Zechariah

Zechariah (zĕkaryāh) claims to be the author of this book (Zech. 1:1, 7; 7:1), and his name means “Yahweh remembers.”^[1] We know more about him than any other minor prophet (except Zephaniah). He was a “young man” (Zech. 2:4), a priest (Neh 12:4, 16), and the son of Berechiah and grandson of Iddo (Zech. 1:1).^[2]

During the dark days of the Exile, Zechariah’s name would’ve inspired hope among the people. Klein writes, “Every mention of Zechariah’s name remonstrated against the people’s lack of faith. The prophet’s name, along with his message, consistently reminded the nation that the Lord had made a covenant with Israel, a binding commitment that God would assuredly keep.”^[3]

Authorship: First and Second Zechariah?

Critics claim that chapters 1-8 were written by “First Zechariah,” and chapters 9-14 are written by “Second Zechariah.” Like the arguments for a dual authorship of Isaiah (see “Authorship of Isaiah”), these arguments for Zechariah are inconclusive. Consider the objections and response below:

OBJECTION #1. The genre changes in chapters 9-14

These chapters are heavily apocalyptic. Critics see this genre as coming late in history. Once the Jews realized that they were not going to be liberated, they “invented” this genre of future liberation. However, it isn’t surprising that the material related to the end times would be apocalyptic in nature.

Moreover, regarding the idea that the apocalyptic genre is late dated, this argues in a circle. Books like Daniel and Zechariah claim to be written in the 6^th century BC, but because they use the apocalyptic genre, they are late dated. This reasons in a circle. If we reject all books that are apocalyptic as early because they are apocalyptic, then we will judge the genre as late dated. But if we judge the books as late based on their apocalyptic genre, this is only because we excluded the books a priori. It’s a bad argument—being question begging to the core.

OBJECTION #2. There are language dissimilarities between chapters 1-8 and chapter 9-14

They argue that this serves as evidence that these are actually two authors—not one. However, even critics reject this argument.[4] Indeed, Andrew Hill[5] dates both sections of the book to around 500 BC on linguistic grounds.

For one, the manuscript evidence supports a single author. This is a purely literary and linguistic argument, having no material evidence. Baldwin writes, “Even the tiny fragment of the Greek manuscript found at Qumran, which includes the end of chapter 8 and the beginning of chapter 9, shows no gap or spacing whatsoever to suggest a break between the two parts.”^[6]

Second, there are many linguistic similarities between the two halves. The expression “says Yahweh” occurs 14 times in the first half and 6 times in the second half. The expression “the eyes of Yahweh” occurs twice in the first half and once in the second. The title “Yahweh of hosts” occurs three times in both halves. The Hebrew verb “to dwell” (yasab) occurs twice in both halves. Archer notes, “Very seldom does this verb have that meaning outside of Zechariah.”^[7] Moreover, Zechariah is written “pure Hebrew.”^[8] If it was written after Alexander’s conquest, we would expect many more Greek influences on the text. Lasor hold to the two-authorship theory, but even he states that there are similarities between the two sections. He writes, “There are connections, such as the covenant formula (8:8; 13:9), the divine protection of Jerusalem (2:5, 8-10; 14:11), and the return of the exiles (8:7; 10:9-12). Most importantly, the climax of the second part of Zechariah is similar to that of the first: the inclusion of gentiles in the Jerusalem worship of the Lord (8:20-22; 14:16-19).”[9]

Third, because this book was written over a 30 to 40 year span, we should expect language differences. An old Zechariah is not going to write the exact same way as a young Zechariah.

Fourth, because this book was written before and after the rebuilding of the Temple, we should expect differences. Since the first half deals with the rebuilding of the Temple in one scenario and the second half deals with the future of Israel in another scenario, we should expect differences in the content and style of the book.

OBJECTION #3. Zechariah predicts events in the 4^th and 2^nd centuries BC

Critics object that Zechariah mentions Greece (Zech. 9:8), Alexander the Great and the Ptolemies (Zech. 9:1-10), and 2^nd century Jewish priests (Zech. 11:4-17). But this is a poor objection.

This is an antisupernatural bias that presupposes that predictive prophecy is impossible. It is given by people who are not philosophers of religion and do not give evidence for their assertions. We might as well as a mechanic his views on geopolitics or a meteorologist her views on car transmissions. Without expertise or evidence, these are bald assertions that lack credibility. Furthermore, Klein observes, “As for the reference to Greece, this nation was already a major power in the sixth century and even earlier and therefore allusion to it poses no problem for the traditional dating of Zechariah.”[10]

Date

Zechariah most likely wrote chapters 1-8 between 520-519 BC, and he wrote chapters 9-14 in 480 BC.^[11] He predicts the Grecian Empire (9:13), but this shouldn’t mean that he wrote after Greece was established as an empire, unless we believe predictive prophecy is impossible (see “Predictive Prophecy”).

Canonicity

The canonicity of Zechariah and the rest of the Minor Prophets have “never been seriously challenged.” The ancient debates “never bring it up for discussion regarding its suitability for being included in the sacred Scriptures.”[12]

What is Zechariah all about?

Zechariah wrote after the exile from Israel. He encouraged the people to rebuild the Temple (with his friend Haggai). These two were like a tag team that helped rally the Jews into building their Temple. Zechariah’s main message is that Israel will survive the Exile, because they are the people of the Messiah. The Messiah will come and judge the Gentile nations for their brutality against the people of Israel. It is a book of hope and trust that God will set things right. This is why chapters 9-14 “constitute the Old Testament section most quoted in the passion narratives of the canonical Gospels.”^[13] Chapters 1-8 are all messages that Zechariah gave during the rebuilding of the Temple.

Consulted Commentaries

K. L. Barker, “Zechariah,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Daniel and the Minor Prophets, vol. 7, ed. F. E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986).

Joyce G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 28, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1972).

George L. Klein, Zechariah, vol. 21B, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2008).

^[1] George L. Klein, Zechariah, vol. 21B, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2008), 80.

^[2] Critics see a problem here. Zechariah is called the son of Berechiah—the son of Iddo (Zech. 1:1), but elsewhere, he is called the direct son of Iddo (Ezra 5:1; 6:14). Baldwin writes, “The simplest explanation of this discrepancy is that the writer of Ezra omitted a generation and used the idiom ‘son of’ to stand for grandson, as it frequently does in the Old Testament.” Joyce G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 28, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1972), 63.

^[3] George L. Klein, Zechariah, vol. 21B, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2008), 20.

[4] Radday and Wickmann write, “Concerning the transition between ch. 8 and 9, it was found that from the point of view of language behaviour there is not sufficient evidence to postulate such a change or, statistically speaking, to reject the null hypothesis of a common origin of the two sections ch. 1-8 and ch. 9-11.” Y. T. Radday and D. Wickmann, “The Unity of Zechariah in the Light of Statistical Linguistics,” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 87 (1975): 30-55

[5] A. E. Hill, “Dating Second Zechariah: A Linguistic Reexamination,” Hebrew Annual Review 6 (1982): 105, 130-32.

^[6] Joyce G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 28, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1972), 73.

^[7] Gleason Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 477.

^[8] Gleason Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 477.

[9] William Sanford LaSor, David Allan Hubbard, and Frederic William Bush, Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament, 4th ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 408-409.

[10] Eugene Merrill (et al.), The Word and the World: A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2011), 804.

^[11] K. L. Barker, “Zechariah,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Daniel and the Minor Prophets, vol. 7, ed. F. E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 598.

[12] Eugene Merrill (et al.), The Word and the World: A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2011), 805.

[13] D. A. Carson, For the Love of God: Volume 2: a Daily Companion for Discovering the Treasures of God's Word (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1999), Zechariah 1.