Original Meaning
THERE IS LITTLE QUESTION about striking similarities between 11:4–17 and 13:7–9. Both use shepherd imagery, refer to a sword striking the shepherd, allude to smelting, and use covenant concepts.1 Based on this, some have treated 13:7–9 as a unit displaced from its original position at the end of Zechariah 9–11.2 This, however, displays insensitivity to the role played by this short unit in chapters 9–14 as a whole and chapters 12–14 in particular. (1) Those shaping the final form of Zechariah 9–14 saw 13:7–9 with its focus on shepherding as the final installment of a series of short redactional seams that reminded the community of the crisis in leadership.
(2) Zechariah 13:7–9 is intimately related to the surrounding sections.3 The consistent mention of the house of David in 12:1–13:1 indicates that leadership is a key concern of those responsible for this piece. Furthermore, the closing section (13:2–6), which cannot be separated from 12:1–13:1, identifies idolatry-false prophecy as a key problem, the same problem identified in the earlier shepherd transition in 10:1–3. Also 13:7–9 foreshadows the remnant theme, which will be taken up in 14:2. This evidence thus allows for the connection of 13:7–9 to chapters 9–11 without ripping it out of its present literary position.
This short piece begins with an appeal to the “sword.” The sword is a regular metaphor in prophetic literature, an image of death and judgment (Isa. 34:5–6; Ezek. 5:1). In Jeremiah 47:6 and Ezekiel 21:16, as in Zechariah 13:7, the sword is addressed directly—in the former by humans, in the latter by God. The phrase “awake . . . against” is used for wielding a weapon in battle (2 Sam. 23:18) as well as for raising up an army against a nation (Isa. 13:17; Jer. 50:9).4 The fact that this imperative is directed at a weapon (“sword”) suggests the first sense. However, one cannot completely discount the second sense since the sword is personified. In either case, this shepherd is doomed, for the awaking is only the first of two imperatives directed to this sword. The second is devastating for the shepherd—the sword is instructed to “strike.”5
This shepherd is called “my shepherd” and “the man who is close to me.” The phrase “who is close” translates the Hebrew term ʾamit, used elsewhere only in Leviticus, where it refers to one’s neighbor, friend, or fellow citizen (Lev. 6:2; 18:20; 19:11, 15, 17; 24:19; 25:14, 15, 17). In a surprising twist, both phrases use the possessive pronoun “my,” emphasizing the close association between the Lord and the one who is struck by the sword.
Because the image of the sword is connected with God’s judgment, this Shepherd is apparently someone who is struck as a result of some offense. This is not surprising in light of the many negative depictions of shepherds elsewhere in Zechariah 9–14. However, precise identification of this shepherd is difficult to attain.
The phrase “my shepherd” is used of leadership on two other occasions in the Old Testament (cf. Zech. 11:17). In Isaiah 44:28 it refers to Cyrus, whom God raised up to accomplish his purposes. Ezekiel 34:8 contains a reference to “my shepherds,” as the prophet attacks the leadership of his day. In light of the close relationship between Zechariah 13:7–9 and 11:4–16 where, because of clear reliance on Ezekiel 34 and 37, evil shepherds were identified as non-Davidic leadership in Yehud, the shepherd may be a reference to a leadership figure within this group. This seems true also for the woe oracle against the shepherd in Zechariah 11:17.
Because of the loss of the shepherd, the flock will be scattered, the expected result of a flock without leadership (1 Kings 22:17//2 Chron. 18:16; Ezek. 34:5, 6, 12, 21). This scattering leaves the “little ones” (cf. Jer. 49:20; 50:45)6 vulnerable to attack. The attack comes from God, who turns his hand against them, a phrase used elsewhere to refer to his judgment (Ps. 81:14; Isa. 1:25; Ezek. 38:12; Amos 1:8). The reference in Isaiah 1:25 is significant because there one finds a reference also to “refining,” as in Zechariah 13:7–9. This indicates that God will discipline the flock (“little ones”) in order to purify them.
The process of purification is described in verses 8–9 as the community is divided into thirds (cf. Ezek. 5, where the prophet’s hair is divided into thirds, with a third burnt [representing those who die of the plague or perish by famine inside the city], a third struck with the sword [representing those who fall by the sword outside the city], and a third scattered to the wind [representing those exiled]). Both passages reveal that the majority of the flock will be eliminated from the outset as two-thirds “will be struck down and perish.”
The final third in both cases survives but then undergoes further discipline. In Ezekiel 5 a sword pursues this final third. In Zechariah 13:9, this final third is refined, using terminology drawn from the practice of metallurgy, a common image in prophetic literature (e.g., Isa. 1:25; Jer. 6:27–30; Ezek. 22:18–22). The process involves the powerful agent of “fire,” which will “refine . . . and test” (Ps. 17:3; 26:2; 66:10; Jer. 9:7) as “silver” and “gold.” Such a process removes the impurities from deposits containing these precious metals.
The second half of Zechariah 13:9 reveals the result of this refining process. The covenant relationship between God and his people will be restored. Calling on God’s name is used for several types of interchange between God and his people, including sacrifice (Gen. 12:8; 13:4; Ps. 116:17; cf. Gen. 21:33), thanksgiving (1 Chron. 16:8; Ps. 80:18; 105:1), and petition (1 Kings 18:24–26), but also for general seeking of God (Gen. 4:26; Ps. 99:6; Joel 3:5; Zeph. 3:9; cf. Ps. 79:6). Having been refined by God, they will now seek him, and to this people God promises to respond. He will declare them “my people” while they affirm that he is “our God.”7 These declarations echo covenantal declarations throughout the history of Israel (Jer. 24:7; 31:33; 32:38; Ezek. 11:20; 14:11; 34:30; 37:23, 27; Hos. 1:9; 2:23; Zech. 8:8).
Bridging Contexts
THIS SECTION IS the final installment in a series of intervening pieces that set the future prophecies of hope (9:1–17; 10:4–12; 12:1–13:6; 14:1–21) against a backdrop of crisis in leadership in Persian period Yehud (10:1–3; 11:1–3; 11:17; 13:7–9). These pieces have become increasingly violent—at first threatening God’s punishment for the shepherds (10:3), then envisioning the destruction of their pastures (11:3), then calling for serious injury against the shepherd (11:17), and now advocating a fatal injury (13:7).
The precise identity of the shepherd(s) is difficult to ascertain. It is hard to imagine that this refers to the Zadokite priesthood who controlled the temple in Jerusalem because of the connection to idolatry in 10:1–3.8 Most likely this refers to political leadership, namely, Jews who ruled Yehud under Persian authority and who may have assumed aspects of Persian religion that compromised Yahwistic faith.
It is important that the New Testament uses 13:7 to interpret the death of Christ and its effect on the disciples, especially Peter’s denial of Jesus (Matt. 26:31; Mark 14:27; cf. John 16:32). One can conclude that Jesus was merely using Zechariah 13:7 as an illustration of a principle, that when a leader (shepherd) is struck down, it has an effect on the followers (sheep). But in light of the way that Zechariah 9–14 is used to shape the narrative of Christ’s passion in the Gospels (see commentary introduction, Bridging Contexts section), it is more likely that Christ saw his death and the disciples’ scattering as a fulfillment of the expectations of Zechariah 9–14. The difficulty with this conclusion, however, is that it places Jesus into the role of the inappropriate leadership that led Yehud astray.
But this need not cause difficulty for Christian interpreters. Just as Christ assumed the role of the covenant community, walking in obedience before taking on himself their sins, so here Christ assumes the role of the covenant leader of this community, leading as a good shepherd before taking on himself their sins and redeeming the community and its leadership. The surprising twist in the New Testament rereading of Zechariah 9–14 is that the good shepherd of 11:4–16, rejected by his people in favor of a bad shepherd, takes the punishment of the bad shepherd in order to achieve the transformation expected throughout chapters 9–14, that is, the creation of a restored, united, and victorious Israel as the center of God’s rule over the cosmos.
This transformation is not only linked to the work of Jesus, who bore the brunt of divine punishment through the sword of Rome, but also to the reaction of the disciples. Zechariah 13:7–9 depicts a new “exile,” the scattering and subsequent slaughter of the sheep to create a remnant that will be refined and ultimately enter into covenant relationship with God. In rereading 13:7–9, the Gospels not only cite the striking of the shepherd but also the scattering of the sheep. This shows us that the scattering of the disciples after the arrest of Jesus is identified by Christ and the Gospel writers as a reenactment of the Exile of Israel.
According to Christ’s comment following the citation of Zechariah 13:7–9, the gathering of the remnant is connected somehow to Galilee: “But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee” (Matt. 26:32; cf. Mark 14:28). This gathering in Galilee is described in the final paragraph of the Gospel of Matthew as the disciples meet and worship Jesus on “the mountain where Jesus had told them to go” (cf. Matt. 28:7, 10; Mark 16:7), where they receive his commission to “go and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:16–20). The remnant community is identified as the disciples of Jesus, an identification echoed in Acts, where the remnant community are the followers of Jesus filled with God’s Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2).
On the one hand, in Christian perspective Zech. 13:7–9 reminds us of the role of Jesus as leader of his people, who received God’s judgment and inaugurated a final exile that would produce a new community. As Christians we celebrate the Christ event and the creation of the remnant community in his followers.
On the other hand, however, the New Testament shows us that the creation of this remnant community is an enduring project as we live as exiles in this world and continue to see people enter into this community. This approach can be discerned in the teaching of the latter part of John, a section that also contains an allusion to Zechariah 13:7–9 (John 16:32). This section, immediately preceding the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus, prepares the way for life after Christ’s death and resurrection. In his prayer of John 17 that follows almost immediately, Jesus prays for God’s care for his disciples through the approaching darkness. This prayer, however, is uttered not only for the disciples but also “for those who will believe in me through their message” (John 17:20), showing that the experience of the disciples following Christ’s death, as a remnant community scattered and gathered, will be the enduring experience of the remnant community that is formed by and through their teaching throughout the ages.
In light of this, the themes of Zech. 13:7–9, so essential in the formation of the early Christian community, endure as themes for the church, not only as we celebrate the foundational events of Christ’s death and his community’s creation, but also as we seek to live in faithfulness to him.
Contemporary Significance
THROUGH 13:7–9 WE observe, with the early church, the redemptive work of Jesus, who suffered as covenant leader to create a remnant community. With the early church, then, we celebrate this act of sacrifice on our behalf. But we also are attentive to the way in which 13:7–9 shapes the experience of the church today, considering the church is the enduring fulfillment of the hopes of this prophetic message. In the following section we will focus on two key themes that define the remnant community in this passage.
Refining. A key theme throughout biblical theology is that of the remnant, namely, that from sinful humanity God forms a holy community.9 The basic trajectory of this activity is set in the early chapters of Genesis. From thoroughly sinful humanity (Gen. 6:5), God sets apart one family as a remnant (9:1–17) and establishes covenant with them. Similarly, from the clan of Shem, God again sets apart one family, that of Abraham and Sarah (12:1–7) and establishes covenant with them (chs. 15; 17). Although this family grows into a blessed and powerful nation (Israel), it also falls into sin and ultimately is disciplined by God through exile (2 Kings 17).
The Law and the Prophets teach that God’s design is not the eradication of Israel; rather, it is the purification of his people. For instance, Leviticus 26:14–46 describes the curses that will fall on Israel when they break covenant with their God. These curses are designed to turn Israel to their God. Ultimately, this list envisions a scattering among the nations, but this exile is not an end in itself. Rather, God does this in order that his people may repent and confess their sins (26:40–45). Similarly, the prophet Isaiah, after experiencing God’s holy presence, receives his prophetic commission. Central to it is the theology of the remnant, filled out in answer to Isaiah’s question, “For how long, O Lord?” God says that after “a tenth remains in the land,” even this group will be purified further until there is only “the holy seed” (Isa. 6:11–13). A key to the biblical theology of remnant is the purification of God’s people.
In the New Testament Jesus is presented as the remnant of Israel, the embodiment of the nation (see Matt. 2:15; Gal. 3:16), as well as the remnant of the Davidic line (Matt. 1:1–17). His death is the ultimate expression of exile at the hands of foreign nations. In his death he takes on himself the punishment of his clan and nation. But we also enter into this same exilic experience, called by Christ to take up our cross daily to follow him (Mark 8:34). In this we see the enduring character of this theme as the church undergoes refining through suffering. The New Testament stresses this theme both through example and exhortation. To follow Christ will mean suffering, and such suffering is to refine us (Heb. 12; 1 Peter 2:20–25; 4:1–6).
It has often been easy for the church to embrace a remnant theology that ultimately distances itself from any danger of suffering and refinement. Remnant theology can become an excuse for creating Christian enclaves that provide a measure of insulation from surrounding secularism. But such insulation can frustrate the purpose of the remnant agenda. God desires to refine his people through suffering, and this will mean living in “detached attachment” to the surrounding culture—in other words, as Christ teaches, to be in the world and yet not of it (John 17). This will mean fully entering into our community as Christ entered into his, something that brought God with us and yet ultimately meant God crucified. It will mean that as we face opposition and pain, we should reflect deeply on how God is refining us and look to the One who endured so much suffering on our behalf and through it “learned obedience” (Heb. 5:8).
The gospel challenges the Western church’s penchant for the health and wealth gospel. In the New Testament account, when people devote their lives to Christ, they are greeted more often with suffering rather than success. We should not be surprised, then, at suffering but rather embrace it as part of God’s purification of his remnant community (Rom. 8:18–39; 1 Peter 4:17).
Relationship. In Zech. 13:7–9, the purpose of this refining is clearly covenantal, as we hear the commitments of both parties to one another: “They are my people. . . . The LORD is our God” (13:9). The covenant language of this verse weaves its way like a scarlet thread throughout the fabric of Old and New Testaments.10
Covenant language is first encountered near the end of the account of the Flood. In Genesis 9, God establishes a covenant with Noah in words reminiscent of the initial commission to humanity in Genesis 1.11 God establishes a redemptive covenant with Abraham in Genesis 15 and 17, promising land, descendants, and relationship with his family.12 At Mount Sinai this promised relationship with the nation is ratified again through covenant as Israel is about to enter the Promised Land (Ex. 19–20; Deut. 5–6). Finally, God establishes covenant with David as covenant leader of Israel (2 Sam. 7).
These various covenants are all based on God’s grace and reflect his desire for a relationship with his people. When Israel broke the terms of the Sinai covenant, God reveals his plan for a “new covenant” (Jer. 31:31–34), confirming his enduring passion for relationship.13 This new covenant is fulfilled in and through Christ’s death and resurrection, and by the Spirit we are empowered to fulfill covenant demands as well as enjoy relationship with Yahweh.
This review reminds us that ultimately the Christian life is about relationship with God, a relationship that has several key characteristics. (1) This relationship is intimate and personal. Parallel to the covenant declaration in Zech. 13:9 is God’s promise that “they will call on my name and I will answer them.” To be in relationship with God through Christ grants us the privilege of access to him. We can cry to him in the midst of our distress, and he promises to answer.
(2) This relationship is exclusive; it involves fidelity to God’s covenant demands. Israel’s struggle was that it loved the privileges of this relationship but rejected the responsibilities. In Christ we have the resource of the Spirit, who empowers to fulfill God’s covenant demands.
(3) This relationship is communal; that is, covenant is never seen as something between me and God, but always between us and God: “They are my people. . . . The LORD is our God.” The early church viewed their lives in these terms. After being released from prison, Peter and John returned immediately to the believing community to report their experiences and join together in prayer (Acts 4). This was never a “me and God” religion; rather, it was “us and God.”
The relational destination of Zech. 13:7–9 reminds us that the refining process has this as its goal. It is this that comforts us in trials and tribulations. Such challenges are intricately related to our relationship with a loving almighty God, who desires to reform his image within us.