An Oracle
1This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him, declares: 2“I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding peoples reeling. Judah will be besieged as well as Jerusalem. 3On that day, when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations. All who try to move it will injure themselves. 4On that day I will strike every horse with panic and its rider with madness,” declares the LORD. “I will keep a watchful eye over the house of Judah, but I will blind all the horses of the nations. 5Then the leaders of Judah will say in their hearts, ‘The people of Jerusalem are strong, because the LORD Almighty is their God.’
6“On that day I will make the leaders of Judah like a firepot in a woodpile, like a flaming torch among sheaves. They will consume right and left all the surrounding peoples, but Jerusalem will remain intact in her place.
7“The LORD will save the dwellings of Judah first, so that the honor of the house of David and of Jerusalem’s inhabitants may not be greater than that of Judah. 8On that day the LORD will shield those who live in Jerusalem, so that the feeblest among them will be like David, and the house of David will be like God, like the Angel of the LORD going before them. 9On that day I will set out to destroy all the nations that attack Jerusalem.
10“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. 11On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be great, like the weeping of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. 12The land will mourn, each clan by itself, with their wives by themselves: the clan of the house of David and their wives, the clan of the house of Nathan and their wives, 13the clan of the house of Levi and their wives, the clan of Shimei and their wives, 14and all the rest of the clans and their wives.
13:1“On that day a fountain will be opened to the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and impurity.
2“On that day, I will banish the names of the idols from the land, and they will be remembered no more,” declares the LORD Almighty. “I will remove both the prophets and the spirit of impurity from the land. 3And if anyone still prophesies, his father and mother, to whom he was born, will say to him, ‘You must die, because you have told lies in the LORD’s name.’ When he prophesies, his own parents will stab him.
4“On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his prophetic vision. He will not put on a prophet’s garment of hair in order to deceive. 5He will say, ‘I am not a prophet. I am a farmer; the land has been my livelihood since my youth.’ 6If someone asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your body?’ he will answer, ‘The wounds I was given at the house of my friends.’ ”
Original Meaning
WITH 12:1 WE enter into a new section of Zechariah signaled by the Hebrew term maśsśaʾ (NIV “oracle”), which also appeared in 9:1. In the commentary introduction, we presented the overall shape of chapters 9–14, including points of continuity and discontinuity between chapters 9–11 and 12–14. There we argued that chapters 12–14 describe the consequences of the crisis described in the sign-act of 11:4–16, which shattered the hopes of chapters 9–10. Chapters 12–14 present God’s plan to cleanse his people and defeat the nations in a future day.
One can discern three distinct units within Zechariah 12–14, namely, 12:1–13:6, 13:7–9, 14:1–21. The first and last units use a similar editorial style as they are introduced by the Hebrew term hinneh (“behold,” untranslated in NIV) at 12:2 and 14:1. The middle unit (13:7–9), however, is distinguished from the other two on the rhetorical level by its use of the vocative (“O sword”) and the imperatives (“awake . . . strike”), and on the thematic level by its use of shepherd/sheep imagery, showing its affinity with other short editorial transitions throughout chapters 9–14.1
Zechariah 12:1–13:6 represents an oracle from God that outlines his comprehensive plan for the renewal of his people. Not only will he make his city, Jerusalem, a fortress impenetrable by the nations, but he will also use Judah to strike at these foreign forces before transforming Jerusalem and his Davidic king into a mighty army. This salvation from God is only the first step in his plan for his people. He promises to produce penitence, provide cleansing, and remove idolatry and false prophecy from the land.
The global dimension of 12:1–13:6 makes it challenging to ascertain the precise historical context in which this oracle was delivered to Judah. Its placement in chapters 9–14 suggests that it reflects the perspective of a prophet who has great hope for the future of Jerusalem, its people, and Davidic leadership. Clearly Jerusalem is in need of political salvation and spiritual renewal, while Judah is seen as not only supportive of, but essential to, God’s purposes for Jerusalem. But the writer does not exclude the house of David or the city of Jerusalem from God’s redemptive purposes, even though mention of the Levitical line of Shimei rather than that of Zadok in 12:13 may be evidence of a negative stance toward the Zadokite priesthood in Jerusalem.
In light of these aspects, we have isolated the period after the tenure of Zerubbabel as governor in the Persian province of Yehud. This prophecy could have arisen soon after this (just after ca. 510 B.C.), when Jerusalem had attained heightened status with the restoration of the temple structure, or even as late as the time of Nehemiah (after 445 B.C.), when Jerusalem received much attention with its rebuilt wall and repopulation of the city. The sociological perspective of the one(s) writing these oracles is clearly the province of Yehud as it grappled with the relationship between province and capital and the function that both would play in the ultimate reign of Yahweh over the earth. If it is from the earlier date, the author could easily be the prophet Zechariah, but if the latter one (after 445 B.C.), then it would have arisen from the prophetic community he spawned.
The appearance of the formula “on that day” at regular intervals throughout this passage is a significant rhetorical feature that should not be overlooked, but this does not mean that every appearance of this formula has structural significance.2 Indeed 12:1 serves as a superscription to chapters 12–14 as a whole. The Hebrew word hinneh at the beginning of 12:2 and 14:1 indicates the start of a new section within these chapters, while the form of “on that day” found in 12:3, 9; 13:2, 4 marks the structural skeleton for the passage that follows.3 This identifies 12:2 as an introduction to 12:2–13:6 with its focus on the victory of Jerusalem over the nations. Then, 12:3–8 relates various aspects of this victory, and 12:9 with its structural formula signals the end of God’s victory for Israel and provides the transition realized in 12:10 to God’s new work within Israel as he pours out his Spirit, which produces mourning (12:10–14) and cleansing (13:1).
Then in 13:2 with its structural formula, we transition to the issue of idolatry and prophecy that will be removed from the land. Finally, 13:4 with its structural formula shows how false prophecy will be squelched, showing the enduring legacy of God’s judgment on idolatry.
Introducing the God of the Oracle (12:1)
THE TERM “ORACLE” signals the beginning of a new section of prophecy (see comments at 9:1). As in 9:1, a prophetic utterance with universalistic overtones unexpectedly interrupts the flow of speech—here, “who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him.” This phrase foreshadows the global dimensions of God’s dominion and is reminiscent of participial praise expressions found in the Psalter (e.g., Ps. 18:47–48), Job (e.g., Job 5:9–16), Amos (e.g., Amos 4:13), and Isaiah (e.g., Isa. 40:22).
The first two divine actions in Zech. 12:1 refer to God’s creation of the cosmos (see esp. Isa. 51:13), while the third action alludes to God’s formation of the spirit of humanity by breathing into the human being the breath of life (Gen. 2:7). By using these snippets of praise, especially connected to God’s role as Creator, the prophet establishes Yahweh’s right to proclaim the message and his ability to act against or for the recipients.4
Victory for Jerusalem and Judah Against the Nations (12:2–8)
THE PROPHECY THAT verse 1 introduces begins by describing a siege of Jerusalem and Judah by opposing forces. The antagonists are described as “all the surrounding peoples” (vv. 2, 6) and “all the nations [of the earth]” (vv. 3, 4, 9)—terms that point to a force of global proportions.5
The protagonists here are mainly Jerusalem and Judah, with some mention of the house of David. Both Jerusalem and Judah are besieged (12:2). Before being used by God to defeat their enemies, the leaders of Judah remind themselves that the origin of the strength of Jerusalem is “the LORD Almighty . . . their God” (12:5). God then uses these leaders to bring the first phase of victory for Judah and Jerusalem, with no participation from the inhabitants of Jerusalem (12:6). The Lord will save the “dwellings” (lit., “tents”) of Judah first, granting them the same honor as the royal house and city (12:7). In the second phase of victory, God uses Jerusalem and the house of David as a fighting force, shielding the inhabitants of the city so that the weakest fighters will be like David and the Davidic house like God, who went before the armies of Israel through the angel of the Lord (12:8).
The way these protagonists are described suggests a distinction between Jerusalem and Judah, between Davidic leadership and Judean leadership. Neither Jerusalem nor its inhabitants (royal and otherwise), however, are denigrated in this prophecy. Nevertheless, one cannot miss the way in which the prophecy lifts the status of non-Jerusalemite Judeans, whom God will use to bring victory first and thus obtain the same level of status as Jerusalem and the royal house.
Throughout this initial section the author uses a variety of images to describe the triumph of Jerusalem and Judah. (1) Jerusalem is identified as “a cup that sends . . . reeling” (Zech. 12:2),6 the image being of a cup of strong wine that makes those who drink it stagger like a drunkard (Ps. 75:9; Isa. 51:17, 22; Jer. 25:15–29; 51:7; Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:31–34; Hab. 2:16).7 Tigchelaar has shown how this image is “bound up with Yahweh’s judgment, and that the drinking from this cup brings about either a situation of unpleasant intoxication (tottering, vomiting, shame) or of destruction.”8 Those who attack Jerusalem will be rendered incapacitated like a drunkard.
(2) The next image of Jerusalem is that of “an immovable rock” (Zech. 12:3) that injures all who try to “move” it, a verb that describes the heavy load carried by a pack animal (Gen. 44:13; Neh. 13:15). The word for “injure” is used in Leviticus 21:5 for cutting oneself; thus, it refers not to a muscle strain but to a bloody gash.9
(3) With the third image (Zech. 12:4) the focus shifts to God’s protection of the house of Judah as the nations advance as cavalry against Judah.10 Using three words restricted elsewhere to the list of curses in Deuteronomy 28:28,11 the prophecy envisions a scene of mass confusion with senseless riders mounted on bewildered and blinded horses.
(4) The final image (Zech. 12:6) continues the theme of victory for Judah by comparing its leaders to two common images of fire (a wood fire under a firepot, a grass fire in a field). In these images the enemy is the wood and sheaves, which are entirely consumed (“right and left”). Taken together these four images emphasize God’s victory over the surrounding nations through Jerusalem and Judah.
Grace and Supplication for Repentance and Cleansing in Victorious Jerusalem (12:9–13:1)
AS NOTED ABOVE, 12:9 begins with the structural formula that signals the transition to a new section. On one level this verse summarizes 12:2–8, emphasizing that it is God who will destroy this global coalition against Jerusalem. However, it also functions as a key transition to the next phase of God’s redemptive work, reminding the people that repentance and cleansing are prerequisite to God’s promised victory over the nations on behalf of Jerusalem and Judah.
This promise is not new in the Old Testament. Psalm 48 reminds us of God’s pleasure for the city of Jerusalem, that is, Zion, the seat of his rule (cf. Ps. 2). Although the kings amassed their forces to attack the city, they were overwhelmed by the mere sight of God’s majestic city. What makes this city secure is the presence of God (48:3, 8), who is characterized by “unfailing love” (48:9) and “righteousness” (48:10).
This promise to Zion became an important part of the city’s tradition. Theological distortions of this tradition led to the belief that Zion’s security was guaranteed apart from covenantal relationship with Yahweh (cf. Jer. 7:4; 21:13). Thus, in Lamentations 2:15 we find an allusion to Psalm 48 in the surprised cry from those who pass by: “Is this the city that was called the perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth?” Similarly in Lamentations 4:12 one finds this statement: “The kings of the earth did not believe, nor did any of the world’s people, that enemies and foes could enter the gates of Jerusalem.” Overlooked in this distortion was the necessity of God’s presence in this city, a presence threatened by the disobedience of the people: “But it happened because of the sins of her prophets and the iniquities of her priests, who shed within her the blood of the righteous” (4:13).12
These voices from the Exile reveal how important was a reevaluation of the status of Jerusalem/Zion in God’s plan for those who lived in the wake of its destruction. The message of Lamentations guides the community toward a repentance based on God’s grace (Lam. 3:40–42). What is fascinating about Zechariah 12:1–13:6 is that God offers victory and salvation for Zion simultaneously with his transformation of the people through his Spirit.
In 12:10–14 the prophet reveals that accompanying this salvation from external forces will be an internal renewal of the nation as God transforms their affections to seek him in repentance. This renewal begins with the initiative of Yahweh, who will “pour out . . . a spirit of grace and supplication.” The pouring out (šapak) of a spirit (ruaḥ) is an expression that appears in two other contexts of the Old Testament, both in prophetic literature (Ezek. 39:29; Joel 2:28–29). In these other instances this spirit is referred to as “my Spirit,” thus indicating more than just “a persuasion or conviction from YHWH that prompts a course of action.”13 God’s pouring out his Spirit is a declaration of his placing his unique and manifest presence upon his people.
This Spirit of God is one of “grace and supplication.” “Grace” (ḥen) is often used to denote the favor a person receives and enjoys with another person (e.g., Gen. 30:27), even someone in authority over them, such as the king (e.g., Est. 8:5) or God (e.g., Gen. 6:8). “Supplication” (taḥanunim) is linked to the same root as the first term, but in this case denotes seeking favor from God (e.g., Ps. 28:2, 6), which in the later period of Israel’s history appears in texts guiding the penitential response of the people (2 Chron. 6:21; 31:9; Dan. 9:3, 17, 18, 23). These terms highlight two aspects of the ministry of God’s Spirit: granting his people favor with himself through renewed relationship and invigorating them to respond to him in penitence.14
The remainder of Zech. 12:10–14 describes the impact of God’s Spirit on the community. Most of the terms and imagery in this section are drawn from the context of mourning for the dead. The people mourn over the fact that they had “pierced” someone. This raises two key questions: To what action and to which person does this “piercing” refer?
First of all, the term “pierced” is one used elsewhere for a fatal wounding (e.g., Num. 25:18) and thus indicates that the person here is experiencing death.15 This view is supported by presence of vocabulary and images that are clearly linked to Israelite responses to death. Zechariah 12:10 uses images drawn from the mourning rites of families in ancient Israel. While the death of “a firstborn son,” who was considered special in the ancient patriarchal societies, would have been difficult, the death of “an only child,” on whom rested the hope of the continuance of the family, would have been devastating.16
While these two initial images are clear, the image found in 12:11 has attracted much controversy. Some have interpreted this verse as an allusion to mourning rites connected to the untimely death of Josiah in the “plain of Megiddo” (2 Chron. 35:25), with “Hadad Rimmon” identified either as an unknown town17 or a textual mistake for “son of Amon.”18 If this interpretation is accepted, the image here is the same as those in Zech. 12:10, only on a national level.
Many interpreters, however, have noticed conspicuous similarities between this verse and the myth and ritual of Canaanite religion.19 The word Hadad Rimmon is an Aramaic epithet for the god Baal (1 Kings 15:18; 2 Kings 5:18). Baal’s death and resurrection figures prominently in Canaanite mythology and religion. Although it is difficult to determine the relationship between this myth and Canaanite agricultural rhythms and religious rituals, it is significant that mourning is associated with the cult of Baalism in Old Testament texts. In 1 Kings 18, which describes the famous battle between Elijah and Baalism on Mount Carmel above the plain of Megiddo, when Baal does not respond to their cries, his prophets perform mourning rites, cutting themselves in similar fashion to El in the Baal myth (1 Kings 18:28).20
Although the evidence is stronger for this second strain of interpretation, many have rejected it because of its association with pagan religion, considered inappropriate in a passage that will go on to reject idolatry and its practices (see Zech. 13:2–6).21 But one should not dismiss the connection to Canaanite religion too quickly. Rather than affirming pagan practices, this passage may simply be drawing on two vivid examples of mourning in Israel: family and religious mourning.
What must not be forgotten is that these various examples are introduced as similes (“as one mourns . . . as one grieves . . . like the weeping”) to express the depth of mourning that will follow the pouring out of God’s “spirit of grace and supplication.”22 Thus, it is not speaking directly of the death of someone; rather, it is using mourning to describe penitential response to God. As in the past the Israelites mourned their children, so now they will mourn in repentance for their treatment of God. As in the past they mourned their pagan gods, so “piercing” Yahweh, they will now mourn penitently their mistreatment of God.23
While this answers the first question (to what action does this piercing refer?), the second of our key questions is more challenging (to whom does this piercing refer?). The recipient of this piercing is referred to as “me” in one phrase (“they will look on me the one they have pierced”) while in the following phrases the person is referred to as “him” (“they will mourn for him . . . grieve bitterly for him”). Suggestions to alleviate this disagreement abound, with some altering the Hebrew text and others dividing the phrase differently.24 The former approach lacks textual support as the best manuscripts in Hebrew and the ancient versions all have “me.” The latter approach is possible but renders an awkward word order.
Several approaches can be discerned in past study of this verse.25 Some see here an allusion to the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 (either as an individual or communal figure), to a representative (often messianic) figure who takes the piercing directed at Yahweh, to some unknown figure, to some historical figure in the eighth to second century B.C.,26 to the king as royal figure in a preexilic ritual,27 or to someone killed in the war of Zechariah 12:1–8.
Those who stress connections to the suffering servant of Isaiah 52–53 do not take into account some clear differences, especially the fact that the death there is vicarious while here it is not; moreover, the death here leads to mourning while in Isaiah 52–53 it leads to salvation.28 Most of the other views assume that there are references to two distinct figures in this verse or presuppose a ritual for which there is little evidence.
Throughout Zech. 12:1–9 first-person speech is consistently attributed to Yahweh (see 12:1), and thus it appears that Yahweh is the “me” of 12:10. While the switch to the third person (“him”) in the following phrase is awkward, examples of such switches can be found in the Old Testament and is probably merely a feature of style.29 In this verse, God likens the people’s past treatment of him as “piercing”—disregarding and abandoning him to the point that his existence was irrelevant to their lives.30
While 12:10–11 reveals the depth of this mourning, 12:12–14 reveals its breadth. Up to here, the focus has been on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but with 12:12 this mourning impacts the entire land as each family feels the pain of the mourning generated by this new Spirit from God. Notably women and men are separated for this activity, an action probably related to the abandonment of decorum in ancient mourning customs.31
Although this mourning is clearly universal in the land (12:14), certain families are singled out. While this listing may be of the entire leadership caste of the community (royal, David; prophetic, Nathan; priestly, Levi; sapiential, Shimei),32 more likely this list represents two specific lines within the royal (David/Nathan) and priestly (Levi/Shimei) houses.
Solomon and his descendants are the ones who sat on David’s throne and through them the royal line is traced (1 Chron. 3), but Nathan is another of David’s sons (2 Sam. 5:14). Luke’s genealogy in Luke 3 reveals that at a later date, at least Nathan’s line could be used for tracing the promised line, a line that went through Zerubbabel. Perhaps Nathan’s line was raised in status because of the sinful behavior of Solomon’s line, though certainty is beyond our grasp.
The focus on Levi and Shimei is more difficult to explain. The leading family of priests in the Persian period, the Zadokites (see comments on Hag. 1:1–12; Zech. 3), traced their lineage through Aaron to Levi’s son Kohath (1 Chron. 6:1–15).33 Shimei, however, was the child of Levi’s other son, Gershom (1 Chron. 6:17; cf. Ex. 6:16–17; Num. 3:17–18). The absence of reference to the Zadokite line here is reminiscent of the trend suggested for the house of David, that is, that the founder of the line is mentioned (David, Levi), but a different descendant is used to trace the legitimate line.
It appears that this verse envisions the future royal and priestly leadership as emerging from Davidic and Levitical lines that includes the line of Zerubbabel but not the Zadokites, who were presently in charge. With this, however, we should not lose the focus of this section of Zech. 12:1–13:6, that is, that God’s Spirit will bring about a depth and breadth of mourning that will encompass the depths of the people’s being and the breadth of the community.
God’s grace has led to penitence for the house of David and the people of Jerusalem, but even this does not complete his work. In the final phase, God will provide cleansing for the behavior of this people. The term “fountain” here speaks of a spring that brings forth “fresh water” (lit., “water of life”; e.g., Jer. 2:13).34 Such a spring was an important source for water needed for ritual cleansing described in the Torah (e.g., Lev. 14:5, 50).35
This connection to ritual cleansing appears to be in view throughout this verse. Although the first term, “sin” (ḥaṭṭaʾt), is a more general term for human behavior that breaks God’s will (e.g., Deut. 9:18), it is nuanced here by its connection to the “fountain” (spring) and to the second term for sin, “impurity” (niddah). These two terms for sin are found together in only one other context in the Old Testament (Num. 19:9), where they are linked to water as here. Numbers 19:9 speaks of the “water of impurity, sin.” The phrases “water of impurity” and “water of sin” are stock terms in the Torah for the waters that bring ritual cleansing: 8:7 (water of sin); 19:13, 20, 21; 31:23 (water of impurity). In all of these cases the term refers to purification from ritual impurity. These waters are usually related to the impurity that arises from contact with dead bodies (cf. 31:23), but in 8:7 it is used in the consecration of the Levites for service in the temple.
Some have connected this ritual cleansing from defilement by a corpse to the involvement of the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the house of David in the siege of Zech. 12:1–8.36 Although this is possible, more likely this alludes to the contact with death in 12:10, where there is mention of the same characters.37 The community that has slain their God has received the “spirit of grace and supplication” in order to mourn their actions and be ritually cleansed, a symbol of God’s acceptance.
Judgment on Idolatry and False Prophecy (13:2–3)
THIS SLAYING OF GOD has still not been defined. We know that this metaphorical slaying has brought defilement, but what is the nature of this slaying? Zechariah 13:2–6 brings clarity to this question, showing that the people have rejected their God by turning to idolatry. Verse 2 continues the close association with the language of ritual impurity already encountered in 13:1, in particular using the words “cut off” (karat) and “unclean” (ṭumʾah), terms that appear together elsewhere only in connection with the state of ritual impurity (e.g., Lev. 7:20, 21).38 As Zechariah 13:1 does, so also 13:2 alludes to Numbers 19:13, with its focus on the contact with the dead. In Zechariah 13:2, however, the impurity is clearly defined as idolatry and divination.
This connection between idolatry and impurity is bolstered by the fact that the word niddah (“impurity”) is used for one other human activity in the Old Testament: idolatry (e.g., Ezek. 36:17). Ezekiel 36 has often been noted for its influence on Zechariah 13:1–6.39 Ezekiel 36 highlights the sorrowful state of the land of Israel that has been conquered and possessed by the nations (36:1–4), and the prophet promises judgment against the nations and restoration of God’s people to the land (36:5–15). It traces the dispersion of the people into exile to their unclean behavior of idolatry (36:16–21) but promises to return them, cleanse them with water from their idolatry, give them a new heart and spirit to follow the law, and provide bountiful provisions (36:22–30). The people will respond to this gracious act of Yahweh by loathing their sins, being ashamed and disgraced for their conduct (36:31–32).
These same aspects are apparent in Zechariah 12:1–13:6. The nations that have besieged Jerusalem are defeated (12:1–9), the gift of God’s Spirit (12:10) leads to deep mourning for their sin (12:11–14), and God provides cleansing for the impurity (13:1), which is identified as the slaying of God through idolatry (12:11; 13:2–6).
This idolatry is the focus of 13:2–6. Here we see the same combination of idolatry and false prophecy first encountered in 10:1–3. This is not an odd connection since divination was closely related to the practice of religion, as people delivered requests and expected answers from their gods.40 The words “spirit of impurity” sum up the impact of this idolatry and false prophecy. Such practices have left their stain on the land, which will be cleansed from it. This “spirit” stands in contrast to the Spirit of God graciously poured out in 12:10.
God will “banish the names of the idols.” The “name” is representative of the idol itself, which will be destroyed. The verb “banish” (karat, “to cut off”) is usually the punishment of the idolater, but with the transformation of the community envisioned in Zech. 12:10 and 13:1, all that will remain are the idols and their attendants. The promise that these idols will “be remembered no more” refers to more than just cerebral amnesia in the Old Testament. It describes the religious affection of the Old Testament worshiper: To remember is to serve a god, while to forget is to abandon it (see comments on 10:9; cf. Deut. 8:18–20).
Not only idols, but also their religious attendants, the prophets, will be removed from the land.41 Many have interpreted this as the end of the prophecy in the Old Testament.42 However, similar to Zechariah 10:1–2, these prophets are linked to idolatry, not to the religion of Yahweh. Furthermore, the prophets are described in terms used for false prophecy: “told lies in the LORD’s name” (13:3), “to deceive” (13:4). Thus, the removal is restricted to idolatrous prophets.
These prophets are the focus of the final verses in 13:3–6. Here we see either the fate of false prophets who will arise after God’s removal of false prophecy from the land or the means by which God removes such false prophets. The people will be so transformed by God that parents will enact the Torah’s judgment against their own child. In Deuteronomy 13 there was to be no toleration of false prophecy connected with idolatry, as the people are commanded to put the person to death (13:5), a practice obeyed in Zechariah 13:3 as the parents “stab” him (same Heb. word as “pierced” in 12:10). Here we see a reversal of the people’s actions toward God in 12:10. As they have “pierced” God, abandoning him through their idolatry, so now they will cleanse the land of idolatry by piercing their prophets. This word not only plays off of 12:10 but also off of Numbers 25:8, in which an Israelite man and Midianite women, participating in idolatrous behavior through sexual intercourse, were “pierced” by Phinehas, grandson of Aaron the high priest.43
Enduring Eradication of False Prophecy (13:4–6)
SUCH DRASTIC MEASURES will make false prophets fear their vocation. They will be ashamed of their visions,44 and such shame will lead them to try to conceal their vocation. The description of this cover-up alludes to four “earlier scriptural types.”45 The reference to “garment” certainly alludes to the garment or cloak worn by prophets in the past (e.g., 1 Kings 19:13; cf. 2 Kings 1:8). But the full phrase “garment of hair” adds another nuance by suggesting the tradition of Jacob and Esau. The only other time this phrase occurs in the Hebrew Bible is in Genesis 25:25 to describe the condition of Esau’s skin, a condition that Rebekah seeks to replicate on his brother, Jacob, in the blessing deception in Genesis 27. The use of “deceive” in Zechariah 13:4 suggests this story is also in mind.
Verse 5 moves from implicit visual denial to explicit verbal dismissal of prophetic status. Again, allusion to two traditions in the Hebrew Bible can be discerned. The first is Amos’s defense of his prophetic calling to Amaziah in Amos 7:14 (“I was neither a prophet . . .”) followed by a claim of agrarian vocation. While Amos explains that God had called him to prophesy, the opposite is the case in Zechariah 13:5. The second tradition is the description of Cain and his birth in Genesis 4:1–2. There “Cain worked the soil” (“I am a farmer,” Zech. 13:5). Furthermore, the Hebrew text behind the phrase “the land has been my livelihood since my youth” consists of three words that read: “A man acquired me in my youth.” Two of these three words are found in Genesis 4:1, the first (“a man”) is Adam who impregnates Eve, the second (“acquired”) the word on the lips of Eve at the birth of Cain (“have brought forth,” Gen. 4:1).46
One can see, then, that both the visual denial and verbal dismissal follow the same pattern. Both draw on two earlier traditions, one a reversal of a positive prophetic tradition intimately related to the calling of a prophet who attacks inappropriate pagan religion and its officials in the northern kingdom (Elijah/Elisha putting on a cloak, Amos defending his calling), the other a negative sibling tradition from Genesis that involved deception and resulted in the deceiver roaming the earth (Esau/Jacob and the stolen birthright, Cain/Abel and the attempted deception of God).47 Through this play on earlier traditions, the author is driving home God’s rejection of this idolatrous prophetic stream; they will not be able to appeal to the ancient legitimizing traditions, and their deceptive lives will result in devastating consequences.
Verse 6 brings this section on false prophecy to a close. Continuing the Hebrew rhetorical technique of apostrophe begun in 13:5, the deception is uncovered. Without the hairy robe to cover his body, the false prophet will expose his “wounds.” The term here for “wound” can refer to both fatal (e.g., 1 Kings 22:35) and nonfatal injuries (e.g., Deut. 25:3). The location of the wounds is “between your arms,” a construction similar to the wound of King Joram in 2 Kings 9:24, which was “between the shoulders” (lit., “between the arms”).
Some have insisted that this wound refers to the injury inflicted by the parents in Zech. 13:3 and that the Hebrew phrase behind “the house of my friends” (lit., “the house of those who love me”) is a reference to the family home.48 The problem with this approach is that the wound in 13:3 is fatal and the Hebrew construction behind “my friends” is never used for a parental home. Elsewhere it refers to the allies of the Israelites (e.g., Jer. 22:20, 22) or the illicit lovers (prostitutes) of the Israelites in contexts speaking of idolatry (e.g., Ezek. 16:33–37; Hos. 2:5–13). Thus, many conclude that this refers to wounds connected with illicit religious rites.49 The cutting of the body is linked to idolatrous practices connected with Baal religion (1 Kings 18:28) and the cult of the dead (Lev. 19:28; Deut. 14:1; Jer. 16:6; 47:5).50 The false prophet who tries to deceive will ultimately be discovered.
As already noted, this message is likely delivered by a member of Judah critical of activities in Jerusalem and yet hopeful of a renewal for this city and its leadership. It is significant that the community that reconstructed the temple and settled around its sacred precincts receives this message. Speaking in language familiar to the temple community, this prophet not only reminds them of the causes of the Exile but also of the hope for transformation envisioned by Ezekiel. In all of this, however, there is never a hint of rejection neither of Jerusalem nor of the Davidic line. There is an enduring hope of victory over external enemies as well as anticipation of internal renewal.
What should not be missed in all this is that these various aspects of renewal are inaugurated through the initiative of God. Although there are serious issues in view, human ability is not the way ahead. Rather, Yahweh brings victory and salvation for Israel, pours out the spirit of grace and supplication, provides a fountain of cleansing, and finally removes idolatry and false prophecy from the land.
Bridging Contexts
ZECHARIAH 9–14 AND apocalyptic. Zechariah 9–11 possesses characteristics typical of classic prophecy. One finds the hope of an idealized future for a united Israel, focus on localized enemies with some allusions to universal rule, and plenty of allusions to earlier prophecy. Announcements of salvation and judgment, woe oracles, and prophetic sign-acts are some of the forms used to express both comfort and warning.
After 12:1, however, the tone changes considerably. Chapters 12–14 focus attention on a future “day” on which God will battle against “all the nations” who have gathered against his people. Additionally, on this day God will remove sin as well as its patterns and structures from his people and establish Jerusalem as his prosperous capital, from which he will rule the earth.
In light of these characteristics, it is not surprising that chapters 12–14 are often mentioned in discussions of apocalyptic literature.51 This type of literature, displayed in its mature form (e.g., the book of Revelation), has been defined in the following way:
“Apocalypse” is a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial, insofar as it involves another, supernatural world.52
The fact that many of the elements of apocalyptic literature can be traced back to passages found in prophetic books (Isa. 24–27; 56–66; Ezek. 38–39; Joel 2:28–3:21; Zech. 1–6; 12–14) suggests that one of its key roots is to be found among the prophetic movement.53 Although not all apocalyptic works have arisen from persecuted communities, the prophetic passages that have provided the building blocks for this form have been linked to such contexts, implying that oppression was key to this transformation within prophetic speech forms.54 Apocalyptic forms with their use of symbols on a heavenly plane not only granted a divine perspective on the situation but protected the writers from their oppressors.
It is obvious that Zechariah 12–14 does not fit the definition of apocalyptic precisely.55 The narrative framework is not as developed as one finds in apocalyptic literature, and there is no otherworldly being or supernatural world. But one does find a key characteristic that ultimately dominates in apocalyptic literature and is described in the above definition: “temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation.” One can tag Zechariah 12–14 as proto-apocalyptic literature, displaying the transformation from classic forms of prophecy, rooted in the particular and historical, to apocalyptic forms, dominated by the universal and eschatological.
But it is important to note that Zechariah 12–14 can only be called proto-apocalyptic in their eschatological outlook. These chapters look to “that day” with a cosmic perspective (“all the nations”). The image of armies gathered around Jerusalem where God fights for Israel will become an important motif in apocalyptic eschatology, but this does not mean that we have here apocalyptic material. To call this “proto-apocalyptic” only means that the prophetic style found here later joins with other stylistic features to form apocalyptic.56
This discussion of genre orients us to the interpretive issues at play as we approach Zechariah 9–14. Because this prophetic material shares much in common with apocalyptic material as a result of their common eschatological perspective, lessons learned from the interpretation of apocalyptic can help shape our reading strategy.
Apocalyptic. Apocalyptic literature offers both “consolation and exhortation in the face of some crisis” by providing “a comprehensive view of the cosmos through the order of the heavens or the predetermined course of history.”57 It speaks primarily to communities undergoing a difficulty, promising hope and exhorting faithfulness through offering a vision of divine justice. This vision comes through symbolic language that communicates more like an impressionistic painting than a photograph. The various symbols are rich and need to be understood in their original context, but together they form a general impression of the ideal future of the community. This general impression usually consists of several key themes:58 God will rescue his people, bring justice to this world, purify his people and the earth from sin, and establish his reign on earth.
This view of apocalyptic is different from that adopted by many evangelicals in North America.59 For them apocalyptic literature provides a photograph of events at the end of time, and by studying the various passages, one can construct a detailed picture of these events. Beasley-Murray has identified the error of this approach:
Even the best apocalyptic cryptographer could not produce an account of the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus from the mythic picture of Revelation 12 alone, nor from the vision of the lamb in Revelation 5. Why then should we suppose that anyone would be able to produce an account of the parousia from Revelation 19:11ff., in which the Word of God rides down from heaven on a white horse followed by armies of heavenly cavalry and treads the wine press of God’s wrath alone, slaying men with the scimitar that issues out of his mouth?60
When apocalyptic passages are treated like newspaper stories, one displays little sensitivity to the symbolic value of the images. Another problem with this approach is the disregard of the way this literature functioned within the communities to which it was first addressed. One focuses less on the comfort and warning functions of this literature with so much energy expended on time lines of the eschaton.
This approach to apocalyptic, however, is also different from that adopted by many historical and literary critics who ignore the future orientation of these passages. Historical critics have traditionally focused exclusively on the function of this literature within an ancient context. Collins, for instance, in his discussion of the “apocalyptic technique” argues:
This apocalyptic technique does not, of course, have a publicly discernible effect on a historical crisis, but it provides a resolution in the imagination by instilling conviction in the revealed “knowledge” that it imparts. The function of the apocalyptic literature is to shape one’s imaginative perception of a situation and so lay the basis for whatever course of action it exhorts.61
Recent literary critics have distanced themselves from the attempt by historical critics to root apocalyptic literature in objective historical contexts, stressing instead the function of such literature to “evoke a social world, the shared reality among us.”62 In this way this ancient literature becomes relevant to the reader today within his or her own “social world.”
The historical and literary approaches to apocalyptic stress the past and present and with their focus on the sociological setting of the writing and reading of apocalyptic texts have become a theological source for many oppressed, encouraging them as they seek a new world.63
One must question, however, whether the ancient writer of apocalyptic intended that this literature merely have “a resolution in the imagination” or “evoke a social world.” Indeed, this literature did serve to comfort and exhort and did encourage hope and expectation of God’s kingdom to come, but it was not merely therapeutic literature. One cannot avoid the presence in this ancient literature of a sincere expectation that nothing less than God’s breaking into history would transform the circumstances of his people. Thus, although not providing a detailed, literal photograph of the future, apocalyptic literature does anticipate future events.
New Testament use of apocalyptic. The use in the New Testament of eschatological passages from the prophets confirms the approach outlined above.64 In his study of the use of such passages in the New Testament, C. H. Dodd cautions the modern interpreter with the following words:
The passages to which reference is made are in general couched in the symbolic language characteristic of apocalyptic literature. We should do less than justice to their authors, and certainly to the New Testament writers who quote them, if we insisted on the kind of crudely literal understanding to which our western minds are prone. Exactly where the attempt at literal description ends and symbolism begins, the writers themselves probably did not know, and we can hardly guess. But we shall be wise to treat the entire scheme of imagery as language appropriate to describe that which lies upon the frontier of normal experience, which therefore cannot be directly communicated in plain speech. But the prophets seriously believed that what they spoke of (in however cryptic terms) would happen.65
Here Dodd rejects both extremes described above—that is, an interpretation that confines the prophetic expectation to a literal future or to a metaphorical past.
Such passages were addressed to communities in crisis, offering hope and exhorting faithfulness through a symbolic vision of God’s ordering of the future. In New Testament perspective, they anticipate the eschatological redemption of Jesus Christ, through whom God entered into the history of his people. They also grant us perspectives on how to live faithfully in hope as we experience crises today and await Christ’s second coming.
Biblical theology. There is little question that Zech. 12:1–13:6 presents considerable challenges to application in our contemporary context. On the surface it uses imagery that is foreign to our modern senses and assumes a historical context for which there is scanty evidence. Nevertheless, this passage was important to the early church, who saw in it hints of the ministry of Jesus on earth, as evidenced in the allusions to 12:10 in the New Testament witness.
New Testament relevance, however, should not be limited to this single verse. The New Testament authors used this allusion to refer to the entire complex of events found in 12:1–13:6 as well as chapters 9–14 as a whole. Because of this, it is important to consider the message of 12:1–13:6 to its ancient hearers and highlight the various expectations for the community of God.
Zechariah 12:1–13:6 was addressed originally to the Jewish inhabitants of the Persian province of Yehud. In this period the Persians tightened their control over the various provinces as they sought to extend their empire into Europe. The Davidic line no longer ruled the tiny province, and the priests in Jerusalem were afforded a key role in its administration. This prophecy addresses issues within the community and yet looks to the future with hope. The prophet, distanced from the Jerusalem power structures and deeply concerned over Persian idolatrous practices, still fixed his hopes on Jerusalem, envisioning both external and internal transformation for the city. God will deliver her from all her external enemies, using the people of the province and city to bring victory. God also will transform the community from within, granting grace, inducing penitence, cleansing sin, and removing idolatrous prophecy.
Celebrating the past. The New Testament community saw in the Roman soldiers’ piercing of Jesus on the cross, the fulfillment of Zechariah 12:10. The ultimate offense against God would be this disregard for his Son by the Gentile soldiers encouraged by the Jewish community. In Revelation 1:7 and Matthew 24:30 the mourning connected to this piercing is attributed to the “nations” who will see Christ at his return. Most Christians see this return as a future experience at the eschaton, others believe that this refers to Christ’s judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Most likely both events are in view; the judgment in A.D. 70 is a foretaste of God’s final victory in history.
The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 is an important event in redemptive history. It signals a major transition in God’s redemptive plan as hopes connected to the physical city are ended and transferred to the communal city of Jerusalem, the new Jerusalem—that is, the church. This new entity made up of Jews and Gentiles (the nations) now assumes the ancient promises of Jerusalem. In an ironic twist, God’s rescue of Jerusalem and defeat of the nations was already accomplished prior to A.D. 70. Although unknown to the Jews and Gentiles at the time, Christ’s death on the cross was God’s means of delivering Jerusalem. Through this victory God pours out his spirit of grace and penitence, drawing his people to himself through Jesus.
Zechariah 12:1–13:6 is thus relevant to Christians today, primarily because it anticipates the great victory of God through Jesus and the fundamental transformation that resulted.
Living in the present. Since this passage relates to us as Christians through Christ’s great work of redemption, this text offers guidance for our life in the present, especially in 12:10–13:6. God promises to pour out a “spirit of grace and supplication.” Through Christ’s death and by his Spirit he has first of all offered his grace to humanity. But such grace is accompanied by the spirit of “supplication,” that work of the Spirit of softening the heart and bending the knee in submission before God. It is not surprising that a key theme of the early church is to “repent,” to return to God in covenant relationship. Zechariah 12:10 reveals that this is not a human work but a divine operation on hearts and communities. The accompanying imagery of mourning shows the depth of such repentance, as deep a pain as that which attends the loss of a child. This imagery also shows the breadth of such repentance as it moves throughout the entire community of God.
God not only offers grace and forgiveness but also cleansing from the impure stains of past rebellion, especially in connection with false prophecy and idolatry. The challenge of false prophecy and idolatry was fundamentally a challenge to God’s sovereignty. Through such means, the people were desirous of spiritual knowledge without the “constraints” of relationship with their covenant God. In the New Testament this cleansing is provided through the sacrifice of Christ on the cross applied through the work of the Holy Spirit.
AS 12:1–13:6 SPOKE to the Persian period Jewish community and to the Roman period Christian community, both of whom needed to live faithfully in their context, so it speaks to the church today.
Celebrating the victory of God. We must begin by celebrating the redemptive work of Christ on the cross, through which God has inaugurated a new era of salvation for his people. This era will reach its culmination in the second advent of Christ, who will come as divine warrior and bring closure to the defeat of the nations. With our bent toward pragmatism, it is easy to overlook the significance of this vision of victory both past and future.
The New Testament community saw here a revelation of Jesus and paused to consider the mystery of God’s redemptive plan—that divine piercing would inaugurate a new era of salvation. We encounter this truth regularly through the Lord’s Supper, a rhythm established by Christ to force us to reflect on the mystery of the suffering God and on the grace extended to us through his supreme act of sacrifice. As Jesus inaugurated the rhythm of celebrating his death within his community, he reminded them of a hope: “I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom” (Matt. 26:29).
As Jesus closed the first Eucharist, he anticipated an eschatological supper, engendering hope in his followers. This future dimension was obviously important to the celebration of Christ’s death in the Lord’s Supper as reflected in the Pauline instructions: “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Cor. 11:26). Zechariah 12:1–13:6, offering us a picture of God’s victory, should engender hope in his final victory inaugurated through Christ’s death, resurrection, and ascension.
Declaring the praise of God. The salvation promised in 12:1–13:6 is founded on the revelation of God as Creator (12:1), subtly setting the tone for the entire passage. Because God is Creator, he has the prerogative, power, and passion to save and judge humanity. The final shape of the Christian canon, with Genesis 1–2 as its introduction and Revelation 22 as its conclusion, reveals that the history of redemption serves a larger purpose: restoration of faithful relationship between God and humanity within a renewed cosmos.
As already noted, there is a close association between the theological statements in Zech. 12:1 and participial phrases in the Psalter and Isaiah. The regular appearance of similar phrases among the praise psalms of Israel reveals the importance of the rhythm of praise for the life of faith. Certainly praise of God is the natural expression of the redeemed to their Redeemer and of the created to their Creator. In addition, it orients believers for a life of faithfulness, reminding them of their dependence on God and his authority over him. This secondary role of praise is displayed in the prophetic messages of the latter part of the book of Isaiah, where the people are called to trust in God in the face of the nations and their idols (e.g., Isa. 44:6–28). In this way praise sets the tone for the declaration of the promises and exhortations of God.
This is why praise is such an important rhythm within the life of the community of God and necessary to the reception of his Word. From one perspective the Christian sermon is an expression of worship. If preaching the gospel is declaring God’s victory and establishing his rule in the hearts of humanity (Isa. 52:7–10; Rom. 10:14–15),66 it is one of the key rhythms in our communal praise of God, both as the preacher declares the Word and as the community responds in word and deed. From another perspective, our worship is an expression of revelation as we rehearse the creative and redemptive works of Yahweh and respond to him in word and deed. In either case, the worship of God should not be relegated to the status of “preliminaries” before the main event of the sermon.
The revelation of God and response through worship also should not be viewed as impractical. Fundamentally, the life of faith is a continuous discovery of God, our Creator and Redeemer. (1) Therefore, theological reflection and response are worthy pursuits because through them we explore the infinite character of our covenant partner and express our love to him.
(2) Such reflection and response are practical because of their influence on our attitudes and actions. Our comprehension and celebration of the character of our God will have a profound impact on our hope for the future and our response in the present. Increasing our grasp of revelation will mean pursuing opportunities to deepen our theological knowledge, whether in a formal learning environment like a seminary or in one of the many informal opportunities afforded by churches for discipleship. As leaders we must take seriously our role as teachers and facilitators of teaching within our local communities of faith. Zechariah 12:1 serves as an important gateway to the prophetic message that follows, a message that seeks to engender hope and stimulate obedience within the community of God.
Using all God’s people. The fact that Yahweh is the subject of the verbs of action throughout Zech. 12:2–9 shows that future victory will be accomplished through his sovereign actions. But clearly human instruments are used in the hands of this sovereign God. Three entities in particular are highlighted: the house of David, the people of Jerusalem, and the house of Judah. On a sociological level this text appears to be written from the perspective of the last entity and indicates some tension between the house of Judah and the other two groups. In all of this, however, there is no suggestion that the house of David and people of Jerusalem will be rejected; rather, the house of Judah will play a major part in God’s victory over the nations.
On a theological level this evidence highlights a major theme within biblical theology. In the call of Abraham in Genesis 12, Yahweh expresses his desire to create a “nation.” God’s focus is not on the creation of covenant leaders but on the formation of covenant community. True, he does raise up leaders to foster community, but these leaders are not the focus; instead, it is the community defined by relationship with God.
Moses, for instance, was the first leader of this community, and the biblical accounts of the Exodus and desert wanderings focus much attention on this central figure. But even Moses hoped for a larger role for the people of God. In Numbers 11, after the Spirit that had rested on Moses was extended to the seventy elders, Moses declares: “I wish that all the LORD’s people were prophets and that the LORD would put his Spirit on them!” (11:29).
Although royal leadership in Israel was part of God’s plan for the nation, one of the dangers inherent in kingship was the accumulation of power within the monarchial family and limitation of communal participation. This balance between covenant leader and community is echoed in the New Testament. Christ comes as covenant leader, who secures victory for God’s people and continues to lead this community at the right hand of the Father. But he has formed a covenant community on whom have fallen promises and responsibilities formerly exercised by Old Testament covenant figures. In Acts 2 Peter tells us that the prophetic office has been extended to all God’s people. In 2 Corinthians 6:18 the promise to the Davidic royal line is now extended to the entire Christian community.
Zechariah 12:2–9 affirms an ongoing role for covenant leadership while asserting the full participation of the entire community. It is a warning to those who accentuate a split between clergy and laity in the church today. Surely the New Testament witness affirms the development of leadership within the church as well as the release of gifted individuals to focus their attention on various leadership roles. But these leaders need to define themselves in terms of the community that God indwells and uses to accomplish his purposes. Similarly, the community must not view their leaders as ministers but as equippers of a community of ministers.
This temptation is not unique to a certain size of church. I remember ministering in a church in the Canadian Maritimes during my college internship. One afternoon I spent a couple of hours reading past annual reports of the church. I noticed that during one period, the pastor’s name appeared at the head of nearly every ministry (except the Women’s Prayer Group). This struggling church had adopted a philosophy of ministry that excused the laity from ministry.
Large churches face similar challenges. The larger the church becomes, the larger the ministerial staff grows. The presence of a large professional staff in a church can lead to passivity on the lay level not only because of these deeper resources, but also because the quality of ministries increases dramatically, intimidating those without professional training. In addition, there is a tendency in large churches to concentrate decision-making in a small executive group. This may be efficient, but it will create unproductive disjuncture between leadership and community. Leaders must think creatively about ways to draw on the considerable resources of the community as a whole for the ministry of the church, and members of churches must take seriously their gifting and resist the temptation to abandon ministry to the professionals.
This “clericalization” of the church, however, is not only linked to patterns of those in vocational ministry. To sustain our modern urban lifestyle there seems to be an expectation that families have to maintain a sixty-hour or more work week, distributed between both spouses. With these kinds of demands, there is little time to devote to family, church, or community, which thus encourages passivity among the laity. Such economic realities have serious implications for spreading the gospel and force us to consider deeply our priorities and calling as Christians, even if that means adopting a simpler lifestyle that is countercultural.
Submitting to God in repentance. While 12:1–9 presents God’s victory over the nations on behalf of his people, 12:10–13:6 focuses on the result of this victory and its implications for God’s people. Whereas one might have expected 12:10–13:6 to present a victory march around his freed city for the victorious divine warrior, followed by a massive banquet feast in his honor, instead one finds mourning and weeping. This is clearly linked to the fact that the people rescued by God were a people who had rejected him.
In the contemporary church we know little of the message of 12:10–14 with its focus on God’s work and a penitential depth of his people. In an era of “easy-believism,” we preach a faith that requires intellectual acceptance of key tenets of doctrine rather than the transformation of our affections. At the same time we often preach a faith that becomes another human work, not a work of God on human hearts. We must teach the doctrine of deep repentance as God’s work.
The kind of repentance encouraged in 12:10–14 is rooted in covenant relationship. The focus here is not on turning from a list of inappropriate behaviors but on mourning over our treatment of God through our rebellion. It is primarily a relational issue arising from our infidelity to God, a theme introduced at the beginning of Zechariah and captured in the simple cry of God through his prophet: “Return to me . . . and I will return to you” (1:3).
Some theological streams within Christianity have emphasized the transcendence of God over his immanence and in the process have caricatured him as a distant God unaffected by the behavior of and indifferent to a relationship with his people. However, God’s revelation in his Word and through his Son highlights his passion for relationship with us and his vulnerability when such relationship is thwarted. Hosea 11 provides a window into the tender love of God for his people, a people described as his dear child whom he sought to love, taught to walk, strove to heal, guided with kindness, released from slavery, and bent to feed (Hos. 11:2–4). The emotions of the divine heart release in 11:8–9 with the impassioned cry:
How can I give you up, Ephraim?
How can I hand you over, Israel?
How can I treat you like Admah?
How can I make you like Zeboiim?
My heart is changed within me;
all my compassion is aroused.
I will not carry out my fierce anger,
nor will I turn and devastate Ephraim.
For I am God, and not man—
the Holy One among you.
I will not come in wrath.
This cry comes from the heart of the Transcendent One, the Creator of the universe, who has entered into vulnerable relationship with his people as a sovereign choice of his will. Such vulnerability demands response from his people, and Zechariah 12:10–14 guides us in this response by calling us to penitential mourning for our rejection of God in the past and present.
Furthermore, this penitential mourning is motivated and sustained by God’s work. Within Christian traditions guilt is often used to motivate penitential response. But 12:10 declares that it is the Spirit “of grace and supplication” that stimulates such response. This means that it is an operation of God within the heart of his community, which in New Testament perspective means the work of the Holy Spirit within the life of believers. We do not conjure up this response to God; rather, it is his work. This is an important truth for preacher as well as hearer of the gospel, both of whom must rely on God for this divine work.
The emphasis on “grace” here matches the prominence of God’s grace within the penitential traditions of the Old Testament.67 Essential to the revelation of God in the Old Testament is the character creed encountered in Exodus 34:6–7:
The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.
This revelation of God’s “glory . . . goodness . . . name” (Ex. 33:18–19) is one of the most intimate revelations of God’s person and character in the Old Testament, one that is echoed throughout its history as an essential summary of Old Testament revelation and faith (cf. Num. 14:18; Neh. 9:17; Ps. 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2; Nah. 1:3; cf. 2 Chron. 30:9; Ps. 111:4). (1) What is instructive for our response to Zechariah 12 is the priority of position and proportion of emphasis on God’s grace in this self-revelation. A review of the echoes of this revelation in the Old Testament shows that the more limited phrase “the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love,” focusing on his mercy, is the constant (Neh. 9:17; Ps. 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2), and sometimes only a portion of this more limited phrase is used (Num. 14:18; Ps. 111:4; Nah. 1:3).
(2) What is also instructive is the preponderance of these echoes in contexts dealing with the forgiveness of sin. This is true in the initial self-revelation that occurs in the aftermath of the famous golden calf rebellion in Exodus 32. Functioning as mediator between God and people, Moses cries out to God to forgive his people and remain with them. The foundation of the renewal of covenant between God and people (Ex. 34) is this self-revelation of God. This pattern is replicated throughout the Old Testament—as Moses pleads for forgiveness of a later rebellion in the desert (Num. 14:18–19), as David cries to God (Ps. 86:5, 15) and praises him for his forgiveness (Ps. 103:8), as Jonah observes the repentance of sinful Nineveh (Jonah 4), as Joel calls his generation to repentance (Joel 2:12–14), or as the priests reflect on God’s forgiveness toward an earlier generation (Neh. 9:16–21).
This trend is displayed most poignantly within the penitential prayer tradition of the Persian period, which focuses attention on the faithful grace of the God who keeps covenant (Ezra 9:8–9, 13, 15; Neh. 1:10; 9:33, 35; Dan. 9:9, 13, 15, 17–18). This same focus on grace as a catalyst for penitence is echoed in the New Testament statement in Romans 2:4, “God’s kindness leads you toward repentance,” and the assurance of 1 John 1:9, “if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
Thus, it is important not to miss the accent in Zechariah 12 and in the entire Scriptures on God’s grace in contexts of forgiveness and repentance. Through his grace displayed in Christ on the cross and communicated to us through his gracious Spirit who indwells us and softens our hearts, we are called to respond in a depth of penitence.
Repentance played an important role at the outset of the Christian church. It was the message of John the Baptist as he prepared the way for Jesus. Christ also called his generation to repentance, as did the early church. The declaration of the gospel must thus include the call to repentance and must consider deeply the ways we have rejected God so that we can turn to embrace the living God. To the early church this was not additional to the call to faith in Christ; rather, it was inseparable from it (e.g., Acts 2:38; 3:19, 26).
Repentance is not restricted to this initial period but is necessary throughout our Christian journey. John stresses this in the letters to the churches in Revelation. These communities are challenged to repent of forsaking their first love (Rev. 2:4–5), endorsing false teaching (2:14–16), encouraging sexual immorality and idolatry (2:20–21), and displaying lukewarm devotion (3:15–19). These letters remind us of the need for rhythms of repentance throughout our lives as Christians, but do so always based on the revelation of grace in Jesus (1:5–6; cf. chs. 4–5).
Such rhythms should not be restricted to the individual Christian. One should not miss the communal dimension of the repentance described in Zechariah 12:10–14, where whole clans mourn together before God. Those of us who have grown up in the West with our individualistic approach to life often miss this. This passage envisions penitential communities, that is, communities that practice and foster the rhythms of penitence.
Although the communal penitential tradition was a reality throughout the history of Israel and Judah, the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem provided greater impetus for its practice. It is clear that throughout the Babylonian exile and down to the time of Christ, the Jewish community regularly set apart time for communal expressions of penitence (Zech. 7–8). Nehemiah 9–10 offers some insights into the components of such a day:
1. gathering together apart from those outside the community (9:1–2)
2. fasting, wearing sackcloth, sprinkling dust on the head (9:1–2)
3. confession of sins of community, present and past (9:2, 3, 16–37)
4. reading from the Torah (9:3)
5. worshiping (9:3–15)
6. reviewing the story of redemption (9:6–31)
7. entering into covenant agreement (9:38–10:39)
Such a model is instructive for the church today as we take seriously penitential rhythms within our faith community. I know of at least one church that sets aside one week early in January as a time of sacred assembly. During this week all church events are cancelled and the people meet each evening to seek their God together as they begin their year. Some churches capitalize on the traditional season of Lent in the lead-up to Easter as a period to consider the message of repentance in a special way. These kinds of communal experiences are invitations to the community to live “penitentially” throughout the year.
Cleansing from sin. God’s victory for his people, demonstrated in Zech. 12:1–9, leads to the penitential response of his people in 12:10–14. Then 13:1–6 opens with the refreshing picture of a cleansing fountain provided for a people dirtied by sin. God promises cleansing from the sin that stains our lives, consciences, relationships, and societies, disqualifying us from his holy presence. This promised fountain is fulfilled in and through Christ’s redemptive work and the ongoing application of this work to our lives by the Holy Spirit.
Zechariah 13:1 affirms God’s desire to cleanse his penitent people. Such a desire is echoed in the promise of 1 John 1:9: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” So also in 1 Corinthians 6:11, after providing a list of those excluded from the kingdom of God, the apostle Paul declares: “And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”
At the beginning of this same letter, Paul notes the dual character of this kind of cleansing sanctification when he writes: “To the church of God in Corinth, those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy” (1 Cor. 1:2). Through faith in Christ Jesus these believers were “sanctified” (past), and yet in the same breath Paul reminds them that they are “called to be holy” (future). In Christ we are cleansed and yet we are also in the process of being cleansed by the work of the Spirit.
The promise of cleansing in Zechariah 13:1 thus reminds us of God’s provision for cleansing through Christ’s death on the cross and of our need to embrace this provision through faith in him. But this cannot be separated from the ongoing process of cleansing so essential to our walk in the Spirit. We are cleansed, we are being cleansed, and we will be cleansed.
Renouncing idolatry. Zechariah 13:1–6 also reminds us of God’s abhorrence of sin, in particular the sin of idolatry and its attendant divination. So serious was God about such actions that capital punishment was required. While it is true that Western Christians are not often tempted to worship divine images, we must not forget that at the heart of idolatry is the pursuit of one’s agenda apart from reliance on and submission to God. Even as the prohibition of idolatry endures in New Testament writings (1 Cor. 6:9; 10:7, 14; 12:12; Gal. 5:20; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 Peter 4:3; 1 John 5:21; Rev. 9:20), one can discern a broader definition of idolatry in Paul’s treatment of evil behavior:
But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a man is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. (Eph. 5:3–5, italics added)
Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. (Col. 3:5, italics added)
Our idols may take different forms, such as hedonism, materialism, or domination, but they are as idolatrous as ancient forms. In light of the seriousness with which God treats idolatry in the Old Testament as well as the New, we need to examine our lives and seek the cleansing waters and motivating Spirit of God to live righteously as his people.
Zechariah 12:1–13:6 has emphasized God’s passion to remove sin from his people and reminds us of the importance of penitential rhythms in our lives. The deceptive nature of sin can be illustrated by the following story that radio personality Paul Harvey once told on his show, in which he vividly describes the method of the sly Eskimo seeking to kill an Arctic wolf.
First, the Eskimo coats his knife blade with animal blood and allows it to freeze. Then he adds another layer of blood, and another, until the blade is completely concealed by frozen blood. Next, the hunter fixes his knife in the ground with the blade up. When a wolf follows his sensitive nose to the source of the scent and discovers the bait, he licks it, tasting the fresh frozen blood. He begins to lick faster, more and more vigorously, lapping the blade until the keen edge is bare. Feverishly now, harder and harder the wolf licks the blade in the Arctic night. So great becomes the craving for blood that the wolf does not notice the razor sharp sting of the naked blade on his own tongue, nor does he recognize the instant at which his insatiable thirst is being satisfied by his own warm blood. His carnivorous appetite just craves more until the dawn finds him dead in the snow!68
This applies to our world today with its enticing message of lifestyles that are sure to satisfy. Promised as paths of “life,” they end in disappointment, despair, and even death. There are many pursuits that can be mentioned within our present culture. One is the hedonistic pursuit of pleasure through sex, food, and drugs that has left our society physically and emotionally scarred. Another is the relentless pursuit of amusement through entertainment and travel, which Neil Postman has succinctly described as “amusing ourselves to death.”69 Still another is the materialistic pursuit of things, the latest technology, clothes, cars, and homes that insulates us for a time from the realities of the world around us and the Spirit that indwells us. Finally, there is the arrogant pursuit of power, the ability to heartlessly knock off all those in line in front of us so that we can advance in status in this world. These are but a sampling of those sinful pursuits that ultimately will destroy us not only as individuals but also as a culture.
God came through Christ to give us life, not death, and Zechariah 12:1–13:6 reminds us not only of the life-giving work of Jesus for us and in us, but also of God’s design to enliven us by his Spirit. Walking in step with this Spirit of life is truly a matter of life and death.