John Calvin Commentary Zechariah 1:1-3

"In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of Jehovah unto Zechariah the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo, the prophet, saying, Jehovah was sore displeased with your fathers. Therefore say thou unto them, Thus saith Jehovah of hosts: Return unto me, saith Jehovah of hosts, and I will return unto you, saith Jehovah of hosts." — Zechariah 1:1-3 (ASV)

Here we learn what we have already stated—that Haggai and Zechariah were joined together by God, so that they might confirm each other’s doctrine, for they had to deal with a stubborn people. Besides, the people had to endure hard and difficult trials, so that they needed more than ordinary testimony to confirm them. Haggai began his work in the sixth month; Zechariah shortly followed him, in the eighth month of the same year. It has already been shown who the Darius mentioned here was; though some interpreters disagree, we may yet learn from certain and undeniable proofs that he was the son of Hystaspes. We will speak of this Darius again when a better opportunity arises; I wished only to say this much in passing.

The word of Jehovah came to Zechariah. We have already said that the word of God comes to people in two ways. God addresses all, from the least to the greatest; but first, He sends His word especially to His Prophets, to whom He entrusts the office of teaching. The word of God thus comes to private individuals, and it also comes to teachers, who serve in a public role and become God’s interpreters or messengers. In this way, God’s word came to Zechariah, not so that he might keep to himself what God had said, but so that he might be a faithful dispenser of His truth.

Regarding Zechariah, those who consider him the son of Jehoiada are mistaken; this error is sometimes made due to Christ’s words in Matthew 23:35. Zechariah is indeed said there to have been killed between the temple and the altar, and he is called the son of Barachiah. However, calculating the years will easily prove the mistake of those who would identify him as the same Zechariah.

The former Zechariah, who is called in sacred history the son of Jehoiada the priest, was slain under Joash. Let us now see how many kings succeeded Joash, and also how many years Joash reigned. That Zechariah must have been almost two hundred years old at the time of the Babylonian exile, if he were still alive, assuming he was a boy when he was stoned.

Now this Zechariah, of whom we are now speaking, served as a Prophet after the people’s return from exile. He must then have been not only more than one hundred and fifty years old, but must have been over two hundred years old when he died. The idea concerning the rebirth of men, being a Jewish fancy, is not worthy of record, much less of refutation.

He is, however, called the son of Barachiah; but the probable conjecture is that Jehoiada the priest had two names, and it does not appear that Jehoiada was a prophet. Be that as it may, the Zechariah who was stoned in the temple by the king’s order was the son of the high priest and died more than a hundred years before the Babylonian exile.

For we have said that this Darius was not the Mede who reigned with Cyrus, but the son of Hystaspes, who reigned a long time afterward—that is, after Cambyses and the Magi. The lack of knowledge of those who think that these Prophets were sent by God before the completion of the time mentioned by Jeremiah is easily proven.

Since, then, the seventy years had elapsed, this Prophet was undoubtedly born after the time when the city was destroyed, the temple pulled down, and the people led captive into Babylon. I will now turn to the doctrine itself.

Angry was Jehovah with anger against your fathers. The Prophet here refers to the severity of the punishment with which the Jews had been afflicted, so that posterity might know that God, who so rigidly punishes those who despise His word and instruction, ought not to be provoked.

For by saying that God was “angry with anger,” he means that God was offended with the Jews to no ordinary degree, and that the very severity of their punishment was clear evidence of how displeased God was with them. But the Prophet’s object was to rouse the Jews, so that they might begin to fear God seriously on seeing how dreadful His wrath is.

The Apostle states it as a general truth that it is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God (Hebrews 10:30); Scripture also speaks this way everywhere. But Zechariah here mentions to his own people a clear sign of God’s wrath, which justly ought to have struck all of them with terror.

He is not, then, speaking here of something unknown, but seriously reminds them to consider how terrible God’s vengeance is. As proof of this, their fathers had been deprived of their perpetual inheritance, they had suffered many degradations, and had also been harassed and oppressed by tyrants; in short, they had nearly been sunk into the lowest depths.

Since, then, God had dealt so severely with their fathers, the Prophet bids them understand that God ought to be feared, lest they should become reckless or indulge themselves as they usually did, but so that they might repent from the heart and not deliberately provoke God’s wrath, of which their fathers had such severe experience.

It then follows, You shall say to them, Return to me, and I will return to you. The Prophet now expresses more clearly why he had spoken of God’s vengeance, with which He had afflicted His chosen people: namely, that their posterity might take heed.

For the common proverb, “Fools become wise through adversity,” ought to have been verified in this case. For where there is truly a teachable spirit, people instantly become attentive to what God says. But even when they are sluggish and slothful, it is a wonder that when they are struck, the blows they feel do not at least somewhat shake off their lethargy.

Hence the Prophet, after speaking of the punishments God had inflicted, exhorts the Jews to repentance.

It ought, however, to be observed that our Prophet not only speaks of repentance but also shows its true character, so that the Jews might not carelessly seek to please God, as is common, but might sincerely repent; for he says, Return to me, and I will return to you.

And this was not said without reason, when we consider the kinds of delusions in which the Jews indulged immediately after their return. We have seen that they became devoted to their private concerns while the temple remained desolate. We also know from sacred history that they married pagan women, and that many corruptions prevailed among them, so that religion almost disappeared.

They indeed retained the name of God, but their impiety showed itself through clear signs. It is no wonder, then, that the Prophet sharply urges them to repentance.

It must also be noted that we cannot enjoy God’s favor, even when He kindly offers to be reconciled to us, unless we repent from the heart. Therefore, however graciously God may invite us to Himself, and be ready to forgive our sins, we still cannot embrace His offered favor unless our sins become hateful to us. For God does not cease to be our judge, unless we anticipate Him, condemn ourselves, and plead against the punishment for our sins.

Thus, we pacify God when real grief wounds us, and we thereby truly turn to God, without deceit or falsehood. Now, the experience of God’s wrath ought to lead us to this; for those are extremely heedless who, having found God to be a Judge, carelessly disregard His wrath, which ought to have filled their hearts with fear.

Paul says, Let no one deceive you with vain words, for on account of these things comes the wrath of God on the children of unbelief (Ephesians 5:6)—or on all the unbelieving.

Paul bids us consider all the evidence God gives of His wrath in the world, so that it may instruct us in the fear of God. How much more, then, should we notice domestic examples?

For the Prophet is not speaking here of foreign nations, but says, angry has God been with anger against your fathers. Since, then, it was evident that God had not spared even His chosen people, they ought, unless they were extremely stubborn, to have carefully continued in obedience to the law.

Hence the Prophet here condemns their slowness, inasmuch as they had made so little progress under God’s chastisements.

We see, then, that no excuse can be brought before God if we do not make right use of all the punishments by which He designs to recover us from our sins.

We have referred to that general truth announced by Paul: that God’s judgment, executed on the unbelieving, ought to be feared. It therefore follows that our insensibility is extreme if we are not thoroughly moved when God teaches us by our own experience, or at least when He sets domestic examples before us, as when He punishes our fathers and others connected with us.

For this method of teaching comes much closer to us.

But when the Prophet says, Return to me, and I will return to you, he means, as I have stated before, that though God meets sinners and is ready with outstretched arms to embrace them, His favor cannot come to those to whom it is offered unless a real feeling of penitence leads them to God.

In short, the Prophet means that though they had returned from exile, they could not expect a permanent state of safety unless they turned to Him from the heart. For if they imitated their fathers, God had far more severe scourges ready to chastise them, and they might also be driven into exile again.

He then briefly reminds them that if they wished to enjoy the incomparable kindness with which God had favored them, it was necessary for them to return to Him seriously.

Though God had, then, already in part returned to them—that is, He had truly proved that He was pacified and gracious to them—yet He had begun by many signs to show that He was again offended with them. For their fruit had either withered from heat or been struck by hail, as we have found elsewhere (Haggai 2:17), so that they had already labored for several years under need and other evils.

God, then, had not so blessed them that they could in every way recognize His paternal favor. This is the reason why the Prophet says, I will return to you when you return to me.

We now perceive the Prophet’s meaning to be that though God had delivered His people, they still ought to have feared lest His wrath should suddenly burn against the ungrateful and the wicked. And that, not being in full favor, they ought also to have known that God was still offended with them.

So the Prophet briefly reminded them that it was no wonder God treated them with no great kindness, for they allowed no place for His favor but provoked His wrath, like their fathers, inasmuch as they did not repent from the heart.

The Papists cite this passage in defense of free will, but it is a most childish sophistry. They say that God’s turning to people is the same as their turning to Him, as though God promised the grace of His Spirit as a help when people anticipate Him. They imagine, then, that free will precedes, and then the help of the Spirit follows.

But this is very crude and absurd. The Prophet indeed means that God would return to the Jews, for he shows that God would in every respect be a father to them when they showed themselves to be dutiful and respectful children.

We must therefore remember that God does not here promise the aid of His Spirit to assist free will and to help human efforts, as these foolish and senseless teachers imagine, but that He promises to return to the Jews to bless them.

Hence, God’s return here is nothing other than the prosperity they desired, as though He had said, “Fear me from the heart, and you will not labor under hunger and thirst; for I will satisfy you, as neither your fields nor your vines will from now on disappoint your hopes. You will find me most bountiful when you deal with me faithfully.” This is the meaning.

We must further bear in mind that, according to the common usage of Scripture, whenever God exhorts us to repentance, He does not consider what our capacity is but demands what is justly His right. Hence the Papists adopt an absurdity when they deduce the power of free will from the command or exhortation to repent. God, they say, would not have commanded what is not in our power to do.

It is a foolish and most childish way of reasoning; for if everything God requires were in our power, the grace of the Holy Spirit would be superfluous. It would not only be, as they say, a “waiting-mind,” but it would be wholly unnecessary. But if people need the aid of the Spirit, it follows that they cannot do what God requires of them.

But it seems strange that God should bid people do more than they can. It does indeed seem so, I allow, when we form our judgment according to the common perception of the flesh; but when we understand these truths—that the law works wrath, that it increases sin, that it was given so that transgression might be made more evident—then the false notion that God requires nothing but what people can perform comes to nothing.

But it is enough for us to know that God, in exhorting us to repentance, requires nothing but what nature dictates ought to be done by us. Since this is so, however short we fall in performance, it is not right to charge God with too much strictness because He demands what is beyond our power.

The frequent repetition of God’s name by the Prophet is emphatic; it was done so that what he taught might more sharply pierce the hearts of the people.

Had he simply said that he had a commission from above to remind the people of the punishments their fathers had endured, and also to call them to repentance, this way of teaching would not have penetrated their hearts as effectively as when the name of God is so often brought before them: You shall say, Thus says Jehovah of hosts, ‘Return to me,’ says Jehovah of hosts, ‘and I will return to you,’ says Jehovah of hosts.

It surely behooved the Jews, when they heard God’s name pronounced three times, to awaken and consider with whom they were dealing. For what can be more base or more disgraceful than for people, when God anticipates them and desires to be united with them, to refuse to respond and devote themselves to His service?

It is also evident that the Prophet adopted a way of speaking then in use, and we know that the Jewish language underwent a change after their Babylonian exile.

It lost the clearness and elegance it possessed before, as clearly appears from the style of those who wrote after the exile.

I also allow that earlier Prophets did not exhibit the same degree of eloquence; for Isaiah differs greatly from Jeremiah and from Amos. Yet it is quite evident from the writings of the later Prophets that the language had become somewhat muddled after the people’s return from exile.