ancient Near East (i.e., after 333 B.C.). These arguments were based primarily on a view that the genre of this section arose at a later period (apocalyptic), that the tension lying behind the passage relates to a split between Jews and Samaritans, and that a few key passages reflect incidents from a later period: the picture of conquest in 9:1–8, the mention of Greece in 9:13, the reference to the disposal of three shepherds in one month in 11:8, and the reference to “the one whom they have pierced” in 12:10.
This consensus has been seriously challenged in recent decades, however. The evidence provided above in favor of a date in the Hellenistic period has been called into question. Apocalyptic features in texts need not indicate a late date, nor is the Jew/Samaritan split the first sign of sociological tension in the Persian/Greek period. The evidence from the various passages is not helpful for ascertaining a specific context, as the picture of conquest in 9:1–8 does not fit Alexander’s conquest (or any other one we know of). The reference to Greece in 9:13 may be either a later gloss or a metaphorical reference to Phoenicians; even if it is Greece, note that Persia interacted with Greece early in Darius’s reign.
In a positive vein, three key works have provided strong reasons to date Zechariah 9–14 in the early Persian period. (1) Hanson’s analysis of apocalyptic style concludes that these chapters range from the mid-sixth to the late fourth centuries B.C.19 (2) Hill’s analysis of the language of Zechariah 10–14 shows that the various passages should be dated between 515 and 475 B.C.20 (3) Redditt’s socio-literary arguments that the conflicts described in chapters 9–14 fit the experience of the Jewish community in the province of Yehud in the early Persian period (i.e., from 515 B.C. [Zerubbabel] until 445 B.C. [Nehemiah]) are helpful.
These arguments provide a foundation for my own conclusion that chapters 9–14 arose during the early Persian period (post-515 B.C.). Recently I have argued for the close association between chapters 1–8 and 9–14, noting that chapters 7–8 function as an appropriate segue between chapters 1–6 and chapters 9–14.21 This confirms that chapters 9–14 originated after the redaction of chapters 7–8, which occurred no sooner than 518 B.C. (cf. 7:1). Zechariah 11:4–16, however, most likely depicts the end of the tenure of Zerubbabel as governor (ca. 510 B.C.) in Yehud and marks the end of a period of increased royal hope for the Davidic house (9:9–10) and of national hope for the reunification of the tribes (chs. 9–10).22
The positive prospects for the reunification of north and south (now found in two different Persian provinces, Samaria and Yehud) and for the renewal of the Davidic throne (through Zerubbabel) suggest that the oracles in chapters 9–10 arose in the period between 515 B.C. and the end of Zerubbabel’s tenure (ca. 510 B.C.). References to drought in 10:1–3a would fit this early period, as attested in passages like Haggai 1:6, 11; 2:15–19; Zechariah 8:12 (see comments on these passages). Furthermore, allusions to idolatry in Zechariah 10:1–3a (cf. 13:2–3) fit into the earliest part of the Persian period, since idolatry is ultimately eradicated in the Persian period (see comments on 10:1–2).
Crossing into chapters 12–14, there remains hope for the renewal of the Davidic house (12:7–8, 12–13; 13:1), although such renewal will result in leadership that empowers the community (12:7–8) and may be related to a non-Zadokite line of priesthood (12:13). Additionally, the world of these two oracles (chs. 12–14) is one in which Jerusalem and its surrounding province are distinguishable and possibly in conflict. Such a distinction would fit a period when Jerusalem’s status had become a threat to that of the surrounding province.
Evidence for the elevation of the status of Jerusalem can be culled from two key eras in the early Persian period with the present literary evidence. (1) There is the period between 520 and 510 B.C. as new energy, personnel, and resources were being poured into the temple restoration in Jerusalem, sanctioned by the Persian crown. (2) There is the period following 445 B.C. during Nehemiah’s tenure as governor as the city was restored.
Although the earlier period is possible, evidence from Nehemiah suggests that even at this later date the city had not prospered demographically (Neh. 7:4–5), most likely because of the lack of protection around the city and the abundance of destruction. The initiative of the governor to import people into the city from the surrounding province (11:1–2) had the potential of causing tension within this struggling province. Therefore, while Zechariah 9–10 can be placed in 515–510 and chapter 11 along with the shepherd pieces (10:1–3a; 11:1–3, 17; possibly also 13:7–9) in post-510, chapters 12–14 arose sometime after 510, maybe even as late as 445. In such a context the prophet encouraged the community through visions of restoration and renewal while exhorting them to faithfulness and warning against abusive and idolatrous leadership.
C. The Prophets
HAGGAI. LITTLE IS known of this prophet who was so instrumental in the restoration of the Jewish community in the wake of the Babylonian exile. The book of Ezra honors him alongside Zechariah as instrumental in encouraging the community to rebuild the temple (Ezra 5:1–2; 6:14). The book of Haggai also bears witness to this role. Each of his messages is linked in some way to the rebuilding project, whether urging the initiation of building (Hag. 1:1–15), encouraging its continuation (2:1–9), or affirming the completion of a key stage (2:10–23).
Although his name is unique in the Hebrew Bible, the archaeological record reveals its widespread use in the Babylonian period.23 The name is derived from the Semitic word for “feast” (ḥag), an appropriate name for a prophet focused on rebuilding the temple, the context for the main feasts in the Jewish calendar. Moreover, each of his messages is delivered on a day associated with a festal or liturgical event (see commentary). The book ends on an eschatological note with great hope for the future as is typical of several prophetic books in the Hebrew Bible (Isa. 66; Hos. 14; Joel 3; Amos 9; Mic. 7; Zeph. 3; Zech. 14).
Zechariah. Ezra 5:1–2; 6:14 presents Zechariah as a prophetic champion of the temple project. The intimate connection between this prophet and the restoration of the temple is discernible within his book. He promises the rebuilding of the temple (Zech. 1:16; 6:12–15), announces the return of God’s presence (1:16; 2:5, 10, 13), supports the reinstatement of priestly service (3:1–7; 6:13), envisions temple furnishings (4:1–14; 6:14), and prophesies at the refoundation ceremony with Haggai (4:6b–10a; 8:9–13).24
This connection to the temple is not surprising because Zechariah apparently came from priestly stock, heading up an important clan in a later period (Neh. 12:16). His grandfather Iddo returned with Zerubbabel and Joshua around 520 B.C. (12:4), and he himself is linked to the generation of Joshua’s son, Joiakim. If this is correct, Zechariah would have been young in 520 B.C. as he began his prophetic career.
For a prophetic voice to arise from a priestly context is not odd (see Jer. 1:1; Ezek. 1:3), for prophets and priests are closely associated in the Babylonian and Persian periods.25 The role of prophets in the temple context is difficult to delineate in detail, but it appears that one crucial function was to deliver the response of God to the requests of his people (see the books of Joel and Jeremiah; Zech. 7 fills a similar role, where the people come to the temple and make a request of the priests and prophets and Zechariah delivers an oracle).
The overall flow of Zechariah suggests an increasing tension between Zechariah’s prophetic community and the leadership in Jerusalem. Although 3:1–10 and 6:9–15 affirm Zadokite priests, affording them significant responsibility in the restoration community, these pericopes carefully circumscribe their role by championing the cause of the royal ṣemaḥ (Branch) figure.26 Concerns over the priesthood come to the fore in chapters 7–8 as Zechariah attacks the present generation, including the priests, for replicating the sins of the past (7:5).27
In Zechariah 9–14 the tension continues as prophecies attack the shepherds of the flock, a reference to leadership closely connected with the Persians.28 The key prophetic sign-acts in 11:4–16 indicate the community’s inappropriate rejection of Davidic leadership and the subsequent appointment of another leader. Zechariah 12:1–13:6 anticipates spiritual renewal not only within the house of David but also within a family of priests from a different line from that of Joshua, the high priest. Joshua arose from the family that traced its roots to the priest Zadok (chief priest of David and Solomon), Aaron (brother of Moses), and ultimately Levi’s son Kohath (1 Chron. 6:1–15). The family mentioned in Zechariah 12:13 (Shimei) traced its roots to Levi’s other son, Gershom (1 Chron. 6:17; cf. Ex. 6:16–17; Num. 3:17–18).
Interestingly, Zechariah is identified as a descendant of a man named Iddo (Zech. 1:1, 7) and as one who led the priestly family of Iddo (Neh. 12:16). The name “Iddo” is associated with a family of Levites in the line of Gershom (1 Chron. 6:21), the same family as that of Shimei (see Zech. 12:12–13). Thus, Zechariah 9–14 seems to proclaim the rejection of Zadokite priestly leadership in the wake of the absence of leadership from the Davidic line in Yehud in the early Persian period. Another line of priests, one possibly related to Zechariah, is associated with future Davidic hopes.
Zechariah 9–14 represents an important stage in the history of prophecy. Here we find a rich variety of forms as well as a large number of allusions drawn from earlier prophets. This section is witness to the important role that the later prophetic tradition played within the Jewish community, namely, as interpreter of the earlier prophets, bringing these ancient words to life within a new context.
D. The Community
HAGGAI AND ZECHARIAH were involved in the community of Yehud, a province on the western fringe of the Persian empire. Through their books and other Jewish documents and remains from this period we can reconstruct the basic contours of this society.
Leaders. The community was led by two key figures who returned from Babylonian exile in the first phase of Persian rule after the fall of Babylon in 539 B.C.: Zerubbabel and Joshua.
Zerubbabel. There has been much discussion over the identity and ancestry of Zerubbabel. A comparison of the genealogy of the Davidic line in 1 Chronicles 3:17–24 with the patrynomic of Zerubbabel provided in Haggai (as well as in Ezra and Nehemiah) reveals a point of tension. In 1 Chronicles 3:19, Pedaiah is named as the father of Zerubbabel while, according to Haggai, Shealtiel is his father. Suggested solutions range from the postulation of a Levirate marriage between Shealtiel’s widow and Pedaiah,29 to textual changes,30 to conjecturing the presence of two different Zerubbabels,31 to the suggestion of a difference between his father’s personal and throne names.32 None of these suggestions is satisfactory. No sons are ever listed for Shealtiel (1 Chron. 3:17–24); thus if he was childless, a substitute heir was necessary. Most likely Zerubbabel was identified as the proper heir, adopted into the line of Shealtiel.
This connection to the Davidic line is probably what qualified Zerubbabel to serve as governor of Yehud.33 Ezra and Nehemiah indicate that a man named Sheshbazzar served as governor in an earlier phase of the Persian period (Ezra 5:14) and that Nehemiah filled the same role in the middle of the following century (Neh. 5:14–18). This second passage alludes to “earlier governors,” evidence for which has been provided by archaeological finds.34
Joshua. The book of Haggai also highlights Joshua, son of the high priest Jehozadak. His genealogy reveals that he is part of the line of Zadokite priests. The origin of the Zadokite line of priests in Israel’s religious structure is linked to the political intrigue of the united kingdom under David and Solomon. In David’s reign Zadok served as priest with Abiathar (from the line of Eli, 1 Sam. 1). However, when Adonijah rebelled against David and sought the throne over Solomon, Abiathar fell from grace by supporting Adonijah while Zadok was faithful to Solomon. Solomon removed Abiathar from office (1 Kings 2:26–27) and replaced him with Zadok (2:35). During the Exile, Ezekiel affirms the Zadokites for their purity. The future temple building and its services are linked to this line (Ezek. 44).35
People. The community that these figures led and to whom these prophets spoke was a diverse group. In simplistic terms one can identify two types of people. (1) There were those who had returned from the Diaspora (mostly in Mesopotamia, but also Egypt), a long list of whom is provided in Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7. (2) There were those who had remained in or moved into the land following the demise of the kingdom of Judah by the Babylonians in 587 B.C. Such distinctions appear to underlie the description of the celebration of the Passover in Ezra 6:19–22, which states: “So the Israelites who had returned from the exile ate it, together with all who had separated themselves from the unclean practices of their Gentile neighbors in order to seek the LORD, the God of Israel” (Ezra 6:21).
The province in which this community lived was smaller than its preexilic monarchical counterpart, covering only the central hills of Judah and excluding the Shephelah and the coastal plain to the west, with Jericho/Bethel at the northern, En-Gedi/Tekoa/Beth-Zur/Keilah at the southern, and the rift valley (Jordan/Dead Sea) at the eastern extremes. The population was only one-third of its preexilic size, estimated between 13,350 and 20,650, while the capital city Jerusalem was reduced to one-fifth of its preexilic size. Its economy was largely dependent on the traditional mix of agrarian and animal husbandry, with taxation received through a combination of an emerging money system alongside an “in-kind” system.36
E. Literary History and Structure of Haggai and Zechariah
PROPHECY AND LITERATURE. Typically prophecy is associated with people who reveal words or visions from God to his people. This is why prophetic books are often linked to a specific individual such as Isaiah (Isa. 1:1; 2:1; 13:1), Jeremiah (Jer. 1:1–3), or Ezekiel (Ezek. 1:1). But prophecy is not merely an oral phenomenon; it is also a written text. Prophetic figures and their entourage were concerned to preserve a literary record of the oral declarations of the prophet.
The process from oral message to written text is difficult to trace. Jeremiah used the services of his scribe Baruch, who was charged with writing on a scroll words dictated by the prophet (Jer. 45:1; cf. Jer. 36). This suggests that disciples gathered around prophetic figures (see 2 Kings 6:1) and were instrumental in transferring prophecy from its original oral form into its present literary state. The use of third-person superscriptions to introduce prophetic books (e.g., Isa. 1:1; Jer. 1:1–3) as opposed to first-person superscriptions (e.g., Isa. 6:1; 8:1; Jer. 2:1), suggests that people other than the prophets were involved in the writing and editorial process. Although the prophets themselves may have been involved in this process, it is not necessary.
Often examination of editorial processes is disparaged among some biblical scholars, so it is essential to highlight the importance of studying this process for our interpretation of the prophetic message.37 (1) The study of the editorial content of a biblical book is as important to exegesis as the study of the original prophetic declarations. The editorial pieces within prophetic books provide an important context for reading prophecies by placing them in a particular historical context (identifying the period of the writing down of the message as well as that of the original speaker and audience), in a particular literary context (drawing together a body of prophecies into a single collection with an overall structure), and in a particular revelatory context (reminding the audience that these words found their origin in the divine). These shape our reading strategy for the interpretation of the prophecies and thus demand our attention.
(2) Investigation of the development of a book through time contributes to our understanding of the final form of that book by offering reasons for the particular structure and by isolating the various units of the completed text. Once these various units are isolated and their background investigated, it is important to ask why the final editor of the book placed them in their present position. Prophetic books are not merely anthologies of prophetic material but rhetorical masterpieces that use the earlier oral materials of the prophets.
A close look at the books of Haggai and Zechariah highlights the important role played by editors in the publication of the oral pronouncements of these two prophets. It is consistent with an evangelical view of Scripture that close associates of the prophets took the words revealed to the prophets by God and shaped them into a powerful message for later generations to read and profit from. The following section will focus on the editorial processes that produced these ancient books.
Haggai. The superscriptions in 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 20 offer initial clues on the history of the editorial process. Haggai 1:1 and 2:1 both tell us that “the word of the LORD came through [beyad] the prophet Haggai,” while 2:10, 20 introduce their sections with the claim that “the word of the LORD came to [ʾel] the prophet Haggai.” The first two sections (1:1–2:9) are addressed to the same three audiences: Zerubbabel, Joshua, people/remnant. The second two sections (2:10–23), however, do not mention Joshua but only the “priests” (2:11), people/nation (2:14), and Zerubbabel (2:21, 23). This evidence suggests either that the book underwent multiple editions (1:1–2:9 and then 2:10–23) or that the final editor drew from sources that used diverse methods of recording the prophet’s witness.
These various pieces place Haggai in a particular community in history, addressing their needs and concerns and calling them to faithfulness to Yahweh’s purposes. The structure of the book is shaped by the phases expected for a rebuilding project, guiding the reader from a call to initiate the project to an encouragement to continue the project to a celebration of the completion of its initial phase. In the first section (1:1–15), Haggai is calling the people to rebuild the temple by focusing on present difficulties. The section ends by depicting their initial response. In the second section (2:1–9), the prophet encourages the people in their work by pointing to a bright eschatological future for the community. The third section (2:10–23) draws together these various motifs from 1:1–2:9 into a final message of the prophet, focusing on past, present, and future. In this section Joshua recedes to the sideline while Zerubbabel comes to the fore.
Although focused on a limited portion of the rebuilding project (the foundation laying), Haggai has great theological significance. It masterfully intertwines the already and the not-yet, the present and the eschatological, showing the future significance of present faithfulness.
Zechariah 1–8. Like Haggai, Zechariah 1–8 also contains clear evidence of editorial activity. On three occasions (1:1, 7; 7:1) superscriptions similar to those of Haggai introduce a block of material that has its own integrity. On the level of genre and rhetoric 1:1–6 and 7:1–8:23 are clearly distinguished from 1:7–6:15. Both 1:1–6 and 7:1–8:23 contain significant oral material written in prose style accompanied by narrative. Furthermore, these two sections use similar vocabulary and allude to similar traditions.38 By contrast, 1:7–6:15 consists of a series of reports of visions interspersed with oracles and sign-acts. Each of these sections has its own history of compilation, which we will investigate more closely.
The core of the central vision-oracle section consists of a series of visions received by Zechariah. Although the entire section is linked to a particular day (1:7), this only indicates the date on which this material was delivered to the people and says nothing about when the prophet received it. That this process may have extended over a period of time is suggested by a comparison of 1:8 with 4:1. In 1:8 Zechariah reports that “during the night I had a vision” and then in 4:1 that “the angel who talked with me returned and wakened me.” This suggests that the visionary experience had at least two phases.
The first three visions (1:8–2:5) as well as the final vision (6:1–8) are closely related by the theme of the punishment of Babylon and restoration of a community in Jerusalem. The initial vision sets the agenda, the second and third visions fill out the details, and the final vision announces its inauguration. Attached to these two visions are the two nonvisionary pieces in 2:6–13 and 6:9–15, both of which bring the visions “down to the earth”; that is, they show the implications of this vision for the Persian period community. Following the visionary promises of 1:8–2:5, the prophet exhorts the community to flee Babylon and return to the land because of God’s imminent return (2:6–13). Following the visionary announcement of 6:1–8, the prophet reminds the returning exilic priests of the priority of this community and the expected return of a royal figure (6:9–15). The vision in chapter 3 stands out from the other visions in 1:8–6:8.39 It displays close affinities with 6:9–15 and addresses Persian period figures directly.
The three visions that occur after 4:1 all focus attention on initial issues in a Jerusalem and Judah being rebuilt and repopulated: the empowerment of the building project (ch. 4) and the purification of the community (ch. 5). Zechariah 4 is interrupted halfway through by two oracles concerning Zerubbabel. These oracles have been placed in the middle of this vision on purpose to highlight the importance of prophecy for the rebuilding project.40
This assortment of prophetic pieces reflecting a variety of genres, messages, and contexts has been drawn together into one section by the editor responsible for 1:7. This person obviously was seeking to communicate an overall message by bringing these various pericopes together in this particular sequence. This section announces the comforting news of the long-awaited restoration. God was disciplining Babylon, releasing his people, and rebuilding his city and temple. This good news was designed to motivate the people to return from Babylon and rebuild the temple (2:6–13; 6:9–15) and to encourage the priests to fulfill their responsibilities in the temple and cooperate with the royal figure in the rebuilding project (3:1–10; 6:9–15). Prophetic endorsement of royal participation in the rebuilding project is encouraged in chapter 4 and the importance of adherence to the law is highlighted in chapter 5.
The final form of 1:8–6:15 reveals a breadth of concern. Although the temple is mentioned in the visions and oracles (1:16; 2:10, 13; 3:7; 4:9; 6:12–15), they also expand restoration to include the return and renewal of the people (physically, socially, spiritually), the transformation of the entire city and province, and the inclusion of “many nations” among God’s people.
This broader agenda in Zechariah can also be discerned in the prose pieces that surround the vision-oracle section in 1:7–6:15. At the core of 1:1–6 is Zechariah’s speech to the community in which he draws their attention to the obstinacy of past generations and the need for the present generation to repent (1:2–6a). This speech is introduced by a superscription (1:1) and concluded by a description of the positive response of his audience (1:6b).
Zechariah 7:1–8:23, however, poses a greater challenge.41 The superscription in 7:1 introduces a short narrative account in which a group of people approach the priests and prophets at the temple for clarification on a liturgical matter (7:2–3). This elicits a response from Zechariah that continues until 8:23. That this material has been drawn from earlier sources written by Zechariah himself is suggested by the regular appearance of the formula, “the word of the LORD Almighty came to me” (7:4; 8:1, 18). But the role of an editor is also implied by the appearance of the formula, “the word of the LORD Almighty came to Zechariah” (7:1, 8).
To identify the foundational level of 7:1–8:23 it is important to return to the original question of the group of people. In 7:3 they ask whether they should continue their practice of fasting at the appointed times during the year. Zechariah appears to begin to answer this question in 7:5 as he confronts the priests and people on the authenticity of their fasting and then links their behavior with that of the generation sent into exile.
Clearly by 8:18–19 the original question is answered, but the material starting at the beginning of chapter 8 does not seem to fit the flow of the answer. It appears that the original account of Zechariah’s interaction with the people and priests consisted of 7:2–14 . . . 8:14–23. Zechariah 8:14 introduces the contrast motif (“just as I had . . . so now I have”), providing the appropriate transition from the disaster at the end of chapter 7 to the anticipated blessing of 8:18–23. The key to this blessing both for the former generation (7:9–10) as well as the present generation (8:16–17) is justice.
Into the midst of this original speech the editor has brought two prophecies (8:1–8, 9–13)42 delivered by Zechariah that anticipate future blessing. Although these “interruptions” appear awkward to us, interrupting the flow of the original account, such “interruptions” are a rhetorical technique used elsewhere in this corpus, in particular in the vision of chapter 4. These two prophetic insertions foreshadow and anticipate the conclusion of the original speech.
Zechariah 1:1–6 and 7:1–8:23 draw attention to the message of the earlier prophets in order to emphasize that repentance is essential for the realization of restoration. Zechariah 1:1–6 presents a model of the appropriate response of the community to the ancient message of the prophets as the prophet summarizes their message (1:2–6a) and the people respond through repentance and admission of guilt (1:6b). This short pericope shapes our reading of 1:7–6:15, reminding the reader that the comforting message of restoration that follows is given to a penitent community. After this comforting message with its broader agenda of restoration, 7:1–8:23 returns the reader to the initial message and tone of 1:1–6 and reveals that restoration will not be realized unless the entire community renounces the patterns of the past and lives in faithfulness to covenant. The final picture is one of glorious hope, but this will not be realized until there is a transformation in the behavioral patterns of the community.
The setting in which the editor responsible for the final shape of Zechariah 1–8 completed this work is difficult to discern. All we know is that this reached its final form sometime after 518 B.C. (see 7:1), but its message is clearly one that challenges the community to reflect deeply on the definition of restoration and not equate it with the completion of the temple, but rather broaden such a definition to include spiritual and social renewal.
Zechariah 9–14. The historical superscriptions that appeared throughout chapters 1–8 at key seams in the text are not used in chapters 9–14. This has led many scholars to separate these chapters off from the rest of the book as a distinct corpus, even though there is no ancient textual evidence for this approach.
Two superscriptions do appear in these chapters, both beginning with the phrase “An Oracle. The word of the LORD . . .” (9:1; 12:1). This simple marker divides the six chapters into two sections of three each: 9–11 and 12–14.43 This word is used as a superscription elsewhere in prophetic literature, notably in the oracles against the nations in Isaiah 13–23. Jeremiah’s attack on the false prophets shows that by his time this term was synonymous with a prophetic message (Jer. 23:33–40). Although the term may have been used for a negative prophetic message, in Zechariah 9–14 and Malachi it functions as a general term to signify a prophetic collection.
Internal evidence confirms that this term introduces a prophetic collection. (1) Zechariah 9–11 focus attention on issues related to Judah and Joseph, the northern and southern tribal entities. In contrast, there is no mention of the Joseph tribes in chapters 12–14, for these focus on the house of David, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the house of Judah (12:2, 4–5, 7–8, 10; 13:1; 14:14, 21). (2) Throughout chapters 12–14 one finds the regular repetition of the key phrase “on that day” (beyom-hahuʾ ), sometimes preceded by the untranslated construction wehayah (“and it will be”; 12:3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13:1, 4; 14:4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 20, 21). This phrase occurs only once in chapters 9–11 with the same eschatological sense (9:16; cf. 11:11).
While these characteristics clearly distinguish chapters 9–11 from 12–14, there are also points of contact that show that these two sections have been woven together as a unified whole.44 (1) Zechariah 13:7–9 shares similar rhetorical (vocative introduction) and thematic (shepherd, sheep) characteristics with the transitional pieces in chapters 9–11; 10:1–3; 11:1–3; 11:17. (2) Chapters 12 and 14 use strong divine warrior imagery with a global dimension, a characteristic of chapters 9–10. (3) One finds the same linkage between idolatry and prophecy/divination in 13:1–6 as in 10:1–3.
Therefore, one can discern continuity and discontinuity between chapters 9–11 and 12–14. The two collections may have distinct roots (see further below), but they share a common tradition and prophetic community. They have been gathered together into a final collection and need to be interpreted in this larger context.
The first two pericopes (9:1–17 and 10:3b–12) show affinity through their positive tone, concern for Judah and Ephraim, and focus on the return from exile. The first one (9:1–17) has two basic levels: (1) a depiction of God as divine warrior recapturing his palace/sanctuary and then defending, saving, and prospering his people (9:1–8, 14–17),45 and (2) an address to Zion (placed strategically between verses 8 and 14, in the transition between God’s return to the sanctuary and his salvation of the people) that celebrates the arrival of the king and the return of the exiles from Judah and Ephraim, who will become God’s weapons (9:9–13).
The second pericope (10:3b–12) shows affinity with the qualities of chapter 9 on a stylistic level it has the cadence of the first level of chapter 9 (switching between first and third person), while on a thematic level it is connected to the second level of chapter 9 (with reference to Judah, Ephraim, restoration). There are several key themes. (1) Restoration is inaugurated by God, who breaks into Israel’s history to instigate and complete redemption (9:1–8, 14–17; 10:3b, 6, 8–10, 12). (2) Restoration is envisioned for both Judah and Ephraim as they are rescued from foreign bondage, although Judah has the leading role to play (9:11–13, 16–17; 10:6–11). (3) The people are described as God’s flock, a term emphasizing God’s personal and caring leadership with the people (9:16; 10:3b).
These two sections in chapters 9–10 contrast the two pieces found in chapters 12–14. Each of these units (12:2–13:6; 14:1–21) is introduced by the Hebrew interjection hinneh (12:2; 14:1)46 and contains the recurring rhetorical phrase “on that day” (12:3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11; 13:1, 4; 14:4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 20, 21). Rather than Judah-Ephraim, chapters 12–14 focus on a different pair: Judah-Jerusalem, with no mention of Ephraim. Whereas chapters 9–10 depict God’s return to his sanctuary-city and subsequent rescue of his people from the nations, chapters 12–14 picture the attack of Jerusalem by all the nations of the earth, a battle in which God intervenes on Jerusalem’s behalf, defeats the nations, and makes Jerusalem a sanctified space (cleansed, holy).47 Chapters 12–14 also share similar lexical stock (12:2b/14:14a; 12:2, 6/14:14b; 12:6/14:10; 12:9/14:16; 12:12–14/14:17–18).48
Although each of these four major pericopes in chapters 9–14 has its unique internal logic and message, our study so far has highlighted clear affinities within 9–10 and 12–14. But to this point we have not discussed one other elongated prophetic portion here: 11:4–16.
Zechariah 11:4–16 clearly stands out from the other four sections already described with its unique genre form of sign-act allegory. The shepherd motif is prominent in this section as it describes the community’s rejection of God’s shepherd and the subsequent appointment of a bad shepherd. There is great focus on the breaking of two staffs. The precise meaning of the names of these staffs is a matter of great debate (see commentary), but the significance of these staffs is clear. The breaking of the first staff signifies the “revoking the covenant I had made with all the nations” (11:10). The breaking of the second staff signifies “breaking the brotherhood between Judah and Israel” (11:14). These two actions of breaking correspond to two key discontinuities between the oracles in chapters 9–10 and 12–14, especially seen in the focus on God’s destruction of “all the nations” and the absence of reference to Israel in chapters 12–14.
The key role that the shepherd allegory plays in transitioning the reader from chapters 9–11 to 12–14 explains four other short units that have not been accounted for to this point: 10:1–3a, 11:1–3, 17; 13:7–9. Each of these stands out from the surrounding text by using imperatival/attention vocabulary, a negative tone, and the shepherd motif. In this they show close affinity with the shepherd allegory of 11:4–16 and appear to be part of the redactional structure. These shorter shepherd units all describe the poor leadership that replaced the rejected Davidic leadership of 11:4–16. There is a progression between the various pieces: from the Lord’s anger (10:1–3a), to the prophecy of destruction (11:1–3), to a curse (11:17), to the execution of judgment (13:7–9).
This analysis reveals three major levels to chapters 9–14: two oracles on return from captivity historically focused (9:1–17; 10:3b–12), two oracles on God’s defeat of the nations eschatologically focused (12:1–13:6; 14:1–21), and shepherd motif pieces denoting the discipline of the leadership in Israel distributed throughout the text (10:1–3a, 11:1–3, 4–16, 17; 13:7–9).
Our work so far has sought to note the various components of this fascinating section of Zechariah, but we must ask finally the question of the meaning of that final form. The message of Zechariah 9–14 is one of expectation and reality. The prophet highlights the great work of God in the redemptive-historical events surrounding the restoration of his people in the Persian period. Although many exiles have already returned, more from both Judah and Israel will return to a land ruled by God and his king. God will use Judah to rescue Israel from their exile.
But this is not the reality of the Persian period community. Although exiles return, this does not happen en masse, nor does it include exiles from Israel (the northern kingdom). This incongruity leads to a further word from God that explains the lack of fulfillment. This lack is traced to a problem connected with leadership within the community. Having rejected God’s appointed Davidic leader (Zerubbabel), the community is given over to uncaring and oppressive leaders in Yehud and in the nations. God attacks such leadership, linking them to the patterns of preexilic Judah that were judged by God (10:1–3a; 11:1–3).
The community’s rejection of God’s leadership has serious implications for the future, annulling both God’s agreement with the nations to care for his people and jeopardizing hope of the reunion of Israel and Judah. The vision in 12:1–13:6 shows God rescuing his people from the threat of the nations, but then turns the focus internally to deal with the sin of the leadership within the province. The vision in chapter 14 again shows God’s rescue of Jerusalem, but this time the vision is externally oriented as the defeat of the nations leads to the attraction of the defeated nations to Jerusalem in worship (Feast of Tabernacles).
Zechariah 9–14 thus reveals a community in tension. It does not, however, abandon Jerusalem and its Davidic house as the focus of hope, although it ignores the priestly leadership at the temple. It reflects the final phase of the trajectory established in chapters 1–8. In chapters 7–8 we see the prophet attack the leadership and the people highlight a replication of preexilic patterns, even though the prophet has great hope for the future centered around Jerusalem, which will be a holy city as well as a place that attracts the nations.49
One can sense a growing concern in Zechariah 1–14 over the issue of leadership: from the absence of concern or focus in 1:1–6, to an affirmation with clear delimitation of priestly prerogatives in 1:7–6:15, to the beginning of criticism in 7:1–8:23, to a serious critique in chapters 9–14. There is also a growth in the Zecharian tradition in eschatological orientation: from the prophetic-historical message of 1:1–6 focused on immediate repentance; to the visions and oracles of immediate future return, restoration, and renewal in 1:7–6:15; to the distant future restoration ideals internally and externally in Zech. 7:1–8:23; to the eschatological focus of chapters 9–14. Finally, while 1:1–6 says nothing of oppression of the poor in the community, one of the visions in 1:7–6:15 (5:1–4) alludes to manipulation of the legal system and then 7:1–8:23 focuses attention on such oppression as evidence of a lack of true penitence. This appears to come to a climax in the shepherd allegory at the center of chapters 9–14, which speaks much of the helpless in the flock.
Although it is difficult to ascertain the authorship and date of Zechariah 9–14, it has a legitimate place in this book. It represents the enduring legacy of the prophet Zechariah, some sections possibly arising from the prophet himself and others perhaps through a community that preserved and echoed his message after his death. This message of repentance ultimately distanced this prophet from the temple he supported in the earlier phases of his ministry. The absence of any reference to the completion of this temple in Zechariah is not surprising in light of Zechariah’s insistence that spiritual renewal must accompany physical rebuilding.
GOD. THE KEY role of the prophet in ancient Israel was to orient the people theologically (cf. Isa. 30:10–11). First and foremost the prophets offered their generation a vision of God. What vision of God, then, do the books of Haggai and Zechariah offer to their readers?
The God of Haggai and Zechariah is clearly the God of grace and mercy. He is a God who loves his people and proclaims his passion to save them from the nations and renew their lives in the Promised Land. He offers them words of mercy and comfort (Zech. 1:13, 16), encouraging them to “be strong” and “not fear” (Hag. 2:4–5). He declares his intention to have compassion on them (Zech. 10:6). Consistently, the prophets depict God at work for his people: restoring their people and land (1:7–17), breaking the power of the nations (1:18–21; 6:1–8), protecting them from external threats (2:1–5), delivering them from the nations (2:6–13), defending them from accusations and cleansing them from the stain of sin (ch. 3), enabling them through his Spirit to accomplish their work (ch. 4), and promising them a glorious future as a remnant saved from the nations (8:1–13).
God’s mercy is closely linked with his electing choice of his people; that is, it is an act of his sovereign will (Zech. 1:17; 2:12; 3:2). But God does not restrict his salvific actions to his chosen people. He displays his deep interest in the nations, for whom there is a place in his kingdom (2:11; 8:13, 20–23; 9:7; 14:16–19).
These portraits of God’s mercy, however, do not contradict another aspect of the prophetic revelation of God in these books, namely, that he is a God of discipline and justice. God disciplines his people who do not follow his priorities (Hag. 1:9–11; 2:14–19). His anger is displayed in his past discipline of the preexilic generation, which ignored the prophetic witness (Zech. 1:1–6, 12; 7:7–14; 8:11). God takes sin seriously and will bring severe discipline on those who do not share his attitude (ch. 5). As with his mercy, so with his justice, God’s anger is also directed against the nations (1:15), whom he promises to judge (1:18–21; 6:1–8; chs. 9–14).
God’s ability to enact both mercy and justice is linked throughout these books to his status as Creator of the universe and Lord of history. The opening and closing visions in Zechariah 1–6 show that he is in control of the universe, is aware of its status, and is able to act with sovereign power (chs. 9–14). His ability to shake the cosmos and manipulate history enables him to bring salvation (Hag. 2:6–9, 20–23; Zech. 12:1). He uses his creation not only to bless his people (Hag. 2:19; Zech. 1:17; 3:10; 8:12) but also to bring discipline (Hag. 1:1–11; 2:10–19).
God is also presented as a God of relationship and presence. He is a God who presences himself with his people, consistently declaring, “I am with you” (Hag. 1:13; 2:4–5; Zech. 2:5, 10–13; 4:6; cf. 8:23; 10:5). This presencing of God with his people is closely related to his passion for covenant intimacy, as expressed in Zechariah 8:8, “They will be my people, and I will be faithful and righteous to them as their God,” and in 13:9, “I will say, ‘They are my people,’ and they will say, ‘The LORD is our God.’ ”
Community. This vision of God provides a foundation for a second key theological witness of these prophets: their vision of the community of God. Haggai and Zechariah speak to a community living in and emerging out of the darkness of the exilic experience. During this period the community clung to God’s promises declared in the Law and the Prophets, namely, that after a period of exile God would deliver his disciplined people.
For Haggai and Zechariah the restoration was multidimensional. Fundamentally, it involved the return of God’s presence (Hag. 1:13; 2:4–5; Zech. 1:16–17; 2:1–5, 10–13; 8:23; 9:8) to a rebuilt temple (Hag. 1:8; Zech. 1:16; 2:1–5; 6:9–15) in the chosen city of Jerusalem (Zech. 1:14–17; 2:12; 3:2; 8:3). Accompanying this presence would be blessing, often expressed in terms of material bounty from the land (Hag. 1:1–11; 2:6–9, 15–19; Zech. 2:1–5; 3:10; 8:4–5, 9–13; 9:17; 10:1), and protection, often expressed in terms of military conquest of the world (Hag. 2:22; Zech. 1:15, 18–21; 2:7–9; 9:1–8, 13–16; 10:3–7; 12:2–9; 14:1–15).
The reinstatement of the Davidic line is linked to this vision of restoration (Hag. 2:20–23; Zech. 3:8–9; 6:9–15; 9:9–10; 12:10, 12), but so also is the return of the community to the land (Zech. 2:4, 6, 7; 8:3, 7–8; 9:11–13, 16–17; 10:6–12). This remnant will experience a renewal of covenant relationship with God (Hag. 2:5; Zech. 8:8; 13:9) and purification by God’s grace (Hag. 2:10–14; Zech. 3:1–5, 9; 13:1; 14:20–21) as they celebrate with joy (Zech. 8:18–19). The restoration will have a clear global dimension as the nations are not only conquered (Hag. 2:22; Zech. 1:15, 18–21; 2:7–9; 9:1–8, 13–16; 10:3–7, 11; 12:2–9; 14:1–15) but also integrated into the covenant community (Zech. 2:11; 8:20–23; 9:7, 10; 14:16–21).
In both prophets this vision of restoration is clearly linked to the sovereign actions of the God of promise, yet each prophet calls for human response. Haggai’s focus is clearly on the need for physically rebuilding the temple complex as the realization of the promised restoration. Whether provoking them to begin the project (Hag. 1), encouraging them to persevere (2:1–9), or celebrating their accomplishments (2:10–23), Haggai intertwines restoration and the temple reconstruction. He identifies the rebuilding project as the key initial step that will transform the past of curse to the future of blessing flowing from God’s renewed presence. By assuming this responsibility, the people are clearly turning to God (2:17).
Zechariah builds on Haggai’s message by calling for the community to renew its covenant relationship with God (Zech. 1:3).50 This renewal will mean loving one’s neighbor as oneself, exemplified in just relationships (5:1–4; 7:8–10; 8:16–17, 19), and loving the Lord God with all one’s heart, soul, and mind, exemplified in pure worship (5:5–11). This need for penitence is an issue for both the community as a whole (11:4–16) and for its leadership (7:5; 10:1–3; 11:1–17; 12:10–13:6; 13:7–9).
These two prophets complement each other. Both announce an imminent restoration inaugurated by the return of God dependent on repentance of the people. For Haggai repentance means rebuilding the temple, for Zechariah purity in covenant relationships. While Haggai’s message is summarized in his words, “Build the house, so that I may take pleasure in it and be honored” (Hag. 1:8), Zechariah’s message is encapsulated in his cry, “Return to me . . . and I will return to you” (Zech. 1:3). For both the ultimate goal is the return of the presence and blessing of God to his people in order to transform the cosmos.
Bridging Contexts
OUR CONSIDERATION OF the original context of Haggai and Zechariah has exposed the deep roots these books have in the history of an ancient community, a feature these books share with all biblical books. On the one hand this feature is to be celebrated, for it reminds us of the relevance of revelation. This is something highlighted by the writer of Hebrews, who addresses the issue of ancient prophecy: “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways” (Heb. 1:1). This statement affirms that God used the prophets to communicate his will to his people. It also reminds us that this happened “at many times” and “in various ways”; that is, such revelation was delivered in relevant ways to people in their own cultural and historical contexts. It is this feature, however, that often intimidates present-day interpreters who desire to connect these ancient texts to contemporary contexts.
In light of this, this section of our introduction addresses key issues of interpretation that will lay a foundation for the commentary that follows. In particular it focuses on familiarizing the reader with hermeneutical strategies related to literature and theology that are essential in order to understand these ancient works and interpret them in light of redemptive history.
A. The Character of Prophetic Literature and Its Use in the New Testament
A FEW YEARS AGO one of my former professors turned on the television and came across a news report of recent events in the Middle East. With the help of maps the news anchor was describing the movements of troops with detailed precision. It soon became clear that a coalition of Arab nations was poised to strike at Israel. As the camera moved back and brought the news anchor into view, my professor recognized him as a Christian leader well known for his interpretation of biblical prophecy. Rather than describing events that had already happened, this man was projecting a possible future for the troubled region, based on evidence drawn from ancient prophecies in the Bible and recent events in the Middle East.
For many this approach to Old Testament prophetic material is not exceptional. Most Christians approach the prophets as sages whose primary activity was peering through a spiritual keyhole into the dimly lit room of the future. This approach is based on the words of passages like 1 Peter 1:10–12, in which the prophets are depicted as those who searched for more light on the future messianic figure. Such a search is confirmed by the many references in the New Testament to the fulfillment of prophetic expectation in Christ and the early church.
Although this aspect of prophetic ministry must be celebrated, a perusal of the prophetic books as well as the New Testament provides a fuller picture. The prophets do, it is true, speak of future events, the “foretelling” aspect of prophetic ministry, but the majority of their prophecies were focused on the values and actions of their contemporaries, the “forthtelling” aspect of prophetic ministry. Even when they spoke of future events, in nearly every case they did so with an eye on the present generation. The prophets were also concerned with the past. They often recited the story of Israel (both its positive and negative elements) in order to challenge the present generation to obedience (see Jer. 2; Ezek. 16, 18, 20; Hos. 11).
New Testament use of the ancient prophets reveals sensitivity to both the foretelling and the forthtelling aspects of prophetic ministry.51 Although New Testament speakers and writers often show how Christ and the church fulfilled the expectations of ancient Hebrew prophecy (e.g., Matt. 1:23; Isa. 7:14; Matt. 2:6; Mic. 5:2; Matt. 2:18; Jer. 31:15), they regularly draw on these ancient books as the foundation of their exhortations to the Christian community.
Not only did Christ say that he did not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets, forbidding breaking their commands (Matt. 5:17–20), but he also claimed that his commands were simply a summary of the prophet’s moral teaching (7:12; 22:40). The early church used prophetic calls to repentance (Acts 13:40; Hab. 1:5) and to faith (Rom. 1:17; Hab. 2:4; Rom. 10:11; Isa. 28:16; Rom. 10:13; Joel 2:32; 2 Cor. 6:2; Isa. 49:8; Heb. 10:37–38; Hab. 2:3–4) as invitations to experience God’s forgiveness in Christ.
New Testament theology is founded on prophetic material, laying the foundation for reflection on sin (Rom. 3:15–17; Isa. 59:7–8), sovereignty (Rom. 9:19–21; Isa. 29:16; 45:9; Rom. 9:13; Mal. 1:2–3), omniscience (Rom. 11:34; 1 Cor. 2:16; Isa. 40:13), divine wisdom (1 Cor. 1:19; Isa. 29:14), grace (1 Cor. 2:9; Isa. 64:4), resurrection (1 Cor. 15:54–55; Isa. 25:8; Hos. 13:14), and revelation (1 Peter 1:23–25; Isa. 40:6–8). The New Testament calls the people to a life of faithfulness by citing the prophets (2 Cor. 6:17; Isa. 52:11; Ezek. 20:34, 41; 1 Cor. 1:29–30; Jer. 9:24) while also encouraging hope and confidence in faith (1 Peter 3:13–16; Isa. 8:12).
This evidence of the New Testament’s use of the Hebrew prophets is reflected in Paul’s description of the Old Testament to Timothy as “able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 3:15) as well as “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (3:16). The first aspect highlights the role of prophecy to illuminate the great redemptive story both past and future, which culminates in the advent of Christ. The second aspect, which must be rooted in the first aspect, encourages the use of the Old Testament to shape faithful living in the present age.
This evidence highlights the passion of the prophets to speak to the present and future and reveals the interpretive sensitivity of the New Testament to these two aspects of prophetic ministry. This stresses the “how,” that is, how the New Testament uses these ancient texts within the Christian community. But we must search for the “why”; that is, why did the New Testament use these texts in this way? What biblical-theological rationale did the early Christian community use that enabled them to access the prophets (and the Old Testament in general) as texts relevant to the church? In doing so we will discover that the “foretelling” aspects of ancient prophecy actually enhance the “forthtelling” aspects.
B. The Biblical-Theological Relationship Between the Prophets and the Church
RETURNING TO MY former professor’s “news report” introduced above, the Christian leader he encountered used ancient prophecies to predict military events in the contemporary Middle East. This kind of connection between ancient and modern contexts is not exceptional. Many Christians assume that the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 is confirmation of their approach to Old and New Testament prophecies. For these interpreters the Bible anticipates a future age in which God will establish a Jewish kingdom in Jerusalem. The nations of the earth, incited by wicked leadership, will arise against this kingdom in rebellion against God and march to Jerusalem for a fight to the finish. God will defeat these forces, judge the wicked, and establish a new heaven and earth.
Other Christians, however, have argued strongly against this strain of interpretation. In their view Israel in the Bible is not first of all an ethnic entity but a spiritual one. Jesus fulfilled the role of Israel and established a new Israel, the church. He prophesied the destruction of the temple as God’s judgment on unbelieving Israel and offered himself as the new temple through whom humanity has access to God. The destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in A.D. 70 not only vindicated Jesus but also signaled the assumption of the promises of Israel by the church.
This brief introduction to these two approaches to Israel exposes major hermeneutical conflict in the church’s interpretation of the Old Testament in general and prophecy in particular. Obviously the resolution of this conflict will have enormous implications on how one appropriates the message of Haggai and Zechariah for the church today.
Israel in redemptive history. In order to clarify the biblical-theological relationship between Israel and the church, we must move back in redemptive history to a key event that defines Israel as a nation, the call of Abraham in Genesis 12. Genesis 1–11 relates the creation of the world, the fall of humanity, and the subsequent struggle between righteousness and sin. Through the Flood God “recreates” the earth in order to establish a covenant with humanity represented now in Noah.52 The subsequent chapters reveal the enduring (Tower of Babel) and universal (Table of Nations) character of sin.
With this larger stage of creation and culture in view, Genesis follows one particular line from Noah’s family: the descendants of Shem (Gen. 11:10–32). To this line God gives a special promise: “I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you” (12:2b–3). This promise highlights the impact that Abraham will have on “all peoples on earth.” At the foundation of Israel’s faith, therefore, is the assertion that they have been called into existence to bring blessing to the entire world. Genesis then provides several stories that foreshadow the redemptive fulfillment of this family’s role of universal blessing—such as Abram’s rescue of Lot (ch. 14), his intercession for Sodom (ch. 18), and Joseph’s rise to power in Egypt at a time of universal crisis (chs. 37–50).
The Old Testament relates the story of God’s rescuing Israel from Egypt (Exodus), establishing a covenant with them as a nation (Exodus–Numbers), sustaining them through the desert (Exodus–Deuteronomy), giving them a land (Joshua), and establishing a united kingdom under Davidic kingship (Samuel–Kings). The purpose of these great acts of salvation, however, remains global: the blessing of the nations. Israel was called out from the nations of the earth to serve as a “kingdom of priests” (Ex. 19:4–6), that is, a nation with a priestly duty for the world. Their obedience was designed to make an impact on the nations of the world (Deut. 4:6–8).
God promised to extend his rule over the nations through the Davidic kingdom (Ps. 2) and through this rule to bring God’s blessing to the nations (72:15). Even the prophets, who knew well the faults of their nation, never lost sight of God’s global purposes, consistently holding out the hope of the restoration of Israel, the universal rule of Yahweh, and the blessing of the nations (Jer. 4:2; Zech. 8:13; cf. Isa. 19:24–25).
Jesus. The New Testament clearly situates Jesus within this larger Old Testament story. He fulfills the promises given to Abraham (see Gal. 3:16; cf. Gen. 12:7; 13:15; 24:7) and David (see Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; cf. 2 Sam. 7:12–16; Ps. 2). He assumes the role of Israel and David as the source of blessing to the entire earth (Acts 3:25; Gal. 3:8).
In other words, the New Testament writers were convinced that Jesus Christ was not some mysterious figure suddenly dropped from the blue, with no connection to the almost two thousand years of God’s activity in history that had preceded him. Rather, Jesus Christ was the completion and fulfillment and final reinterpretation of that lively history, and so he can only be fully understood in terms of it.53
Recent research on Jesus has bolstered this connection between him and the Old Testament story. His message focused on the restoration of Israel as a nation, the fulfillment of the hopes of the Old Testament.54 By gathering around himself a group of “twelve,” Jesus was suggesting the establishment of a new Israel (Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:14–16). By linking the death-resurrection of his body with the destruction-restoration of the temple, Jesus was signaling the appearance of a new temple (Matt. 26:61; 27:40; Mark 14:58; 15:29; John 2:18–22). Near the end of his ministry, as his message was rejected by the Jewish leadership, he pronounced judgment on Israel and its key institution, the temple (Matt. 24; Mark 13; Luke 21; cf. Luke 19:39–44). This prophetic message was fulfilled in A.D. 70 as the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, confirming the creation of a new Israel through Jesus’ followers. Jesus came to restore Israel, but in ways not always consistent with the expectations of his generation.55
Church. This message informs the message and mission of the early church. Acts begins with a key conversation between Christ and his disciples in which they ask him whether the kingdom will be restored to Israel (Acts 1:6). Although he replies that the Father alone knows the precise answer (1:7), he suggests the first step toward the establishment of God’s universal kingdom: “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (1:8).
Acts 1:12–26 then relates the story of the apostolic replacement for Judas. The significance of this story lies in the symbolism of an apostolic foundation of twelve Jewish men. As with Jesus, the appointment of the Twelve can only be linked to the twelve tribes of Israel.
Acts 1 sets the scene for the story of the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. In his sermon Peter, standing “up with the Eleven” (emphasizing the symbolism of new Israel), announces that the coming of the Holy Spirit is the fulfillment of the ancient prophecy of Joel (Joel 2:28–32). By citing this ancient prophecy, Peter reveals that the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost and the calling on God by this remnant returned from the nations to Jerusalem is the fulfillment of the prophetic hope for the restoration of Israel. The “three thousand” who repented, were baptized (Acts 2:38–41), and entered into this community (2:42–47) were the new Israel. This community will move out from Jerusalem and spread the kingdom to the ends of the earth.
This understanding of the church as the new Israel is echoed throughout the New Testament. In Galatians 6:16 the church is identified as the “Israel of God,” in Philippians 3:3 as the “[true] circumcision.” Gentiles who enter the church enter the commonwealth of Israel (Eph. 2:12). In describing the bride of the Lamb as the new Jerusalem, Revelation 21:12 reveals that the names of the twelve tribes of Israel are written on her gates. First Peter 2:9–10 takes titles formerly used of Israel in the Old Testament and applies them to the church community (cf. Ex. 19:6; Hos. 2:16–23). Likewise Hebrews 8:8–12 reveals that the Israelite new covenant promise (Jer. 31:31–34) has now been established through Jesus for the church.
The church is thus identified as the promised restoration community of Israel. In and through Christ and founded on the new Twelve, this community extends to Gentiles as well, drawing them in as legitimate members to the new Israel (Eph. 2:11–22; 3:6; cf. Rom. 10:12; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11) and finally fulfilling that ancient promise to Abraham in Genesis 12 (Gal. 3:14). But although the church is identified as the community restored through Christ’s work, there are indications that the exile is an ongoing reality for God’s people and that the motif is used for the experience of the church as they await Christ’s return.56
Thus, the church is described as Israel “scattered” (James 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1; cf. Deut. 30:4; Neh. 1:9; Ps. 147:2; Isa. 49:6), as “strangers” and “aliens” in this world (1 Peter 1:1; 2:11; cf. Ezra 8:35; Ps. 119:5; Ezek. 20:38; Heb. 11:13). We are encouraged, then, to “stand firm” (Phil. 4:1) because “our citizenship is in heaven,” from which “we eagerly await a Savior,” that is, the “Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3:20).57 The apostle Peter declares that Christ’s return will be the time when God will “restore everything” (Acts 3:21). When the disciples, prior to his ascension, ask Jesus when he is going to “restore the kingdom to Israel,” he discourages them from speculating on the precise time and encourages them to preach the gospel to all nations, implying that restoration is still future and is connected with the spread of the gospel (1:6–8).
This “already-not yet” aspect of the exile-restoration theological complex is a regular feature of New Testament theology. Christ has come and is coming, Christians are sanctified and being sanctified, this world is redeemed and being redeemed. Rather than disappointing us as members of this new covenant community, this aspect is a comfort and encouragement to live faithfully in this world as we await the consummation of all things. It also brings alive Old Testament texts that depict God’s people awaiting his deliverance, something not lost on the writer of Hebrews 11 (esp. 11:8–10, 13–16).
Jews. If the church is identified as the new Israel, restored and being restored, what then of the Jews as an enduring ethnic and religious community? There are some who find no space in New Testament theology for a future for Israel as a special nation or community, now that the church has fulfilled Israel’s role in redemptive history.58 The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 was God’s judgment against a disobedient community, bringing an end to the national hopes of Israel. The remnant of Israel has been preserved in the apostolic community of the church. Others, however, propose a biblical theology with parallel redemptive tracks for Israel and the church.59 These theologians distinguish between the present dispensation of the church with its mission to the Gentiles and God’s plan for Israel, which will reach fulfillment in a future millennial kingdom. For many of these, the reestablishment of Israel as a nation in 1948 presages this coming Jewish kingdom.
Both of these views, however, are extremes that fail to do justice to the New Testament witness.60 On the one hand, any attempt to create parallel redemptive tracks for Israel and the Church fails to recognize the unique and climactic work of Christ on the cross. This sacrifice was for Jew and Gentile alike, and any suggestion of a return to temple sacrifice does not take seriously the New Testament message of the atonement. On the other hand, the New Testament witness reserves special attention for the Jewish community through whom God’s revelation and redemption has come to humanity. Key to understanding this is the argument of Romans 9–11.
After reviewing the foundations of Christian theology in Romans 1–8 and before laying out the implications of this theology for our life in this world (chs. 12–16), Paul grapples with the issue of Israel’s rejection of Christ. Clearly he refers here to the physical descendants of Abraham, that is, ethnic Israel (9:2–5). Paul struggles with the implications of Israel’s rejection for one’s view of God: If Israel has rejected God’s Messiah, has God’s Word failed (9:6)? Paul provides a perspective on the future of the Jewish community within redemptive history.
(1) He asserts that physical descent does not constitute membership in Israel; rather, only those to whom God has extended mercy are included in Israel (Rom. 9:6–18).61 (2) He argues that God’s desire is to include the Gentiles in his covenant people, an inclusion made possible through the hardening of Israel’s heart (9:19–33). (3) He reminds his readers that God has offered the message of Jesus to the Israelites, some of whom accepted it while others rejected it (ch. 10). The message has now gone out to the nations to evoke jealousy in Israel (10:19–20). (4) He declares that God has not rejected his people but has saved a remnant, of which Paul is representative (11:1–10). (5) Paul sees the expansion of the gospel among the Gentiles as a means to make Israel envious (11:11–32).
Two points are clear in these chapters. (1) Paul does not construct parallel redemptive tracks for Israel and the church. It is one olive tree, from which branches are cut out (Jews) and into which branches are grafted (Gentiles). That olive tree is the community of God established through the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. (2) For Paul, Israel (even “all Israel,” 11:26) is not a matter of ethnicity alone but also of the heart (9:6).
Therefore, Romans 9–11 argues that there is a future for the Jewish community, but not apart from Jesus and his gospel. While the gospel of the kingdom extended out from Israel to the nations through the community of the Twelve, the apostle Paul envisions an interesting twist in redemptive history: God has now hardened Israel as the nations are saved and will use these redeemed nations to bring salvation to the Jews. True Israel will assume its place within Christ’s redeemed community. Through Israel the blessing of God extended to the nations and to Israel is the same blessing as all enter into the bride of Christ.62
C. Haggai-Zechariah and the New Testament
THIS PERSPECTIVE ON ISRAEL and the church helps us see how the original message of Haggai and Zechariah was taken up in the New Testament witness.
1. Haggai and Zechariah 1–8. The prophet Haggai calls his generation to pursue the priority of temple reconstruction. Although this message was focused on the present generation and their responsibility, an eschatological tone is evident in Haggai 2:1–9 and 2:20–23. For him present obedience is intricately linked with the inauguration of the new age in which Yahweh will rule the world through his Davidic vice-regent. The participation of both Zerubbabel (a descendant of David) and Joshua (the priestly line commissioned by David) in this rebuilding project is important to this eschatological vision. Zechariah continues this trend of linking the rebuilding of the temple and city with the inauguration of the new age and the restoration of the Davidic line. For him the key figure is Zerubbabel, with Joshua playing a supporting role (cf. Zech. 4:6b–10a; 6:9–15).
This emphasis within Haggai and Zechariah 1–8 lays the foundation for New Testament messianic claims for Jesus. The genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, although tracing different lines after King David, intersect prior to Christ in the person of Zerubbabel (Matt. 1:12–13; Luke 3:27). The early church saw Jesus not only as arising from Zerubbabel but ultimately fulfilling the hopes attached to him. The language of Matthew 27:28–29 and John 19:5, both of which describe the crowning of Jesus (with thorns), appears to be influenced by the description of the crowning of ṣemaḥ (“the Branch”) in Zechariah 6:11.63
This connection is bolstered by the fact that the Gospel writer includes Pilate’s declaration “Behold the man,” an allusion to the declaration of Zechariah in 6:12. As the ultimate ṣemaḥ/Zerubbabel Jesus has the proper authority not only to destroy his temple but also to rebuild it, even if this does not match the expectations of his generation. As N. T. Wright has argued, “Jesus is to be the reality towards which the figure of Zerubbabel was pointing. Judgment will be followed by a strange new rebuilding.”64
Both Haggai and Zechariah 1–8 speak of the return of God as the key sign of this eschatological age. This, however, is not fulfilled in their generation, and throughout the coming era many within the Jewish community will continue to long for this return.65 According to the early Christian witness this return has been realized in the coming of Jesus (Luke 1:68, 78; 7:16; 15:14; cf. Luke 19:44; 1 Peter 2:12).66
Christ’s discussion of fasting and feasting in the Gospels (Matt. 9:15–16/Mark 2:19–22/Luke 5:34–37) must be interpreted against the background of Zechariah’s promised transformation in 7:1–8:23. When Christ discourages fasting, he is insinuating that the restoration has now begun.67 So also Christ’s inclusion of the Gentiles in this feasting in Matthew 8:11–12 is based on Zechariah 1–8 (2:11; 8:8, 18–23), where not only are fasts turned into feasts but also Gentiles join Jews in the festal community of God.68 Furthermore, Christ’s expectation of the gathering of the elect from the four winds of heaven at the eschaton (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27) draws from the restoration vision of Zechariah 2:6; 6:1–8.69
The influence of Haggai and Zechariah 1–8 is also found in the New Testament outside the Gospel accounts in contexts that set the fulfillment of their vision of restoration into the eschatological future of the church.70 For instance, Hebrews 12:26 draws on Haggai 2:6 to describe God’s cataclysmic shaking of the cosmos in the renewal of all things. Revelation 21:3 appears to be drawing on Zechariah 2:4, when the new Jerusalem appears as a bride and God dwells with humanity in covenant relationship. This suggests that ultimate fulfillment of Zechariah’s vision of restoration is seen in the future.71
These various passages reveal the importance of Haggai and Zechariah to the eschatological vision of Jesus and the early church. For them the eschaton is already breaking in through Christ’s earthly ministry, even as there is expectation of much more to come (compare Hag. 2:6 with Heb. 12:26).
Zechariah 9–14. Zechariah 9–14 develops a future expectation for Israel in two successive waves. In the first wave (chs. 9–10) one finds a message of expectation in which God returns in triumph, introduces his king, and saves his people from exile, uniting all twelve tribes. In the second wave, God cleanses this community and defeats the nations, establishing his rule on earth. Jerusalem appears at the center of these expectations as the seat of God’s rule, the destination of the restoration community, the site of the battle against the nations, and the home of God’s holy community.
This expectation, however, is declared to a community in turmoil. The prophetic voices of Zechariah 9–14 speak against a leadership in Jerusalem that cares little for God’s people and in some way is associated with idolatry/divination (10:1–3; 11:1–17; 13:1–9). It is uncertain as to who this leadership is. Most likely no one from Davidic lineage is in view; rather, Zadokite priests seem to be in liaison with Persian officials because of the following evidence:
1. There is a positive role to be played by the Davidic house (12:1–13:6), through the line of Nathan.
2. The Davidic house is linked to a priestly family, but it is the Levitical line through Shimei, so that the Zadokite priestly line, presently ruling in Jerusalem, is left out.
3. Although there is a positive view of Jerusalem, problems are apparent in the city at the moment, related to ritual issues (priestly) as well as some form of idolatry/divination. It is difficult to imagine that Zadokite priests would be involved in idolatry/divination, so it is most likely that this is related to a Persian-endorsed governor after the Davidic line, who may have used Persian methods and religion and thus brought ritual impurity to the city.
4. The shepherds are seen as intimately linked to “owners,” who are the nations (Persians). Perhaps the shepherds are to be equated with the priests, and the owners with the Persians and their officials. Alternatively, perhaps the shepherds represent the Persian governors, and the owners represent the emperor. It is impossible to be certain about this.
Thus, Zechariah 9–14 envisions a great work of God that will be accomplished for, among, and through his people and have a global impact. This will be accomplished by God’s intervention in their history, his cleansing and provision of leadership (royal and priestly), and his restoration of a holy community.
It is not surprising, then, that the New Testament alludes explicitly and implicitly to Zechariah 9–14 in its portrayal of Jesus.72
• His entry into Jerusalem is patterned after 9:9 (Matt. 21:5; Mark 11:1–11; Luke 19; John 12:15).
• His promise of “living water” to those gathered for the Feast of Tabernacles declares the fulfillment in his ministry of Zechariah 14:8, 16–19 (John 7:38).73
• His cleansing of the temple with a refusal to allow people to carry or sell vessels in it is probably a play on Zechariah 14:20–21 (Matt. 21; Mark 11:16; Luke 19; John 2:16).
• His judgment of the temple, delivered on the Mount of Olives, speaks of a great battle of the nations against Jerusalem, and the flight of his disciples contains strong links to Zechariah 14 (esp. 14:1–3, 4–5, 9; cf. Mark 13; Matt. 27).74
• His arrest and death, followed by the fearful flight of his disciples, are linked to Zechariah 13:7 (Mark 14:27; John 16).
• His betrayal by Judas to the Jewish leadership is linked to Zechariah 11:13 (Matt. 26:14–16; 27:3–10).75
• The reference to his “little flock” is likely a play on the pastoral language of Zechariah 11:11; 13:7 (Luke 12:32); similarly, his depiction of Israel as a “sheep without a shepherd” alludes to Zechariah 10:2 (Matt. 9:36; Mark 6:34).76
• The piercing of Jesus’ side is linked to Zechariah 12:10 (John 19:37), as is the mourning of women at the crucifixion (Luke 23:27).
• The earthquake and appearance of holy ones alludes to Zechariah 14:3–5 (Matt. 27:51–53).
In the most detailed analysis of connections between Zechariah 9–14 and the Gospels, Mark Black concludes that these six chapters are “the most-quoted portion of the OT in the gospel accounts of the final days of Jesus . . . the number of events and details in the gospels which are integrally related to Zech. 9–14 is staggering.”77 The reason for this is linked by Black to the way in which Zechariah 9–14 envisions the future:
What the early church discovered after being led to Zech. 9–14 is a whole eschatological schema which involved the sending of the messiah; his subsequent rejection, suffering, and death; the repentance, cleansing, and restoration which would follow the death; and the resurrection of the saints which would follow in the messianic kingdom.78
The general correspondence is clear: (1) The events in Zechariah 9–14 and Christ’s Passion occur in the vicinity of Jerusalem; (2) the primary actors in both are indifferent Jewish leaders who oppose and reject God’s representative; (3) a representative of God is shepherd and king and by the will of God suffers and dies; and (4) nations who were formerly enemies of Israel are brought to worship God.79 The sequence of events is also similar. Even if Zechariah 9–14 was originally only a collection of oracles,80 there is a general correspondence between the Passion narratives and these chapters from Zechariah, as Black has shown: 81
Event | Zechariah | Gospels |
Messiah enters | 9:9–10 | Mark 11:1–11 & par. |
Covenant established | 9:11 | Mark 14:24 & par. |
Messiah rejected | 11:4–17 | Matt. 27:51–53; Mark 12:1–12 etc. |
Messiah betrayed | 11:12–13 | Mark 14:10–11; Matt. 27:3–10 |
Messiah deserted | 13:7 | Mark 14:26–31, 50, 66–72 & par. |
Death of Messiah | 12:10; 13:7 | Mark 15 & par.; John 19:28–37 |
Mourning of people | 12:11–14 | Luke 23:27; Mark 15:39–45 & par. |
Cleansing of people | 13:1, 8–9 | John 7:38; Mark 14:24 et al. |
Resurrection | 14:3–5 | Matt. 27:51–53; Mark 16 & par. |
Like Zechariah, Jesus stood against the leadership of his day and came to realize the eschatological hopes of Israel. Thus, Zechariah 9–14 is first and foremost “fulfilled” and enacted by Jesus through his earthly ministry. As C. H. Dodd has concluded:
The employment of these scriptures as testimonies to the kerygma indicates that the crisis out of which the Christian movement arose is regarded as the realization of the prophetic vision of judgment and redemption . . . the prophets seriously believed that what they spoke of (in however cryptic terms) would happen. The early Christians believed it had happened, or at least was in process of happening.82
Dodd’s final sentence reveals another aspect of the New Testament witness, namely, that the fulfillment of Zechariah 9–14 was viewed as past as well as future.83 These prophecies, therefore, were “declaring that which had happened, was happening and would happen, indistinguishably.”84
This “not yet” approach to Zechariah 9–14 can also be discerned in Revelation. Revelation 1:7 clearly alludes to Zechariah 12:10: “Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen.” This continues the belief that Christ indeed came to fulfill the expectations of Zechariah 9–14, but in doing so it pushes the realization of this fulfillment in the future and expands the fulfillment to include not only Israel but also the nations.85
A similar trend is also discernible in the complex of events described in Revelation 20–22, which Sweet calls “a creative reinterpretation of scripture in the light of the cross”:
Zechariah 14 takes up the same motifs, which are all echoed in Revelation 20–2: the nations gathered against Jerusalem (14:2); the fountain (14:8); removal of the curse (14:11); the survivors come up to keep the feast of Tabernacles, or ingathering (14:16); Jerusalem is all holy (14:20).86
These links reveal that Zechariah 9–14 was influential for early Christian interpretation of the first phase of Christ’s ministry (up to his resurrection), but also for the expected final phase (at the eschaton). As his ministry initiated a much larger complex of events, one must not confine the fulfillment of these chapters to this first phase of Christ’s ministry, but see how it is being fulfilled in and through the church in history and will reach its climax in the return of Christ.
D. Implications
IN THIS BRIDGING CONTEXTS section we have noted that prophecy in general originated as messages focused on both present and future; that is, it had both a forthtelling as well as a foretelling aspect. The “foretelling” aspects of these ancient prophecies connect the Christian community to these texts and invite the Christian interpreter to heed their “forthtelling” aspects. (1) Haggai and Zechariah point to Christ as the One through whom the ancient hopes were and will be fulfilled, inviting us to celebrate God’s redemptive actions and situate ourselves within this larger story. (2) In light of this connection, Haggai and Zechariah espouse essential values for the church as the new Israel, established and being established by Jesus.
These two aspects of prophetic literature are evident in the approach of the New Testament to the ancient prophecy. As an essential part of the Old Testament witness, writes Paul in his paradigmatic statement, the prophets are “able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 3:15) and are “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16).
In many circles the prophets are used merely as sign posts pointing to redemption in Christ. In others the prophets are moral agents who shape the ethical agenda of the church.87 Taking our lead from the character of the prophetic literature and from the New Testament interpretation, our interpretation must strike a balance between these two aspects.
I can remember well a course on preaching Christ from the Old Testament that I took with Edmund Clowney.88 Dr. Clowney repeatedly stressed the need to preach Old Testament texts with the great story of redemption in mind, to demonstrate how the Old Testament anticipates the gospel. When a student raised a concern over the relevance of such preaching for his church ministry, Dr. Clowney gently reminded us that there was nothing more relevant than witness to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, more practical than the transforming message of the gospel. In a pragmatic culture filled with how-to books, it is easy to miss the powerful witness of the Scriptures to God’s redemptive plan. The prophets make us “wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus,” and this salvation needs to be proclaimed and celebrated within the Christian community.
This, however, need not be separated from the ethical dimension of the prophetic message, as Paul makes clear in 2 Timothy 3:16–17. The prophets too are useful in rebuking, correcting, and training us in righteousness. Deeply rooted in the story of salvation we must proclaim the message of the prophets, which shape our view of God as well as our walk with him.
This orientation to the biblical-theological relationship between prophecy and the New Testament needs to shape our hermeneutical approach to Haggai and Zechariah. Understanding Haggai and Zechariah demands sensitivity to the various contexts of these passages. (1) It requires exegesis of the message of this corpus, determining the meaning of the various messages in their original contexts and the way these texts spoke to their original communities. (2) It requires sensitivity to the way in which this message was appropriated by Jesus and his community. (3) Based on this foundation, this ancient text continues to speak to the community of faith today, identifying Jesus and his followers as the focus of eschatological hope while shaping our vision of the present and future of the church.
Contemporary Significance
BY PLACING HAGGAI AND ZECHARIAH in their historical and literary as well as canonical and redemptive-historical contexts, this introduction has laid the foundation for wise and creative interpretation in our present context. As the remnant community longing for full restoration, the church today is comforted by the proclamation of the character and action of God in these prophets, while at the same time it is challenged by their exhortation to respond to this God through faith and obedience. Throughout the commentary we will discuss issues relevant to contemporary life, but some points of contact are provided below to show you the potential of this book to inform and transform Christian experience.
Passion and presence. These books grant us vivid glimpses of God. We discover that God is passionate for his people, reflected not only in his disciplinary actions of the Exile but also in his extension of grace in this new phase of redemptive history. This passionate God consistently expresses his desire to presence himself among his people, a desire that will be realized through the rebuilding of the temple and repentance of the people.
This immanent presence, however, should not be taken lightly, for God is still the transcendent God of the cosmos, who rules as king and will enact punishment on the rebellious. This message is relevant to a generation far more open to the spiritual dimension of human existence than in the past. It reminds us that “church” is ultimately about a relationship with a God who has passionately pursued us in grace. However, to this same generation these glimpses of God challenge present patterns of creating God in our own image.
Salvation and judgment. Haggai and Zechariah offer us a balanced view of God’s character. These prophets reveal a God who extends his grace in the present and future, but also who disciplines and judges the impenitent. These are not seen as contradictory but as reflections of the holy character of the Lord Almighty. The prophets announce a new era of grace and restoration, but this does not ignore human sinfulness. God’s desire is to purify a remnant for his name’s sake. These books, therefore, are books of comfort for God’s people today. However, at many points in the prophetic witness the message is a challenge to holiness and faithfulness.
Priorities and discipline. Both Haggai and Zechariah challenge the community of God to consider carefully their actions in light of his priorities. They teach the church today that God sometimes shouts to his people through the difficult circumstances of their lives, reminding them of his priorities. The way is not always easy, however, for those who follow these priorities, but God encourages those whose lives are consumed by his call that participation in kingdom work is essential to the ultimate fulfillment of his sovereign plans.
This message has great potential for shaping the agenda of the church today. It motivates God’s people to participate in kingdom work in whatever form that may take, whether in church, society, or family. These prophets have a significant message for those undergoing suffering in their lives. For some people and communities God’s message may be to rearrange behavior according to his priorities, while for others his message may be one of comfort, offering hope and encouragement to persevere in their calling.
Worship and word. These prophets have much to say about our practice of worship and treatment of God’s Word today within our communities of faith. Worship is relational activity; that is, it has as its goal the relational encounter between God and his people expressed through the phrase: “They will be my people, and I will be their God.” The message of these prophets is relevant to the church today living in a period of heightened spiritual sensitivity.
In such a world the church is called to discern carefully the spiritual patterns of a society that often creates religion in its own image rather than submitting before the personal covenant Creator of the universe. Consistently throughout these books the Word of God is placed at the center of community life—either the oral prophetic word proclaimed by Haggai and Zechariah or the written Word of ages past. These prophets call the community to bend their knees, open their ears, fix their eyes, and attune their hearts to this life-giving Word from the Lord Almighty.
Purity and justice. These prophets call their communities to a holiness that reflects that of the Lord God, who calls them to be holy as he is holy. Such purity, based on restored covenant relationship through divine grace, is encouraged in various areas of life, including the issues of priorities and worship (see above), but also in terms of our relationship with our fellow human beings. Among a community experiencing financial crises, Zechariah calls the community to avoid the unjust patterns of the past that caused the Exile and to display the covenant faithfulness and love that God outlined in the Law and the Prophets. It is this social injustice that is singled out in Zechariah 7–8 as the reason why the community went into exile and why their exilic hardship extends into the indefinite future. The church today cannot ignore this aspect of these books. Believers must be a catalyst for social justice as we proclaim the gospel in word and deed.
Nations and kingdom. These prophets clearly manifest a cosmic vision of God’s kingdom. They see that the ultimate destination of redemptive history is nothing less than God’s global dominion over the nations. At times this vision is negative as the prophets describe the subjugation of the power of rebellious and abusive nations. At other times this vision is positive as the prophets picture the nations’ entrance into the community of faith. These themes relate to us today as we seek to extend God’s kingdom to the ends of the earth. They remind us of God’s intentions for the nations—to rule, but also to save.
Messiah and kingdom. Both prophets anticipate the arrival of a royal figure through whom God will rule these nations (Hag. 2:20–23; Zech. 3:8–10; 6:9–15; 9:9–10; 12:10–14). Zerubbabel’s participation in leadership is a sign of God’s faithful design on the Davidic line, a line that will continue unabated through the next four centuries and ultimately produce Jesus the Christ, who will usher in God’s kingdom. However, the methods of his subjugation of the nations are surprising in light of some aspects of Haggai and Zechariah, for it is through suffering that Christ reveals the powerful arm of the Lord. According to the early church, this suffering is foreshadowed in Zechariah 9–14 (9:9–10; 11:4–17; 13:7–9).
Unity and leadership. Haggai and Zechariah both speak of the importance of unity and leadership to the accomplishment of God’s kingdom purposes. They envision a community in which king, priest, and prophet cooperate to bring God’s rule on earth. They see a future in which northern and southern tribes and urban and rural populations will live in unity once again. Key to this unity is leadership purified in their motives and practices, replicating the example of God as the ultimate Shepherd of the sheep. It was leadership that led the people astray in the preexilic generations, and God’s displeasure with any restoration of such leadership is evident throughout Zechariah (esp. chs. 9–14). God commits himself to lead his dear flock, but he accomplishes this through providing leaders for his community. These books, thus, challenge us as we lead and follow in his covenant community today.
This introduction has sought to shape a hermeneutical framework for our interpretation of these prophetic books. It makes clear that in this commentary we will strive for a balanced multidimensional reading of these books with attention to both the ancient historical and literary aspects, as well as the biblical-theological and contemporary potential of these books for the church today. That such is possible is witness to the grace of the revelatory God of Israel, who not only spoke in the past but continues to speak today to us by his Spirit through this Word.