الكتاب المقدس

Expositor's Bible Commentary 00000000 "ZECHARIAH" (9-14) "Lo, thy King cometh to thee, vindicated and victorious, meek and riding on an ass, and on a colt, the foal of an ass." "Up, Sword, against My Shepherd! Smite the Shepherd, that the sheep may be scattered!" "And I will pour upon the house of David and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and of supplication, and they shall look to Him whom they have pierced, and they shall lament for Him, as with lamentation for an only son, and bitterly grieve for Him, as with grief for a first-born." CHAPTERS 9-14 OF "ZECHARIAH" WE saw that the first eight chapters of the Book of Zechariah were, with the exception of a few verses, from the prophet himself. No one has ever doubted this. No one could doubt it: they are obviously from the years of the building of the Temple, 520-516 B.C. They hang together with a consistency exhibited by few other groups of chapters in the Old Testament. But when we pass into chapter 9, we find ourselves in circumstances and an atmosphere altogether different. Israel is upon a new situation of history, and the words addressed to her breathe another spirit. There is not the faintest allusion to the building of the Temple-the subject from which all the first eight chapters depend. There is not a single certain reflection of the Persian period, under the shadow of which the first eight chapter were all evidently written. We have names of heathen powers mentioned which not only do not occur in the first eight chapters, but of which it is not possible to think that they had any interest whatever for Israel between 520 and 516: Damascus, Hadrach, Hamath, Assyria, Egypt, and Greece. The peace, and the love of peace, in which Zechariah wrote, has disappeared. Nearly everything breathes of war actual or imminent. The heathen are spoken of with a ferocity which finds few parallels in the Old Testament. There is a reveling in their blood of which the student of the authentic prophecies of Zechariah will at once perceive that gentle lover of peace could not have been capable. And one passage figures the imminence of a thorough judgment upon Jerusalem, very different from Zechariah’s outlook upon his people’s future from the eve of the completion of the Temple. It is not surprising, therefore, that one of the earliest efforts of Old Testament criticism should have been to prove another author than Zechariah for chaps, 9-14, of the book called by his name. The very first attempt of this kind was made so far back as 1632 by the Cambridge theologian Joseph Mede, who was moved thereto by the desire to vindicate the correctness of St. Matthew’s ascription { Matthew 27:9 } of "Zechariah" { Zechariah 11:13 } to the prophet Jeremiah. Mede’s effort was developed by other English exegetes. Hammond assigned chapters 10-12, Bishop Kidder and William Whiston, the translator of Josephus, chapters 9-14 to Jeremiah. Archbishop Newcome divided them, and sought to prove that while chapters 9-11 must have been written before 721, or a century earlier than Jeremiah, because of the heathen powers they name, and the divisions between Judah and Israel, chapters 12-14, reflect the imminence of the Fall of Jerusalem. In 1784 Flugge offered independent proof that chapters 9-14 were by Jeremiah; and in 1814 Bertholdt suggested, that chapters 9-11 might be by Zechariah the contemporary of Isaiah, and on that account attached to the prophecies of his younger namesake. These opinions gave the trend to the main volume of criticism, which, till fifteen years ago, deemed "Zechariah" 9-14 to be pre-exilic. So Hitzig, who at first took the whole to be from one hand, but afterwards placed 12-14 by a different author under Manasseh. So Ewald, Bleek, Kuenen (at first), Samuel Davidson, Schrader, Duhm (in 1875), and more recently Konig and Orelli, who assign chapters 9-11 to the reign of Ahaz, but 12-14 to the eve of the Fall of Jerusalem, or even a little later. Some critics, however, remained unmoved by the evidence offered for a pre-exilic date. They pointed out in particular that the geographical references were equally suitable to the centuries after the Exile. Damascus, Hadrach, and Hamath, { Zechariah 9:1 } though politically obsolete by 720, entered history again with the campaigns of Alexander the Great in 332-331, and the establishment of the Seleucid kingdom in Northern Syria. Egypt and Assyria { Zechariah 10:10 } were names used after the Exile for the kingdom of the Ptolemies, and for those powers which still threatened Israel from the north or Assyrian quarter Judah and Joseph or Ephraim, { Zechariah 9:10 ; Zechariah 9:13 etc.} were names still used after the Exile to express the whole of God’s Israel; and in chapters 9-14, they are presented, not divided as before 721, but united. None of the chapters give a hint of any king in Jerusalem; and all of them, while representing the great Exile of Judah as already begun, show a certain dependence in style and even in language upon Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah 40:1-31 ; Isaiah 41:1-29 ; Isaiah 42:1-25 ; Isaiah 43:1-28 ; Isaiah 44:1-28 ; Isaiah 45:1-25 ; Isaiah 46:1-13 ; Isaiah 47:1-15 ; Isaiah 48:1-22 ; Isaiah 49:1-26 ; Isaiah 50:1-11 ; Isaiah 51:1-23 ; Isaiah 52:1-15 ; Isaiah 53:1-12 ; Isaiah 54:1-17 ; Isaiah 55:1-13 ; Isaiah 56:1-12 ; Isaiah 57:1-21 ; Isaiah 58:1-14 ; Isaiah 59:1-21 ; Isaiah 60:1-22 ; Isaiah 61:1-11 ; Isaiah 62:1-12 ; Isaiah 63:1-19 ; Isaiah 64:1-12 ; Isaiah 65:1-25 ; Isaiah 66:1-24 . Moreover, the language is post-exilic, sprinkled with Aramaisms and with other words and phrases used only, or mainly, by Hebrew writers from Jeremiah onwards. But though many critics judged these grounds to be sufficient to prove the post-exilic origin of "Zechariah" 9-14, they differed as to the author and exact date of these chapters. Conservatives like Hengstenberg, Delitzsch, Keil, Kohler, and Pusey used the evidence to prove the authorship of Zechariah himself after 516, and interpreted the references to the Greek period as pure prediction. Pusey says that chapters 9-11 extend from the completion of the Temple and its deliverance during the invasion of Alexander, and from the victories of the Maccabees, to the rejection of the true shepherd and the curse upon the false; and chapters 11-12 "from a future repentance for the death of Christ to the final conversion of the Jews and Gentiles." But on the same grounds Eichhorn saw in the chapters, not a prediction, but a reflection of the Greek period. He assigned chapters 9 and 10 to an author in the time of Alexander the Great; Zechariah 11:1-17 - Zechariah 13:6 he placed a little later, and brought down Zechariah 13:7 . to the Maccabean period. Bottcher placed the whole in the wars of Ptolemy and Seleucus after Alexander’s death; and Vatke, who had at first selected a date in the reign of Artaxerxes Longhand, 464-425, finally decided for the Maccabean period, 170 ff. In recent times the most thorough examination of the chapters has been that by Stade, and the conclusion he comes to is that chapters 9-14, are all from one author, who must have written during the early wars between the Ptolemies and Seleucids about 280 B.C., but employed, especially in chapters 9, 10, an earlier prophecy. A criticism and modification of Stade’s theory is given by Kuenen. He allows that the present form of chapters 9-14 must be of post-exilic origin: this is obvious from the mention of the Greeks as a world power; the description of a siege of Jerusalem by all the heathen; the way in which ( Zechariah 9:11 f., but especially Zechariah 10:6-9 ) the captivity is presupposed, if not of all Israel, yet of Ephraim; the fact that the House of David are not represented as governing; and the thoroughly priestly character of all the chapters. But Kuenen holds that an ancient prophecy of the eighth century underlies chapters 9-11, Zechariah 13:7-9 , in which the several actual phrases of it survive; and that in their present form 12-14 are older than 9-11 and probably by a contemporary of Joel, about 400 B.C. In the main Cheyne, Cornill, Wildeboer, and Staerk adhere to Stade’s conclusions. Cheyne proves the unity of the six chapters and their date before the Maccabean period. Staerk brings down Zechariah 11:4-17 and Zechariah 13:7-9 to 171 B.C. Wellhausen argues for the unity, and assigns it to the Maccabean times. Driver Jdg 9:1-57 ; Jdg 10:1-18 ; Jdg 11:1-40 , with its natural continuation, Zechariah 13:7-9 , as not earlier than 333; and the rest of 12-14 as certainly post-exilic, and probably from 432-300. Rubinkam places Zechariah 9:1-10 in Alexander’s time, the rest in that of the Maccabees, but Zeydner all of it to the latter. Kirkpatrick, after showing the post-exilic character of all the chapters, favors assigning 9-11 to a different author from 12-14. Asserting that to the question of the exact date it is impossible to give a definite answer, he thinks that the whole may be with considerable probability assigned to the first sixty or seventy years of the Exile, and is therefore in its proper place between Zechariah and "Malachi." The reference to the sons of Javan he takes to be a gloss, probably added in Maccabean times. It will be seen from this catalogue of conclusions that the prevailing trend of recent criticism has been to assign "Zechariah" 9-14 to post-exilic times, and to a different author from chapters 1-8; and that while a few critics maintain a date soon after the Return, the bulk are divided between the years following Alexander’s campaigns and the time of the Maccabean struggles. There are, in fact, in recent years only two attempts to support the conservative position of Pusey and Hengstenberg that the whole book is a genuine work of Zechariah the son of Iddo. One of these is by C.H.H. Wright in his Bampton Lectures. The other is by George L. Robinson, now Professor at Toronto, in a reprint (1896) from the American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, which offers a valuable history of the discussion of the whole question from the days of Mede, with a careful argument of all the evidence on both sides. The very original conclusion is reached that the chapters reflect the history of the years 518-516 B.C. In discussing the question, for which our treatment of other prophets has left us too little space, we need not open that part of it which lies between a pre-exilic and a post-exilic date. Recent criticism of all schools and at both extremes has tended to establish the latter upon reasons which we have already stated, and for further details of which the student may be referred to Stade’s and Eckhardt’s investigations in the Zeitschrift fur A.T. Wissenschaft and to Kirkpatrick’s impartial summary. There remain the questions of the unity of chapters 9-14; their exact date or dates after the Exile, and as a consequence of this their relation to the authentic prophecies of Zechariah in chapters 1-8. On the question of unity we take first chapters 9-11, to which must be added (as by most critics since Ewald) Zechariah 13:7-9 , which has got out of its place as the natural continuation and conclusion of chapter 11. Zechariah 9:1-8 predicts the overthrow of heathen neighbors of Israel, their possession by Jehovah and His safeguard of Jerusalem. Zechariah 9:9-12 follow with a prediction of the Messianic King as the Prince of Peace; but then come Zechariah 9:13-17 , with no mention of the King, but Jehovah appears alone as the hero of His people against the Greeks, and there is indeed sufficiency of war and blood. Chapter 10 makes a new start: the people are warned to seek their blessings from Jehovah, and not from Teraphim and diviners, whom their false shepherds follow. Jehovah, visiting His flock, shall punish these, give proper rulers, make the people strong and gather in their exiles to fill Gilead and Lebanon. Chapter 11 opens with a burst of war on Lebanon and Bashan and the overthrow of the heathen ( Zechariah 11:1-3 ), and follows with an allegory, in which the prophet first takes charge from Jehovah of the people as their shepherd, but is contemptuously treated by them ( Zechariah 11:4-14 ), and then taking the guise of an evil shepherd represents what they must suffer from their next ruler ( Zechariah 11:15-17 ). This tyrant, however, shall receive punishment, two-thirds of the nation shall be scattered, but the rest, further purified, shall be God’s own people ( Zechariah 8:7-9 ). In the course of this prophesying there is no conclusive proof of a double authorship. The only passage which offers strong evidence for this is chapter 9. The verses predicting the peaceful coming of Messiah ( Zechariah 9:9-12 ) do not accord in spirit with those which follow predicting the appearance of Jehovah with war and great shedding of blood. Nor is the difference altogether explained, as Stade thinks, by the similar order of events in chapter 10, where Judah and Joseph are first represented as saved and brought back in Zechariah 10:6 , and then we have the process of their redemption and return described in Zechariah 10:7 ff. Why did the same writer give statements of such very different temper as Zechariah 9:9-17 ? Or, if these be from different hands, why were they ever put together? Otherwise there is no reason for breaking up chapters 9-11, Zechariah 13:7-9 . Rubinkam, who separates Zechariah 9:1-10 by a hundred and fifty years from the rest; Bleek, who divides 9 from 10; and Staerk, who separates 9-11:3 from the rest, have been answered by Robinson and others. On the ground of language, grammar, and syntax, Eckardt has fully proved that 9-11 are from the same author of a late date, who, however, may have occasionally followed earlier models and even introduced their very phrases. More supporters have been found for a division of authorship between chapters 9-11, Zechariah 13:7-9 , and chapters 12-14. {less Zechariah 13:7-9 } Chapter 12 opens with a title of its own. A strange element is introduced into the historical relation. Jerusalem is assaulted, not by the heathen only, but by Judah, who, however, turns on finding that Jehovah fights for Jerusalem, and is saved by Jehovah before Jerusalem in order that the latter may not boast over it. { Zechariah 12:1-9 } A spirit of grace and supplication is poured upon the guilty city, a fountain opened for uncleanness, idols abolished, and the prophets, who are put on a level with them, abolished too, where they do not disown their profession. { Zechariah 12:10 - Zechariah 13:6 } Another assault of the heathen on Jerusalem is described, half of the people being taken captive. Jehovah appears, and by a great earthquake saves the rest. The land is transformed. And then the prophet goes back to the defeat of the heathen assault on the city, in which Judah is again described as taking part; and the surviving heathen are converted, or, if they refuse to be, punished by the withholding of rain. Jerusalem is holy to the Lord (chapter 14). In all this there is more that differs from chapters 9-11, Zechariah 13:7-9 , than the strange opposition of Judah and Jerusalem. Ephraim, or Joseph, is not mentioned nor any return of exiles, nor punishment of the shepherds, nor coming of the Messiah, the latter’s place being taken by Jehovah. But in answer to this we may remember that the Messiah, after being described in Zechariah 9:9-12 , is immediately lost behind the warlike coming of Jehovah. Both sections speak of idolatry, and of the heathen, their punishment and conversion, and do so in the same apocalyptic style. Nor does the language of the two differ in any decisive fashion. On the contrary, as Eckardt and Kuiper have shown, the language is on the whole an argument for unity of authorship. There is, then, nothing conclusive against the position, which Stade so clearly laid down and strongly fortified, that chapters 9-14 are from the same hand, although, as he admits, this cannot be proved with absolute certainty. So also Cheyne: "With perhaps one or two exceptions, chapters 9-11 and 12-14 are so closely welded together that even analysis is impossible." The next questions we have to decide are whether chapters 9-14 offer any evidence of being by Zechariah, the author of chapters 1-8, and if not to what other post-exilic date they may be assigned. It must be admitted that in language and in style the two parts of the Book of Zechariah have features in common. But that these have been exaggerated by defenders of the unity there can be no doubt. We cannot infer anything from the fact that both parts contain specimens of clumsy diction, of the repetition of the same word, of phrases (not the same phrases) unused by other writers; or that each is lavish in vocatives; or that each is variable in his spelling. Resemblances of that kind they share with other books: some of them are due to the fact that both sections are post-exilic. On the other hand, as Eckardt has dearly shown, there exists a still greater number of differences between the two sections, both in language and in style. Not only do characteristic words occur in each which are not found in the other, not only do chapters 9-14 contain many more Aramaisms than chapters 1-8, and therefore symptoms of a later date; but both parts use the same words with more or less different meanings, and apply different terms to the same objects. There are also differences of grammar, of favorite formulas, and of other features of the phraseology, which, if there be any need, complete the proof of a distinction of dialect so great as to require to account for it distinction of authorship. The same impression is sustained by the contrast of the historical circumstances reflected in each of the two sections. Zechariah 1:1-21 ; Zechariah 2:1-13 ; Zechariah 3:1-10 ; Zechariah 4:1-14 ; Zechariah 5:1-11 ; Zechariah 6:1-15 ; Zechariah 7:1-14 ; Zechariah 8:1-23 , were written during the building of the Temple. There is no echo of the latter in "Zechariah" 9-14. Zechariah 1:1-21 ; Zechariah 2:1-13 ; Zechariah 3:1-10 ; Zechariah 4:1-14 ; Zechariah 5:1-11 ; Zechariah 6:1-15 ; Zechariah 7:1-14 ; Zechariah 8:1-23 picture the whole earth as at peace, which was true at least of all Syria; they portend no danger to Jerusalem from the heathen, but describe her peace and fruitful expansion in terms most suitable to the circumstances imposed upon her by the solid and clement policy of the earlier Persian kings. This is all changed in, "Zechariah" 9-14. The nations are restless; a siege of Jerusalem is imminent, and her salvation is to be assured only by much war and a terrible shedding of blood. We know exactly how Israel fared and felt in the early sections of the Persian period: her interests in the politics of the world, her feelings towards her governors and her whole attitude to the heathen were not at that time those which are reflected in "Zechariah" 9-14. Nor is there any such resemblance between the religious principles of the two sections of the Book of Zechariah as could prove identity of origin. That both are spiritual, or that they have a similar expectation of the ultimate position of Israel in the history of the world, proves only that both were late offshoots from the same religious development, and worked upon the same ancient models. Within these outlines there are not a few divergences. Zechariah 1:1-21 ; Zechariah 2:1-13 ; Zechariah 3:1-10 ; Zechariah 4:1-14 ; Zechariah 5:1-11 ; Zechariah 6:1-15 ; Zechariah 7:1-14 ; Zechariah 8:1-23 , were written before Ezra and Nehemiah had imposed the Levitical legislation upon Israel; but Eckardt has shown the dependence on the latter of "Zechariah" 9-14. We may, therefore, adhere to Canon Driver’s assertion, that Zechariah in chapters 1-8 "uses a different phraseology, evinces different interests, and moves in a different circle of ideas from those which prevail in chapters 9-14. Criticism has indeed been justified in separating, by the vast and growing majority of its opinions, the two sections from each other. This was one of the earliest results which modern criticism achieved, and the latest researches have but established it on a firmer basis." If, then, chapters 9-14 be not Zechariah’s, to what date may we assign them? We have already seen that they bear evidence of being upon the whole later than Zechariah, though they appear to contain fragments from an earlier period. Perhaps this is all we can with certainty affirm. Yet something more definite is at least probable. The mention of the Greeks, not as Joel mentions them about 400, the most distant nation to which Jewish slaves could be carried, but as the chief of the heathen powers, and a foe with whom the Jews are in touch and must soon cross swords, { Zechariah 9:13 } appears to imply that the Syrian campaign of Alexander is happening or has happened, or even that the Greek kingdoms of Syria and Egypt are already contending for the possession of Palestine. With this agrees the mention of Damascus, Hadrach, and Hamath, the localities where the Seleucids had their chief seats. { Zechariah 9:1 f} In that case Asshur would signify the Seleucids and Egypt the Ptolemies: it is these, and not Greece itself, from whom the Jewish exiles have still to be redeemed. All this makes probable the date which Stade has proposed for the chapters, between 300 and 280 B.C. To bring them further down, to the time of the Maccabees, as some have tried to do, would not be impossible so far as the historical allusions are concerned; but had they been of so late a date as that, viz. , 170 or 160, we may assert that they could not have found a place in the prophetic canon, which was closed by 200, but must have fallen along with Daniel into the Hagiographa. The appearance of these prophecies at the close of the Book of Zechariah has been explained, not quite satisfactorily, as follows. With the Book of "Malachi" they formed originally three anonymous pieces, which because of their anonymity were set at the end of the Book of the Twelve. The first of them begins with the very peculiar construction " Massa’ Debar Jehovah ," "oracle of the word of Jehovah," which, though partly belonging to the text, the editor read as a title, and attached as a title to each of the others. It occurs nowhere else. The Book of "Malachi" was too distinct in character to be attached to another book, and soon came to have the supposed name of its author added to its title. But the other two pieces fell, like all anonymous works, to the nearest Writing with an author’s name. Perhaps the attachment was hastened by the desire to make the round number of Twelve Prophets. ADDENDA Whiston’s work is " An Essay towards restoring the True Text of the O.T. and for vindicating the Citations made thence in the N.T. ," 1722, pp. 93 ff (not seen). Besides those mentioned (seen.) as supporting the unity of Zechariah there ought to be named De Wette, Umbreit, von Hoffmann, Ebrard, etc. Kuiper’s work is "Zachariah 9-14," Utrecht, 1894 (not seen). Nowack’s conclusions are: 9-11:3 date from the Greek period (we cannot date them more exactly, unless 9:8 refers to Ptolemy’s capture of Jerusalem in 320); 11, 13:7-9, are post-exilic; 12-13:6 long after Exile; 14 long after Exile, later than "Malachi." Zechariah 12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him. 8. JUDAH VERSUS JERUSALEM Zechariah 12:1-7 A title, though probably of later date than the text, introduces with the beginning of chapter 12 an oracle plainly from circumstances different from those of the preceding chapters. The nations, not particularized as they have been, gather to the siege of Jerusalem, and, very singularly, Judah is gathered with them against her own capital. But God makes the city like one of those great boulders, deeply embedded, which husbandmen try to pull up from their fields, but it tears and wounds the hands of those who would remove it. Moreover God strikes with panic all the besiegers, save only Judah, who, her eyes being opened, perceives that God is with Jerusalem and turns to her help. Jerusalem remains in her place; but the glory of the victory is first Judah’s, so that the house of David may not have too much fame nor boast over the country districts. The writer doubtless alludes to some temporary schism between the capital and country caused by the arrogance of the former. But we have no means of knowing when this took place. It must often have been imminent in the days both before and especially after the Exile, when Jerusalem had absorbed all the religious privilege and influence of the nation. The language is undoubtedly late. The figure of Jerusalem as a boulder, deeply bedded in the soil, which tears the hands that seek to remove it, is a most true and expressive summary of the history of heathen assaults upon her. Till she herself was rent by internal dissensions, and the Romans at last succeeded in tearing her loose, she remained planted on her own site. This was very true of all the Greek period. Seleucids and Ptolemies alike wounded themselves upon her. But at what period did either of them induce Judah to take part against her? Not in the Maccabean. Oracle of the Word of Jehovah upon Israel. "Oracle of Jehovah, who stretched out the heavens and founded the earth, and formed the spirit of man within him: Lo, I am about to make Jerusalem a cup of reeling for all the surrounding peoples, and even Judah shall be at the siege of Jerusalem. And it shall come to pass in that day that I will make Jerusalem a stone to be lifted by all the peoples-all who lift it do indeed wound themselves-and there are gathered against it all nations of the earth. In that day-oracle of Jehovah-I will smite every horse with panic, and their riders with madness; but as for the house of Judah, I will open its eyes, though every horse of the peoples I smite with blindness. Then shall the chiefs of Judah say in their hearts the inhabitants of Jerusalem through Jehovah of Hosts their God. In that day will I make the districts of Judah like a pan of fire among timber and like a torch among sheaves, so that they devour right and left all the peoples round about, but Jerusalem shall still abide on its own site. And Jehovah shall first give victory to the tents of Judah, so that the fame of the house of David and the fame of the inhabitants of Jerusalem be not too great in contrast to Judah." THE CONTENTS OF "ZECHARIAH" Chapters 9-14 FROM the number of conflicting opinions which prevail upon the subject, we have seen how impossible it is to decide upon a scheme of division for "Zechariah" 9-14. These chapters consist of a number of separate oracles, which their language and general conceptions lead us on the whole to believe were put together by one hand, and which, with the possible exception of some older fragments, reflect the troubled times in Palestine that followed on the invasion of Alexander the Great. But though the most of them are probably due to one date and possibly come from the same author, these oracles do not always exhibit a connection, and indeed sometimes show no relevance to each other. It will therefore be simplest to take them piece by piece, and; before giving the translation of each, to explain the difficulties in it and indicate the ruling ideas. Zechariah 12:8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them. 9. FOUR RESULTS OF JERUSALEM’S DELIVERANCE Zechariah 12:8-14 ; Zechariah 13:1-6 Upon the deliverance of Jerusalem, by the help of the converted Judah, there follow four results, each introduced by the words that it happened "in that day". { Zechariah 12:8-9 ; Zechariah 13:1-2 } First, the people of Jerusalem shall themselves be strengthened. Second, the hostile heathen shall be destroyed, but on the house of David and all Jerusalem the spirit of penitence shall be poured, and they will lament for the good shepherd whom they slew. Third, a fountain of sin and uncleanness shall be opened. Fourth, the idols, the unclean spirit, and prophecy, now so degraded, shall all be abolished. The connection of these oracles with the preceding is obvious, as well as with the oracle describing the murder of the good shepherd. { Zechariah 13:7-9 } When we see ‘how this is presupposed by Zechariah 12:9 ff., we feel more than ever that its right place is between chapters 11 and 12. There are no historical allusions. But again the language gives evidence of a late date. And throughout the passage there is a repetition of formal phrases which recalls the Priestly Code and the general style of the post-exilic age. Notice that no king is mentioned, although there are several points at which, had he existed, he must have been introduced. 1. The first of the four effects of Jerusalem's deliverance from the heathen is the promotion of her weaklings to the strength of her heroes, and of her heroes to divine rank. { Zechariah 12:8 } In that day Jehovah will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the lame among them shall in that day be like David himself, and the house of David like God, like the Angel of Jehovah before them. 2. The second paragraph of this series very remarkably emphasizes that upon her deliverance Jerusalem shall not give way to rejoicing, but to penitent lamentation for the murder of him whom she has pierced-the good shepherd whom her people have rejected and slain. This is one of the few ethical strains which run through these apocalyptic chapters. It forms their highest interest for us. Jerusalem’s mourning is compared to that for "Hadad-Rimmon in the valley" or "plain of Megiddo." This is the classic "battlefield of the land," and the theatre upon which Apocalypse has placed the last contest between the hosts of God and the hosts of evil. In Israel’s history it had been the ground not only of triumph but of tears. The greatest tragedy of that history, the defeat and death of the righteous Josiah, took place there; { 2 Chronicles 35:22 ff.} and since the earliest Jewish interpreters the "mourning of Hadad-Rimmon in the valley of Megiddo" has been referred to the mourning for Josiah. Jerome identifies Hadad-Rimmon with Rummani, a village on the plain still extant, close to Megiddo. But the lamentation for Josiah was at Jerusalem; and it cannot be proved that Hadad-Rimmon is a place-name. It may rather be the name of the object of the mourning, and as Hadad was a divine name among Phoenicians and Arameans, and Rimmon the pomegranate was a sacred tree, a number of critics have supposed this to be a title of Adonis, and the mourning like that excessive grief which Ezekiel tells us was yearly celebrated for Tammuz. { Ezekiel 8:14 } This, however, is not fully proved. Observe, further, that while the reading Hadad-Rimmon is by no means past doubt, the sanguine blossoms and fruit of the pomegranate, "red-ripe at the heart," would naturally lead to its association with the slaughtered Adonis. "And it shall come to pass in that day that I will seek to destroy all the nations who have come in upon Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and of supplication, and they shall look to whom they have pierced; and they shall lament for him, as with lamentation for an only son, and bitterly grieve for him, as with grief for a first-born In that day lamentation shall be as great in Jerusalem as the lamentation for Hadad-Rimmon in the valley of Megiddo. And the land shall mourn, every family by itself: the family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Levi by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of Shime’i by itself, and their wives by themselves; all the families who are left, every family by itself, and their wives by themselves." 3. The third result of Jerusalem’s deliverance from the heathen shall be the opening of a fountain of cleansing. This purging of her sin follows fitly upon her penitence just described. "In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David, and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness." {Cf. Ezekiel 36:25 ; Ezekiel 47:1 } 4. The fourth consequence is the removal of idolatry, of the unclean spirit, and of the degraded prophets from her midst. The last is especially remarkable: for it is not merely false prophets, as distinguished from true, who shall b

The burden of the Word of the Lord for Israel Zechariah 12:1 The burden and glory of God's Word to Israel J. Leckie, D. D. God presents Himself here as creating and speaking. It is to Israel that HIS Word is primarily addressed, for it is Israel that recognises His Word, and by Israel His Word is carried to the world, which thus becomes also Israel. Remember the meaning of the name, and its origin. Prince of God was the name which Jacob got from that long wrestling in the dark — Israel, prince of God, because he had power with God. The name denotes the fact and the power of communion. Israel is composed of those who seek God and cling to Him, who worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. I. THE CREATOR OF THE HEAVENS AND EARTH AND THE SPIRIT OF MAN HAS AN ISRAEL. The idea of Israel is fellowship with God and power with God, gained in and by that fellowship. Is such an idea reasonable? We think it a poor conception of God which represents Him as so mighty and rich that He does not care for fellowship with souls. Do you think to convince me that God is wanting in sympathies and affections by showing that He is Almighty? The argument is all in the opposite direction. Should I have more ground to believe in His heart if He were less than all-powerful and all-wise! There is in man a longing after relation to the Infinite. All his history proves this. Something in him cries out after God, and the heavens and the earth have tended to intensify this cry. Man is haunted by a something issuing from heaven and earth that will not let him rest. It would have been sad if man had craved an infinite friend, had yearned after nearness to a perfect and eternal living One, and felt no hope, countenance, or stimulus in the world around him. But man stands in no such barren and dead world. A living world is round him, material, but full of spiritual suggestion, inviting him to seek God, and waking him up again when he grows dull and hard. Will it be said that this does not make probable the idea of an Israel — men that have power with God, it gives support to the idea of communion with God, but not to that of prayer, an asking that influences the Divine will? The answer is obvious. Communion with God, in the case of a being like man, an imperfect, sin-laden being, must take largely the form of prayer. Such a being, coming near to God, cannot but ask from Him. And this asking, so inevitable, cannot be a futile thing. If asking be a necessity with the spirit that has communion with God, there must be room and need for it on the side of God. What is true on the human side is true on the Divine side. The whole doctrine of prayer is found in the spirit of man, in the longings and necessities, and there can be nothing in real contradiction to these. They who seek God have a peculiar affinity with Him. God as a moral being has moral affinities. It is not a lowering or limiting of God to believe that He has an Israel. II. GOD HAS A WORD FOR HIS ISRAEL. Neither the heavens nor the earth nor the spirit of man take the place of a word. They are each a revelation. But they are fuller of questions than of answers. The heart of man needs a word. It is only in words that there is definiteness. One of the distinguishing peculiarities of man is that he employs words. By these he reaches the fulness of his being. He makes his thought clear to himself, and gives it an outward existence by words. He makes all shadowy and vague things firm and abiding by words. And shall not God meet him on this highest platform? A Word of God is a necessity to the human soul God has a word to Israel which makes fellowship close and confiding. The word gives man the necessary clue to the interpretation of the universe and himself. It is God's Word to Israel as the ideal man Israel is the ideal and complete man, and it is in proportion as any man approaches the ideal that he fully comprehends and embraces the message of God's Word to Israel. III. GOD'S WORD TO ISRAEL IS A BURDEN. This expression is often used by the prophets. No doubt it expresses, in the first instance, the weight of obligation and responsibility in the declaring of God's message, but this rests on the fact that the Word of God is a weighty matter for all men. 1. God's Word is a burden by reason of the weight of its ideas. Thoughts that may be put into words are of all degrees of weight — some light as a feather, some heavy as a world. Thoughts weigh upon the mind, even though they are felt to be precious. The ideas in God's Word are the weightiest of all — God, soul, sin, salvation, renewal, eternity. Men are never right till they try to lift these thoughts and weigh them. They are no judges of the weight of things till they try these. 2. God's Word is a burden of momentousness and obligation. There are many weighty thoughts that have little or no practical moment. But the thoughts in God's Word are of pressing and supreme importance. They are light, food, shelter, life. To reject them is ruin. Everything must depend on how we stand to these words. 3. God's Word is a burden which is easier to bear in whole than in part. The half or quarter, or some little fraction of God's Word is worse to bear, harder and heavier than the whole. A single truth taken out of the whole may be quite oppressive and intolerable. It may crush all joy and courage out of life. The truth about sin needs the truth about grace and redemption in order to be borne. The truth about duty needs the Divine promises. Relief is to be found not by throwing off any truth, but by taking up more. The hardest truths become pleasant in proper company. Every truth has relations to all the rest, and is not properly itself without them. Let the effort be to take the whole truth, and to take it as a whole. Then it will no more oppress than the vast load of atmosphere which every man carries. 4. The Word of God is a burden which removes every other load. Thought, conviction, and feeling bring their inevitable burden. And if a man rejects burdens he is but making up a heavier burden. If a man will not have the burden of God's Word, then the whole riddle of the universe becomes his burden. But if I take up God's Word, and actually carry it as God's Word, I have no further care. There is provision for driving away every fear and every care in that Word. ( J. Leckie, D. D. )

12:1-8 Here is a Divine prediction, which will be a heavy burden to all the enemies of the church. But it is for Israel; for their comfort and benefit. It is promised that God will make foolish the counsels, and weaken the courage of the enemies of the church. The exact meaning is not clear; but God often begins by calling the poor and despised; and in that day even the feeblest will resemble David, and be as eminent in courage and every thing good. Desirable indeed is it that the examples and labours of Christians should render them as fire among wood, as a torch in a sheaf, to kindle the flame of Divine love, to spread religion on the right hand and on the left. 12:9-14 The day here spoken of, is the day of Jerusalem's defence and deliverance, that glorious day when God will appear for the salvation of his people. In Christ's first coming he bruised the serpent's head, and broke all the powers of darkness that fought against God's kingdom among men. In his second coming he will complete their destruction, when he shall put down all opposing rule, principality, and power; and death itself shall be swallowed up in that victory. The Holy Spirit is gracious and merciful, and is the Author of all grace or holiness. He, also, is the Spirit of supplications, and shows men their ignorance, want, guilt, misery, and danger. At the time here foretold, the Jews will know who the crucified Jesus was; then they shall look by faith to him, and mourn with the deepest sorrow, not only in public, but in private, even each one separately. There is a holy mourning, the effect of the pouring out of the Spirit; a mourning for sin, which quickens faith in Christ, and qualifies for joy in God. This mourning is a fruit of the Spirit of grace, a proof of a work of grace in the soul, and of the Spirit of supplications. It is fulfilled in all who sorrow for sin after a godly sort; they look to Christ crucified, and mourn for him. Looking by faith upon the cross of Christ will cause us to mourn for sin after a godly sort.