THEN I LOOKED up—and there before me was a man with a measuring line in his hand! 2I asked, “Where are you going?”
He answered me, “To measure Jerusalem, to find out how wide and how long it is.”
3Then the angel who was speaking to me left, and another angel came to meet him 4and said to him: “Run, tell that young man, ‘Jerusalem will be a city without walls because of the great number of men and livestock in it. 5And I myself will be a wall of fire around it,’ declares the LORD, ‘and I will be its glory within.’ ”
Original Meaning
AS IN 1:18–21, this third vision begins with an introductory narrative sentence, distinguishing it from the previous revelation and yet continuing the visionary experience begun in 1:8. Both the second vision and this one unpack the promise of the initial vision to punish the nations (cf. 1:14–15 with 1:18–21) and restore the Lord’s city (cf. 1:16–17 with 2:1–5).
This encounter with an individual holding surveying equipment in his hand fits the historical context in which the prophet Zechariah was living. The people had returned to the land and were in the midst of a major building project as they restored the temple in Jerusalem (Ezra 2–6; Hag. 1–2) and rebuilt some of the homes in the city (Hag. 1). With these projects underway, the thought of reconstructing a protective wall around the city would be natural in order to preserve their renewed urban assets.
The visionary narrative comes to an end in verse 5. God speaks to the young man about the building of a city and a wall in 2:4–5. But in 2:6–13 the focus moves in a different direction; this does not appear to be part of a speech to the young man, but rather a sermon speaking to those in exile, providing hope on the basis of the prophetic vision. The speaker is no longer the angel but the prophet. Although related to 2:4–5, the oracle in 2:6–13 expands beyond this vision to reflect on the first three visions. Therefore, we will deal with the oracle in a separate section.
ZECHARIAH FIRST CATCHES SIGHT of a man with a measuring line in his hand. The Hebrew term ḥebel middah (“rope of measure”) refers to a surveyor’s line. It is a different term from the one found in either Zechariah 1:16 (qaw) or Ezekiel 40:3 (qaneh), but the same action is in mind. The objective is to define property and building lines.
Zechariah enters into the narrative by asking a question of the surveyor: “Where are you going?” The surveyor declares that he intends to measure the width and length of Jerusalem. The order of these words (“how wide and how long”) is unusual in the Old Testament and only appears here and in Ezekiel 40–48. There, as here, one finds measuring for the rebuilding of the temple and the city (cf. Ezek. 45:1–8; 48:15–22).1 This young man, therefore, appears to be proceeding to fulfill the exilic vision of Ezekiel. In the message that follows (Zech. 2:5), the reference to a “wall” implies that the measuring is in order to build a wall around Jerusalem.
There is some debate over the intention of the surveyor. Most interpreters have seen his intention in a negative way, that his measuring will limit the size of the city. Jerome, however, saw this act in a positive light, that his measuring was to show where God’s fiery presence would be. There are several indications that the former interpretation is correct. In Zech. 2:3–4 one angel encounters another and sends him on an urgent mission. This sense of urgency is communicated by the presence of the disjunctive phrase in 2:3 “but another angel” (NIV, “and another angel”), the use of the terms “run, tell” in 2:4, and the reference to the surveyor as “a young man,” a term that most likely indicates the authority of the speaker over the surveyor. The content of the message also bolsters the negative evaluation of the surveyor’s action. In it the angel argues against limiting the size of the city because of the great number of people and animals.
By now Zechariah knows well the “angel who was speaking to me,” an individual who has appeared in both visions so far and will be his constant companion throughout the night visions. The identity of the one called “another angel” is uncertain, although some have seen him as the angel of the Lord, which is a possibility because he appears to have authority over the “angel who was speaking to me.”
There is some confusion over the identity of the “young man” to whom the angel must speak in Zech. 2:4. Some have linked this individual to the man with the measuring line, while others link him to Zechariah himself.2 It seems clear from the content of the message that it is directed to the man with the measuring line, not the prophet.
The message for the surveyor implies that his action of measuring is inappropriate because “Jerusalem will be a city without walls.” The phrase “a city without walls” is a translation of the Hebrew word perazot, which occurs elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible only in Judges 5:7; Esther 9:19; Ezekiel 38:11. A similar word, drawn from the same Hebrew root, is used in 1 Samuel 6:18 to create a contrast between the fortified city and the unwalled village. To use this term for the former royal city of Jerusalem would be shocking. At the height of the monarchy in Israel, Jerusalem was not just any fortified city, it was the fortified city, the place of protection for the king, the ultimate stronghold for the nation.
A wall around a city served one main function: to protect it from enemies. This may appear odd to some; why would one fear enemies in a world under Pax Persica? The reality is that imperial structures did not ensure safety. The books of Ezra and Nehemiah expose inter-and intra-provincial vulnerability (Ezra 3:3; 4:1–6:13; Neh. 2:7–10, 19–20; 4:1–23; 6:1–7:3) as well as danger from bandits (Ezra 8:31).3 There was, however, a trade-off for the protection created by a city wall, for a wall delimited the extent of the city.
For two reasons, then, Yahweh sees the measuring of the city, the first step in building a wall, as opposed to his agenda for this city. (1) Related to the restriction of a wall, Yahweh plans to fill Jerusalem with a multitude that no wall can contain. The term perazot would have been associated with smallness, for larger cities were fortified. However, the message immediately contradicts this impression by revealing that the reason for this status is the immense size of the city. Jerusalem will be filled with a “great number of men and livestock.”
(2) Related to the protection afforded by a wall, Yahweh himself plans to shelter Jerusalem, just as he protected the Israelites in the desert. Such phrases as “a wall of fire around it” and “its glory within,” reminiscent of Exodus 13:21–22; 24:17 and Numbers 9:15–23, remind the people that God’s protecting presence remains with this community, who are living in circumstances parallel to the precarious context of the Exodus community. The promise of God’s glory is also reminiscent of Ezekiel’s vision of the return of God’s glory in Ezekiel 43:1–5.4
Petersen draws an interesting parallel here to Pasargadae, the royal city of the early Achaemenid kings.5 This showcase city was built without walls, surrounded instead by fire altars representing their god, Ahura Mazda.6 Jerusalem is now identified as a city from which will emanate Yahweh’s cosmic rule. The absence of walls reflects the confidence of its Ruler in his unlimited power and authority.
The two reasons cited for the absence of walls around Jerusalem are not mutually exclusive. The unlimited prosperity of this city is to be traced to the protective role of Yahweh around this city. Zechariah hears a message of hope in a time of extreme hardship.
The vision of Zechariah 2:1–5 unpacks the promises of the initial vision in 1:8–17, in particular, the promise that God will return (1:16), rebuild the temple and city (1:16), and restore prosperity (1:17). This continues the tone of comfort that began in 1:13 in response to the initial penitence of the people (1:1–6).
Bridging Contexts
HOPE VIA ASSURED PROSPERITY. While the second vision (1:18–21) offered hope to God’s people through the negative message of a promised punishment of the nations, this third vision is the flip side of that same hope, now expressed through the positive message of assured prosperity for the nation. To grasp the significance of this ancient prophecy for contemporary audiences, it is important to set this message in its original context.
Although the downfall of Judah can be attributed to many historical factors over the first two decades of the sixth century, the events of the year 587–586 B.C. endured as symbols of the demise of the nation. The exile and abuse of the leadership, the incorporation of the territory into the Babylonian empire, and the destruction of the city and temple became the focus of attention in the prayers, speeches, and narratives of Jewish texts after this time. One cannot rate the importance of these symbols, but the physical destruction of the sacred capital of the Jews prompted strong reactions from God’s people.
This is vividly displayed in various liturgical responses that arose in the Babylonian and Persian periods. Lamentations, for instance, voices the shock that the enemy entered, looted, and damaged the temple (Lam. 1:10; 2:6) while destroying strongholds (2:2, 5), ramparts (2:8), walls (2:8), gates (2:9), and foundations (4:11). Foreigners reacted to the destruction with shock (2:15) and disbelief (4:12), but for God’s people the pain was almost beyond description.
Several psalms also preserve the reaction of the people:
O God, the nations have invaded your inheritance;
they have defiled your holy temple,
they have reduced Jerusalem to rubble. . . .
How long, O LORD? Will you be angry forever?
How long will your jealousy burn like fire? (Ps. 79:1, 5)
Why have you rejected us forever, O God?
Why does your anger smolder against the sheep of your pasture?
Remember the people you purchased of old,
the tribe of your inheritance, whom you redeemed—
Mount Zion, where you dwelt.
Turn your steps toward these everlasting ruins,
all this destruction the enemy has brought on the sanctuary.
Your foes roared in the place where you met with us;
they set up their standards as signs.
They behaved like men wielding axes
to cut through a thicket of trees.
They smashed all the carved paneling
with their axes and hatchets.
They burned your sanctuary to the ground;
they defiled the dwelling place of your Name. (Ps. 74:1–7)
The depth of pain, highlighted by the searching questions of the classic psalms of lament (“how long . . . why?”), reveals the importance of Jerusalem and the temple to the Jewish community living in the wake of the destruction of Judah.7
But why were these physical structures so important to this community? Why would the destruction of this city and sanctuary lead a people to sense that God had rejected them forever? To understand this, we must reflect on several passages in the foundational texts of the Jewish community. Deuteronomy 12 is part of a larger speech of Moses to the Israelites on the verge of occupation of the Promised Land, in which Moses sets out legislation to protect the exclusive worship of Yahweh in this new land. This legislation has negative and positive aspects. (1) The people are to eliminate all places of idolatrous worship strewn throughout the land (e.g., those on high mountains or hills, or under trees) and all objects that facilitate idolatry (e.g., altars, Asherah poles, or idols). (2) They are to centralize worship at the “place the LORD your God will choose from among all your tribes” (12:5). This place will be the place of God’s presence (“put his Name there for his dwelling”). It will also be a place at which the people will “rejoice in everything you have put your hand to, because the LORD your God has blessed you” (12:7).
It is this legislation that explains the hope of kingship in Judges, which links the absence of a king with the fact that “everyone did as he saw fit” (Judg. 17:6; 21:25; cf. 18:1; 19:1), a clear allusion to the legislation of Deuteronomy 12. David is the one who fulfills this hope, for in the early part of his reign he centralized worship by transporting the ark and tabernacle to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6; 1 Chron. 13–16; Ps. 122). His son Solomon completed David’s centralization by constructing a permanent structure for the worship of the kingdom (1 Kings 5–8; 2 Chron. 2–7). During the dedication of the temple, God took up residence in this building, filling it with his manifest presence (1 Kings 8:10; 2 Chron. 5:13–14; 7:1–3).
From this temple God rules over all of Israel and receives tribute from his people (Ps. 84). But Israel’s Zion tradition has more in view than just the land of Israel. From Zion God will extend his rule over the entire earth. It is the “joy of the whole earth” for the God whose “praise reaches to the ends of the earth” (Ps. 48:2, 10). This city will become the center of the earth as nations stream to the holy mountain (Isa. 2:1–4//Mic. 4:1–3) and gladly trace their heritage to this city of God (Ps. 87).
Such a strong theology of Zion explains why in the closing moments of the kingdom of Judah, the people pinned their hope of salvation on the temple:
This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Reform your ways and your actions, and I will let you live in this place. Do not trust in deceptive words and say, “This is the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD!” (Jer. 7:3–4)
The temple became a place in which people trusted for salvation rather than responding to the prophetic call to repentance. Such trust, however, would not avert God’s judgment (Jer. 7:14). In the end both city and temple would be destroyed. Nevertheless, the prophets did expect a renewal of the city and its sanctuary. God would one day look with compassion on her ruins (Isa. 51:3) and rebuild Jerusalem and her temple (Isa. 44:28; Ezek. 40–48). It is this hope that sustained the people throughout the coming centuries. Daniel longed for the restoration of the city, informed by his reading of Jeremiah and expressed through his penitential prayer (Dan. 9). Ezra pursued purity in his generation because of his desire to sustain the restoration of the city (Ezra 9:9). Nehemiah’s mission was instigated by an inquiry about Jerusalem (Neh. 1).
Zechariah 2:1–5, therefore, declares the imminent fulfillment of the hopes of a people who have lost so much in 587 B.C., hopes based on a long theological tradition within Israel, beginning with Deuteronomy 12. Rebuilding the city is intricately linked with the return of God’s presence and the experience of his blessing.
Underlying this message one can discern two key issues within this ancient community: a lack of vision and a lack of trust, both of which become evident in the prohibition to measure the city. (1) Decades of abuse under foreign oppression have dampened the hopes of the most optimistic among the Jewish community, both those living in exile and those remaining under foreign rule in the homeland. For many, the prophetic ideals of cosmic rule and unprecedented blessing have been tempered by present circumstances and reduced to realistic expectation. Zechariah’s vision in Zech. 2:1–5 challenges the community to trust God’s plan for his people.
(2) The other key issue is a lack of trust in God’s protection for his people. Certainly this community has lived with many fears and experienced much abuse at the hands of foreigners. The vision encourages them through an allusion to their ancient exodus tradition. The journey from Egypt to Canaan was a precarious journey, which left them vulnerable and demanded trust in God. The Persian period community on a second exodus to reclaim their land would need similar trust in God, whose cloud of fire would protect them from their enemies. This vision encourages trust in the same God who preserved his people through the dangers of the desert.
This vision speaks to the church today in similar ways. The symbol of Jerusalem and its temple is fulfilled ultimately in the church (1 Cor. 3:16–17; 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21; 1 Peter 2:4–5; Heb. 12:22) because of Christ (John 2:19–22). As we are involved in fulfilling Christ’s commission to build his church, it is all too easy to live with limited and unbelieving vision.
Contemporary Significance
PRESENCE OF GOD. The promising vision of Zech. 2:1–5 provides a necessary perspective for a community emerging from exile. The New Testament echoes the themes of this vision as it encourages the nascent church community to view their world from God’s perspective and as the early Christians live their new life of faith. Key to this encouragement is the promised presence of Christ through his Holy Spirit. Thus, in Acts 2 we find the disciples awaiting the arrival of the Spirit. When the Spirit comes on them in power, they are propelled forward into a life of precarious faith to accomplish feats greater than they could ever have imagined.
In Acts 4 Peter and John return from their meeting with the Sanhedrin to join with the voices of the community in prayer to God. Their initial words to God as a community reveal that they are viewing life from God’s perspective (“Sovereign Lord”), and as they continue and ask for God to do great wonders through them in their generation, they reveal their willingness to live by faith in the midst of vulnerability. God graces this community with a powerful display of his presence, as their meeting place was shaken and they were filled with the Holy Spirit.
Fundamental to this message, both in Zechariah and Acts, is God’s manifest presence in the midst of his people. Transformed vision and faithful living are possible only for the community that experiences God’s personal presence in their midst. His presence is the glory within, consecrating and prospering God’s people, and yet it is also the fire around, protecting the people. God’s presence on the one side is terrible, for it strikes awe and fear in humanity (Ex. 19–20; Isa. 6); yet this presence is also necessary to the life of faith (Ex. 32–34).
The glorious message of the New Testament is that God has graced us with his presence through his Holy Spirit, who enlivens his faithful community (Rom. 8). Yet our churches and lives are often bereft of manifestations of his presence. As communities of faith we are often unaware of God’s absence in our midst and need to cry to him to pour out his Spirit. Without that presence the challenges of this vision, to which we now turn, will never be realized.
Vision beyond—viewing the world from God’s perspective. As already noted, the prohibition of measuring the city is related to two key issues that continue to challenge us today as Christians. The first is the temptation to limit our vision of the potential of the kingdom. It is easy to delimit the boundaries of God’s city, to restrict our vision to human realities (past and present) rather than divine possibilities.
In our lives and communities of faith we must dream outside of our limited boxes. Sometimes these boxes are created by well-meaning people trying to protect God from losing face. These theological boxes with their careful limitations on what God actually does today can border on heresy or even blasphemy. Our theology must bear witness to the miraculous God of Scripture, who can and does do anything.
Sometimes these boxes are created by fearful people trying to preserve their community from change. As we will see in our consideration of Zech. 2:6–13, the “great number of men and livestock” envisioned in 2:5 is defined in 2:11–12 as those from outside the Jewish community. If built, the city walls that protected the Jews from hostile foreign nations would have limited these same nations from access to the community of God.
When I was a young boy, there was a special loft in the rafters of one of the garages on our block. My brother and two of his friends had established a secret club in this loft. One day my brother took me along to the club meeting. We ascended the ladder and I was ushered into the place of privilege. Almost immediately the two other boys, who along with my brother were a year older than I, began to whisper to themselves energetically. They then motioned to my brother to join them and informed him in no uncertain terms that I was banned from the loft because I was not part of the club. My brother turned to them and with indignation in his voice declared that if the club was not open to his little brother, then he was quitting the club. Taking my hand we both marched down the ladder and back to our house.
It is easy for the church to imitate such childish behavior. Zechariah 2:1–5, however, reminds us that the community of faith is not a private country club but rather a community center. The church is a city without walls, open to unprecedented and diverse growth.
Precarious life of faith—trusting in the God of the impossible. The prohibition of measuring the city not only challenges us to expand our vision in light of the character and acts of God in history and his vision for his people, but also to live by faith in this same God. To live without walls in a hostile environment will mean to live in vulnerability, to trust the God of the impossible. Zechariah’s vision in Zech. 2:1–5 encouraged this community that had lived through much pain and disillusionment to entrust themselves to the God of the exodus community.
Such a precarious life of faith is not encouraged in churches in the West, especially in light of the many freedoms we enjoy. But a true life of faith may mean following a calling that is not expected or honored within our community—that is, counseling families in a needy urban context, planting a holistic church ministry within an inner-city neighborhood, caring for people suffering from AIDS, pursuing a life in the arts where few Christians can be found, receiving an orphan or abused child into our family, and the list could go on. The important point here is learning to trust God as we pursue the impossible.
Zechariah 2:1–5, therefore, encourages God’s people to experience life in its fullness as they expand their vision of God, his purposes, and his people, and as they step out in new ventures of faith. This is only possible as God’s presence is a reality in their midst individually and corporately.