Font Size
This allegorical passage presents some of the most difficult interpretive problems in the OT. But this much is clear. The flock represents Israel, and the shepherds are their leaders. The Lord charges his prophet to become their new shepherd, who illustrates the symbolism with two staffs named Favor (or “Graciousness”) and Union. But to their detriment the people reject his gracious and unifying leadership. The message of this enigmatic unit is clearly the need for (and responsibility of) godly leaders among the believing community. This imagery was the backdrop for Jesus' self claims in Jn 10:11-18 and may also have been operative in Jn 21:15-19. This message is as pertinent today as it ever has been.
In vv.4-6 Yahweh shows pity on a flock that has been raised specifically for meat, fattened, and soon to be sold at the slaughterhouse. The merchants, and even their own shepherds, care little for the sheep, but only for making a profit. The exclamation “Praise the Lord, I am rich!”(v.5) seems to have more adherents in the modern church than ever before. Few in the Wesleyan heritage today follow John Wesley’s injunction to give to the poor everything beyond the necessities of life (Wesley, Sermons, 50, 87, 116). Whether or not Wesley’s austere economic practices can be applied to our technical and complex culture, his love and commitment to the flock is exemplary of Christian leadership.
Yahweh’s remedy was to send his prophet to care for the flock marked for slaughter (vv.4, 7). But vv.7-14 trace the deterioration and disruption of the relationship between the new shepherd and his flock. Lest we overemphasize the importance of godly leadership in the church, it should be remembered that rejection of God’s true representatives will result in irreparable loss.
The identity of the three shepherds (v.8) is one of the most complicated problems of Zechariah, yielding up to forty variations of interpretation (for an excellent survey of the data and conclusions, see Baldwin, 181-83). Under the present circumstances it is impossible to determine the historical background of this reference.
The oracle closes with the prophet impersonating a foolish shepherd chosen by the flock in their rejection of Yahweh’s Shepherd. He will neglect every responsibility of a good shepherd and will in fact feed on the sheep, tossing aside their carcasses when he has had enough (v.16). In the closing poetic stanza, this worthless shepherd is left debilitated, unable to protect the sheep from attack or to watch over their daily activities.