לתשובת המינים

Zechariah 12:10 --Not Death by Crucifixion

Many times as a Christian I misunderstood and misapplied many verses from T'nakh, accepting standard Christian understandings without evaluating them critically as I would with the interpretations of competing religious philosophies. However regarding Zechariah 12:10 my misunderstanding was, although common, unsupported even by interpretation found in the Christian Bible. The NIV of this verse reads (in part), "They will look on me, the one they have pierced." At one time I understood this as a reference to the piercing of the Nazarene as he was hung on the cross, and I was not alone. David Stern, for example, lists this as a source for his assertion that Messiah must "Be executed by crucifixion, by having his hands and feet pierced" (The Jewish New Testament, Introduction xxix). I must confess that I was a bit surprised when it dawned on me that this is NOT how the Christian Bible interprets this verse.

The Gospel of John quotes this passage in relation to its narrative of the crucifixion. Accordingly a superficial reading one might not realize the exact context in which it was cited. Chapter 19 verse 33 and 34 reads, "But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water" (italic’s mine). The author then provides assurance of the truth of the eyewitness testimony and concludes in verse 36 and 37, "These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: 'Not one of his bones will be broken,' and, as another scripture says, 'They will look on the one they have pierced'."

The implication is clear, but easy to overlook. Zechariah 12:10 is given as a prophecy of the Nazarene being pierced in the side with a spear after he had already died. The piercing was not those which fixed his hands and feet to the cross, but rather one in the Nazarene's lifeless body which indicated that the soldiers need not break his legs to hasten death. Grant Jefferey also noted this, citing this prophecy under the heading "His side would be pierced." (The Signature of God, page 178). Rather than the fatal wounds which, according to Christianity, provided salvation to mankind this was a posthumous wound without spiritual significance other than to supposedly help prophetically narrow the playing fields of potential Messianic candidates.

Unfortunately we seldom get such help from the Christian Bible to explicitly contradict a misunderstanding of Scripture promoted by missionaries. Of course I do not accept John’s authority nor his interpretation of Zechariah 12:10 but his understanding is nevertheless significant since an interpretation contrary to the Christian scriptures cannot be evidence for the truth of Christianity. It highlights that missionaries do, in fact, read into T'nakh an unjustified description of the Nazarene. And while Christianity does interpret this verse in reference to the Nazarene we see that Christianities foundational documents offer a different understanding than held by many Christians clearly showing that they are seeing something which not really there.

Understanding Zechariah 12:10

The NIV version of Zechariah 12:10 reads, "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son." Earlier we examined Zechariah 12:10's interpretation according to the Christian Bible (John 19:33-37) and contrasted that with a common misapplication of it. Here I would like to examine this verse in its surrounding context and try to understand the proper interpretation of the verse provided by that context and the language used in the original Hebrew. In doing so we will see that the traditional Jewish interpretation is not only reasonable but plausible and much more plausible than the explanation provided by the Gospel of John.

Chapter 12 of the book of Zechariah describes a battle shortly before the coming of the Mashiach. The early verses in the chapter state that God will cause the nations which surround Jerusalem to attack it. But God tells us that He will protect the Jewish people and strengthen their leaders. Jerusalem will remain secure while God will destroy the nations which attacked them. Our verse then comes against a backdrop of the Jewish people being saved by Divine intervention from the surrounding nations who seek to destroy them.

The conclusion of the passage, starting with our verse, describes a period of intense mourning, likened to mourning "at the Valley of Megiddon" (vs. 11). The Valley of Megiddon was a site frequently used for a battleground; its name has become infamous in its English adaptation of "Armegedon". It was at Megiddon where King Josiah was fatally wounded by an arrow (2 Chronicles 35:23), ending the career of a king the Bible says "walked in all the ways of his father David" (2 Kings 22:2). We are told in the 2 Chronicles passage that Yirmeyahu HaNavi, Jeremiah the Prophet, joined in the mourning himself writing lamentations about the occasion. So our verse begins to describe a great period of mourning, which followed a miraculous salvation from war which is likened to the mourning over the great Davidic King Josiah…who died in battle.

Furthermore, in our verse itself, we see that someone is described as "pierced", from the Hebrew root word daqar. In the Kings James Version, Zechariah 12:10 seems to be the only instance where this root is translated to imply "to pierce". Similar to how the English verb "stab" generally implies use of a knife the word daqar generally seems to imply the use of an instrument of war such as a sword (1 Sam 31:4) or a spear (Num. 25:8). The KJV generally translates this verb as "thrust through", and does so in the next chapter; Zechariah 13 (NIV renders it "stab"). It is interesting to note (as we have before) that in the book of John the "piercing" is done with a sword, which is probably coincidence but may be further evidence that this word carries a particular implication (or that such a nuance was carried over into Greek translations). Quite consistent with the battle which precedes our passage, and similar to Josiah who was shot with an arrow, this individual's "piercing" seems to imply a, presumably fatal, battle wound.

Now we must dig into the verse itself, looking particularly at some obscure language in the Hebrew text. Let me restate the phrase in question, leaving the contested part un-translated; "They will look toward me, 'eth asher' (את אשר) they have stabbed, they will mourn over him....". Now "asher" (אשר) is the Hebrew relative pronoun meaning who or which. את is used to indicate the direct object of the verb. That is to say since in Hebrew the person or thing which is performing the action may be named after the verb as well as the noun to which the verb is being done, "eth" distinguishes which noun the action is being done to from the one which is doing it. For example if we where to say "stabbed Bryan את Eric", we can tell that Bryan is doing the stabbing and Eric is being stabbed. But the combination of "es asher", which in this case is before the second verb, is unusual and even then seems have various implications. But by looking at the context I think we can reasonably evaluate the different approaches to this phrase and come up with the most plausible explanation.

First let’s identify the speaker, the "Me" in our verse. From earlier in the passage we see that the speaker is God. It is to God that "they" look to. And according to Christianity it is God, (or the Nazarene more specifically who they identify as God), who is "pierced". Despite the Christological interpretation there is no reason that Jews need reject this approach for polemic purposes. "Piercing" does seem to imply a battle wound but the language could be figurative, such as "stabbed in the back". In fact "daqar" (דקר) is used figuratively to describe hunger pain in Lamentations 4:9. However if God was the subject which "asher" referred to, then the "es" is unnecessary. Likewise God is the "first person" of our passage, while the individual being mourned is described in the third person. It seems more plausible to say that the one who is "pierced" is identical to the one who is mourned (note how John 19 switches the first person to the third in the first part of the verse!). So it would seem that "they" looked to God about someone who was killed in battle like Josiah.

But who are "they" who look to God and mourn for this individual. I have seen some Jewish counter-missionary literature that it is the nations themselves in regret for having killed him. To me this does not seem plausible since the latter verses describe how different families in the Jewish nations will mourn separate from each other (an idea which has well known halachic consequences). And the mourning is likened to that over King Josiah, which was clearly the mourning of the Jewish people. Nor do I think there is justification for the Christian assumption that the "they" who turn to God and mourn are identical to the "they" who did the "piercing". Since God is speaking in the first person both armies are described in the third person. It is much more plausible for the "they" who wounded this Jewish leader to be the opposing army.

What we are presented with is a prophecy of a major war where the nations of the Middle East rise up against Jerusalem (I know those of you who are knowledgeable on current events can hardly believe such an unlikely scenario coming to pass). In the aftermath the Jewish people turn to God and mourn over a great leader who, like Josiah, died in battle defending the Jewish people. Now we can understand the Jewish tradition of Mashaich ben Ephraim, a Jewish leader who dies in battle shortly before the coming of Mashiach. Such a picture is much more internally consistent with the contextual evidence than John's anti-climatic suggestion that after this great salvation the Jewish people are mourning the fact that the Nazarene's already dead body was poked with a spear. The contrast between missionary proof texts and thorough and honest examination of the Scriptures couldn't be greater.