John Calvin Commentary Zechariah 7

There is no vision here, but the answer which Zechariah was commanded to give to the messengers of the captives, for he says that some had been sent from Chaldea to offer sacrifices to God, and at the same time to inquire whether the fast, which they had appointed when the city was taken and destroyed, was to be observed.

But there is some ambiguity in the words of the Prophet, for it is doubtful whether the two whom he names, namely Sherezer and Regem-melech, together with the others, had sent the messengers who are mentioned, or whether they themselves came and brought the message from the captives. But this is a matter of no great moment.

As to the question itself, I am inclined to adopt the view of those who think that these two came with their associates to Jerusalem, and in the name of them all inquired about the fast, as we shall see later.

The Jews think that these were Persian princes, but this opinion is frivolous. They are thus accustomed to interpret everything for the glory of their own nation without any discretion or judgment, as if it had been greatly desired by the Jews for two Persians to go up to the temple.

But there is no need here for a long discussion. For if we consider the Prophet’s design, we may easily conclude that these were Jews who had been sent by the exiles, both to offer gifts and to inquire about the fast, as the Prophet tells us.

The sum of the whole, then, is that Sherezer and Regem-melech, and their companions, came to the temple, and that they also asked counsel of the priests and Prophets, whether the fast of the fifth month was still to be observed.

It must first be observed that, though all had not enough courage to return to their own country as soon as permission was given to them, they were not yet utter despisers of God, and wholly destitute of all religion. It was indeed a significant fault to remain torpid among the Babylonians when a free return was allowed them, for it was an invaluable kindness on God’s part to extend His hand to the wretched exiles, who had wholly despaired of a return.

Since then God was prepared to bring them home, such a favor could not have been neglected without great ingratitude. But it was still the Lord’s will that some sparks of grace should continue in the hearts of some, though their zeal was not as fervid as it ought to have been.

We see the same sloth in many today, who continue in the filth of Popery; and yet they groan there, and the Lord preserves them, so that they do not shake off every concern for religion, nor do they wholly fall away. All then are not to be condemned as unfaithful who are slothful and lack vigor; but they are to be stimulated.

For they who indulge their torpor act very foolishly; but at the same time, they ought to be pitied when there is not in them that desirable alacrity in devoting themselves to God, which they ought to have. Such an instance then we see in the captives, who ought to have immediately prepared themselves for the journey when permission was given to them by the edicts of Cyrus and Darius.

They however remained in exile, but did not completely renounce the worship of God, for they sent sacred offerings by which they professed their faith. They also inquired what they were to do and showed deference to the priests and Prophets then at Jerusalem. From this it appears that they were not satisfied with themselves, though they did not immediately amend what was wrong.

There are many now who, in order to excuse themselves, or rather to wipe away (as they think) all disgrace, despise God’s word and mock us. Indeed, they devise crimes with which they charge us, in order to vilify the word of the Lord in the opinion of the simple.

But the Prophet shows that the captives of whom he speaks, though not as courageous as they ought to have been, were yet true servants of God, for they sent sacrifices to the temple and also wished to hear and to learn what they were to do.

He says first, that messengers were sent to entreat the face of Jehovah. Here, by the word entreating or praying, the Prophet also means sacrifices. For it is certain that the Jews prayed in exile, as there could have been no religion in them if they had not engaged in prayer. But the mention here is of that formal prayer, connected with sacrifices, by which they professed themselves to be God’s people. From this we may also learn that sacrifices in themselves are not of great importance, since prayer, or calling on God, always has the first place. Sacrifices then, and other offerings, were, as we may say, additions (accessoria — accessions); for this command ought always to be regarded by the faithful: Offer to me the sacrifice of praise (Psalms 50:14).

He says, in the second place, that messengers were sent that they might learn from the priests and the Prophets what was doubtful to them. From this we conclude that it was no blatant dissimulation, such as is found in hypocrites who pretend to pray to God, but that there was a real desire to obey.

And, undoubtedly, when God’s word and heavenly truth are despised, there is then no real prayer, nor any other religious exercise; for unbelief pollutes and contaminates whatever is otherwise in its nature sacred. Whoever then desires to pray rightly to God, let him add faith, that is, let him come to God in a teachable frame of mind and seek to be ruled by His word.

For the Prophet, in telling us what was done, undoubtedly keeps to the method or the order observed by the captives. It was then worthy of praise that they not only were anxious to seek God’s favor by prayers and sacrifices, but that they also sought to know what was pleasing to God.

Nor was it surprising that they sent to Jerusalem for this reason, for they knew that place had been chosen by God as the place from which they were to seek the right knowledge of religion. Since then Jerusalem was the sanctuary of God, the captives sent their messengers there, particularly as they knew that the priests were the ambassadors of God, and that the interpretation of the law was to be sought from their lips. They indeed knew that the time had not yet come when the doctrine of salvation was to be disseminated throughout the whole world.

But the Prophet says that the captives not only inquired of the priests, but also of the Prophets. From this it appears that it was commonly known that God had raised up Prophets, something He had ceased to do for a long time. For it was not without reason that Isaiah said that God would still speak by His Prophets when He would again comfort His people (Isaiah 40:1). There had been then a mournful silence for seventy years, when no Prophets were sent forth, according to what is said in the book of Psalms: Our signs we see not, nor is there a Prophet among us (Psalms 74:9).

God indeed had been accustomed to lead the people as by an erected banner when they lived in the holy land, and Prophets continually succeeded one another in regular order, according to what the Lord had promised by Moses: A Prophet will I raise up in the midst of you, etc. (Deuteronomy 18:15).

From the time, then, when they had been driven into exile, while looking at one another there, they could hear no voice to encourage them with hope, until new Prophets were again raised up unexpectedly.

And it was God’s will that the Prophets should have their abode and habitation at Jerusalem, so that He might gather the dispersed Israel. For if there had been Prophets in Chaldea, many might therefore find a pretext for their slothfulness, saying, “Does not God dwell in the midst of us? What need is there to undertake a difficult and toilsome journey? We shall indeed find nothing better at Jerusalem than in this exile, for God shows that He is present with us by His Prophets.”

It would have therefore been a great harm to the Jews to have Prophets in their exile.

But when the captives heard that the gift of prophecy appeared again in the temple, they might have recalled what their fathers had heard from Isaiah and also from Micah: From Zion shall go forth a law, and the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:3; Micah 4:3). We now perceive why Zechariah joined Prophets to priests.

But we must bear in mind what we have stated elsewhere: that the prophetic office was, as it were, an extraordinary office, when God took others as the ministers of His word besides the priests. For their work was sacerdotal; but God meant to condemn the priests by transferring the work of teaching to others, that is, when Prophets were taken from the common people, or from other families, and not from the Levitical tribe.

It is not indeed true that all the priests were Prophets; but the office itself would not have been transferred to any other tribe, had not God thus punished the ingratitude of those who spent more effort on their own private concerns than on teaching the people. Be that as it may, it was an illustrious testimony of God’s favor that Prophets at that time had again been raised up.

And this fact has been added—that they lived nowhere else but at Jerusalem, to encourage the dispersed to return and to show them that the place had not been chosen in vain previously by God. This is the reason why the Prophet expressly says that the Prophets, as well as the priests, were in the house or in the temple of the Lord of hosts.

The time is also mentioned: the fourth year of Darius, and the ninth month and the fourth day. The beginning of the year, we know, was in March; therefore, the month Chisleu was November, or a part of October and November, for they customarily began their months at the new moons.

Of King Darius we have spoken elsewhere. He was not, indeed, the first Darius, the father-in-law of Cyrus, who transferred the monarchy to the Persians, but Darius the son of Hystaspes. The seventy years had then passed, for, as has been stated before, this was the fourth king.

Let us now consider the question which the captives proposed to the priests. They asked whether they were to weep in the fifth month, and whether they were to separate themselves as they had done for seventy years and more; for some years, as we have seen, had passed beyond that number.

From this we learn that a regular fast was observed from the time when the temple was burned and the city destroyed. He speaks here only of the fifth month, but shortly after, mention is made of the seventh month. It is evident from sacred history that the city was demolished and the temple pulled down in the fifth month.

It is therefore probable that there was a day of mourning observed by the people in memory of that sad event. In the seventh month, though not in the same year, Gedaliah was slain, and the remainder of the people were driven into exile. As the land then became desolate, it is also probable that another fast was appointed, so that they might yearly humble themselves before God and humbly seek His pardon.

Since then there was a reason for both fasts, it is evident that they could not have been condemned by the priests; nor is there any doubt that it was by the public consent of all that they kept these days of weeping every year.

We also see the purpose God has in view in prescribing a fast—that people, in coming to Him, may feel true penitence and remind themselves by their external appearance of their own guilt. Since the Jews observed this rule in their fasts, we must conclude that they pleased God, for these were religious exercises by which they might have been led to repentance.

Now they inquired whether they were to continue their weeping, for the temple and the city had now begun to be built. Since the reason for their mourning had been that the temple no longer stood where they might offer their sacrifices, and that the holy city had been demolished, it was then undoubtedly right to give thanks to God and to feel joy when their calamities came to an end.

However, the captives did not venture to change anything without the authority and consent of the priests, so that they might all agree together. And thus they also testified that they were true members of the Church, as they had no desire to have anything different from others.

The word 'fast' is not mentioned; but they asked, “Shall we weep?” From this it also appears that they were not so crude in their ideas as to think that the chief part of religion is fasting, as hypocrites do, who imagine that they honor God by abstaining from food, and thus mock God, who is a Spirit, with mere trifles, when it is His express will to be spiritually worshipped.

We then clearly see that the Jews were not imbued with this crude and foolish thought when they established this annual fast, for they put weeping in the place of fasting. And why was this weeping, except that they went into God’s presence conscious of their guilt and in a humble manner, and testified by external signs that they acknowledged their sins, so that they might obtain mercy and forgiveness?

They also mentioned consecration. The word נזר, nezar, which means to separate, is variously explained. But here many interpreters confine it to abstinence from food, as if they had said, “Shall we separate ourselves from food?”

This seems forced to me. I therefore prefer to apply it to sanctification, for we know that when a day was prescribed for fasting or for offering sacrifices, sanctification was added.

For though it was fitting for the Jews throughout their whole life to abstain from all defilements, yet we know that when a fast or any particular sacrifice was appointed, they were more diligent and solicitous to cast aside every pollution. We now understand then what the Jews had in view and what they meant by these words.

Here the Prophet tells us that he was sent to the people and to the priests, not so much to teach the messengers who came from distant lands, as to correct the vices of his own nation; for the Jews had then begun, according to their usual manner, to dissemble with God, and had glided, as it has elsewhere appeared, into many evil practices.

And it appears evident that God did not commit to Zechariah what the messengers might bring back to Chaldea, but that an occasion was taken to remind the Jews that they were to look to themselves. It may have been the case that the priests themselves and all the rest had begun to raise a controversy: “How is this? Our brethren inquire whether the fast is to be still observed,” and the opinions might have been various. But as this is doubtful, I leave it as such. We however see that the Prophet does not speak here concerning the captives, nor does he address to their messengers anything which they might convey to Chaldea, but turns his discourse to the priests and to the people.

The sum of the whole is, that while the captives gave a significant testimony of their religion, God reproved the Jews who had returned to their own country for ingratitude, as they had already begun to pollute themselves.

He therefore brings this charge against them, Have you fasted to me? Have you eaten to me? as though he had said, “God does not regard fastings, except they proceed from a sincere feeling and tend to a right and lawful end.” It was then the object of the Prophet to awaken the Jews, that they might not imagine that God was pacified by fasting or by any other frigid ceremonies, but that they might know that something more was required.

And we see how prone humankind is to rely on external rites, and to think that they have rightly performed their duty to God when they have fasted. As then human nature labors under this disease, the Prophet is here sent to dissipate this delusion, which he does by declaring that fasting does not please God, or is acceptable to Him, as though it were something meritorious, or as though there was in it any holiness.

He says first, that the word of Jehovah was given to him, that he might go to the people of the land and to the priests. We see the truth of what I have already said, that the answer was not directed to the captives, but to the very inhabitants of the land and to the citizens of Jerusalem, and for this reason—because they thought that when the question concerning fasting was raised, the first and chief part of all religion was the subject of inquiry.

Hence God, that He might strip them of this superstition, says, When you fasted in the fifth month and in the seventh month, and during the seventy years, did you fast to me—to me? For He has put an affix to the verb, צמתני, tsametni, and afterwards added אני, ani: as though He had said, “Was it to me that you fasted?

Shall I approve of such fasting?” There is an emphasis in the repetition, as though He had said that there was no reason for the Jews to boast that they faithfully served God and fully performed their duty because they fasted twice in the year, for they had to do with that God who rejected such trifling things.

We therefore learn that nothing is more preposterous than for people to judge of God’s worship according to their own notions and to trust in themselves. It is indeed easy for us to deceive ourselves; for as we are earthly, so we may think that whatever glitters before our eyes is most acceptable to God. But the Prophet here reminds us, by one sentence, how frivolous are such self-pleasing thoughts; for God meets us with this question, “Have you fasted to me? Are you to be judges, and is it right for you at your pleasure to invent various modes of worship? But I remain always like myself, and I do not transform myself according to what pleases you; for I repudiate everything of this kind.”

By saying that to themselves they did eat and drink, he intimates that to eat and to drink, or to abstain from eating and drinking, are things wholly unconnected with the worship of God. Another sense may indeed be elicited—that the Jews ate as heathens did: and there will be in this case an indirect reproof—that they sought to pacify God only twice in the year, and that during the rest of the time they were heedless and indulged themselves in excesses. We ought indeed to bear in mind what Paul says, that:

Whether we eat or drink, all things ought to be done
to the praise of God (1 Corinthians 10:31).

The law also expressly commanded the Jews to “feast before the Lord,” that is, not to taste food without thanksgiving, as though God were present. When, therefore, the Jews fasted themselves without any regard to God, it is no wonder that their fastings were rejected; for their course was not consistent.

For though the godly do not always fast, yet while they partake most freely of meat and drink, they do not turn away their thoughts from God, but on the contrary rejoice before Him. They therefore eat and drink to God, as well as abstain on God’s account. But the Prophet shows here that the Jews did eat to themselves, and that therefore their fasting was not regarded before God.

This latter sense is not unsuitable: but as to the subject itself, it is enough for us to know that the Prophet, as he had to deal with hypocrites, ridicules their superstition in their fastings, since they thought that these were expiations by which their sins were blotted out, and that if they abstained for a day or two from meat and drink, God was thereby pacified.

And the Prophet’s object is more evident from the next verse, when he says, Are not these the words which Jehovah proclaimed by the former Prophets? He confirms here his doctrine by many testimonies, that is, that God had already through successive ages exhorted the Jews to true repentance and condemned their dissimulation, that they might not think that true religion was made up of fasting and of similar things.

And this the Prophet did, not only to gain or secure to himself more credit, but also to double the wickedness of the Jews; as though he had said that they were apparently very anxious not to offend God, but that it was merely a false pretense. For had they from the heart wished to please God, they might have long ago learned that fastings were of themselves of no importance, but that a beginning ought to be made with true religion and spiritual worship.

I have already mentioned that possibly, when the question was raised by the captives, much disputing, as is commonly the case, prevailed among the people. But as the Jews always reverted to their old ways, being blindly attached to their frigid ceremonies and thinking in this manner to propitiate God, the Prophet, for this reason, derides their preposterous labor and toil.

“See,” he says, “the only question now is whether there should be fasting, as though this were the principal thing before God. In the meantime godliness is neglected, and neglected is real calling on God, and the whole of spiritual worship is also esteemed by you as nothing, and no integrity of life prevails: for you bite one another, plunder one another, wrong one another, and are guilty of lying. You heedlessly close your eyes to such vices as these; and at the same time when fasting is neglected, you think that the whole of religion falls to the ground.”

These are your old ways, and such were commonly the thoughts and doings of your fathers; and it appears evident that you trifle with God, and that you are full of deceits, and that there is not in you a particle of true religion. For God formerly spoke loudly in your ears, and His words were not obscure when He exhorted you by His Prophets; He showed to you what true repentance was, but effected nothing.

Is it not then quite evident that you are now acting deceitfully, when you so carefully inquire about fasting?” We now perceive what force there is in this sentence, Are not these the words which Jehovah formerly proclaimed? For it was not enough to remind the Jews of true repentance; but this reproof was necessary, in order more sharply to stimulate them. And it was wholly necessary to discover their hypocrisy, that they might not be too much pleased with external performances.

That they might not then object that what they asked concerning God’s counsel was done with a good intention, the Prophet answers them, “Where are the words by which God had testified as to what can please Him?” And for the same purpose he uses the word, קרא, kora, proclaimed: for he does not say that God merely declared words by His Prophets, but that He uttered them loudly, and as it were with a full mouth.

“See,” he says, “you inquire as though you were in doubt, and that the knot could hardly be untied, and as though it were a matter of great moment. God has indeed not only spoken, but has also cried aloud in the ears of your fathers; in the meantime you tread underfoot His teaching, or pass it by with closed eyes.”

What does this mean? To inquire so anxiously about fasting, and at the same time to despise what is far more important? In a similar manner does Christ also condemn hypocrites, because they hesitated not to swallow a camel, while they were accustomed to strain at a gnat (Matthew 23:24); for in trifling things they dared not to attempt anything; but as to gross wickedness, they leaped over it as it were with the audacity of wild beasts.

The object then of the Prophet’s words was to show that the Jews did not seriously and in earnest inquire concerning God’s will, but pretended to be very attentive to religion, while they openly, and with gross and reckless audacity, rejected the true doctrine, which was by no means ambiguous, as God had by His many Prophets clearly taught them and their fathers what He required from them.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as we are so inclined to dissimulation, we may learn strictly to examine ourselves, and to descend into our own consciences, so that none of us may sleep in self-delusion, but be so displeased with our hidden vices, as in the meantime to aspire after, and with every care and labor, to attain true religion, and so strive to devote ourselves wholly to You, that we may groan under the burden of our sins, and so suppliantly flee to Your mercy, as at the same time to be touched with true penitence, until having at length put off the corruptions of our flesh, we shall be received into that purity which has been prepared for us in heaven by Jesus Christ our Lord. — Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

Thus says Jehovah of hosts, saying, The judgment of truth judge, and kindness and mercies show, every one to his brother. We have seen what the Prophet said of fasting, when messengers were sent by the exiles to inquire on the subject. It was a suitable opportunity for handling the question.

For, as we then said, the people were so devoted to their ceremonies as to think that the whole of religion consisted in fasting and in similar exercises. And as we are by nature prone to this evil, we ought carefully to consider what the Prophet has taught us—that fasting is not simply, or by itself, approved by God, but on account of the purpose intended for it.

Having already shown to the Jews their error in thinking that God could be pacified by ceremonies, he now reminds them of what God mainly requires in His law—that people should observe what is just and right towards one another.

It is indeed true that the first part of the law refers to the service due to God. However, it is a way God has commonly adopted to test the lives of people by the duties of the second Table, and to show what this part of the law especially requires.

God, then, in this passage, as in many others, does not commend righteousness towards others so as to depreciate godliness; for as this far excels everything in the whole world, so we know that in rightly forming one's life, the beginning should always be made by serving God correctly. But as the Prophet had to do with hypocrites, he shows that they only trifled with God, while they made much of external things, and at the same time neglected uprightness and the duties of love.

We now, therefore, understand the Prophet’s object. He had said in the last lecture that he brought forward nothing new, but only reminded them of what had been taught by other Prophets; and here he pursues the same subject—that God valued uprightness and kindness more highly than those legal shadows, which in themselves were of no importance.

The judgment of truth, he says, judge. This could not have been extended indiscriminately to the whole people; but by these words the Prophet indirectly reproved the judges, because they committed plunder, either through favor or hatred, so that they decided cases not in a just and equitable manner.

We then learn from the Prophet’s words that judgments were then given corruptly, so that the judge either decided in favor of a friend, or was bought by a price or a reward. As then there was no truth in the judgments given, but false pretenses and deceptions, the Prophet here exhorts them to execute the judgment of truth, that is, true judgment, when no respect of persons is shown, and when neither hatred nor favor prevails, but equity alone is regarded.

He then addresses the whole people in common, and says, Show, or exercise, kindness and mercies every one towards his brother. He not only instructs them to abstain from doing any wrong, but exhorts them to show kindness; for it would not be enough to do no harm to any one, unless each of us were also concerned with assisting our neighbors, since it is the dictate of benevolence to help the miserable when necessity so requires.

But we must remember that a part is given twice for the whole in what the Prophet says: in the first place, he refers only to the second Table of the law, while he includes in general the rule by which our life is to be formed; and in the second place, he enumerates not everything contained in the second Table, but mentions only some things as instances.

It is however certain that his design was to show that people are greatly deceived when they seek to discharge their duties towards God by means of external rites and ceremonies; and furthermore, that it is a true and substantial evidence of piety when one observes what is just and equitable towards his neighbor. He afterwards adds—

He mentions here some other duties, but for the same purpose of showing that the fear of God is not proved by ceremonies, but by acting justly towards our neighbors. It is not proved by merely abstaining from doing wrong, but by being ready to help the miserable. Since widows, orphans, and strangers are, as if, exposed to plunder, Moses often in the Law commends them to favor, showing that God cares for them and will be their defender when they are injured by anyone.

So also the Prophet speaks here explicitly of widows, orphans, and strangers, so that the Jews might understand that they were not only to be careful that no wronged person should complain, or that no one should retaliate an injury, but that they were to maintain integrity before God. For the ungodly are often terrified by fear and refrain from doing harm, because they know that there will be an avenger.

This is why the rich and the opulent are safe from all injuries, because they are surrounded and fortified by strong defenses; but widows and orphans are not similarly able to repel wrongs. This is the reason the Prophet chooses here to mention widows, orphans, and strangers, rather than to speak generally of all the people. For the meaning of the whole passage is, as I have reminded you, that the fear of God is not truly proven, except when a person adheres to what is just and right. This person is not restrained by fear or shame, but fulfills their duty as if in the presence of God and His angels, showing favor to the poor and miserable who have no one to help them. But as I have elsewhere explained this subject in greater detail, it is sufficient now to touch on it briefly. Let us proceed—

The Prophet here, by referring to the fathers, more sharply reproves the Jews of his age, for he saw that they differed little from their fathers.

The sum of what he says is that the Jews in all ages dealt unfaithfully and perversely with God. For however much they boasted of their care and zeal for religion, they still sought to satisfy God only with vain trifles. This, then, was the Prophet’s object.

For it is certain that there had always been some pretense to religion in that nation, but it was mere dissimulation. For they were meanwhile intent on their ceremonies, and when God seriously remonstrated with them, their previously concealed obstinacy and perverseness immediately appeared.

He therefore says that they refused to hear. He does not now accuse the dead, except for the purpose of teaching the people of his age.

He saw that they were concerned about fasting at appointed seasons, while at the same time they regarded as almost nothing the main requirements of the law: mercy, justice, and uprightness. These are indeed the three things which Christ mentions (Matthew 23:23).

He then intimates that this doctrine was not new and that their fathers had been sufficiently warned and instructed, but that they willfully, and, as it were, intentionally rebelled against God.

In short, he pulls off their mask of ignorance. For as men mostly seek to lessen their sins by pleading that they had not been clearly or promptly taught, the Prophet declares that there was no excuse of this kind, because they had been rebellious and untamable; they had refused to hear.

To explain more fully this perverseness, he afterwards says that the shoulder of withdrawing had been presented by them. The Hebrews say that men serve with the shoulder when they are submissive and tractable, and willingly undergo the burden laid on them, according to what we have seen in Zephaniah 3:1.

The Prophet now, on the contrary, says that the Jews had a refractory shoulder, as they refused to bear the yoke but shook off every fear of God. The reason for the metaphor is this: as burdens are carried on the shoulder, so the Lord lays the law on our shoulders, that the flesh may not indulge itself at pleasure but be kept under restraint. He therefore says that they had presented a rebellious shoulder. The word סררת, sarret, is properly translated “declining.” Some translate it as “perverse,” and others as “contumacious.” Since the meaning is the same, I do not argue about the word. It is enough to know that the contumacy of the Jews is what is condemned here, for they had been completely unteachable and had refused to submit to God and to His word.

He afterwards mentions their ears: They made heavy their ears, lest they should hear. In short, the Prophet sought by all means to prove the Jews guilty, that they might not bring forward anything to lessen their sin: for they had in every way, with the most resolute wickedness, refused to obey God when His teaching was sufficiently clear and intelligible.

He then comes to the heart: They made, he says, their heart adamant, or the very hardest stone. Some translate it as steel, and others as flint. It sometimes means a thorn, but in this place, as in Ezekiel 3:9 and Jeremiah 17:1, it is to be taken for adamant, or the hardest stone.

We now see then that the Prophet’s object was to show that the Jews had no excuse, as if they had fallen away through error or ignorance, but had always willfully and perversely rejected sound doctrine.

The Prophet then teaches us that hypocrisy had been the sole hindrance preventing them from understanding and following what was right.

But it may be useful to notice the manner of speaking which the Prophet adopts in condemning the perverseness of the Jews, when he says that they had refused to pay attention to God. For we ought here to observe the connection between the fear of God and obedience, and on the other hand, between the contempt of the law and willful rebellion.

If, then, we would not be condemned for contumacy before God:

1. First, attention must be given to His word.
2. Second, our shoulders must be submitted, so that we may bear submissively the yoke laid on us.
3. Third, we must listen with our ears, so that the word of God preached to us may not be lost but may take deep root in us.
4. Finally, our hearts must be turned to obedience, and all hardness corrected or softened.

Then Zechariah adds that the Jews had a stony or an iron heart, so that they repudiated the law of God and all His Prophets. He gives the first place to the law, for they should have sought from it the whole doctrine of religion; and the Prophets, as has often been stated, were only interpreters of the law.

He afterwards mentions the words which had been sent by Jehovah through his Spirit and through his Prophets. By saying that God spoke by His Prophets, he meets an objection with which hypocrites are accustomed to cover themselves when they reject the truth. For they object and say that they would willingly be submissive to God, but that they cannot bear the authority of men, as if God’s word changed its nature by coming through the mouth of a human.

But as hypocrites and profane men are accustomed to diminish the authority of the word, the Prophet here shows, with this pretext in mind, that God intended to be heard, though He employed ministers. Hence by this kind of concession it is implied that Prophets are intermediaries, and yet that God so speaks by their mouth that contempt is shown to Him when truth is not given its due honor.

And further, lest human baseness should cause the word to be disregarded, he also mentions the Spirit, as if he had said that God had spoken not only by His servants, even mortal men, but also by His Spirit.

There is then no reason for hypocrites to excuse themselves deceitfully by saying that they do not rebel against God when they belittle His prophets; for the power and majesty of the Holy Spirit appear and shine out in the doctrine itself, so that the human condition of the messengers does not diminish its authority in any way.

This point was also added to condemn the Jews, because they had been warned at the proper time from the very beginning, and it was solely their own fault that they did not repent.

For if the Lord had allowed them to go astray for a long time, there would have been some pretext for their evasions. But since God had tried to recall them to the right way, and prophets, one after another, had been continually sent to them, their unfaithfulness, indeed, their iron perverseness in obstinately refusing to obey God, was more fully revealed. This is the reason why Zechariah mentions the former prophets here.

He then adds that there was great wrath from Jehovah of hosts. By this sentence, he reminded them that it was not a matter of dispute, as if it were a doubtful thing, whether their fathers had been wicked and disobedient to God, for He had sufficiently proved by punishments that He detested their conduct.

For this principle must be held as true: God does not deal unjustly with people when He chastises them; instead, the gravity of crimes is to be estimated by the punishment He inflicts.

As God then had so severely chastised the ancient people, the natural conclusion is that their wickedness had become intolerable. We now see then why the Prophet said that there had been great wrath from God; the reason was that the Jews might not think that He had been slightly offended, as He had not been satisfied with a moderate punishment. For since His wrath had been so great, and since He had in such a dreadful manner punished the sins of the people, it follows that their wickedness had been more serious than men considered it to be.

There is also here an implied comparison, for the unfaithfulness of those who then lived was worse because they took no warning from the calamities of their fathers, so as to deal with more sincerity with God. They knew that their fathers had been carefully and in various ways admonished; they knew that exile followed, which was an evidence of the dreadful vengeance of God. Since then they were like their fathers and had not cast off their perverse disposition, they proved themselves guilty of greater and more refractory baseness, for they should have been influenced at least by fear when they saw that God’s judgment had been so dreadful against obstinate men.

The Prophet sets forth more fully the dreadfulness of this punishment — that they groaned and complained in vain, for God was deaf to their complaints and cries. When God fulminates to some extent and is soon reconciled, he does not seem to be greatly incensed; but when the miserable people whom he afflicts with his hand gain nothing by their entreaties and prayers, it then becomes evident that God is offended to no ordinary degree. This, then, is what the Prophet meant by saying that they were not heard by God when they cried.

But we must notice what is said of their perverseness, for he says that God had called, and he was not heard by them. Now, it cannot be considered an unjust reward for God to punish contempt for his word. For how great is the honor with which he favors miserable wretches when he invites them to himself, and most expressly invites them? Therefore, when God's call is rejected and despised in this way, do not those who are so rebellious deserve what the Prophet declares here — that they would have to cry in vain, as God would be deaf to their groans?

As for the words, the change of person may confuse those unfamiliar with this style, but it is a way of speaking common to the Prophets. For they speak in the person of God to give more authority to their doctrine. They spoke sometimes in the third person and sometimes in the first person: when in the first, God himself speaks; and when in the third, it is in the role of ministers, who declare and deliver, as if from hand to hand, what had been entrusted to them by God.

Thus, the Prophet in the first clause speaks as God’s minister; he afterwards speaks in God's person, as though he were God himself. But this, as has been said, was done concerning the word delivered. It was, that as he called and they heard not, etc. Who called? It is not correct to apply this, as some do, to the Prophet. Therefore, he undoubtedly charges the Jews here with the sin of turning a deaf ear to God’s word. So, he says, they shall call, and I will not hear. It might have been said, “So they shall call, and the Lord will not hear.” As we see, there is nothing obscure or ambiguous in the meaning.

The meaning of the whole, then, is that God had not threatened in vain through his ancient Prophets. Just as he had denounced vengeance through the mouth of Isaiah, so it had been carried out against the Jews, for they had cried without effect and found God to be a severe judge, whose voice they had previously despised.

Indeed, we know it is an often-repeated truth that the ungodly are not heard by God; in fact, their prayers are abominable, for they profane God’s name with an impure heart and mouth whenever they flee to him, since they approach him without faith and repentance. We learn then from these words that those who perversely despise God’s word deservedly rot in their own calamities, for it is by no means right or reasonable that the Lord should be ready to hear the cries of those who turn a deaf ear to his voice.