Intro
We concluded last week with God instructing Zechariah to take on the role of a shepherd. Follow with me as we read Zechariah 11:4. “This is what the Lord my God says: ‘Shepherd the flock marked for slaughter.”i That is the assignment God gives Zechariah. He is to represent the Lord as a good shepherd.
Verse 5 elaborates on the condition of the “the flock marked for slaughter.” “Their buyers slaughter them and go unpunished. Those who sell them say, ‘Praise the Lord, I am rich!’ Their own shepherds do not spare them.” That is God’s indictment against the leaders in Israel who are leading the people toward destruction. In Matthew 15:14 Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees “blind guides.” Then he said, “If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.” That’s why this flock is “marked for slaughter.” Their leaders are steering them toward a pit of judgment and destruction. That was happening in the latter part of Zechariah’s life. It was the situation in Jeremiah’s day prior to the Babylonian exile. And it was the situation that existed during the First Advent of Christ.ii
When God offers a good shepherd, the people as a whole reject him. At the First Advent, the crowd cried out for him to be crucified. The consequence of Israel’s rejection of Messiah is described in verse 6: “‘For I will no longer have pity on the people of the land,’ declares the Lord. I will give everyone into the hands of their neighbors and their king. They will devastate the land, and I will not rescue anyone from their hands.’”
The devastation of the land is depicted in the opening poem in Zechariah 11:1-3:
“Open your doors, Lebanon, so that fire may devour your cedars! 2 Wail, you juniper, for the cedar has fallen; the stately trees are ruined! Wail, oaks of Bashan; the dense forest has been cut down! 3 Listen to the wail of the shepherds; their rich pastures are destroyed! Listen to the roar of the lions; the lush thicket of the Jordan is ruined!” We will not go back into those verses since we explained them in detail last week. Our previous message was part one of this two-part message. It furnished a lot of contextual information for today’s text. So, it is preferable to hear that teaching before this one.
This chapter naturally divides into three sections:
I. Consequences of Rejecting the Good Shepherd (vs 1-3)
II. Israel’s Rejection of the Good Shepherd (vs 4-14)
III. Israel’s Reception of the Wicked Shepherd (vs 15-17)
We dealt with the first section last week. In Section II we examined God’s commissioning of Zechariah to prophetically act out the role of a good shepherd (vs 4-6).
I. ISRAEL’S REJECTION OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD (vs 7-14)
Today we begin with Zechariah’s assumption of the role of a good shepherd. Zechariah 11:7-8a says, “So I shepherded the flock marked for slaughter, particularly the oppressed of the flock. Then I took two staffs and called one Favor and the other Union, and I shepherded the flock. 8 In one month I got rid of the three shepherds.” Let’s examine the details given here.
Zechariah tells us he did what God told him to do in the previous three verses. We are not told exactly how this prophetic action took place, but in some way, Zechariah represented the Lord as a good shepherd before the people of his day. He probably accepted some position that was recognized by the people as the job of a shepherd.iii
Then he adds: “particularly the oppressed of the flock.”iv The emphasis of his investment is on the godly remnant who respond in faith to the good shepherd. In contrast to the corrupt leaders and the majority of the people, some received Christ at his First Advent. “The common people heard Him gladly” (Mark 12:37 NKJV). John 1:11 records the rejection of Christ by the nation. “He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.” But in the next verse we read, “Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” Particular attention was given by Zechariah and by Christ to the poor people who responding in faith.v
In verse 7 of our text, Zechariah introduces the two staffs which symbolized his work as a shepherd: “Then I took two staffs and called one Favor and the other Union, and I shepherded the flock.” “The Eastern shepherd carried a rod (shebet) or club for repelling wild beasts and a crooked staff (mish’eneth) for helping the sheep and himself in difficult places.”vi With these two instruments the shepherd guided, protected, and cared for the sheep. Therefore, David could say in Psalm 23:4, “your rod and your staff, they comfort me.”
The names Zechariah gives these two staffs carries prophetic significance. One he called Favor. The RSV translates it Grace, and the KJV translates it Beauty. We know from verse 10 this staff represented the favor Israel enjoyed through her covenant relationship with Yahweh. The other staff he called Union. The NKJV translates that as Bonds. Verse 14 helps us understand this as the unifying influence of the good shepherd.
The statement in verse 8, “In one month I got rid of the three shepherds” is one of the most enigmatic in all the Bible. There have been at least 40 interpretations of who the three shepherds are.vii There were probably three corrupt leaders that Zechariah dismissed as a part of his prophetic action.viii But what was Zechariah’s action predicting in Christ’s ministry? Of the multitude of proposals, Henderson’s interpretation is the most acceptable. “Henderson wrote, “The only construction which is at all entitled to any notice, is that which regards the language as descriptive of the three orders of rulers in the Jewish state—the priests, the teachers of the law, and the civil magistrates.”ix These were the leaders influential in the crucifixion of Christ. These were the Jewish leaders who lost their place of leadership in 70 AD.x The phrase “in one month” is probable “a code word for a short time.”xi
The people’s response to Zechariah’s dismissal of these three corrupt leaders is recorded near the end of Zechariah 11:8: “The flock detested me. . . .”xii What a surprising response. These false shepherds are oppressing the people. You would think the good shepherd’s dismissal of them would inspire favor and celebration toward the good shepherd. But the opposite happens. Instead of loving Zechariah, the flock detested him. It was the same with the Jewish people during Christ’s First Advent. The corrupt leaders were putting heavy burdens on the people.xiii At the temple, they were cheating the common people. Jesus took up the people’s cause and drove the money changers from the temple. He healed the sick and fed the hungry.xiv He openly condemned the corrupt priests and Pharisees. But the people he was defending demanded his crucifixion along with the Jewish leaders.xv This is a remarkable statement: “The flock detested me.” This rejection of the good shepherd will be detailed more fully in the verses that follow.
The good shepherd’s response to their rejection of him is stated in the last phrase of verse 8 where the good shepherd says, “and I grew weary of them.” The Hebrew katsar means to become short, be grieved, or lose patience with them.xvi The good shepherd has unselfishly cared for these people. Instead of responding to love with love, they intensely detest him. This has often been the surprising response to godly leadership. Prior to the Babylonian exile the people rejected the true prophets that God sent them.xvii Zechariah is experiencing the same treatment during the latter part of his life. And Israel detested Christ to the extent that they demanded his crucifixion. In all these cases, the good shepherd exercised extreme patience. But there is a point where the dye is cast, the decision has been made to reject God’s messenger and message. When that point is reached, there is nothing left but judgment. Even then, God’s judgment is executed with the gracious hope that it will work repentance in the hard hearts.
The shepherd’s response that is recorded in the remainder of the chapter, must be understood in the context of their rejection of the shepherd. So, verse 8 concludes with the good shepherd says, “The flock detested me, and I grew weary of them.”
Verse 9 continues, “and said, ‘I will not be your shepherd.’” That terminated Zechariah’s responsibility to act as a shepherd for those people. It foreshadowed the termination of Israel’s opportunity during the First Advent when they rejected Messiah. In Matthew 23:13-36 Jesus pronounced seven woes that were about to come on Israel’s corrupt leadership as a result of their rejection of the Good Shepherd sent to them. Then we are given a glimpse of Christ’s grief over their fatal decision. In Matthew 23:37-39 Jesus laments, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left
to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”
You were not willing. That was the key to their destiny. The desolation for that generation would come in 70 AD. But above it all, God will work his plan for the nation. There will come a day when Israel will be willing to receive Messiah. There will come a day when they say, “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.”xviii At the Second Advent repentance will have been worked in the nation. Sadly, that will only come after horrific suffering and humiliation. In the interim between the First and Second Advents, the good shepherd’s protection will be absent, and the gentile nations will exact their cruelty on them.xix
This abandonment of the shepherdly protection is expressed in the rest of verse 9: “Let the dying die, and the perishing perish. Let those who are left eat one another’s flesh.” The good shepherd accepts the decision of the flock to reject his services. They will not have his intervention; those who are sick will not be healed; they will die. Those who are perishing will perish. The shepherd’s leadership that would unite the people in love is removed.xx As a result, they bit and devour one another.xxi During the siege of Jerusalem in the first century AD, they will literally cannibalize one another. The horror they have consigned themselves to is unimaginable. Josephus records the death of 1.1 million Jews during that judgment and specific stories of them eating one another’s flesh.xxii To reject God’s mercies is to step off in the abyss of temporal and eternal judgment.
In verse 10 Zechariah enacts the termination of covenant by breaking the staff named Favor. “Then I took my staff called Favor and broke it, revoking the covenant I had made with all the nations.” This certainly entails the removal of God’s restraint on the nations to prevent them from destroying Israel. But what covenant is being referenced here? There are two viable interpretations:
(1) One approach is to understand the word covenant in a general sense and as God’s covenant with the nations to not harm Israel. Unger (p. 197) argues for this position based on the fact that the Hebrew word translated nations (KJV: people) is in the plural and the singular is usually used in reference to Israel. The translators of the NIV seem to have embraced this interpretation.xxiii
(2) Another approach is to understand this in reference to the Mosaic covenant, but in the context of God replacing it with a new, better covenant. Meyers and Meyers (pp. 268-271) take this position citing texts in Ezekiel and Jeremiah in their arguments. David Levy also takes this as a reference to the Mosaic covenant. In contrast to the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants, he understands the Mosaic covenant to be conditional, a covenant already broken by Israel’s unfaithfulness to its conditions.xxiv
Regardless of which interpretation we use, God is clearly removing his protection from the nation due to their rejection of Messiah. The consequences of that will be destruction for the nation.
Verse 11 says, “It was revoked on that day, and so the oppressed of the flock who were watching me knew it was the word of the Lord.” In Zechariah’s role-play as a shepherd, “on that day” refers to the day he broke the staff named Favor. This prophetic act pointed to the time at the end of Jesus’s earthly ministry when the nation’s decision to reject him had been made. That decision was sealed at the time of his crucifixion. But just prior to the crucifixion, Jesus had pronounced seven woes on the nation’s leadership and concluded with the statement in Matthew 23:38, “Look, your house is left to you desolate.”
The “oppressed of the flock who were watching me [the godly remnant who received him] knew it was the word of the Lord.” The unbelieving might explain the judgments away as bad luck. But the godly listened to the shepherd’s voice and knew “it was the word of the Lord.”xxv
Having resigned from his role as a shepherd, Zechariah asks the people to finalize his employment by giving him his pay. In verse 12 he writes, “I told them, ‘If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it.’” He leaves it up to them to estimate the worth of his shepherdly service and to not pay him at all if that was their choice.
Their response is recorded at the end of verse 12: “So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.” That amount was an insult. It was the amount, according to Exodus 21:32, paid for a slave gored by a bull. “It was not even the price of a freeman.”xxvi Of course, this is all prophetic of the value Israel would place on Messiah, God manifested in the flesh.
In verse 13 God instructs Zechariah on what to do with the thirty pieces of silver. “And the Lord said to me, ‘Throw it to the potter’—the handsome price [this is sarcastic language] at which they valued me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them to the potter at the house of the Lord.” The word translated threw (shalak) means to “throw, cast, hurl, or fling.”xxvii Both Unger and Hill understand this to be a contemptuous act.xxviii The amount is an insult, and it is thrown back contemptuously.
The fulfillment of this prophecy is documented in Matthew. Matthew 26:14-16 records the chief priests’ chosen price of thirty pieces of silver. “Then one of the Twelve—the one called Judas Iscariot—went to the chief priests 15 and asked, ‘What are you willing to give me if I deliver him over to you?’ So they counted out for him thirty pieces of silver. 16 From then on Judas watched for an opportunity to hand him over.” That begins the betrayal that culminates in the crucifixion of Christ. The rest of that chapter records Jesus’s arrest.
Matthew 27:1-10 continues the story. “Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people made their plans how to have Jesus executed. 2 So they bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate the governor. 3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. 4 ‘I have sinned,’ he said, ‘for I have betrayed innocent blood.’ ‘What is that to us?’ they replied. ‘That’s your responsibility.’5 So Judas threw [flung] the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. 6 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, ‘It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money.’ [It’s interesting that they did not mind killing an innocent man but were so meticulous about keeping their religious rules.] 7 So they decided to use the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners. 8 That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: ‘They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10 and they used them to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.’”
Matthew’s phrase in verse 9 is very significant: “the price set on him by the people of Israel.” That was the nation’s value that they placed on their Messiah—no more than that of any slave. It confirmed their rejection of the good shepherd sent from above.
In verse 9, Matthew attributes this prediction to Jeremiah. Of course, the prediction was from Zechariah, not Jeremiah. So, how do we explain this apparent discrepancy? Various explanations have been proposed.
(1) Some attribute it to an early scribal error as Matthew’s original text was being copied.
(2) Edersheim says Matthew is stringing Jeremiah’s prophecy with the “description furnished by Zechariah” and “sets the event before us as the fulfillment of Jeremy’s prophecy.”xxix
(3) The most acceptable explanation is that Matthew is loosely quoting Zechariah but labeling the citation from Jeremiah because Jeremiah was “at the head of the prophetic roll he used.”xxx Leupold says, “different groups of Old Testament writings were named among the Jews according to the first book of a roll. Zechariah happened to be in the Jeremiah roll or in the roll whose first book was Jeremiah.”xxxi Unger points out, A similar usage occurs in Luke 24:44 when the book of Psalms gives its name to the entire third section of the Hebrew canon.”xxxii
Matthew is not quoting Zechariah word for word. Instead, he is interpreting Zechariah’s story as a prediction of the New Testament event. In Zechariah’s story the thirty pieces of silver are thrown to the potter who was serving in the temple.xxxiii It was an act of contempt because the potter was “one of the lowest of the laboring classes.”xxxiv In Matthew’s fulfillment, the thirty pieces of silver passed into the hands of the potter as the chief priests used it to purchase a field of a potter for a burial ground.xxxv
Zechariah 11:12-13 is parenthetical detail separating verse 11 and 14 where the two shepherd’s staffs are broken. In verse 14, Zechariah reports, “Then I broke my second staff called Union, breaking the family bond between Judah and Israel.” This is reflective of the division under Rehoboam’s rule that was a judgment on Israel’s sin earlier in Israel’s history.xxxvi But it is, more importantly, prophetic of the judgment that would occur when Israel rejects Messiah at his First Advent. We have already talked about the internal strife among the Jews that followed during the Roman revolt in the first century AD. The strife among the Jews during the siege of Jerusalem is reported by Josephus.xxxvii
When God was commissioning Zechariah to this assignment, he indicated in verse 6 this breaking of the staff name Union: “‘For I will no longer have pity on the people of the land,’ declares the Lord. ‘I will give everyone into the hands of their neighbors. . . .’” Here in Zechariah 14, the prophet is acting out that judgment.
So, in verses 1-14 we have seen the consequences of Israel’s rejection of the good shepherd. Zechariah’s experience as good shepherd serves as a prediction of Israel’s rejection of Messiah at his First Advent. The consequences are represented by the breaking of the two staffs. But there is one other consequence recorded in this chapter. Because of their rejection of the good shepherd, they will be deceived and receive the wicked shepherd.
III. ISRAEL’S RECEPTION OF THE WICKED SHEPHERD (vs 15-17)
In verse 15, Zechariah is now told to role-play a foolish or wicked shepherd. “Then the Lord said to me, ‘Take again the equipment of a foolish shepherd.’” The equipment of a foolish shepherd is the same as that of a good shepherd including the staffs.xxxviii The problem is that this wicked shepherd does not use that equipment for the benefit of the flock.
In verse 16 God says, “For I am going to raise up a shepherd over the land who will not care for the lost, or seek the young, or heal the injured, or feed the healthy, but will eat the meat of the choice sheep, tearing off their hooves.” Unlike the good shepherd, this shepherd “will not care for the lost, or seek the young, or heal the injured.” Those are the things a good shepherd does. But this shepherd neglects all those duties. Furthermore, he will not even nurture the healthy sheep. The text says he will not “feed the healthy.” His motivations are entirely selfish. The rest of the verse portrays one so greedy that he devours the sheep. He “will eat the meat of the choice sheep, tearing off their hooves.” The phrase “tearing off their hooves” indicates the extreme greediness of this shepherd. As he consumes the sheep, he even tears open the hooves to take the last morsel of edible meat.xxxix
The word translated “foolish” in biblical terms refers to the ungodly. This shepherd is the opposite of the good shepherd. His heart is set on his own wickedness, not the welfare of the sheep. Psalm 14:1 says, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, their deeds are vile. . . .” That is the nature of this ungodly shepherd.
In Zechariah 11, this shepherd is set in contrast to the good shepherd depicted in the previous verses. The foolish shepherd is not a collection of rulers in Israel as some commentators suppose. Just as verses 4-14 predict the coming of the good shepherd, Christ, these verses predict the coming of the bad shepherd, Antichrist.xl In John 5:43 Jesus told the Jewish leaders, “I have come in My Father's name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive” (NKJV). The nation rejected the true Messiah. They will receive the false Messiah, Antichrist.
Daniel prophesied the Antichrist’s rise to power and the covenant he would make with Israel at the beginning of the end-time Tribulation period.xli Paul predicts the deception that will characterize this foolish shepherd: “The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing” (2 Thess. 2:9-10). In the last days, the Jews living in Israel will be deceived by this false Messiah. They will enter into a covenant with him which he will break after 3½ years. That will launch a time of suffering like this world has never seen.xlii
But God will ultimately destroy this wicked shepherd. Zechariah 11:17 pronounces his doom. “Woe to the worthless shepherd, who deserts the flock! May the sword strike his arm and his right eye! May his arm be completely withered, his right eye totally blinded!”xliii This is poetic language describing his destruction. The arm and eye represent power and intelligence.xliv The utter destruction is communicated by the words “completely withered’ and “totally blinded.” The Lord Jesus, the good shepherd, will overthrow this man “with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming” (2 Thess. 2:8). Revelation 19:20 describes his final demise in this way: “But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.”
Conclusion
As we close, I want to address one timeless principle prominent in this chapter. When people reject the godly leadership that the Lord sends them, they will receive ungodly leadership as a judgement. The mega story in Zechariah 11 is first the rejection of the good shepherd, followed by God sending them the wicked shepherd. Did you notice in Zechariah 11:16 that the Lord says, “For I [God] am going to raise up a shepherd over the land who will not care for the lost.” In 2 Thessalonians 2:10 God says, “They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.” That’s what will happen to Israel at the beginning of the Tribulation Period.
But the principle is at work today as well. Refusal of the truth is not a neutral matter. It always sets the person up for deception. Rejection of godly leadership is followed by the installation of ungodly leadership.xlv We all need shepherding. We all need to be under authority. We all need the care and guidance of a good shepherd.xlvi Have you surrendered your life to Christ? He is the Good Shepherd who laid down his life for your salvation.xlvii He offers himself to you as the only one who can give you eternal life. Will you embrace him as your shepherd today?
ENDNOTES:
i All Scripture quotes are from the New International Version (2020) unless indicated otherwise.
ii This leadership problem was addressed in Zechariah 10:3-4 where God’s solution is to provide Good Shepherd (Messiah). Zechariah 11 expands on that with much more detail.
iii See part 1 of this message for a discussion of opinions as to whether Zechariah physically acted out this shepherding role or is simply reporting an inner vision.
iv The RSV translates Zechariah 11:7: “So I became the shepherd of the flock doomed to be slain for those who trafficked in the sheep.” The phrase “for those who trafficked in the sheep” is based on the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew. However, Fienberg (p. 159), and Unger (p. 194) convincingly argue against the RSV. Hill (p. 231-232) and Meyers (Zechariah 9-14, 261-262 argue for the RSV approach.
v Cf. 1 Cor. 1:26-28; Heb. 4:2.
vi W. Emery Barnes in the Cambridge Bible, vol. Hag. Zech. Mal. (Cambridge: The University Press, 1934) as quoted by Leupold, Exposition of Zechariah, 210.
vii Hinckley. G. T. Mitchell, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and Jonah, International Critical Commentary, S. Driver, A. Plummer, and C. Briggs, eds. (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1912), 306. Cf. Feinberg, 160.
viii Cf. Leupold, 211; Richard Phillips, 247.
ix E. Henderson, The Book of the Twelve Minor Prophets (1868) 442 as quoted by Unger, 195. . At his Second Coming, Christ will shepherd his people as a prophet, priest, and king. For an examination of various theories for interpreting this text see Baron, 393-399.
x In John 11 the corrupt Jewish leaders decided to kill Jesus. They reasoned in verse 48 that if they allowed him to continue ministering, “the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation” (KJV). Ironically, that is exactly what happened as a result of (judgment on) the decision they made.
xi André Lacocque, Zacharie 9-14 (Neuchatel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1981), 177 as quoted by Merrill, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, 268.
xii The word translated detested (bachal) indicates intense loathing. Strong’s OT: 973.
xiii Cf. Matt. 23:4, 13-15.
xiv Matt. 21:12-14; Mark 6:34-44; Acts 10:38.
xv Mark 15:9-13; Luke 23:13-24.
xvi Strong’s OT: 7114.
xvii Jesus stated this history in Matthew 23:37 as he lamented their decision to reject him as their shepherd: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you.”
xviii See Richard W. Tow, Rapture or Tribulation: Will Christians Go Through the Coming Tribulation? (Bloomington, IN: WestBow Press, 2022), 136-138.
xix While the nation is unbelief, God continues to exercise his sovereignty over Israel to preserve the Jewish people according to his plan. But the favor and protection that might have been is removed. This is symbolized by the breaking of the staff Favor.
xx This is symbolized in Zechariah 11:14 by the braking of the staff Union.
xxi Cf. Gal. 5:15. When families, churches, nations, etc. are in conflict, the first step toward lasting resolution is to make sure the group is truly submitting to God’s leadership. As a conflict consultant, I sometimes find organizations that are pursuing their own selfish agenda and wondering why there is so much internal strife. In our consultations for conflicted churches, we explore the churches value system and faithfulness to the organizations God-given mission. God protects and empowers the fulfillment of the mission he gives. But if we go our own way, we can lose the uniting influence of the Good Shepherd’s leadership.
xxii Josephus, Josephus Complete Works, The Wars of the Jews, Book VI, Chapter IX, trans. by William Whiston (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1981), 587. An incident of a mother killing, roasting, and eating her son is recorded in The Wars of the Jews, Book VI, Chapter III, 579.
xxiii Leupold (p. 214) also takes this position citing Job 5:23 and Hosea 2:18 as other places where the Hebrew term is used in a similar way. Because of the way the same phrase “with all the nations” is used in Zechariah 12:6 and 14:12, Boda takes the same position. Boda, Haggai, Zechariah, The NIV Application Commentary, 463. Cf. Feinberg, 162; Phillips, 249.
xxiv David M. Levy, Zechariah: Israel’s Prophetic Future and the Coming Apocalypse (Bellmawr, NJ: The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, Inc., 2013),100. Merrill (pp. 269-270) understands this as a reference to the Mosaic covenant with Israel, but not as an irreparable breach. Instead, the benefits of that covenant against conquest and deportation are being withheld.
xxv Baron (pp. 402-403), Unger (pp. 197-198), Leupold (p. 215), and Duguid hold this position. Duguid. Iain M. Duguid, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, Evangelical Press Study Commentary, J. D. Currid, ed. (Leland, England: However, Meyers and Meyer (pp. 261) follow the Greek rendering and interpret this as a reference to the merchants. Evangelical Press, 2010), 158. Hill (p. 234) also believes it is a reference to the sheep merchants because they are the ones addressed in verse 12. The RSV and NLT translate it that way. Cf. John 10:27.
xxvi Leupold, 216. Phillips (p. 250), Merrill (p.272), Feinberg (p. 163), and Unger (p. 199) understand this to be an insulting amount. The action commanded in verse 13 seems to confirm it to be an insult. In disagreement with the majority, Baldwin contends the amount was significant. Joyce G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1972), 184.
Cf. Meyers and Meyers, 275-276.
xxvii Strong’s Concordance OT: 7993.
xxviii Unger, 199; Hill, 234. Contra Meyers and Meyers, Zechariah 9-14, 276.
xxix Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Book III, Chapter XIV (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 576. Edersheim is basically seeing Matthew as drawing from both prophets but citing Jeremiah because he was the more prominent prophet.
xxx Unger, 201.
xxxi Leupold, 218. We must remember that Scripture was not organized in the first century the way it is today. “”It would be after AD 1500 before chapter and verse divisions and numbering were introduced.” Walter C. Kaisere, Jr., P. H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, M. T. Brauch, Hard Sayings of the Bible (Downers Grove: IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996) 399.
xxxii Unger, 201. We must keep in mind the manuscripts used in the first century were not organized
xxxiii Feinberg, 164. See also Keil on this verse.
xxxiv Feinberg, 164. Leupold (p. 217) views the phrase “cast it to the potter” as a proverbial expression of distain similar to saying “throw it to the dogs.” In this way, Leupold eliminates the need to identify or locate the potter.
However, Zechariah probably acted physically in obedience to the command in Zechariah 11:13 to ““Throw it to the potter.” The Septuagint translation “throw it into the furnace” is not preferred. Additionally, the Syriac reading (treasury) should not be substituted for the Masoretic text (potter) as done in the RSV. Cf. Merrill, 273. Contra Meyers and Meyers, 276-278.
xxxv Cf. Unger, 200.
xxxvi First Kings 11:9-13 attributes this judgment to Solomon’s unfaithfulness in leading Israel into idolatry. First Kings 12 records the split when Rehoboam became king. The breaking of Union under Rehoboam eventually to the exile of both the northern and southern kingdoms. The breaking of Union in the first century AD lead to dispersion as well.
xxxvii See part one of this message for more detail.
xxxviii Cf. Leupold, 220; Feinberg, 165.
xxxix Keil says, “When he consumes the sheep, he even splits or tears in pieces the claws, to seize upon the swallow the last morsel of flesh of fat.”
xl Cf. Baron, 417’ Unger, 202-203. Contra Leupold, 220.
xli Daniel 9:24-27. See also Daniel 7:7-9, 19-23). Cf. Richard W. Tow, 15-30.
xlii Matthew 24:21. See Richard W. Tow, Rapture or Tribulation: Will Christians Go Through the Coming Tribulation? (Bloomington, IN: WestBow Press, 2022), 151-168.
xliii Cf. 1 Kings 13:4.
xliv Cf. Baron, 417; Hill, 237.
xlv People in our nation may think they are innocent victims of wicked, incompetent leadership. But it is a judgment on the choices the nation as a whole has made. May God be merciful to us.
xlvi Christians should submit themselves to a godly pastor as a protection against deception (Heb. 13:17). To reject a good shepherd that God provides can result in being led astray by a false shepherd. This text serves as an admonition for believers to receive the leadership God provides and to be discerning about the leadership they submit themselves to.
xlvii John 10:11; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 2:24-25.
