ZECHARIAH ON THE PIERCING OF GOD
The citations here are taken from Thomas V. Moore’s The Prophets of the Restoration, Or, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi: A New Translation with Notes, published by Robert Carter & Brothers in 1856. All emphasis will be mine.
Y. 10. There is here predicted a great spiritual blessing from God on the Church, but contemplated mainly as now containing the penitent Jews. “A spirit of grace and supplication ” is an outpouring of the spirit of God, that awakens gracious affections and leads the heart to prayer. The spirit of prayer is the gauge of the spirit of grace, and the mercury whose rise or fall is an unerring test of the state of the Church.
In this mighty revival that shall take place in the future, there will be much prayer and much penitence. This penitence shall pervade the whole Church, but especial prominence is given here to the recovered Jews.
“They shall look on me whom they have pierced.” As God is here the speaker, this passage has always been a stumbling-block to the Jews, for how could God be pierced? The only fact that explains it is that which they have not yet admitted, that they have crucified and slain that prince of peace who was God manifest in the flesh. As soon as they admit this fact they will see the consistency of the passage, and will mourn the guilt of their fathers in crucifying the incarnate Son, and their own guilt in so long rejecting him.
John 19:37 refers this passage to the piercing of Christ’s side, but as this was the act of a Roman soldier and not of the Jewish people, it must be regarded as only a partial fulfilment of the prophecy. It refers to all the sufferings of Christ, which culminated in his death on the cross, and affirms that then the Jews will admit what heretofore they have rejected, a suffering and dying Messiah. There is a change of person from the first to the third, which is not unusual with the prophets, (see Nordheimer’s Grammar, § 7G8, 1, 6,) and which, in view of what was to be said in reference to the speaker, was highly appropriate.
This passage has always been regarded as one of no small difficulty; at least, the expositors have found no small difficulty with it, from the fact that if its obvious meaning be admitted, a real prophecy and a suffering and yet divine Messiah must also be admitted. Hence Jews in earlier times, and neologists in later, have endeavored to get rid of this meaning. Some alleged that daqaru here means not to pierce, but to grieve, or to insult, and that the charge is that of insulting or blaspheming God. This is the rendering of the LXX and the Chaldee. Calvin favors it to a certain extent, but finds, in the literal fulfilment on the cross, a divinely arranged procedure, giving a symbolical exemplification of this insulting treatment of God. Rosenmuller, Eichorn, Theiner, Maurer, De Wette, Winer, and others, contend very strenuously for this opinion. But it is a sufficient objection to it that the word never occurs in that sense, but always in the sense of literal piercing, even in this prophecy, (ch. 13:3.) And the whole context is at variance with this meaning. The mourning, to which it is compared, was for a literal piercing, or death, in the case of Josiah, and, unless it is a literal death here, the depth of sorrow indicated in these words seems hardly explicable, and the analogy fails.
That the passage refers to Messiah was admitted, even among the Jews, the later interpreters explaining it of Messiah Ben Joseph, or the suffering Messiah, whom they invented to meet the passages of Scripture that speak so clearly of this characteristic of the promised Redeemer. But as they believed that this Messiah son of Joseph was a mere man, the difficulty met them that Jehovah declared “they shall look on me whom they have pierced;” so that if it refers to the Messiah he cannot be a mere man, but must be divine. To escape this difficulty, they changed the text, and made it read ” him,” instead of ” me.” This was at first only a marginal reading, as appears from some of the MSS., but was afterwards admitted into the text. But many of the most able Jews reject this gloss, and admit that “me” is the true reading. Scarcely any scholar of any note, even among the infidel critics, admits this interpolation. Hence this evasion is utterly inadmissible, and the text still stands, asserting that the Jews would look AT JEHOVAH WHOM THEY HAD SLAIN, a prophecy which can only be interpreted in the light of the cross.
It is useless to discuss the opinion of some of the early Jews, adopted in later times by Jahn, Bauer, Bertholdt, and others, that the mourning here was for the death of Judas Maccabeus, or some other Jewish leader, for this is liable to the same objections with the last- named opinion. Calmet admits this view, but says that Judas Maccabeus was a type of Christ. Ackermann, who quotes it at length, coincides with it as most probable. But there is no necessity for supposing any such reference as this, for the context refers obviously to events later than the Maccabean age, and events some of which are still future. Indeed, this very mourning is obviously yet to take place.
Hence, the only meaning that the text will bear is, that Jehovah is the speaker, and that he is speaking of himself, and the manner in which he has been treated by his people, and will be hereafter. Having, in the previous passage, under the symbol of a shepherd, declared how the people would treat him, in their blindness and madness, he then predicts that they would repent of this treatment, and turn to him with deep and heartrending penitence.
When their eyes were open to see what they had done, they would mourn. The bitterness of this mourning is described by two illustrations, a private and a public. The private is the grief that a parent feels at the loss of a first-born and an only child. The bitterness of this agony in any parent is a most vivid image of sorrow, but to a Jew, with his passion for posterity, and his impression of disgrace and curse connected with childlessness, this illustration was one of the most significant that could be used. There is an allusion to this passage in Matt. 24:30, and also in Rev. 1:7, implying its Messianic interpretation. (Pp. 278-282)
This verse has been variously interpreted. Calvin thinks that it applies to Christ only in common with the whole body of pastors, and cannot be restricted to him or to his death. Maurer refers it to Jehoiakim, others to Pekah, others to Judas Maccabeus, and others to the false prophets of v. 4—6. But as Sanctius well remarks, we have this verse expounded by the very best expositor, Jesus Christ, and applied specifically to himself, in Matt. 26:31. The obvious connection of this verse with ch. 11:4—14, would corroborate this exposition, were it necessary to add to the authority of the omniscient prophet.
The sword is the symbol of judicial power. The taking away of life being the highest function of government, the sword, which is the instrument of violent death, was selected as the symbol of these functions. The magistrate was called one who beareth the sword, see Rom. 13:4, because he wielded judicial power. Hence the great doctrine here set forth is, that the death of Christ was a judicial act, in which he endured penalty of that law whose penal power was symbolized by this sword of divine wrath. The sheep had deserved the blow, but the shepherd bares his own bosom to the sword, and is wounded for the sins of his people, and bears those sins in his own body on the tree. The vicarious nature of the atonement is therefore distinctly in-volved in this passage.
But who was this shepherd? “A man, my nearest kin.” He was a man, with all human sympathies and emotions, but he was more than a man, the nearest kin of Jehovah. The word amithi is only found elsewhere in the Pentateuch, where it is used for the nearest kin, and sometimes as synonymous with brother. See Lev. 5:17, etc. It is never used to indicate similarity of office, as Socinians assert on this passage, but always nearness of relation or kindred. Hence it here must refer to a human nature that beyond this humanity has a nature in the nearest possible relation to Jehovah, which of course must be a divine nature. Hence we have here clearly a twofold nature in the suffering Messiah, human and divine.
The versions vary in rendering this phrase. The LXX renders it, “a man, my fellow-citizen;” Aquila, “a man, my kinsman;” Symmachus, “a man of my people;” Theodotian, “a man, my neighbor;” the Syriac, “the man, my friend;” the Vulgate, “a man, my connection;” De Wette, “the man, my equal;” Arnheim, “the man whom I have associated with myself.” The last two versions are remarkable, as coming the one from a Rationalist and the other from a Jew, and express very nearly the exact truth. It is one equal with God, and associated with him, and such an one can only be found in Immanuel.
The scattering of the sheep must not be limited exclusively to the dispersion of the disciples on the night of Christ’s arrest, but refers to that general dispersion that should follow the death of Messiah. The flock that the shepherd was to feed was the whole theocratic people, of whom the Christians were but a part. The dispersion, therefore, applies to the whole people. The extent of the dispersion is explained in the next verses. To “bring back the hand ” is to interpose in reference to any one, whatever be the animus of the interposition, and to do so upon the little ones, is that interposition in favor of the humble and faithful that is alluded to elsewhere, (see ch. 11:7, 11.) It was partly fulfilled in the gathering of Jewish disciples into the Christian church…
PRACTICAL INFERENCES.
(1.) How fearful an evil is sin, when it could call forth the sword against God’s own co-equal and well beloved Son! (v. 7.)
(2.) Christ was man, and yet equal with God, (Phil. 2:6,) or, God and man in one person, (v. 7).
(3.) The death of Christ was the judicial sentence of God against sin, the endurance of the penalty of the law, and was, therefore, strictly vicarious and propitiatory, (v. 7.)
(4.) No human merit can mingle with the infinite merit of the work of Christ, for he trode the wine-press alone. It is impossible for us to eke out our works with Christ’s work, or to attempt with our “filthy rags” to patch the seamless robe of his righteousness. When the shepherd was smitten the sheep were scattered, and the blow fell on him alone, (v. 7.)
(5.) God often makes his people pass through the furnace, not that they may perish, but that they may be purified, and thus reach a better salvation, (v. (Pp. 293-297)
FURTHER READING
ZECH. 12:10 & THE PIERCING OF GOD
The OT Prophets Testify that the Messiah is Equal to God the Father [Part 1], [Part 2]