THEN THE ANGEL who talked with me returned and wakened me, as a man is wakened from his sleep. 2He asked me, “What do you see?”
I answered, “I see a solid gold lampstand with a bowl at the top and seven lights on it, with seven channels to the lights. 3Also there are two olive trees by it, one on the right of the bowl and the other on its left.”
4I asked the angel who talked with me, “What are these, my lord?”
5He answered, “Do you not know what these are?”
“No, my lord,” I replied.
6So he said to me, “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the LORD Almighty.
7“What are you, O mighty mountain? Before Zerubbabel you will become level ground. Then he will bring out the capstone to shouts of ‘God bless it! God bless it!’ ”
8Then the word of the LORD came to me: 9“The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this temple; his hands will also complete it. Then you will know that the LORD Almighty has sent me to you.
10“Who despises the day of small things? Men will rejoice when they see the plumb line in the hand of Zerubbabel.
“(These seven are the eyes of the LORD, which range throughout the earth.)”
11Then I asked the angel, “What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?”
12Again I asked him, “What are these two olive branches beside the two gold pipes that pour out golden oil?”
13He replied, “Do you not know what these are?”
“No, my lord,” I said.
14So he said, “These are the two who are anointed to serve the Lord of all the earth.”
OF ALL THE night visions, Zechariah 4 has attracted the most debate about the history of its redaction. Verses 6b–10a portrays the characteristics of prophetic oracular speech with its messenger formulas (“This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel . . . says the LORD Almighty . . . the word of the LORD came to me”) and prophetic confirmation formula (“then you will know that the LORD Almighty has sent me to you”). It clearly interrupts the interchange between Zechariah and the interpreting angel.1 Questions about the flow and meaning of this chapter have been compounded further by considerable debate over the meaning of the various images presented in the scene.
I maintain that in the original sequence of visions (without ch. 3), Zechariah 4 marked the center of the collection and was designed to elevate the role of prophecy within the restoration community. The lampstand (connected in the past to tabernacle and temple) represents the temple project, and its lamps (as the eyes of the Lord) identify it as the source of God’s all-pervading presence throughout the earth. This project to restore God’s presence and kingship on earth is fueled by the prophetic ministry of two key figures, Haggai and Zechariah. Into the middle of this vision are placed two oracles addressed to Zerubbabel, showcasing this prophetic role.2
The Vision (4:1–6a, 10b–14)
THE VISION BEGINS with the return of the “angel who talked with me.” This figure is not mentioned in the previous chapter, having left the scene in 2:3. The angel “rouses” (ʿwr) the prophet from sleep as a man is “wakened” (also ʿwr) from his sleep (4:1). This form is rather odd within the conventions of normal language, for how can someone experience an action “as” one who experiences the same action? Some interpret this as arousal from “a state of lethargy” or from being “deep in thought, or in trance state.”3 However, a description of an otherworldly experience as one finds in Zechariah 1–6 stretches the limits of normal language: The prophet is awakened from sleep, but only “as” a normal awakening, for he does not awaken into the real world but into a visionary one.
The prophet, asked to describe the odd scene before him (4:2), answers: “I see a solid gold lampstand.” Although the Hebrew term here (menorah) is used for a domestic lampstand (2 Kings 4:10), its appearance here is clearly religious. The greatest concentration of this term in the Hebrew Bible is in the accounts of the tabernacle construction in the Torah (Ex. 25:33–40; 37:17–24; 40:4, 24; cf. Lev. 24:4; Num. 8:2–4).4 Both here and in the tabernacle a lampstand made from “pure” (ṭahor, Ex. 25:31; here kullah) gold possesses seven lamps (ner).
Beyond these elements, however, the two articles have little in common. Whereas the lamps of the tabernacle lampstand are placed atop the main shaft in the six branches extending from that shaft, Zechariah’s lamps are restricted to a bowl fitted at the top of the center shaft.5 There is no mention of this term for “bowl” (gullah) in the tabernacle accounts, although there were cups (gabiaʿ; Ex. 25:31, 33, 34; 37:17, 19, 20), but these were not reservoirs for lamp oil.
Bowl-shaped lampstands with seven lamps positioned on top of a center shaft, similar to the one described in this vision, have been uncovered in archaeological digs from the Middle Bronze period onward and were used at religious sites.6 The seven “channels” (Heb. muṣaqah) to the lights are thus not to be interpreted as pipes but rather the spouts that held the wicks and directed the oil to the flame.
The difference between the tabernacle and visionary scene is accentuated by the presence of two olive trees situated by the lampstand on the left and the right. At this point the description of the scene ends, but we can discover further details of the olive trees from Zechariah’s question in Zech. 4:12. There, following a question about the two olive trees, the prophet speaks of “two olive branches beside the two gold pipes that pour out golden oil.” The Hebrew term šibbolet (“branches”) is used elsewhere either of the fruit of grain crops (e.g., Ruth 2:2) or of flowing liquid (e.g., Isa. 27:12). Although it could be referring to the fruit of the olive tree (olives), the restriction elsewhere of this term to grain and the appearance of the terms “pipes” and “pour” in the phrases that follow tip the scale in favor of the second gloss. This would best be translated: “two olive streams that pour out golden oil through the two gold pipes.”7 The phrase “golden oil” translates zahab, normally “gold.” The olive oil as it pours into the bowl looks like gold, an appropriate color considering it is flowing through golden pipes into a golden lampstand.
This evidence helps us to understand the connection between the lampstand and the olive trees. In contrast to the lampstand in the tabernacle, which was supplied with oil by the offerings of the Israelites and tended by the priests and Levites (Lev. 24:1–4; Num. 3:31; 4:9–10), this lampstand is connected to two olive trees by gold pipes that supplied the lampstand directly. The supply from these trees is plenteous as the oil gushes forth.
The use of numbers separates this vision into two major image complexes.8 Seven is used for the various elements of the light-producing gold lampstand: seven lights with seven spouts. Two is used for the constituent parts of the source of the fuel for this lampstand: two olive trees with two streams through two gold pipes.
As in the other visions, the prophet searches for an explanation from the interpreting angel. It is uncertain whether in the ambiguous question, “What are these, my lord?” (Zech. 4:4), the prophet has in mind the olive trees (the closest antecedent) or the lights on the lampstand. In any case, the angel chooses to reveal the significance of the vision in order of the appearance of elements and does so in two phases, each inaugurated by the question: “Do you not know what these are?” (4:5, 13). This question is a rhetorical technique intended to heighten the reader’s expectation by prolonging the answer.
(1) The first phase focuses on the number seven and thus refers to the lampstand and, in particular, its seven lamps. Verse 10b (the continuation of the visionary experience after the oracular interlude) interprets them as the “eyes of the LORD, which range throughout the earth.”
There are some who translate the Hebrew word for “eyes” (ʿayin) with a second legitimate gloss, “springs.” These springs “flow over the whole earth.”9 However, the verb “range” (šwṭ) is one that often describes the movement of a person over a territory (Num. 11:8; Amos 8:12; Dan. 12:4), and the phrase “eyes of the LORD” appears elsewhere in the Old Testament to speak of God’s observing the activities of his creation either to bring discipline or blessing (Deut. 11:12; Ps. 34:15; Prov. 5:21; 15:3; 22:12).
2 Chronicles 16:9 contains the closest Hebrew idiom to Zechariah 4:10b when the prophet Hanani tells Asa that “the eyes of the LORD range throughout the earth to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him.” The same Hebrew word stock appears here: “eyes,” “LORD,” “range in all the earth.” Although Hanani’s message is one of doom for King Asa, the activity of God’s eyes throughout the earth is pointedly a positive task: “to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him.” This text does, however, reveal the downside of this omniscient procedure. When the eyes fall on those who disobey, God may enact discipline. The interpretation is that this lampstand, with its obvious links to the ancient sanctuaries of Israel, is a reminder of God’s omnipresence in the earth, mediated through this new temple. Through this renewed seat of his rule, he will exercise his reign on earth.10
(2) The second phase of the interpretation immediately follows in Zech. 4:11–12 as the prophet turns his attention to the olive trees and the pipe work that connects them to the lampstand. The angel reveals that “these are the two who are anointed to serve the LORD of all the earth.” In other words, the olive trees symbolize two individuals. Olive tree imagery for humans is positive imagery that signifies a person “as beautiful, productive and important” (Judg. 9:9; Job 15:33; Ps. 128:3; Hos. 14:6; Jer. 11:16).11 But who are these people?
Past interpretations have identified these two individuals with two prominent leaders in the early Persian period community, Zerubbabel and Joshua.12 This has been based on the translation “anointed” (anointing practiced for royal and priestly figures) and the strong tradition of these two contemporaneous figures in Hebrew literature depicting the early Persian period (Ezra 2–6; Hag. 1–2; Zech. 1–8).13 However, a closer look at the Hebrew text calls this consensus view into question and suggests a new direction.
The phrase “the two who are anointed” (NIV) reads in the Hebrew text “the two sons of fresh oil.” The term for oil here (yiṣhar) is never used elsewhere for anointing, a role reserved for the Hebrew word šemen (kings in 1 Sam. 16:13; 1 Kings 1:39; priests in Lev. 8:12; Ex. 30:23–33; the tabernacle in Lev. 8:10).14 The term yiṣhar is reserved for unmanufactured oil from the olive tree, appropriate because it flows directly from tree to lampstand.
These two individuals “serve the Lord of all the earth.” Again, this translation masks the Hebrew idiom “stand by the Lord of all the earth.” This combination of the verb “stand” (ʿamad) with the preposition “by” (ʿal) followed by a reference to deity is found in 1 Kings 22:19. In this instance the prophet Micaiah observes God deliberating with the host of heaven, the divine council of angelic spirits who are “standing [ʿamad] by [ʿal]” God.15 It is instructive that Micaiah has access to this scene, and the calls of other prophets reveal that the prophet was the one human allowed into this privileged position (Isa. 6; Ezek. 1–3; Jer. 23:16–22; Amos 3:7; cf. Ps. 89:6–7; Job 15:8).16
This evidence brings into question the traditional connection between Zechariah 4:14 and Zerubbabel and Joshua. If these two individuals are human beings in this passage, they are most likely prophetic figures.17 The prominence of Haggai and Zechariah in the early Persian period and their crucial role in the rebuilding of the temple explains the presence of two prophetic figures in this vision (Ezra 5:1–2; 6:14; Hag. 1–2; Zech. 8:9–13).
Thus, the vision of the lampstand and olive trees emphasizes the role of the prophet in the restoration of the early Persian period. The lampstand, signifying the role of the temple as the location from which God’s presence and sovereignty emanate throughout the earth, is fueled by oil supplied by the prophets. Therefore, at the center of the vision complex lies a strong reminder of the importance of the prophetic office and word within the restoration community.
The Oracles (4:6b–10a)
AS ALREADY NOTED, into this vision about the role of the prophetic word have been inserted two oracles addressed to Zerubbabel during the refounding of the temple. In its new context the author is driving home the point that the eyes of God ranging over the earth have discovered the faithfulness of Zerubbabel, and this prophetic word offers the strength needed for such an individual and the community he represents.
Zerubbabel’s involvement in rebuilding the temple is well attested in the Old Testament. Haggai consistently refers to him as the governor of this province (Hag. 1:1, 14; 2:1, 21), and he is listed among those who returned to the land from captivity in Babylon (Ezra 2), rebuilt the altar (3:2), and relaid the foundation of the temple (3:8–13).
Zerubbabel’s lineage is traced through Shealtiel to Jehoiachin and the Davidic royal line (1 Chron. 3:16–17). It is this royal connection that explains his role in the rituals accompanying the restoration of the temple foundation. When ancient Near Eastern temples were being rebuilt, the phases of the project were marked by certain rituals. One ritual occurred at the outset of work, in which a stone was chosen from the rubble of the former temple and carried out by a royal figure. Once the rubble was cleared, the foundation laying was begun with the royal figure laying the first stone of the new foundation.18
These two rituals provide the ritual background for the two oracles preserved in Zech. 4:6b–10a. (1) In the first, the prophet proclaims an oracle of confidence as Zerubbabel faces a mountain of rubble19 and then brings out the first stone (4:6b–7).20 The ritual character of this oracle is confirmed by the reference to “shouts” of “God bless it! God bless it!” (lit., “Grace! Grace!”), indicating a response from a group of people.21
(2) In the second message (4:8–10a), the prophet addresses Zerubbabel at a later point in the project (after the clearing of the rubble) as the governor inaugurates the foundation laying. This message also alludes to another ritual when a “stone of tin” (NIV “plumb line”) was handled by the royal figure. This “stone of tin” likely refers to a building deposit incorporated into the foundation, probably when the foundation phase was completed.22
Some have suggested that the “stone of tin” anticipates the completion of the temple project, but this is based on the translation of the first portion of 4:9: “The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this temple; his hands will also complete it.” The phrase “laid the foundation of this temple” refers to the inauguration of the foundation laying with the placing of the “first stone.”23 In the Hebrew text, the phrase “his hands will also complete it” is ambiguous, reading “his hands will complete.” This could refer to either the temple structure as a whole or to the foundation-laying phase. The reference to a building deposit (“stone of tin”) tips the interpretation in favor of the foundational-laying phase.24
These oracles are messages of encouragement and hope for Zerubbabel and the activity he commences. In both oracles there is evidence of a challenge that lies in the way of the leader. The first challenge is physical in nature, the great mountain of rubble that must be removed (4:7). The second challenge is communal in nature, the derision of those less than enthusiastic about the project (4:10). In both cases the prophet promises a reversal: The great mountain will become “level ground” and despising will become “rejoicing.”
Although these oracles do contain the above similarities, they do have a slightly different message. The encouragement of Zerubbabel in the first oracle is linked to the message that God’s Spirit will strengthen Zerubbabel for the monumental task that lies ahead. He must not rely on the “might” and “power” of humanity. These two words are used in the Old Testament to describe all aspects of human potency, whether physical (Eccl. 10:10; Judg. 16:5), military (2 Sam. 17:10), economic (Job 31:25; Deut. 8:18), or moral strength (1 Kings 1:52). The oracle focuses Zerubbabel’s attention on God’s Spirit as the source for the great task that lies ahead.
References to God’s Spirit enabling his human instruments are associated with two offices in Israel: the prophet and the king. The sign of true prophecy is the presence of God’s Spirit in the life of the prophet (Neh. 9:30; Joel 2:28–32; Mic. 3:8; Zech. 7:12; cf. Num. 24:2). When Micah attacks the false prophets of his day, he highlights the presence of the Spirit of the Lord as the source of his power (Mic. 3:8). The prophets transfer this power of the Spirit to the royal house at the beginning of the monarchy in Israel. The first two kings in Israel are commissioned to their tasks by physical anointing with oil by the prophet (1 Sam. 10:1; 16:13), but also by divine anointing with God’s Spirit (1 Sam. 10:10; 16:13).25 In Zechariah 4, one of the last prophets in Israel now reminds this royal figure of the need for the empowerment of the Spirit of God as the source of strength for the rebuilding project.
The second oracle again encourages Zerubbabel, but it focuses more on the credibility of his mission and on the reliability of the prophetic word. The prophet confronts those skeptical of the ability of Zerubbabel to complete the foundation. Such skepticism can be discerned in several texts from this period. Haggai 2:1–9 links such skepticism to those who had seen the grandeur of the preexilic temple structure. Haggai’s question “Does it not seem to you like nothing?” voices the feelings of many within the community.26 So also Ezra 3:12–13 records the odd combination of rejoicing and weeping on the day of foundation laying. The prophet links his own credibility to the fact that Zerubbabel will surely complete the foundation phase.
The details of these two oracles bolster further the relationship between vision and oracle in Zechariah 4. In both the royal and prophetic offices are intertwined. The power of the Spirit well associated with the prophetic office and linked to the empowerment of the royal office is promised to Zerubbabel, who undertakes the temple building project in the first oracle. The promise of the prophet confronts the skepticism against Zerubbabel in the second oracle. Surely the “oil” of prophecy fueled the building project, bringing God’s presence on earth.
Bridging Contexts
GIFT OF PROPHECY. One of the great privileges of a young father raising three boys is the opportunity to watch increasingly creative children’s videos. Toy Story was certainly the “buzz” in our home when it arrived on the market and even more so within my family because my sister worked for the Manhattan toy company that produced and marketed toys for Disney movies. In Toy Story we first meet cowboy Woody, who is the beloved toy of Andy. Before long, however, the drama begins as a new toy enters into Andy’s life and threatens to dethrone poor Woody from his place as most loved of the toys. This toy is Buzz Lightyear, a super space traveler with all the bells and whistles, whose trademark saying is: “To infinity and beyond.”
Buzz, however, does not realize that he is a toy, and Woody sees it as his duty to teach Buzz the reality: You cannot fly, you are not a space traveler, you are a toy. Of course, he can’t convince Buzz, who must come to this realization on his own. That moment occurs when Buzz is trapped in the evil neighborhood boy’s house and happens upon a TV broadcasting a commercial about him. At first he thinks it is real, but the announcer makes it clear that Buzz Lightyear is only a toy. For Buzz, “to infinity and beyond” was nothing more than a fantasy.
In Israel, however, the prophets were the only ones who could claim what Buzz Lightyear had claimed. The long story of prophetism began with Moses and extended through a multitude of personalities who faithfully revealed God’s truth to his people, including Samuel, Nathan, Gad, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, Micah, Hosea, Amos, Nahum, Habakkuk, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Haggai, and Zechariah.27 God raised them up to be conduits of revelation to his people, often delivered through visions and dreams (Num. 12:6; 1 Sam. 3). The authority of this revelation is intimately linked to the prophetic claim that they had been “to infinity and beyond”; that is, they had privileged access to the council room, experiences that, according to Jeremiah’s attack on the false prophets, enabled the true prophet to speak God’s word:
But which of them has stood in the council of the LORD
to see or hear his word?
Who has listened and heard his word? . . .
But if they had stood in my council,
they would have proclaimed my words to my people
and would have turned them from their evil ways
and from their evil deeds. (Jer. 23:18, 22)
Through Jeremiah’s attack we are reminded of the dark backdrop of false prophecy against which we see the brilliance of this faithful line. We are given glimpses of this backdrop in the ministry of Elijah (1 Kings 18), Hosea (Hos. 4:5), Micah (Mic. 3:5–8), and Micaiah (1 Kings 22), but near the end of the monarchial period the backdrop becomes far darker. Jeremiah speaks often of prophets who prophesy falsely and bring condemnation on themselves (Jer. 2:8, 26; 5:13, 31; 6:13; 8:1, 10; 13:13; 14:13–15; 23:9–40; 37:19; 50:36). This tension is powerfully illustrated in the confrontation between Jeremiah and Hananiah in Jeremiah 27–28. So also Ezekiel focuses his attention on false prophets (Ezek. 13; cf. 22:28). The painful expressions of Lamentations reveal the disillusionment with the false prophets among the community living in the wake of the destruction of Jerusalem (Lam. 2:9, 14; 4:13).
This disillusionment may explain the character of the prophetic word in the early Persian period. Already in Ezekiel we see the constant use of prophetic formulas that are intended to bolster the divine origin of the message. Besides the typical “this is what the LORD says” (Ezek. 5:5) or “declares the LORD” (5:11), we find constant use of the phrases “then they/you will know that I am the LORD” (12:15; 13:9; 14:8; 15:7; 16:62; etc.), and “then they will know that a prophet has been among them” (2:5; 33:33). In Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, we see a marked elevation in the number of prophetic formulas used to introduce the speeches of these prophets. This most likely reveals a crisis in the prophetic word, a greater popular skepticism toward prophecy in the wake of the Exile.28
This historical context reveals the timeliness of Zechariah’s message within his community. This vision emphasizes the continuing role for the prophetic word in this crucial period of restoration. The community needed to see the prophet as a major source of God’s power and presence in the rebuilding period. God was continuing to raise up his servants to speak to them and to encourage them in their pursuits.
Spirit of prophecy and royalty. There is no question that the Spirit of God is most often connected with the prophetic office in the Old Testament. When Moses cries out to God for assistance in leading the people from Egypt to Canaan, God promised to take of the Spirit that was on Moses and to distribute it to the various leaders of the tribes of Israel (Num. 11). The interesting feature of this act of God is that when this Spirit does fall on these leaders, the evidence of this empowerment is that they will prophesy (11:24–30). God’s empowerment of Moses here is linked to his role as prophet for Israel (cf. Deut. 34:10–12).
In light of Numbers 11, throughout Israel’s history the prophets are distinguished by their possession of the Spirit, who enables them to prophesy (2 Kings 2:9, 15, 16; 2 Chron. 15:1; Neh. 9:30). This relationship to the Spirit is confirmed in the testimony of the prophets themselves (Ezek. 2:2; 11:5; Dan. 4:18; Mic. 3:8). Furthermore, in scenes reminiscent of Numbers 11, the prophets are the source of the Spirit’s endowment on the kings of Israel. Saul is anointed by the Spirit at the outset of his rule through an encounter with a procession of prophets (1 Sam. 10:6, 10). So also when David is anointed king as a young man by Samuel, the text emphasizes his reception of the Spirit alongside the removal of that Spirit from wayward Saul (16:13–14).29
Although the prophets are not the only ones who experience the presence of the Spirit in the Old Testament (e.g., Ex. 31:3; 35:31; Judg. 3:10; 6:34; Isa. 42:1; 61:1), they are a major conduit of the Spirit within the community and especially for the empowerment of the royal line. This connection to the royal line may explain why the prophecy to Zerubbabel has been inserted into the center of the vision report of Zechariah 4. As with David and Saul, the prophet endows the royal figure with the Spirit, the sign of his princely status and empowerment for the royal task that lay ahead.
Spirit, prophet, and the New Testament. How do we apply this to our new covenant community of faith? One of the main roles of the prophet in the Old Testament was to point the people back to God’s revelation on Sinai, to remind them of God’s covenant principles and demands (2 Kings 17:13). There is no question, then, that God’s Word has been delivered to us through the canonical witness of Scripture and that this represents the continuing witness of God within his community. Anointed preachers and teachers of God’s Word continue the prophetic tradition by declaring the canonical Word to God’s people. This explains why the New Testament constantly refers the community and its leaders to this Word as the foundation for their truth, witness, and mission (2 Tim. 3:14–17; 1 Peter 1:22–25; cf. 1 Tim. 4:13).
But is there a continuing role for the prophet within the new covenant community? In recent years there has been considerable debate over the nature and function of prophecy in the church today.30 Gaffin argues that the prophetic office has become obsolete with the coming of the canon and is no longer operative within the church today. Grudem has maintained, however, that there is a prophetic gift of the Spirit that involves revelation from God today, although carefully placing it on a lower level than Old Testament prophetic and New Testament apostolic speech. There is no room in this commentary to resolve this debate, but I think it is important to highlight one aspect of the New Testament theology of prophecy that is often overlooked and provides an opportunity to incorporate the theme of the Spirit’s prophetic empowerment into the life of the church today.
In Acts 1:1–8 Christ instructs his disciples to go to Jerusalem and remain until the Holy Spirit is given to them. The coming of the Spirit on them will propel them forward as his “witnesses” to the ends of the earth, a statement programmatic for the book of Acts, which depicts the advance of gospel witness from Jerusalem to Rome.31
What is interesting is the fulfillment of Christ’s promise in Acts 2. Peter interprets this coming of the Spirit on the community in Jerusalem as fulfillment of a prophecy in Joel that speaks of the coming of the Spirit and prophetic utterance. Peter declares the prophetic role of all Christians—a role defined by Acts 1:8 as a witness that will reach the ends of the earth.
The wonder of Acts 2 is that we encounter redemptive progression beyond Zechariah 4. Whereas the source of the Spirit is linked to the witness of the few prophets God raised up within the community, under new covenant administration the Spirit is given to all God’s people (fulfilling Moses’ wish in Num. 11), who form a prophetic community to the nations. The oil flows through all of us as God’s prophetic community to bring his presence and rule on earth.
Contemporary Significance
THE MESSAGE OF ZECHARIAH 4 is greatly needed in the church today, calling us back to the primacy of Word and Spirit within the ministry of the church. For Zechariah these two were the essential components of the power needed to complete the God-given mission of the restoration community. For us in the new covenant community, these components have even greater potential, as Christ has poured out his Spirit on all members of the community and granted us the canon in its fullness.
Unlimited potential of the Spirit’s power in the ministry of the church. The New Testament makes it clear that the impact of the gospel on the Roman world was not due to the leadership skills of great visionaries or oratorical abilities of gifted speakers, but rather to the power of the Spirit as he worked through the weakness of humanity (Acts 1:8; 2:1–41; 1 Thess. 1:4–6). Paul celebrated his weaknesses, for in them he saw an opportunity for God to display his glory and power (2 Cor. 12:1–10).
What a contrast to what we often find today in the church. As leaders today, too often we become more interested in the latest seminar on visionary leadership and public oratory than on experiencing the unction of God’s Spirit in our lives and ministries. There is an increasing temptation to look to secular sources for guiding the church rather than to the One who has promised to build his church by storming the very gates of hell (Matt. 16:18).
Zechariah 4 calls the church back to the empowerment of God’s Spirit for its life and mission. As already noted, the exciting possibility for the church, in contrast to the community of God in Zechariah’s day, is that the conduit of the Spirit has been greatly expanded to involve the church as a whole. This calls us to empower the many within the church who have been gifted by God’s Spirit to accomplish God’s mission in this world.
The Spirit’s empowerment provides us with the courage to overcome the incredible challenges that stand in our way. For Zerubbabel the challenge was represented by the pile of rubble that stood before his community as they commenced the rebuilding project. God’s word through Zechariah came at the right time and reminded Zerubbabel of his need for the Spirit’s empowerment to accomplish this task. So also today, as communities of faith we face formidable tasks that remind us of our desperate need for God’s empowerment.
I think of the church in the inner city in the midst of communities with soaring crime rates, dissolving families, and with absent economic vitality, a formidable pile of rubble. Yet I have seen the power of God’s Spirit work through communities of faith in these situations, performing miracles as they have impacted these communities in all the dimensions of life: physical, social, and spiritual. I think of the church in the suburbs facing the challenge of a community spellbound by all the comforts of our society, seeking to soothe their spiritual conscience through these pleasures and seeing their lives and families torn asunder by strife, again a formidable pile of rubble. Reaching these kinds of communities in all of their dimensions is a venture beyond human potential and requires the empowerment of God’s Spirit.
The New Testament encourages God’s people to seek the Spirit’s empowerment in their lives. In John 20:21–22, Jesus, introduced in 1:3–4 as the One through whom “all things were made” and in whom “was life,” performs a second decisive creative act. In one of his key post-resurrection appearances, Jesus says to his disciples: “ ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ With that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’ ” It is odd to see Jesus “breathing” on his disciples and linking that act with the reception of the Holy Spirit, but in doing so he is reenacting the original act of creation: “The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” (Gen. 2:7). The Spirit re-creates life, abundant and eternal in this new community.
This Spirit is thus essential to living as a new creation in this world, and so it is not surprising how much the early church spoke about the Spirit’s role in their lives and ministry. Throughout Acts God’s people were a people of the Spirit, who empowered them to be God’s witnesses (Acts 1:8), to declare his praises (2:1–12), to proclaim truth with boldness (4:8–12, 31; 6:10; 7:55), and to serve (6:3). This focus on the Spirit’s empowerment for service is evident in the close link between the gifts of service in the church and the Holy Spirit in New Testament teaching (1 Cor. 12; 14). These gifts, however, must be exercised in the context of a life that portrays the fruit of the Spirit—that is, a life of holiness, love, and peace (1 Cor. 13).
Paul emphasizes this aspect of the Spirit’s work throughout his writings. Immediately prior to calling God’s people to “live a life worthy of the calling you have received” (Eph. 4:1), he prayed for God to “strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being” (3:16) and then encouraged these same people to “be filled with the Spirit” (5:18). Furthermore, he encouraged the Galatian church to “live by the Spirit,” to be “led by the Spirit,” to “keep in step with the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16, 18, 25). Thus, the life-giving Spirit truly empowers us for holy living and faithful service, both as individuals within our families, work, and churches, but also as communities of faith within our community, culture, and globe.
In light of the importance of the Spirit’s work in our lives as Christians, as we participate in Christ’s great plan to restore God’s kingship on earth, we must follow the encouragement of Jesus himself, who invites us to ask for the Spirit’s work in our lives: “If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him” (Luke 11:13).32 This invitation is often appropriated by holiness and Pentecostal streams of Christianity, but it should become the cry of all Christians who seriously desire the fullness of God’s work in and through their lives.
But we must not forget that the Spirit is at work within those who are in “step with the Spirit” (Gal. 5:25), reminding us of the importance of walking in holiness and obedience as we courageously embrace God’s work in this world. The biblical theology of the Spirit’s work within his people is never exclusively passive or exclusively active; rather, as we are filled with God’s Spirit, we are propelled forward to holiness and service, and as we obediently pursue God’s work, we are promised the life-giving Spirit’s empowerment.
Primacy of God’s Word in the ministry of the church. Zechariah links the power of the Spirit to the revelation of God’s word through the prophet in the restoration community. We often see the Spirit’s work in terms of power and strength to perform a task, but here that power and strength are afforded through the words of encouragement and challenge relayed from God through the prophets.
As in the early church, so today the powerful combination of Spirit and Word is essential to advance the church’s mission. One of our greatest needs is a return to Spirit-filled proclamation of God’s Word in our churches. This message, first of all, is directed to those who have been charged with the regular proclamation of God’s Word in the context of the church. In recent years we have witnessed a shift in the content and style of preaching in our pulpits from a didactic edification model (edifying the saved) to an experiential evangelistic model (reaching the unsaved). On one level this transformation is to be applauded and has resulted in much numerical growth. On another level, however, there is cause for concern as there has been a tendency to sideline God’s Word in the process.
In recent years I have been invited to speak at several churches on weekend modular format courses, experiences that I always find enriching and invigorating. One pastoral staff member in a church that has witnessed phenomenal growth in the past decade admitted to me that they were bringing me in because of a perceived need within the congregation. Their people were coming to them asking for the pastors to go deeper in their sermons. The pastoral staff responded that this was as deep as they could go, but they would bring someone else in who could go deeper. This attitude, of course, secures employment for me in the near future, but it should be a signal to all that something is wrong.
This is true also for lay leadership within the church. I recently spoke with a pastor providing leadership for Christian education in a large affluent and well-educated church. This individual was lamenting the lack of laypeople who could or would teach the Bible in their church. One person agreed to teach a study but, after attending a seminar on evangelism in an American megachurch, pulled out of the responsibility so that he could evangelize. I am not trying to pit edification against evangelism and want to strongly endorse both as essential to the restoration of God’s kingdom in our world. But my recent experiences reveal the challenge we now face in our generation of the church.
The New Testament makes it clear that the leadership of the church was called to the ministry of the Word of God. The apostles set the trajectory for us from the outset as they focused their attention on the ministry of the Word and prayer (Acts 6:3). Paul reminds the church in Ephesians 4 that God has given leaders to the church to prepare God’s people for ministry so that they may attain maturity. A key characteristic of that maturity is doctrinal and theological (Eph. 4:14–16). This matches Paul’s exhortations to Timothy and Titus. Well over one-third of Paul’s letters to these two young leaders concerns doctrine, truth, and teaching. In our rush to create large churches relevant to our generation, we have redefined church leadership in ways more like the business world and less like the biblical witness.
For Zechariah the great work of restoration was fueled by the Spirit’s gift of revelation through his Word. This is certainly true for those leading the church today as we face a culture increasingly hostile to the gospel, whether through hyper-secular or pantheistic influences. This will mean continued emphasis on the skills necessary for interpreting Scripture in its original context. But equally important is enhanced reflection on the application of biblical truth into our postmodern culture. Expertise in both of these areas is essential. If we attain maturity in exegesis without developing skills in application, we risk irrelevance. If we attain maturity in application without developing exegetical aptitude, we risk severing our link to the source of authority, the Word of God. We desperately need a generation of teachers and preachers on vocational and lay levels who display sensitivity to both Word and culture.
All members of the church need to hear this message, whether they are involved in public leadership and teaching or not. The gifts of both God’s Word and Spirit are available to each one of us in Christ. God has given us these gifts that we might grow to maturity in the faith.
In the early 1980s on a short-term mission trip to the Philippines, I had the privilege of hearing Stephen Olford speak to a large group of believers in Manila. Olford compared two New Testament passages, Ephesians 5:18–20 and Colossians 3:16–17, most likely written during the same period in Paul’s ministry. Olford observed that the two passages end in a similar way, highlighting the worship and gratitude of the church (Eph. 5:19–20; Col. 3:16–17) before teaching on submission within the church (Eph. 5:21–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1). However, the introductory clause is different in each case. In Ephesians 5:18 Paul speaks of the filling of the Holy Spirit while in Colossians 3:16 he speaks of the Word of Christ dwelling within us through wise teaching. Olford used this fascinating parallel to reveal the essential connection between Word and Spirit for the growth of the church. His aphorism on the necessity of both Spirit and Word for Christian growth was unforgettable:
Word without Spirit we dry up.
Spirit without Word we blow up.
Word and Spirit we grow up.
God grants us his Spirit as the Spirit of truth, who guides us into deeper spiritual insight and knowledge (Eph. 1:15–23; 3:14–21). This guidance is true for each one of us as individuals, but also for the church as a whole. We must return to Spirit-filled interpretations of God’s Word on every level of the church as we face a cultural context hostile to the claims of this Word.
This means that we must recover the rhythms of exegesis as leaders in the church on the vocational and lay level. There is no replacement for the example of godly leadership working with the text before the community of faith, whether in Bible studies, formal growth classes, or sermons. This also should be supplemented with regular opportunities for God’s people to learn how to interpret the Scriptures on their own.33 However, it is not merely a matter of teaching interpretive methodology, for we cannot lose sight of the Spirit’s role in interpretation.
When I began teaching courses on preaching, I searched for appropriate textbooks for the course. I found many books available on the market, written by authors who approached the Scriptures as authoritative for contemporary faith and life. But as I perused many of these books, I found little emphasis on the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the preparation and delivery of sermons. One of the most popular books for preaching in North America, which has influenced preachers studying at evangelical colleges and seminaries for the past twenty-five years, provided a systematic approach for studying the Scriptures and preparing a clear and concise message for contemporary audiences, but there was no mention of the ministry of the Holy Spirit and only a passing reference to the importance of prayer.
As I began to search for elongated treatments on the ministry of the Spirit and prayer for preaching, I found a section in John Stott’s Between Two Worlds and a chapter in Martin Lloyd-Jones’ classic Preaching and Preachers. Then I had to mine the works of earlier centuries, in which I found rich resources for preaching that guided earlier generations in the preparation of sermons for God’s people.34 These older giants of the faith knew the importance of cultivating the life of the Spirit in order that it might produce a rich harvest of deep, sensitive, and relevant preaching and teaching for their people. They consistently called leaders in the church to a life of prayer, especially but not exclusively in relation to the ministry of preaching and teaching. They remind us of the need to pray as we prepare to preach and teach this Word, a principle taught so clearly and passionately by James Flavel:
Thus laying our foundations in the knowledge of principles, choosing our subjects by the people’s necessities; handling them in apt language; working them first upon your own affections, enforcing them by strict conversation, and steeping this holy seed in prayer; we shall approve ourselves the prudent ministers of Christ.35
As we look for passages to preach, as we interpret the Scriptures during the week, as we create sermons relevant to this generation, as we rise to preach and teach, we must seek God in prayer. Furthermore, we should not overlook the importance of prayer as our people seek to live out the truth of this Word in their daily lives, as John Owen so aptly wrote: “To preach the word, and not to follow it with prayer constantly and frequently, is to believe its use, neglect its end, and cast away all the seed of the gospel at random.”36
Preachers and teachers of the Word must ask for wisdom and clarity, sensitivity and compassion, but above all they should cry to the heavenly Father for the unction of the Spirit of truth. The paucity of emphasis on the Spirit in the present generation has been addressed in Arturo Azurdia’s book Spirit Empowered Preaching, in which he reminds us:
In the final analysis, we take up our privilege as proclaimers of the gospel, not because we are more intelligent or creative than the world, nor because our powers of rhetorical and logistical techniques are greater than those of other religious spokesmen. None of these powers will ever serve to win one person to Jesus Christ. We must never forget that the Christian Church always advances from a position of human weakness, not human strength. . . . Instead, we step out to accomplish the greater works because the Spirit of God, on the merits of our Savior’s death, has been given to us. According to His own good pleasure He will be pleased to take our feeble and flawed presentations of the gospel and fill them with His irresistible power, consequently overcoming the hearts of sinful people that, otherwise speaking, will prove to be impenetrable.37
The interpretation and declaration of God’s Word today, through preaching and teaching, must take center stage in the ministry of the church. It must, however, be interpretation and declaration directed by the Holy Spirit, who sensitizes our hearts and minds to the intention of Scripture and to the real needs of the present generation. This is not to play down the importance of honing interpretive skills, becoming sensitive to the original context into which Scriptures were first transmitted, but it does mean cultivating the life of the Spirit within as we seek to declare God’s truth relevantly and powerfully to our needy world and people.