Zechariah 7:1-3

Occasion of the prophetic utterance, Zechariah 7:1-3.

1. Fourth year 518 B.C. (compare Zechariah 1:1; see on Haggai 1:1).

The ninth month See on Haggai 2:10, and Hastings’s Dictionary of the Bible, article “Time.” The last date mentioned (Zechariah 1:7) was nearly two years earlier. In this same month two years before Haggai had delivered two messages of promise (Haggai 2:10-23). The order of the words and the construction in Hebrew are peculiar; therefore many are inclined to omit 1b as a later addition and to connect 1a with Zechariah 7:2 so as to read, “And it came to pass in the fourth year of Darius that Beth-el sent.”

Zechariah 7:2-3 describe the occasion which called forth the utterance. The translation of Zechariah 7:2 is uncertain; R.V. reads, “Now they of Beth-el had sent Sharezer and Regem-melech, and their men, to entreat the favor of Jehovah.” Beth-el (R.V.), though meaning house of God (A.V.; compare Genesis 28:19) does not seem to be used of the temple. The form as well as the context require that it should be taken as the name of the well-known town and sanctuary of the northern kingdom, about ten miles north of Jerusalem (see on Amos 4:4), to which some exiles had returned (Ezra 2:1; Ezra 2:28). But is it in the nominative or in the accusative (of direction)? Should it be translated “Beth-el sent,” or “he sent to Beth-el”? The latter is improbable, for why should anyone send to Beth-el in the postexilic period, when Jerusalem was the only recognized religious center? If the text is correct Beth-el must be taken as the subject in the sense of men of Beth-el (so R.V.). If so, “Sharezer and Regem-melech” would be the object; the community in Beth-el sent these two men. Then the phrase “his men” (English versions read incorrectly the plural their) becomes peculiar, for the singular pronoun refers ordinarily to only one individual. This difficulty was evidently felt by the Revisers, for they place in the margin as an alternative, “Now they of Beth-el, even Sharezer, had sent Regem-melech and his men.” This may be a more accurate reproduction of the Hebrew, but Sharezer sounds peculiar in apposition to they of Beth-el. Hence some have thought that in the two words Beth-el and Sharezer (Isaiah 37:38) we have a corruption of what was originally a single proper name, perhaps Belsharezer, which is identical with Belshazzar (Daniel 5:1). Then Belsharezer would be the sender of Regem-melech. The former may have been some prominent citizen or official it has been suggested, though with little probability, that he is no other than Zerubbabel who, as the representative of the community, sought the advice of the prophets and priests. Others seek to remove the difficulty by taking Beth-el as the subject, Sharezer as the object, and Regem-melech not as a proper name but as an official title. “Now they of Beth-el sent Sharezer, the Regem-melech (friend of the king), and his men.” The title is found nowhere else. The present text, no matter how it is translated, presents difficulties. If it is emended the change to “Belsharezer sent Regem-melech and his men” is the most simple. Perhaps all we can say with certainty is that a delegation was sent from somewhere to consult the religious leaders, and that the coming of this delegation was the occasion of the prophet’s utterance.

The purpose of the sending of the emissaries was twofold: (1) To entreat the favor of Jehovah (R.V.) Literally, to stroke the face of Jehovah, and thus make him favorably inclined. The metaphor seems to have originated at a time when it was customary to stroke or embrace the image of the deity to secure the divine favor. In the general sense of entreat the favor of God or man by presents, petitions, or other means the verb is used quite commonly in the Old Testament. (2)

Speak unto the priests… to the prophets Speak to is used in the sense of consult. It would seem that the two classes of religious workers possessed at this time equal authority, and that there was peace and good will between them. There is no indication of the opposition which was so prominent in the eighth century, and which appears again in the days of Malachi.

Should I weep in the fifth month No matter who was the sender, the question was asked in the name of the community (see Zechariah 7:5). The fifth month was called Ab, on the tenth day of that month the city and temple were given up to the flames (Jeremiah 52:12-13; but compare 2 Kings 25:8-9). In commemoration of this terrible calamity a public fast and mourning was held annually by the later Jews on the ninth of Ab. As the new temple approached completion, many would ask themselves whether this fast and mourning should be continued.

Separating myself Abstaining from meat and drink (Zechariah 7:5).