130. - Collection Point® | The Total Digital Asset Management System

130. - Collection Point® | The Total Digital Asset Management System 130. - Collection Point® | The Total Digital Asset Management System

cipg.codemantra.us
from cipg.codemantra.us More from this publisher
02.04.2013 Views

3. The Structure of Individual Sections of Zechariah 125 It is probable that Zechariah 4 was compiled in at least two stages. 1 The texts that we may consider to be redactional units are: 1. The final text as we have it. 2. Verses l-6a0 + 10acx-14. Verse 12 may have been absent from 2 and even 1 at some time. It is not clear what it is meant to add (clarification or confusion?); it does pick up one expression, T3, from the middle section of the chapter, although it refers to the two minus (which must have some connection with the two olive trees) rather than simply Zerubbabel; and it is used in the sense of 'beside' and not 'in the hand of. The final redactor intended the readers to note, not only the promises from Yahweh to the effect that he will restore Jerusalem, but that: 1. Joshua the priest has a special function in Yahweh's purposes. 2. Zerubbabel either is 'the Branch' or represents him. 3. Zerubbabel will finish the Temple. 4. The people will know that Yahweh has sent someone to them. 2 We have already strayed, inevitably, into the proper subject matter of Chapter 4, since chs. 3 and 4 must be interpreted together with 6.9- 15. Accordingly I defer further discussion. 3 1. This is the view of most scholars and is assumed here, although I do not think we have very much evidence of the sort of literary construction that might be received in a vision. Our main concern is to understand the significance of the structure. Opinions vary about this. Petersen regards these verses as pro-Zerubbabel against Joshua, and since ch. 4 as a whole regards the two as on a par, it was necessary to insert vv. 6a-10a at this point. The Meyers' believe that 6b-10a was placed here deliberately to separate the two parts of the vision, and this emphasizes its importance; it was added early by Zechariah or (less probably) a disciple; since Zerubbabel's title and patronymic are consistently omitted, unlike Haggai, we must assume that Zechariah's view was that a Davidide would only become king again in the future, after Zerubbabel's time. 2. See on 2.5-17 above. 3. See the section on Zech. 3 in Chapter 4 below.

126 Structure and the Book of Zechariah Zechariah 5.1-4 + 5-11 It is convenient to present one table (figure 6) displaying references to repeated words in both 5.1-4 and 5-11, since they are short sections and, like the second and third visions, they have much in common. Zechariah 5.1-4 This sixth vision (V6) has some obvious parallels with the third (2.5- 9) 1 as can be seen in the use of several words. 'Its length. ..and its breadth' (v. 2). This seems to be an unusual addition. It is not mentioned in v. 1, and we are not told how Zechariah knew the measurements. It recalls 2.6 'to measure Jerusalem, to see what is its breadth and.. .length'. 'Abide [but p 1 ?, not atf»] in the midst of his house' (v. 4) recalls 2.8- 9. 'multitude of men and cattle in the midst' and 'glory in the midst'. These and other parallels will be investigated in Chapter 4 below. The repeated words function as follows: ntn (1, 2 [2x]) is used three times instead of one because the common device of question and answer is used. Whereas previously Zechariah has questioned the angel, here the angel questions him (cf. Amos's first two and second two visions Amos 7.1-9, 8.1-3). HDP if?aa occurs twice only: once in the description of what the prophet saw, and once in his answer to the angel's question. One wonders whether the question is in order to impress the phrase more clearly upon the hearers. 1. There is a difference of opinion among scholars, as mentioned previously, as to whether Zech. 3 should be counted as one of the visions in the cycle. This makes for a discrepancy in labelling them. We regard Zech. 3 as the fourth vision (V4), since this is how it is presented in our received text, and therefore we have VV1-8. There is also a difference in the way that scholars see the correspondence of the visions to one another. A. Jepsen ('Kleine Beitrage zum Zwolfprophetenbuch III', ZAW 61 (1945-48), pp. 95-114 [97], quoted in K. Seybold, Bilder zum Tempelbau: Die Visionen des Propheten Sacharja [Stuttgarter Biblestudien; Stuttgart: KBW, 1974], p. 35) gave the following scheme (in my own system of labelling): i n in v (Zech. 4) vni vii vi We shall be considering these claims in Chapter 4.

3. <strong>The</strong> Structure of Individual Sections of Zechariah 125<br />

It is probable that Zechariah 4 was compiled in at least two stages. 1<br />

<strong>The</strong> texts that we may consider to be redactional units are:<br />

1. <strong>The</strong> final text as we have it.<br />

2. Verses l-6a0 + 10acx-14.<br />

Verse 12 may have been absent from 2 and even 1 at some time. It<br />

is not clear what it is meant to add (clarification or confusion?); it<br />

does pick up one expression, T3, from the middle section of the<br />

chapter, although it refers to the two minus (which must have some<br />

connection with the two olive trees) rather than simply Zerubbabel;<br />

and it is used in the sense of 'beside' and not 'in the hand of.<br />

<strong>The</strong> final redactor intended the readers to note, not only the<br />

promises from Yahweh to the effect that he will restore Jerusalem,<br />

but that:<br />

1. Joshua the priest has a special function in Yahweh's purposes.<br />

2. Zerubbabel either is 'the Branch' or represents him.<br />

3. Zerubbabel will finish the Temple.<br />

4. <strong>The</strong> people will know that Yahweh has sent someone to<br />

them. 2<br />

We have already strayed, inevitably, into the proper subject matter<br />

of Chapter 4, since chs. 3 and 4 must be interpreted together with 6.9-<br />

15. Accordingly I defer further discussion. 3<br />

1. This is the view of most scholars and is assumed here, although I do not<br />

think we have very much evidence of the sort of literary construction that might be<br />

received in a vision. Our main concern is to understand the significance of the structure.<br />

Opinions vary about this. Petersen regards these verses as pro-Zerubbabel against<br />

Joshua, and since ch. 4 as a whole regards the two as on a par, it was necessary to<br />

insert vv. 6a-10a at this point. <strong>The</strong> Meyers' believe that 6b-10a was placed here<br />

deliberately to separate the two parts of the vision, and this emphasizes its importance;<br />

it was added early by Zechariah or (less probably) a disciple; since<br />

Zerubbabel's title and patronymic are consistently omitted, unlike Haggai, we must<br />

assume that Zechariah's view was that a Davidide would only become king again in<br />

the future, after Zerubbabel's time.<br />

2. See on 2.5-17 above.<br />

3. See the section on Zech. 3 in Chapter 4 below.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!