THE second half of Zechariah's prophecy (chapters 9-14) might be compared to an ellipse with its two focal points, one of which (chapters 9-11) centers in "the judgment through which Gentile world-power over Israel is finally destroyed, and Israel is endowed with strength to overcome all their enemies." The point of interest of the second prediction (chapters 12-14) consists of "the judgment through which Israel itself is sifted and purged in the final great conflict with the nations and transformed into the holy nation of the Lord."

With the eagle-eye of prophetic interpretation Zechariah foresaw the victorious, sweeping conquest of western Asia by Alexander the Great and the Lord's protection of His holy temple in Jerusalem during that period of unprecedented events. The picture of this monarch's conquest blends imperceptibly in 9:8 with the final invasion of Palestine by the world power in the end time and of the Lord's appearing upon the scene and delivering Israel from that titanic conflict.

This deliverance by implication suggested the Redeemer; hence, the prophet, acting upon the principle of the law of recurrence, was led by the Spirit to foretell the first coming of Messiah to Zion when He rides upon an ass in a lowly and humble manner. Then suddenly the picture of this first appearance begins to blend into that of His triumphant coming which will be when Israel accepts Him. At his return to Jerusalem He will deliver the nation from all oppressors (vs. 10).

In the paragraph 9:11-17 the prophet explains the basis of the redemption of Jerusalem and the Hebrew race and the manner of the Lord's first appearance in the city for her deliverance. For instance, the efficient cause of Israel's release from age-long, world-wide bondage and deliverance at Messiah's second coming is "the blood of thy covenant" (vs. 11). What is the significance of the expression "the blood of thy covenant"? Certainly not the blood of bulls and goats that were slain on the altar in ancient times. The correct answer to this question can be found in Isaiah 52:13-53:12. From this passage it is evident that the blood of Messiah is the efficient cause of Israel's final release and redemption. In Zechariah 9:12-17 appears a very vivid description of how the Lord will appear personally then in Zion to deliver Israel. In verse 16 appears the prediction that the Lord will be the shepherd of His flock.

The central thought of chapter 10:1-7 is found in verse 4:
"From him (Judah) shall come forth the cornerstone, from him the nail, from him the battle bow, from him every ruler together."

This verse gathers up in small compass three principal figures under which Messiah and His work for Israel are by the former prophets set forth. In Isaiah 28 and Psalm 118 He is represented as the cornerstone and the head of the corner. In Isaiah 22, verses 22-24, appears the figure of the nail driven in the wall.*

In the national anthem of Israel, sung by Moses (Deuteronomy 32:41-43), the Lord represents King Messiah as His sword with which He will slay the nations and deliver Israel. In Psalm 45:3-5 He is presented as a brave warrior who shoots His arrows at His enemies, and who at the end of the conflict stands victorious upon the battlefield. Isaiah (49:2) compared Him to a polished shaft, but Zechariah in our verse (10:4) changed the figure a little and compared Him to a battle bow. In the last phrase of this verse, "from him every ruler (or, exactor) together," the prophet gathered up all the remaining figures used of Messiah in the former prophets and applied them to Him. Zechariah, therefore, brought together in this verse all of the figures used by the prophets in setting forth Messiah in His final conquest of the nations and deliverance of Israel.

In verse 8 of this chapter appears a beautiful prediction of the final regathering of Israel. Here the prophet compares God to the shepherd who with his reed sounds his note, and all of the flock of Israel come, gathering around Him. This final regathering of Israel presupposes the world-wide dispersion; hence, in verse 9 the prophet foretells Israel's being sown among the nations. In verses 10-12 the prophet reverts to the thought of her being regathered and describes it in most glowing terms. From this forecast we see that the Lord will make bare His holy arm, as at the time of the Exodus from Egypt, and will perform mighty acts and show marvelous manifestations of His presence, that will make the deliverance from Egypt pale into insignificance.

During the prophet's foretelling the final regathering of Israel, one of his auditors could have appropriately asked, Why would the nation be dispersed among the peoples of the earth? What would be the primary cause of such a calamity? These questions he answers in 11:1-14. Therefore we must study most minutely all of these verses.

"Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars. Wail, O fir-tree, for the cedar is fallen, because the goodly ones are destroyed: wail, O ye oaks of Bashan, for the strong forest is come down. A voice of the wailing of the shepherds! for their glory is destroyed: a voice of the roaring of young lions! for the pride of the Jordan is laid waste" (11:1-3).

There has been much discussion as to whether or not these verses are to be taken literally or symbolically. The rule by which we are to be governed in our interpretation of all language is that we must take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the context indicates otherwise. A departure from this simple common-sense rule always leads into vagaries and uncertainties. An excellent statement of the literal interpretation of this passage is found in the following quotation:

"Lebanon is bidden to open its doors; that is, its steep mountain paths, in order that the fire of the enemy might consume its cedars. The firs, or cypresses, are called upon to howl or lament because the cedars are fallen; for if the more excellent and valuable trees were felled without mercy, the poor firs and cypresses must needs expect a similar fate.

"From the heights of Lebanon the destructive storm sweeps down on the land of Bashan, and the Oaks--the pride of the land (with their kindly shade from the burning heat)--are likewise felled by the enemy to meet the wants of the invading army, and to construct his means of offence and defence. Thus, the wood hitherto practically inaccessible is brought low. The desolating storm sweeps from the high lands to the low lands. The very shepherds are forced to howl, because their splendour is laid waste; namely, the pasture lands in which they were wont to feed and tend their flocks in the day of peace and quiet. The conflagration extends even to the south of the land. Judah is wrapped in flames. The close thickets which fringed the Jordan river, as it ran along through the territory of the southern kingdom, are consumed by the fire. The thickets which shut in that stream so closely that its waters could not be seen till the traveler was close on its banks, which were wont to be the abode of lions and other beasts of prey in those days, are likewise described as destroyed. 'The pride of Jordan' is rendered desolate, and hence the voice of the roaring of lions is heard wailing over the general ruin."-- The Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah, by David Baron, p. 377.

The author whom I have just quoted has clearly stated the literal common-sense interpretation of this wonderful prediction. The prophet saw the country invaded by a foreign foe who left wreckage and desolation in his wake. About this position I do not think there can be any question. At the same time, however, the general impression of the passage is that while it is to be taken literally, it goes beyond the plain sense.

Many interpreters have ignored the literal meaning and have seen a figurative significance only in this wonderful prediction.

"Thus, the 'cedars' are taken to mean the highest and noblest in the land, while the 'cypresses,' or 'firs,' represent the common people, who are commanded to 'howl,' because since the 'cedars' have fallen there is no hope of their being spared."--Baron.

True that in Ezekiel 17:3 the family of David is represented by a lofty cedar and in Isaiah 14:8 and Jeremiah 22:6,7 lofty cedars are "the emblems of the glory of the Jewish state." The oracle following, in verses 4-14, favors a symbolic or allegorical interpretation of the first three verses, in addition to the literal meaning of the words. The transition from the literal to the symbolic or allegorical is very easy in this instance and is accomplished by what we might properly call a play on words. This fact becomes evident when we remember that the lumber which was used in the construction of the temple, the royal palace, and public buildings was procured from the mountains of Lebanon. The prophet in vision sees an approaching army entering the defiles of the Lebanon mountains, speaks to them as if animate, and urges them to open their gates to this invader who will destroy, not only the country of Lebanon, but also Bashan and the Jordan valley. Seeing the plunderer entering Palestine, his mind easily grasped the whole situation which would effect the complete destruction of the Jewish state. Having spoken of the cedars of Lebanon and knowing that the timbers used in the construction of the temple and public buildings had been procured from that region, he referred to these edifices in terms of the forests of Lebanon and Bashan. Thus, when the prediction is understood in the light of these facts, it becomes evident that the first three verses foretell the invasion of Palestine by some foreign foe and the complete collapse of the Jewish nation. In order to make the connection between the literal fulfilment of this invasion and the overthrow of the Jewish nation by this conqueror unmistakable, I will again resort to the use of one of my favorite illustrations, which is that of a picture thrown upon the screen by the stereopticon. First, one picture is projected upon the screen and presently begins to fade. At the same time the dim outlines of another become apparent, and, by the time the first has disappeared, the second is in full view. Thus the literal interpretation of this passage is evident at the very beginning, and yet in the light of the language itself and that which follows, it is evident that the literal blends with the allegorical and that these first three verses present the overthrow of the Jewish nation by this invader. What catastrophe is here set forth?

In the heading of this section I use the word impersonation. Let us recognize that this passage is very dramatic. The action and reaction are indeed realistic.

At this point of the investigation we must, if possible, determine whether the symbolic transaction described in these verses was a vision on the one hand or a real experience of the prophet's appearing at the temple and performing the acts described. Scholars are divided on this question. In favor of the literal interpretation I wish to quote from Abarbanel, who declared:

"God commanded the prophet to perform a real action, and in a waking state, which action was to be an intimation and a sign of that which was to happen in God's dealings with Israel," and adds: "By attending to the affairs of the prophets thou mayest know that God, blessed be He, sometimes commanded them to perform real actions, and in a waking state, and afterwards explained to them the reason of the command according to the sign that was in them.³ But sometimes the blessed God commanded the prophets to do things foreign to their character, and unnecessary for them to do; which things were also to be a sign and a type of coming events, and did not expound the meaning, because He knew that the thing itself could be understood" (as, for instance Isa. viii. 1-2; Ezek. iv. 1-2, v.1). But, as has been observed, the narrative in this chapter differs in some respects from the symbolical actions of the prophets and from Zechariah's own visions.

"The symbolical actions of the prophets are actions of their own: this involves acts which it would be impossible to represent, except as a sort of drama. Such are the very central points, the feeding of the flock, which yet are intelligent men who understand God's doings: the cutting off of the three shepherds; the asking for the price; the unworthy price offered; the casting it aside. It differs from Zechariah's own visions, in that they are for the most part exhibited to the eye, and Zechariah's own part is simply to inquire their meaning and to learn it, and to receive further revelation. In one case only (chap. iii. 5) he himself interposes in the action of the vision; but this, too, as asking that it might be done, not as himself doing it. Here (in chap. xi) he is himself the actor, yet as representing Another, Who alone could cut off shepherds, abandon the people to mutual destruction, annulling the covenant which He had made."

Abarbanel was clear in his reasoning and presents a plausible case. No one has thus far been able, according to my information, to overthrow the logic of his argument.

Maimonides took the opposite view and interpreted the passage as simply a vision presented to the prophet's mind:

"This, 'I fed the flock of the slaughter,' to the end of the narrative, where he is said to have asked for his hire, to have received it, and to have cast it into the Temple, to the treasurer--all this Zechariah saw in prophetic vision. For the command which he received, and the act which he is said to have done, took place in prophetic vision or dream. 'This,' he adds, 'is beyond controversy, as all know who are able to distinguish the possible from the impossible.'"

This commentator wishes us to accept his understanding of the case because any other interpretation to him appears impossible. To me his reasoning is not sufficiently forceful to lead me to such a conclusion. It is altogether possible that he may be correct, but his explanation of this symbolic act is not at all the only possible one.

In view of the fact that this is a controversial point and excellent scholars are divided in their opinions relative to it, I shall not be dogmatic. I will say, however, that I am inclined to favor the position that the prophet actually took staves, went to the temple, and, before its authorities, impersonated the shepherd of Israel.

The late David Baron has done well to call our attention to an observation of an old writer concerning the actions of the prophet. On this point he states,

"The actions of the prophets are not always to be understood as actions, but as predictions--as, for instance, when God commands Isaiah to 'make the heart of the people fat and their ears heavy'; or when He says that He appointed Jeremiah over the nations, 'to root out, and to break down, and to destroy, and to overthrow, and to build, and to plant'; or when He commanded the same prophet to cause the nations to drink the cup whereby they should be bereft of their senses (Jeremiah 1:10; Isaiah vi:10; Jeremiah (25:15-27)."