THEN HE SHOWED me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right side to accuse him. 2The LORD said to Satan, “The LORD rebuke you, Satan! The LORD, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you! Is not this man a burning stick snatched from the fire?”
3Now Joshua was dressed in filthy clothes as he stood before the angel. 4The angel said to those who were standing before him, “Take off his filthy clothes.”
Then he said to Joshua, “See, I have taken away your sin, and I will put rich garments on you.”
5Then I said, “Put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him, while the angel of the LORD stood by.
6The angel of the LORD gave this charge to Joshua: 7“This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘If you will walk in my ways and keep my requirements, then you will govern my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you a place among these standing here.
8“ ‘Listen, O high priest Joshua and your associates seated before you, who are men symbolic of things to come: I am going to bring my servant, the Branch. 9See, the stone I have set in front of Joshua! There are seven eyes on that one stone, and I will engrave an inscription on it,’ says the LORD Almighty, ‘and I will remove the sin of this land in a single day.
10“ ‘In that day each of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and fig tree,’ declares the LORD Almighty.”
Original Meaning
ZECHARIAH 3 BEGINS with court proceedings in the heavenly council. The high priest Joshua stands before this court in filthy clothes about to be prosecuted by “the Adversary” (NIV “Satan”). The Lord, however, discontinues the proceedings by rebuking the Adversary and explaining the condition of the high priest. With the Lord’s backing, the angel of the Lord, who is overseeing the court, rectifies the high priest’s condition by commanding his helpers to remove the filthy clothes and replace them with new vestments.
After the angel interprets this clothing act as a removal of guilt, the prophet interjects, requesting that a turban be placed on the priest’s head. The angel then delivers a message to the high priest.1 First he looks to the immediate present and gives him a solemn charge to fulfill his duties as high priest in the restored temple. Fulfillment of these duties will result in the provision of the prophetic word. Then the angel looks to the future, revealing that the establishment of the priests at the restored temple mount is a sign of a new era in redemptive history, one in which a Davidic ruler named ṣemaḥ (NIV “Branch”) will come and remove the guilt of the land, ushering in a period of prosperity known before only in Solomon’s reign.
This vision reflects a period in Zechariah’s ministry after Joshua has returned to the land but prior to the arrival of Zerubbabel, the Davidic descendant.2 The prophet affirms the role of the Zadokite priestly family, a family that has remained faithful during the Exile (see Ezek. 44:10–16), and installs their leader Joshua as high priest for the new temple and community. But the prophet also carefully delineates a role for the monarchy and argues that the reinstatement of the priestly house is a sign of the renewal of the royal house, which will usher in a new age of prosperity.
Court/Investiture Scene (3:1–5)
THE VISION OPENS with the ambiguous phrase “he showed me.” Although the interpreting angel escorted the prophet in the earlier visions, he left the scene in 2:3. Most likely the subject here is the Lord himself, whose entrance was announced in 2:13.3
The Lord shows Zechariah a scene that features Joshua, a priestly figure, well known to us from the books of Ezra (see Ezra 3; 5:1–2) and Haggai (see Hag. 1:1–11). His lineage can be traced through his father Jehozadak to the great priest Zadok and ultimately to Aaron, brother of Moses and first high priest of Israel. Zadok served with Abiathar as priest under David (2 Sam. 15:24), and when Abiathar joined Adonijah’s rebellion against David (1 Kings 2:26–27, 35), he assumed sole control of priestly duties in Jerusalem. Ezekiel lauds the Zadokite priests for their faithfulness during the Exile (Ezek. 44:10–16). According to Ezra and Haggai, Joshua emerges with Zerubbabel as the key leaders (one priestly, one royal) in the second phase of restoration.
Joshua is the focus of a meeting of the heavenly council in which the Lord is surrounded by his angelic messengers.4 Zechariah’s presence is not odd because prophets had access to the divine court (1 Kings 22:19–21; Isa. 6; Jer. 23:16–22; Ezek. 1–3; Amos 3:7). The prophet sees Joshua “standing before” the angel of the Lord. This phrase is used in the Old Testament to describe participants in a royal court (1 Sam. 16:21–22; Jer. 52:12) as well as a legal assembly (Num. 5:16, 18, 20; 27:2; 35:12; Deut. 19:17).5 In Zechariah 3 these two contexts cannot be distinguished because the royal court functioned in the ancient Near East as a legal court.
On the right side of Joshua stands “Satan.” Psalm 109, a psalm of someone accused who awaits trial,6 also speaks of a śaṭan (NIV “accuser”) on the right hand (109:6), who brings an accusation and seeks a guilty verdict (109:6–7; cf. vv. 4, 20, 29). In Zechariah 3, the śaṭan in the heavenly legal court is an angelic being who fills the role of prosecuting attorney for the purposes of the tribunal.7 The content of these accusations is not delineated in the vision. However, the proceedings that follow strongly suggest that they focus on the unworthiness of the high priest to perform his duties.
Rather than deny the accusations, the Lord rebukes the accuser and declares his intention to change the deplorable condition of the high priest because of his election of Jerusalem, echoing early assertions of divine choice and renewed favor in the night visions (1:17; 2:12).8 The condition of the high priest is explained by the fact that he is “a burning stick snatched from the fire,” an allusion to the priest’s recent release from exile in Babylon drawn from Amos 4:11, who condemned the impenitent nation prior to exile. This image is a reminder both of the past punishment as well as future grace.
Verse 3 slows down the vision narrative for a moment and signals a new phase in the legal proceedings: the verdict. Joshua’s clothes are indeed filthy (ṣoʾim), a term unique to this verse in the Old Testament but closely related to two nouns (ṣeʾah, Deut. 23:14; Ezek. 4:12; ṣoʾah, 2 Kings 18:27; Isa. 28:8, both used for human excrement and the latter one also for vomit). Such uncleanness is obviously inappropriate for a high priest in the presence of deity.
The angel of the Lord addresses the verdict to “those who were standing before him” (i.e., other members of the heavenly court) and instructs them to remove the filthy clothes. Immediately the angel turns to Joshua and declares that he has removed his “sin,” a term that appears in the high priestly clothing rituals described in Exodus 28:36–38 (NIV “guilt”) and Numbers 18:1 (NIV “responsibility for offenses”).9 This connection between the removal of guilt and the high priestly clothes suggests that Joshua is not only portrayed a steward for God’s temple palace but also represents the entire remnant community.10
Next the angel declares that he has clothed this priest with “pure garments” (NIV “rich garments”),11 after which the prophet Zechariah commands the attendants to set a “clean turban” (ṣanip) on Joshua’s head. Though this is a different term for headdress from that found in the Torah (miṣnepeti, cf. Ex. 29:6; Lev. 8:9; Num. 20:26–28),12 the reader cannot help but think of the high priestly turban because it is modified by the adjective “clean” (ṭahor), a term employed regularly in the priestly literature to speak of ritual purity (e.g., Lev. 10:10).
In the Torah the turban joins several other special items of clothing fabricated from the finest materials for the high priest upon his ordination (Ex. 28 and 39), and in the investiture ceremony it was the last piece of clothing to be donned before the anointing oil was applied (Ex. 29:6–7; cf. Lev. 8:9–12). The turban is also mentioned in another ritual context in the Torah, the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:4). The priestly vestments worn on this day were made from a type of material called bad (“linen”), distinguishing them from the garments used on the day of consecration, which were made from several forms of šeš (“linen”).13 The Day of Atonement was the only day in the ritual calendar when the high priest was allowed to enter into the Most Holy Place, and on this day he made atonement for the sins of the Israelite community.
These two events in the Torah provide a backdrop for the imagery and rituals encountered in Zechariah 3. (1) Both highlighted the act of clothing the high priest and were concerned with the removal of “guilt” (Ex. 28:38; Lev. 16:21; Zech. 3:4, 9). (2) Both ceremonies made it possible for the Lord to dwell with his people through a consecrated mediator (Ex. 29:44–46) and sanctuary (Lev. 16:16 for the tabernacle; cf. 16:18 for the altar), an issue that prepares the way for this vision. Zechariah 3 announces a new day for Joshua as he is cleansed from the stain of the Exile and installed as priest of the temple, instrumental for removing guilt from the community.
This, however, is only half of the story, for although the imagery conjures up the high priestly garments of the Torah, the actual words used for Joshua’s new clothing and turban can be traced to Isaiah 3:16–4:6. This passage begins by speaking of the proud “daughters of Zion” and promises judgment typified by the removal of their many luxuries (including pure garments and turbans). By the end of Isaiah 3 these women become indistinguishable from the personified city of Jerusalem (notice “her gates,” 3:26), which mourns over the loss of inhabitants.
A reversal, however, occurs in Isaiah 4:2–6, which continues the imagery of the “daughters of Zion” (4:4), whose “filth” (ṣoʾah, cf. above) is removed by “the spirit of fire” (cf. imagery of fire in Zech. 3). In this period the “Branch [ṣemaḥ] of the LORD” will be beautiful and glorious, the same word used twice in the oracles in Zechariah 3 to speak of a coming figure who ushers in a period of blessing. In other words, this vision deliberately plays off Isaiah 3:16–4:6 as the God “who has chosen Jerusalem” promises a new day for his people.14
Angelic Oracular Interpretation (3:6–10)
UP TO THIS point in Zechariah 3 the focus has been on the scene and its action, with minimal interpretation (only 3:4). As in the other visions, this scene sets up an oracle that relates to the visionary scene. The angel’s prophetic speech (“This is what the LORD Almighty says,” 3:7; “declares the LORD Almighty,” 3:10) is introduced by the verb “gave this charge” (Hiphil of ʿwd), a verb used elsewhere in connection with strong warnings delivered by a human (e.g., Gen. 43:3), by God (e.g., Ex. 19:21, 23), or by a prophet (e.g., Jer. 6:10).15 The fact that the recipients of this action elsewhere are all being warned reveals a transition from a positive disposition in the interpretation in Zechariah 3:4, which declared God’s removal of guilt, to a darker nuance, reminding the priest that this new status cannot be taken for granted.
This more negative tone becomes clear in 3:7. In contrast to the first speech to Joshua in 3:4, this second one begins with a series of conditional clauses, outlining expectations for the high priest. There are four conditional clauses, divided into two groups—the first two speaking in general and the second two in specific terms.
(1) The angel calls Joshua to “walk in my ways . . . keep my requirements.” (a) The phrase “walk in my ways” is a general term for walking in covenantal fidelity to God expressed through obedience to Torah (e.g., Deut. 8:6). (b) “Keep my requirements” can also refer to general faithfulness to Torah (e.g., Lev. 18:30), but in priestly literature often refers to the service performed by a priest (e.g., Lev. 22:9). This phrase appears in two other contexts relevant to Zechariah 3. One of the last instructions on the day of the ordination of the high priest was the exhortation to remain at the Tent of Meeting for the seven days of the ritual and “do what the LORD requires” (Lev. 8:35; lit., “keep my requirements”). Moreover, Ezekiel uses this phrase to refer to the faithful ministry of the priestly line to which Joshua belonged (Zadokites; Ezek. 40:45, 46; 44:8, 14, 15, 16; 48:11), a line contrasted with other Levites who participated in idolatry (44:10). These priestly connections to the phrase “keep my requirements” strongly suggest that the angel is referring generally to faithful priestly service.
(2) From the more general call to covenantal and ritual faithfulness, the next two conditions focus on more specific actions (“govern . . . have charge”) within a prescribed area (“my house . . . my courts”). The Hebrew verb dyn (NIV “govern”) is usually translated as “judge” (Ps. 7:8), and the phrase “my house” refers to the location where this justice was dispensed, since legal proceedings in the sanctuary were included in priestly duties (Deut. 17:8–13) and anticipated by Ezekiel for the restored Zadokite priests (Ezek. 44:24). The subsequent reference to “courts” (ḥaṣer) refers to the courtyards within the sanctuary precincts (Ex. 27:9; Lev. 6:9, 19; 1 Kings 6:36; 7:12), where ritual activity took place, another responsibility suggested by Ezekiel’s vision of the renewed Zadokite priestly service (Ezek. 44:17–23; cf. ch. 40).
If such conditions of faithfulness to the covenant in general and to priestly duties in particular are met, the angel promises the high priest “a place among these standing here.” “These standing here” clearly refers to members of the heavenly council, but recent work on the Hebrew term that underlies the word “place” has demonstrated that the high priest is not being offered access to the heavenly council, but rather to individuals who already enjoy such access,16 most likely prophets (cf. Zech. 7:3).17
With the completion of 3:7, the angel now returns to the unconditional tone, with the call to attention: “Listen.” As in the previous verse, he is still addressing Joshua but now expands the discussion to include “your associates seated before you,” a phrase that describes the relationship between a religious figure and his disciples (2 Kings 4:38; 6:1).18 These are Joshua’s priestly associates, who assist him with the temple justice and ritual (cf. Ezra 3:2; Zech. 6:9–15), a reference to the instatement of the Zadokite priesthood in the priestly service.
That the larger issue of Zadokite priesthood is in view here is bolstered by the following phrase, which links the “men symbolic of things to come” to “your associates” (Heb., “they”) rather than to Joshua. But in what way can these be “men symbolic of things to come”? This phrase consists of only two words in the Hebrew text: ʾanše mopet. Although mopet (NIV “symbolic of things to come”) can denote God’s visible signs before humanity (e.g., “wonders” in Ex. 7:3), the reference here is to prophetic revelation through object lessons or sign-acts.19 Two prominent examples of sign-acts (mopet) are Ezekiel’s acts of packing his belongings and digging through the wall (Ezek. 12:6, 11) and his silence at the death of his wife (24:24, 27).20
Sign-acts are “nonverbal behaviors . . . whose primary purpose was communicative and interactive” in similar ways to verbal prophecy; that is, they “give advice, express conviction, indict” as well as “predict” (e.g., Jer. 13; Ezek. 3).21 In what way, then, are the priests involved in a sign-act? There is no reason to deny the ceremony of clothing Joshua the status of sign-act, especially considering the involvement of the prophet in the procedure. Thus, the investiture of Joshua as a symbol of the installment of the Zadokite priesthood (“your associates”) is the sign-act that expresses the conviction of God’s approval of the priesthood. But there also appears to be a future aspect to this sign-act communicated in two phases in the section that follows.22
In the first phase, the angel speaks of someone called “my servant, the Branch [ṣemaḥ]”23 Who is this individual and how does he relate to Joshua and his priestly cohorts? In Isaiah 4:2–6 ṣemaḥ is used as a general image of prosperity, referring to rich vegetation and paralleled with “the fruit of the land” (4:2). This prosperity is experienced by “the survivors in Israel” (4:2) and “those who are left in Zion, who remain in Jerusalem” (4:3), phrases reflective of remnant and restoration theology. We have already noted the influence of Isaiah 3:16–4:6 on Zechariah 3 as the vision intertwines the clothing and condition of the “daughters of Zion” with the clothing and condition of the high priest. This reference to ṣemaḥ returns one final time to Isaiah 3:16–4:6 to speak of a coming age of prosperity typified by rich vegetation (cf. Zech. 3:10).
In Zechariah 3:8, however, there is a transformation of the image ṣemaḥ. Whereas in Isaiah 4 this word is a sign of prosperity, by linking it with “my servant” Zechariah 3:8 clearly identifies ṣemaḥ as a person. Outside of Zechariah 1–8, Jeremiah 23:5–6 and 33:15–16 are the only passages to use this image to refer to a human being—in both cases a Davidic descendant.24
If ṣemaḥ is a Davidic descendant, then in what way are these priests “symbolic of things to come”? Although some have suggested that the prophet is collapsing the royal house into the priestly office, this is not the case here.25 A closer look at Jeremiah 33:15–22 reveals how Jeremiah links the hope of the endurance of David’s royal line in Judah with the endurance of the priestly service in the temple. This is not lost on Zechariah, who reveals that the installment of Joshua as high priest foreshadows the coming age of ṣemaḥ.
The angel provides a second phase of his interpretation in Zech. 3:9–10 by drawing attention to “the stone I have set in front of Joshua.” The phrase “I have set in front of” probably means “handed over to” (cf. Deut. 1:21; 2:36).26 More controversial is the reference to “the stone.” In recent years scholars have been split between several views,27 interpreting the stone as the temple rebuilding project, the temple mount,28 the desert rock spring (Num. 20),29 the engraved metal plate on the turban (Ex. 28:38), or the engraved stones on the ephod of the high priest’s vestments (Ex. 28:22–28). Of these views, the final two fit the context best because of connections to vocabulary in texts describing the high priestly clothing (“stone, engraving”) coupled with the mention of taking away “guilt” in “one day.”
This stone has “seven eyes” on it, which may refer to facets of a gem,30 to the letters engraved on the golden plate (Ex. 28:36–38),31 or to the fourteen stones on the high priest’s breastplate/ephod complex (Ex. 28:16–28).32 In any of these cases, the stone is associated with the representative nature of the high priest for bearing the guilt of the nation, for the final phrase declares its significance: “I will remove the sin of this land in a single day.”
This reference to the removal of sin in one day alludes to the high priest’s role as representative of Israel who, through the rites of the Day of Atonement, made atonement for the sins of the people and for their defilement of the sanctuary. “Sin” (ʿawon) is the same word used by the angel in verse 4 (for which we have suggested “guilt”) and the same one used in the Day of Atonement legislation (Lev. 16:21–22).33 The verb “remove” (mwš), however, is different from those found in the Day of Atonement rites (Lev. 16:30, 33). The use of this term in Zechariah 3:9 rather than those used in the Day of Atonement seems to distinguish this act from the high priestly ritual. Whereas the Day of Atonement was designed to “make atonement for” guilt and ritually “cleanse” the people and sanctuary, the day associated with Branch, to which and to whom the priestly investiture points, will be a day when “guilt” is removed permanently, making the Day of Atonement obsolete.34
Verse 10 concludes the angel’s oracular interpretation. The idiom used here “each . . . under his vine and fig tree” occurs elsewhere for the peace and prosperity experienced under a successful ruler, whether Solomon in the past (1 Kings 4:25) or the Lord in the future (Mic. 4:4).35 The association of ṣemaḥ with the Davidic dynasty brings to mind the idyllic description in 1 Kings 4:25. But the Micah passage focuses on the role of the temple in the future universal rule of Yahweh (Mic. 4:1–5) and is followed by another prophetic piece that speaks of the return of the remnant, Mount Zion, and the Daughter of Zion. Whether or not the use of this idiom is linked to these specific passages, there is clearly a connection to rulership in a passage that speaks of ṣemaḥ, a future Davidic ruler.
The idiom, however, has a unique twist here in Zechariah 3, for its orientation is expressly communal: “Each of you will invite his neighbor.” The future figure will usher in a new day of safety and prosperity, typified by the ability of each member of the community to offer hospitality. To those living in the wake of Babylonian hegemony, including destruction of their nation and, for many, captivity in a foreign land, this promise is comforting indeed.
In summary, Zechariah 3 completes a line of argument that began in 2:6. There the prophet exhorts the people, called “Zion” and “Daughter of Zion,” to escape their captivity in Babylon and return to the land and city that God inherited, chose, and promised to indwell.36 This prepares the way for the vision of chapter 3, which uses Joshua’s investiture as high priest for two purposes. (1) It is an opportunity to speak to Joshua as high priest, assuring him of God’s blessing and calling him to faithfulness in his duties. (2) It is also an opportunity to speak to Joshua as representative of his priestly line, which is a sign-act of something far greater—a new era in redemptive history that will culminate in the coming of a royal Davidic ruler. Key to this new era is the removal of guilt from the land and prosperity for its inhabitants.
Bridging Contexts
PRIEST, PROPHET, AND KING. “Monica Lewinsky . . . Monica Lewinsky . . . Monica Lewinksy.” It did not matter whether the newscast was in English at Humphrey Airport in Minneapolis, in Dutch at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam, or in Hebrew at Ben Gurion Airport near Tel Aviv, her name was recognizable across the globe on the same day I led a group of students from Saskatchewan, Canada, to the Israeli coastal city of Jaffa. In a world on the brink of the Kosovo War, with El Niño devastating the globe and the Asian financial “flu” placing entire nations in the Far East in jeopardy, the lead story was Monica Lewinsky.
Growing up in Canada, I have always been fascinated by the American system of government, which always seemed so cumbersome to me in contrast to the simplicity of the British parliamentary system. What I call “cumbersome,” however, my friends to the south call “balance of power.” This system consists of three semi-independent branches, each with unique responsibilities, including a check on the others—the executive branch: the president of the United States; the legislative branch: the Congress (including the Senate and House of Representatives); and the judicial branch, the Supreme Court and its lesser courts and attorneys.
Enter, stage right: Monica Lewinsky, and what looked like a balance of power turned to all-out civil war: the judicial branch (aka Kenneth Starr), secretly taping conversations between Lewinsky and a girlfriend to get information on the president and handing out subpoenas to many of the President’s closest aides; the executive branch (aka Bill Clinton), denying all; and the legislative branch, split down the middle with some supporting the executive and others the judicial branch, primarily along party lines. This balance of power was stretched to the limit in the lead-up to and in the aftermath of the impeachment proceedings of the president, at times leaving the nation disgusted, at other times undermining the ability of leaders to guide the nation with integrity.
Such disarray in the leadership of a nation, however, is not unique to late twentieth-century American life, but is evidenced in early sixth-century Judean life as well. The final days of the southern kingdom (Judah) were witness to tension and collusion between the three “branches” of leadership within Judean society: the royal, priestly, and prophetic branches (cf. Mic. 3:11). A quick look at Jeremiah 37:3 reveals the role played by all three of these branches: “King Zedekiah, however, sent Jehucal son of Shelemiah with the priest Zephaniah son of Maaseiah to Jeremiah the prophet with this message: ‘Please pray to the LORD our God for us.’ ”
In this case king and priest were arrayed against prophet as the nation teetered on the brink of destruction. The balance of power that was to preserve the nation, however, was undermined by the refusal of two of the branches to heed the cry of the prophetic branch. Because of this refusal, the nation would ultimately end up in exile and the various branches dispersed and decimated by this devastation.
The vision in Zechariah 3 is a timely message for Zechariah’s community as it proclaims the reemergence of these same branches of leadership within the restoration community. Although clearly priestly, prophetic, and royal figures lived in and through the Exile, an important sign that restoration arrived for the people was the reinstatement of these figures in official capacities in the temple and polity of the Persian period.
It is not surprising that the prophets were the first to emerge after the Exile, since their ministry continued throughout the exilic period (see Jeremiah and Ezekiel). Priestly and royal figures, however, were slow off the mark, considering they were restricted in the exercise of their role without temple (priest) or palace (king). A closer look at the priestly, prophetic, and royal figures in Zechariah 3 helps us identify the significance of the message of this passage for Zechariah’s original audience and begin the process of identifying its significance for us today.
Joshua represents the priestly caste within Israel. Most of the priests were born in a land far distant from the holy ground of Israel and only heard of the priestly duties from the older generations. But as this passage shows with its reference to the cleansing of the entire land, Joshua also represents the entire exilic community as they return to the land. As the one who will serve in God’s presence offering sacrifices and offerings on behalf of the people, the fate of Joshua is intertwined with that of the people. As a mediatorial figure positioned between God and his people, Joshua is essential for God to fulfill his promise of returning to the temple and for the people to have access to this presence.
The message from God through this vision is clear: Although filthy from the stain of the Exile, represented by the filthy clothing, God proclaims his grace for the high priest. The stain will be removed and new clothing provided in order to signal a new start for the priesthood and the people; it opens the way for the return of the Lord to his temple. There is little question that this reinstatement occurs in the early Persian period and that the rule of the Zadokite priests will endure for the next 350 years until the rise of the Hasmoneans.37
Essential to this new start for priesthood and people is the gift of prophets like Zechariah, who have access to the divine council. These mouthpieces of God’s revelation arose throughout the history of God’s people to guide the community in the ways of God. Haggai’s queries of the priests in Haggai 2:10–14 and Zechariah’s role alongside them in the temple in Zechariah 7:3 show the close relationship between priest and prophet in the early Persian period, a relationship evident in the preexilic era as well (Jer. 26:2, 7–8, 16; 23:16; 35:4; Lam. 2:20).38 The books of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi trace the important role that such prophets play within the Persian period community as they encourage and warn the people. Similarly, Ezra 5–6 highlights the role of the prophetic word within this same community:
Now Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the prophet, a descendant of Iddo, prophesied to the Jews in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, who was over them. Then Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel and Jeshua son of Jozadak set to work to rebuild the house of God in Jerusalem. And the prophets of God were with them, helping them. (Ezra 5:1–2)
So the elders of the Jews continued to build and prosper under the preaching of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah, a descendant of Iddo. They finished building the temple according to the command of the God of Israel and the decrees of Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes, kings of Persia. (Ezra 6:14)
In the first passage the prophets are placed alongside Zerubbabel and Joshua as instrumental in rebuilding the temple. In the second passage the preaching of the prophets is placed on the same level as the “decrees of Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes,” the Persian emperors. Certainly nothing emphasizes more the key role that the prophets play in this formative period for the restoration. With access to the divine council, they are key conduits of discernment for this community as they seek God’s word and encourage the people in their endeavors.
This vision finally focuses considerable attention on the reinstatement of the Davidic line. It represents a message to the priestly caste that their return to the temple courts foreshadows the coming of ṣemaḥ (“Branch”). Delivered in the period when Joshua and many priests have returned (see Zech. 6:9–15) but Zerubbabel, the Davidic scion, has not,39 this reminds the priests of Jeremiah’s promise that the fates of both priestly and royal lines are intertwined. They should anticipate a period of peace and prosperity with the two offices restored.
This hope in the reemergence of the Davidic line is a core element of Old Testament revelation and faith. God promised David an unending line of descendants to serve as vice-regent over his people and world (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 2). This was seriously threatened as the king was marched off into exile (2 Kings 24–25), but God’s promises come true as he preserves his anointed one among the nations and ultimately returns his descendant to the Promised Land.
A message for the church. Zechariah 3 thus speaks to a community long ago and far away. Its focus on the priestly order in Israel is a potential stumbling block for many Christian readers. Priests do not receive positive billing in the New Testament because of their opposition to Jesus’ ministry. Moreover, the book of Hebrews clearly subordinates the Aaronic and Levitical priesthood to that of Christ’s Melchizedekan priesthood, highlighting the way in which the Old Testament priesthood falls short of the ideal in Christ. It is this lack of fulfillment that provides an important segue for the Christian community to appropriate its message for the church today. The New Testament identifies Jesus as the ultimate fulfillment of the Davidic hope. In and through him the idyllic conditions of Zechariah 3 can be realized.
On the basis of this we cannot afford to miss the timely message of this chapter for us. It bears witness to God’s continuing pursuit of his people. God reveals his persistent desire to be present with his community, a priority only possible through the priestly and sanctuary structure. He also reveals his continued gracious provision of salvation for his people, a provision that makes his presence possible. This passage reminds the church of Christ’s grace, unmerited and yet available through God’s faithfulness. The Adversary is accurate in his accusations: Joshua is a sorry sight and unworthy to be within the camp of Israel, let alone the divine council. But God declares a new start by his grace, on the basis of which we are called to faithfulness. As we hear the call to Joshua, we can hear a call to each of us as a community of priests within our world.
God’s provision of the prophetic word in Joshua’s time parallels his provision of the written Word today for the church. Although the New Testament is well aware that the written Word can spell death if it is only “tablets of stone” without the enlivening Spirit (2 Cor. 3:1–18; cf. John 5:37–40), it does describe that Word in dynamic terms. The Scriptures are “living and active” (Heb. 4:12), “living and enduring” (1 Peter 1:23), and therefore are “God-breathed and useful” (2 Tim. 3:16) and “at work in you who believe” (1 Thess. 2:13). In this way the Scriptures today grant us access to God’s divine council.
The prophets, however, not only deliver God’s word to his people, but also stand as mediatorial figures who bring the people’s requests for discernment to the divine council.40 In this way God’s provision of the prophetic word in Zechariah 3 parallels provision of immediate access through Jesus Christ to the “throne of grace,” that is, the divine council (Heb. 4:16).
The arrival and rule of Zerubbabel on one level fulfill the anticipated reinstatement of the royal line.41 One should not forget, however, that this does not exhaust the hopes of Jeremiah and Zechariah as Zerubbabel only functions as a governor in the Persian province of Yehud, not as king over an independent and prosperous state. After Zerubbabel the Davidic line continues its connection to civil rule only for a short period through the marriage of his daughter to his political successor. The frustrations accompanying and the reasons underlying the failure to realize the prophetic promises can be discerned in the prophetic sign-act of Zechariah 11 (see comments on 11:4–16).42 These promises directed toward Zerubbabel are not realized in his time but await the coming of Someone greater in his family line. Thus, the divine pursuit to be present with his people, to provide cleansing, revelation, access, and prosperity, awaits the arrival of another: Jesus Christ. Zechariah 3 bears witness to God’s great plan of redemption and through this engages us in our present context.
Contemporary Significance
GRACIOUS FOUNDATION. The vision of God’s grace in Zechariah 3 foreshadows the work of Christ to provide cleansing for all and access to God’s holy presence. We as Christians face the great danger of losing sight of the fundamental doctrine of grace in our walk with God. Often I have watched new Christians reveling in these doctrines alongside “mature” Christians who have lost the wonder and have been forced to evaluate my own definition of maturity in Christ.
This danger is particularly so within those traditions that emphasize the biblical principles of sanctification and the progressive work of the Holy Spirit in a believer. There is a tendency to create distance (both logically and temporally) between justification/regeneration/adoption and sanctification. Thus, some denominations speak of the “deeper life” and others of the “higher plane,” expressions that reveal an honest passion for sanctification but which can lead to a loss of focus on the foundational doctrines of grace. This is usually not the intention of those who call the church to these holiness values.43
The wonder of the doctrine of grace should never be lost as we grow in the Christian life. Colossians 2:6–7 reminds us that we are to continue to live in Christ as we “received Christ Jesus as Lord.” The grace of Christ is the foundation of our faith from first to last; we cannot somehow leave it behind as we mature in the faith.
The exhortations in Paul’s various letters in the New Testament are always based securely on the theology of grace through Christ. For instance, the call to walk in holiness in Ephesians 4–6 (“live a life worthy of the calling you have received,” 4:1) is based on all the blessings we have received “in Christ” in Ephesians 1–3 (e.g., 1:3). So also the exhortation to “offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God,” which introduces a series of commands in Romans 12–15, is based securely on “God’s mercy” (12:1), which is explicated in detail in Romans 1–11.
This pattern is not restricted to the New Testament; rather, it takes its lead from the foundational covenant document of the Old Testament: the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20; Deut. 5). Before delivering the Decalogue to his people, Yahweh reminds them of his gracious act of salvation: “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery” (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 5:6). All instruction in holiness, therefore, must be founded on an explanation of the grace we have received through Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension. Anything short of this is dead moralism. As Clowney once noted, “the Scriptures are full of moral instruction and ethical exhortation, but the ground and motivation of all is found in the mercy of Jesus Christ.”44
Churches can foster this tone of grace among their membership through regularly focusing on grace within their worship and teaching. This may sound surprising to some, but there are some traditions that focus so much on exhortations to purity that the evangelical message of grace has been silenced. This can create an inappropriate cloud of guilt that stunts spiritual growth. This may be why the regular spiritual rhythm that Christ instituted for us as the church is the Lord’s Supper. By participating in this symbolic act of grace and remembrance, we are constantly reminded that our Christian lives are based on the gracious act of Jesus on the cross. Zechariah 3 served as an encouragement to the Persian period community that God had extended his grace to them through their high priest. This was but a foreshadowing of the kind of grace and cleansing he would one day communicate through Jesus.
Grace and the accuser. It is the sovereign choice and gracious provision of God in Zechariah 3 that ultimately undermine the arguments of the accuser (śaṭan). From what we can tell from this scene, most likely the angelic prosecutor in this scene is correct in his allegations against Joshua and the community he represents. Fresh from the Exile they are unqualified for the presence of their holy God. The point in this chapter, however, is that God applies his sovereign grace to Joshua and that this alone dismisses the indictment against him.
Although it is difficult to know with certainty the identity of this accuser here, clearly he represents all attempts, whether from spiritual or human sources, to undermine our confidence in Christ’s grace received through faith. This can be applied to our ultimate spiritual adversary, to whom is often attributed two great lies. Before we fall into sin, he whispers in our ear that such a sin is of no great consequence—only afterward to turn on us and remind us that the same sin has made us eternally unworthy for God’s kingdom. Zechariah 3 reminds us of God’s sovereign election and free grace, assuring revelation from God that silences both accuser and accusation.
Priestly calling. Having answered the accuser’s charges by providing his grace and cleansing, God calls Joshua the high priest to fulfill his commission. This calling operates on two levels. (1) On the general level he is called to faithful living according to God’s Word. (2) On a more particular plane, he is commanded to fulfill the specific duties of the high priest within the temple precincts.
The church functions in a similar way as God’s priestly representatives on earth (1 Peter 2:5, 9). (1) In Revelation 1:6 it is this community, “freed . . . from our sins by his blood,” that is made into “priests to serve his God and Father” (cf. 5:10). We are called to faithfulness to the new covenant, to follow the commands of Christ and his apostles, which echo the themes of the Law and Prophets. This is the foundational calling of holiness and obedience.
(2) We are also called to fulfill our particular priestly duties. Individual believers and communities are called to specific tasks within their contexts. For individuals, that will be to discover, celebrate, refine, and exercise their God-given gifts in the church, family, or society. The church should be a place of encouragement and exploration for all those who seek to use their gifts. So also communities of faith are raised up within societies at particular junctures in history to speak or act as representatives of Christ. Church leadership should take this calling seriously and discern how this should play out in their unique ministry context. Exercising these particular callings, however, should flow out of the foundational faithfulness to God’s core values of holiness, which is made possible by the grace of God in Christ.
Prophetic counsel. Joshua is promised prophetic voices that will provide access to God’s will in the divine council. For Joshua that meant prophets like Haggai and Zechariah, who provided God’s encouragement and exhortation throughout the rebuilding project.
All through the history of Israel God made clear that the prophetic word was one of the most crucial gifts to his community. He sent his word through these messengers in order to invite his people back to covenant intimacy (2 Kings 17:7–23; Neh. 9:26–32) and to warn them of the consequences of their disobedience.
So also God took seriously the sacredness of the prophetic word to his people. One of the severest prophecies of judgment is Micah’s prophecy against the false prophets of his day (see Mic. 3). Although he speaks to all leadership in Israel (leader, priest, prophet) at the beginning and end of the message (3:1–4 and 9–12), Micah reserves the center admonition for one particular group: the prophets. He warns them that because they have used the prophetic office for their own ends, merely to feed themselves, their judgment will be “darkness,” a symbol of silence from God: “There is no answer from God.” God placed priority on the prophetic word throughout the history of his interaction with his people, and this will be no different among the restoration community. For Joshua access to the divine council through prophetic figures is key for the success of his priestly function as well as the spiritual vitality of his community.
So also for us, God has provided his voice through Scripture. This precious gift of revelation should never be taken for granted but be accepted as God’s Word to our generation. But God has not left us on our own to interpret this Word. He guides us by his Spirit, who illuminates this Word for our minds and hearts.
This ministry of God’s Spirit in illuminating his Word to us is necessary because of two important hermeneutical conditions we share as humans: our finitude and our fallenness. (1) A hermeneutic of finitude assesses properly the finite nature of our minds, namely, that we cannot grasp or understand everything in God’s Word. These ancient texts are rich in history, imagery, and theology; thus, we are unable to fully grasp the complete dimensions of these texts because of the limitations of our minds and hearts. (2) A hermeneutic of fallenness takes seriously the fallen character of our minds, namely, that we refuse to grasp or understand everything in God’s Word. In simplest terms, this means that there are some things we can not understand in God’s Word and there are some things that we will not understand.
Fowl and Jones remind us of the importance of the life of the reader in interpreting Scripture.45 They do highlight the great focus in our interpretations of Scripture on grasping the original context and intention of the author. But they also remind us that our greatest obstacle is not a historical one but a moral one; that is, scriptural interpretation “is also related to the character of the interpreters.” A long-range view of such character development must be part of our communal vision:
A Christ-like character, however, is not a commodity that can be purchased; neither can it be put on and taken off at will. It is formed over time through disciplined attention to our thoughts, words and practices. That is why in earlier chapters we have argued that Christian communities need to establish spaces in which believers can have their characters formed and informed by a true knowledge of God.
This is why the doctrine of the Holy Spirit is key to interpreting the Bible. God grants us his Spirit to illuminate our finite minds, opening them to his infinite truth and softening our fallen hearts to accept his authoritative truth. He grants his Spirit to communities of faith in which the Scriptures are read and interpreted. God continues to empower interpreters with his community to communicate his Word with relevance to contemporary generations and readers who live out this Word before one another and a watching world. God has granted us access to his divine court through the Scriptures, which are “living and active . . . sharper than any double-edged sword . . . penetrat[ing] even to dividing soul and spirit” (Heb. 4:12).
Royal prosperity. The vision of the high priestly clothing cannot be separated from the prophecy of the future removal of sin from the land. The prophet is shown a vision of a future when ṣemaḥ (“Branch”) will usher in a new era in which sin will finally be removed. This era is the final stage of redemptive history, in which there will be prosperity within the community of God and peace among its members.
God’s fulfillment of this prophecy came with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This sacrificial act indeed did “remove the sin of this land in a single day” in a way that transcended the Old Testament Day of Atonement. Hebrews 10:11–13 develops this most thoroughly in the New Testament, when it states in relation to the daily sacrifices:
Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.
The writer of Hebrews here combines the language of priesthood (priest) with that of the monarchy (“sat down at the right hand of God . . . he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool”). The last phrase is a clue to the writer’s intention. Jesus is being portrayed here as the priest-king in the order of Melchizedek, an order to which the Davidic line traces its roots (Ps. 110:1, 3; cf. Heb. 1:13; 7:1–8:13).
Christ as high priest fulfills once for all the ceremonies of the Day of Atonement. After describing the Day of Atonement ceremonies in Hebrews 9:1–10, the writer then introduces Christ: “He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption” (9:12).
This priest-king, the fulfillment of the ṣemaḥ hope of Zechariah 3, removes the sin of the land “once for all” through “one sacrifice.” According to Hebrews this removal cleanses “our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God” (Heb. 9:14b) and motivates us to “draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith” and to “hold unswervingly to the hope we profess” (10:22–23).
This ultimate Day of Atonement inaugurated the final stage of redemptive history, in which we already are able to enjoy the prosperity and peace highlighted at the end of Zechariah 3. The Western church has often been too individualistic in its approach to the salvation accomplished through Christ. Zechariah 3 reminds us that the blessing of the gospel is communal in nature, propelling us outward to offer the blessing we have received to others within the covenant community and beyond. It also reminds us that God’s salvation provides for our prosperity and physical as well as spiritual well-being.
This final idyllic picture of a community purified by God through Christ and sharing their prosperity with one another is one that should have a lasting impression on the readers of Zechariah 3. It encourages us to view the church as a place where God’s blessing is shared with one another—whether that is sharing one’s material, spiritual, emotional, or relational abundance. This may mean inviting a stranger at church into your home, offering a meal for a homeless person, providing hospice relief for a couple caring for a handicapped child or parent, and so on. Zechariah 3 shows us the power of grace within the church, for as people receive grace and prosperity from God, they in turn pour that into the lives of others.
Based on Catherine Ryan Hyde’s book by the same name, the movie Pay It Forward captures the imagination of the audience by tracing the simple yet utopian scheme of an eleven-year-old boy, Trevor McKinney. When Mr. Simenot, his history teacher, challenges the class with an extra-credit assignment (“Think of an idea to change our world—and put it into action”), naive Trevor takes him seriously and conjures up the following plan: Instead of people paying others back for a good deed, they are to pay it forward to three other people. Similarly, Zechariah 3 encourages us to a utopian scheme that ultimately will transform the world—one taught by God, enabled by Jesus, empowered by the Holy Spirit, and carried out by the community of faith.