Zechariah 3:1

1. He showed me Either Jehovah, who is the author of all prophetic revelation (Zechariah 1:20; Amos 7:1), or the interpreting angel, who acts as the divine agent both in presenting and in interpreting the visions; probably the latter.

Joshua Called also Jeshua (Ezra 2:2; Ezra 3:2), the son of Jehozadak (Haggai 1:1; 1 Chronicles 6:15), the grandson of Seraiah (2 Kings 25:18). He was the ecclesiastical head, while Zerubbabel was the civil ruler (Haggai 1:1).

The high priest Joshua appears throughout the entire vision in his official capacity, not as a private individual (see introductory remarks to the vision).

Angel of Jehovah See on Zechariah 1:11.

Standing before For what purpose is not stated. The phrase is used in a judicial sense of a person standing before a judge, either as plaintiff or as defendant (Numbers 27:2; 1 Kings 3:16; Deuteronomy 19:17); more frequently of a servant standing before his master, to minister to his wants (Genesis 41:46; Deuteronomy 1:38); here in the judicial sense. The angel of Jehovah sits upon the judgment seat, Joshua stands before him as the accused, the adversary appears as the accuser.

Satan Better, with margin R.V., “the Adversary”; the presence of the article indicates that the noun is not to be understood as a proper name; otherwise in 1 Chronicles 21:1 (see Introduction, p. 599; compare Hastings’s Dictionary of the Bible, article “Satan”).

At his right hand Equivalent to by his side (Compare Psalms 109:6).

To resist him Better, R.V., “to be his adversary,”

that is, to present the accusation. The verb is derived from the same root as the noun adversary.

Since no opportunity was given to present the charges, it remains a matter of conjecture what were the indictments the adversary desired to present; and it is not strange that from the earliest rabbinical period to the present much speculation concerning this point has been indulged in. The place of Joshua in the vision as the representative of the people precludes the idea that the reference is to the removal of personal sins of the high priest, whether moral or ceremonial. The question, “Is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?” also would seem to indicate that it is the people against which the adversary appears. It seems more satisfactory, therefore, to think that the sins against which complaint is made are the sins of the people, which the high priest bears as the representative and mediator of the people. That corruption was not entirely wiped out by the exile is made clear in the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah. The adversary was anxious to make prominent the shortcomings which remained, in order to bring about the destruction of the people; but the gracious purpose of Jehovah provided a way of escape. Nowack’s contention, that there was no ground for the accusation, is contrary to the facts, as stated by the postexilic prophets.