Jesus was betrayed for the price of a slave

JESUS WAS BETRAYED FOR THE PRICE OF A SLAVE
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Zechariah 11:12-13
12 I told them, “If you think it best, give me my pay;
but if not, keep it.” So they paid me thirty pieces of
silver.
13 And the Lord saidto me, “Throw it to the
potter”—thehandsomeprice at which they valuedme!
So I took the thirty pieces of silverand threw them to
the potter at the house of the Lord.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
A Model Spiritual Teacher
Zechariah 11:12-14
D. Thomas
And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear.
So they weighedfor my price thirty pieces ofsilver. And the Lord said unto
me, Castit unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I
took the thirty pieces ofsilver, and castthem to the potter in the house of the
Lord. Why these words should have been referred to by the Evangelist

Matthew (Matthew 27:9, 10), and applied to Christ and Judas, I cannot
explain. Nor can any one else, judging from the conflicting interpretations of
biblical critics. Matthew not only misquotes the words, but ascribes them to
Jeremiah, and not to Zechariah. The probability is that the "thirty pieces of
silver" and the "potter's field," in connectionwith Judas, reminded the
evangelistof these words, brought them to his memory, and from his memory
he quotes them; for he gives them very incorrectly, neither according to the
Greek versionnor the original Hebrew. As the words, as they stand here, have
an historical meaning entirely independent of St. Matthew's application of
them, they may be fairly employed to illustrate a model spiritual teacherin
relation to secularacknowledgments ofhis teachings. Three things are
suggestedconcerning the shepherd in this capacity.
I. HE LEAVES THE SECULAR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO THE FREE
CHOICE OF THOSE TO WHOM HIS SERVICES HAVE BEEN
RENDERED."And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and
if not, forbear." He does not exactanything, nor does he even suggestany
amount. He leaves the matter entirely to themselves, give or not give, give this
amount or that. This is as it should be. Ministers, whilst they have a Divine
claim to a secularremuneration of their services, are neither authorized nor
are they disposed, if they are true teachers, to enforce their claims upon the
reluctant. "We have not used this power," says Paul (see 1 Corinthians 9:9-
17). It may be asked- Why should the temporal support of the spiritual
teacherbe left entirely to the choice of the people?
1. Becausecontributions that are entirely free are the only proofs to the
minister that his services are really valued. What proof is there in the
amounts raised by tithes or rates, or, as in some NonconformistChurches, by
diaconate guarantees,that the service of the existing minister has been really
valued?
2. Becausethe contributions that are entirely free arc the only contributions
that are of any moral worth. Those who give from custom or law, or in any

way reluctantly, without a "willing mind," have no claim to moral credit;
their contributions, howeverlarge, are counted worthless in the empire of
virtue.
II. HIS SPIRITUAL SERVICES ARE SOMETIMESSHAMEFULLY
UNDERRATED,"So they weighedfor my price thirty pieces of silver."
Thirty shekels.An amount in our money of about £3 3s. 9d. This was the price
they put on his services, just the price paid for a bond-servant (Exodus 21:32).
1. Do not determine the real worth of a spiritual teacherby the amount of his
stipend. This is often done: all fools do this. Yet who does not know ministers
who getfor their labours £100 a year who are of far higher character, and
render nobler services than many who get their £500, andeven £1000?The
fact is, the minister who wants a large income, as a rule, must geta large
congregation;and he who would get a large congregationmust pander to
popular prejudices and tastes.
2. Deplore the backwardness ofthe world in appreciating the highest services.
The highest service one man canrender another is the impartation of those
Divine ideas that will most quicken, invigorate, and ennoble his mind. But
such services are, alas!the leastvalued. Men will pay their scullery maid or
their groom a largersum every year than they pay their minister. "Thirty
shekels,"£3, fora minister; £100 fora horse! Curates are starving, whilst
cooks,dressmakers,and tailors are getting fat.
III. HIS INDEPENDENT SOULREPUDIATES INADEQUATE SECULAR
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS."And the Lord said unto me, Castit unto the
potter: a goodlyprice that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces
of silver, and castthem to the potter in the house of the Lord." He felt the
insult of being offeredsuch a miserable sum. "Castit unto the potter" -

perhaps a proverbial expression, meaning, "Throw it to the temple potter."
"The most suitable person to whom to castthe despicable sum, plying the
trade, as he did, in the polluted valley (2 Kings 23:10)of Hinnom, because it
furnished him with the most suitable clay." A true teacherwould rather
starve than acceptsuch a miserable acknowledgmentforhis services. Your
money perish with you!
CONCLUSION. Oh for ministers of this lofty type! - ministers who feelas
Paul did when he said, "I seek not yours, but you" (2 Corinthians 12:14). -
D.T.
Biblical Illustrator
So they weighedfor my price thirty pieces ofsilver
Zechariah 11:10-14
The goodlyprice of Jesus
W. Hay Aitken, M. A.
Satan's dealings with the human family may be truthfully described as one
gigantic system of bribery and corruption. He has bribes of all sorts, and of
different kinds and characters, andhe knows how to apply them. He takes
care to suit his bribe to the person who is being bribed. With some of us
wealth is no particular object. But even while we spurn that bribe we are open
to others. Before one man Satanputs the possibility of revelling in pleasure,
before another a dream of ambition, before anotherliterary distinction,
before another domestic happiness. This systemof bribery and corruption
was fully shownwhen Satanentered the lists againstthe Saviour of the world.
When the Son of God, made man, stood before the tempter in the wilderness,
it was after this fashionthat he dared to proceed. On that occasionSatan
presentedto the view of our blessedMasterthe very highest bribe that was

ever offered. Of all the assaults whichhe made on our blessedLord, this
seems to have been the leastsuccessful. On other occasions he was very subtle;
he approachedour Lord very cautiously, but he made no headway; on each
occasionhe was met with wisdom and firmness. Satan is very frugal with his
bribes. What is all his bribery and corruption for? How comes it to pass that
Satanthus exerts his malignant skill in endeavouring to gain an influence over
us? Satan's prime objectis, to carry out his rebellious purposes in the very
face of the everlasting purposes of Jehovah. We, Christians, believe that in the
end God will manifest His own wisdom by triumphing completely over Satan's
malignant skill, but that for the time being appearances are otherwise.There
is no class ofpersons in human history for whom we feela greatercontempt
than for traitors. We all despise a traitor. Who is there that can have any
respectfor a man like Judas Iscariot? And yet the sin that Judas committed is
the sin that is being committed by the slaves of Satanstill. We have not,
indeed, the powerof doing what Judas did. But as it is possible for us to
"crucify" our Lord afresh, so it is possible to betray Him afreshinto the
hands of His enemies. How can this be done? This nature of ours, what is it? It
is a citadel of the living God; it should be an abode of the EternalSpirit. Every
one of you belongs to God. If we refuse to recogniseHis right it is simply
because we are already in our own hearts traitors againstHis love. The Lord
is aware of his enticements. So He says to us: "If it seemgoodunto you, give
Me My price." If you are going to barter My rights for that which Satan
offers you; if you are going to play the part of a base and perfidious traitor,
make up your mind what your bargain is to be; look your own actin the face.
If men and women were to sit down and ask themselves the question: "What
price have I acceptedfor Jesus;for how greata considerationhave I agreed
with Satanto make over my soul to his influences, and to live the life that he
would have me lead?" they would soonrepent of their bribe. Little do you
think that when you are selling the rights of Jesus you are actually selling
your own interests. The man that sells Jesus sells his own soul, and there is no
man that makes so bad a bargain as the man who accepts the devil's bribes for
the betrayal of Jesus. Look atthis miserable man Judas. Can you fancy how
he crept down that dark street? He felt already as if he were standing on the
very verge of hell. The bargainwas struck. And what a bargain it was!It did
not seemmuch to get for Jesus — thirty pieces of silver. Then the end for

Judas. It is the way the devil's bribe will always end. He makes you fair
promises;he takes you by the hand; he pleads with you; he lays all tempting
things before you; but behind them all he has gotthe hangman's rope ready,
and the scaffoldis prepared, and the awful moment of doom is drawing
nearer and nearer. By and by come the agonies ofremorse, the terrors of
despair, and the awful horrors of a lost eternity.
(W. Hay Aitken, M. A.)
A model spiritual teacher
Homilist.
Why these words should have been referred to by Matthew, and applied to
Christ and Judas, I cannot explain. They may fairly be employed to illustrate
a model spiritual teacherin relationto secularacknowledgments ofHis
teachings.
I. HE LEAVES THE SECULAR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO THE FREE
CHOICE OF THOSE TO WHOM HIS SERVICES HAVE BEEN
RENDERED."And I said unto them, If ye think good, give Me My price; and
if not, forbear." He does not exactanything, nor does he even suggestany
amount.
II. HIS SPIRITUAL SERVICES ARE SOMETIMESSHAMEFULLY
UNDERRATED."So they weighedfor My price thirty pieces of silver."
Thirty shekels.An amount in our money of about £3, 2s. 6d. This was the
price they put on His services, justthe price paid to a bond servant (Exodus
31).
1. Do not determine the real worth of a spiritual teacherby the amount of his
stipend.

2. Deplore the inappreciativeness ofthe world of the highest services.
III. HIS INDEPENDENT SOULREPUDIATES INADEQUATE SECULAR
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS,"And the Lord said unto me, Castit unto the
potter: a goodlyprice that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces
of silver, and eastthem to the potter in the house of the Lord." He felt the
insult of being offeredsuch a miserable sum. "Cut it unto the potter," a
proverbial expression, meaning, throw it to the temple potter. "The most
suitable person to whom to castthe despicable sum, plying the trade, as he
did, in the polluted valley of Hinnom, because it furnished him with the most
suitable clay." A true teacherwould starve rather than acceptsucha
miserable acknowledgmentfor his services. Your money perish with you!
(Homilist.)
Meantreatment of an old prophet by his people
J. Morlais Jones.
Here is an old Jewishprophet honourably putting himself in the hands of his
congregation, who is dismissing himself with thirty pieces ofsilver.
I. AN OLD PROPHET'S MANLY OFFER TO HIS CONGREGATION. If
you think good, give me my price. If you are wearyof me, pay me off and
discharge me. If you be willing to continue me longer in your service, I will
continue; or turn me off without wages — I am content. His spirit is
(1)pathetic,
(2)submissive,

(3)magnanimous.
II. THE CHURCH'S MISERABLE ACCEPTANCE OF HIS OFFER. "So
they weighedfor my price thirty pieces of silver." They acceptedthe offer —
1. Immediately. They took no time for consideration. The money was ready
for dismissal.
2. Despicably. Thirty shekels.
3. Dishonourably. Dismissing an old pastor with such a paltry sum. Parting
with the man of God with a sham testimonial. An old prophet, after a long
service of usefulness, castupon the world with thirty pieces of silver.
4. Studiously mean. "They weighedthirty pieces of silver." They shamefully
put the lowestpossible value on his ministry. See the extreme want of
appreciationof goodpastoralservice. Zechariah's ministry was Divine. What
wretchedness ofdealing with the prophetic shepherd of Israel. Salary is no
test of a goodministry. Some of the best are badly paid: The geniuses are
frequently unworthily recognisedby their congregations.JonathanEdwards
was too poor to getpaper to pen down his superhuman thoughts in the
ministry.
III. The prophet's MANLY DISDAIN OF HIS PEOPLE'S MEANNESS.
"And the Lord said unto me, Castit unto the potter," etc. The act was —

1. Divine. "And the Lord said unto me."
2. Manfully done.
3. A proof of their meanness.
IV. An old prophet ROBBED OF HIS JUST CLAIM.
1. Scriptural claim. "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth the corn."
2. Social. Forthe "workmanis worthy of his hire."
3. Equitable. Every class of, people have powerto claim their due, why not the
ministry?
4. Divine. "Evenso hath the Lord ordained that they which preachthe Gospel
should live of the Gospel." "Who goetha warfare any time at his own
charges? And who planteth a vineyard and eateth not of the fruit," etc. It is
nothing but right for the ministry to get and have their due, for the credit of
the Church and the goodof their successors. Honestyis virtue everywhere.
Conclusion— God frequently punishes publicly mean churches by presenting
them with shepherds of extreme barbarity and cruelty. Meanness will be
punished.
(J. Morlais Jones.)

The price of our redemption
John Nance, D. D.
The exactagreementof this prophecy with the event it predicts would be
sufficient to render this chapter more than ordinarily interesting. But it has a
still greaterclaim on our regard, since it contains the passagewhichI have
chosenas the subject of this discourse, than which no prophecy is more clear,
no prediction more close and circumstantial. To whichever prophet or to what
particular book the passagebefore us may be attributed, its circumstantial
and prophetic description of an extraordinary event connectedwith man's
redemption cannot be denied. How trifling was the sum for which Judas sold
his immortal soul. What could be his motive we at this distant hour can
scarcelyconceive. It has been saidto have been avarice. But the sum of two or
three pounds is surely too small a temptation even for the most covetous of
mankind to betray and deliver to certaindeath his kindest friend and
benefactor. The Gospelexpresslytells us the crime originated at the
instigation of Satan. Man's salvation was bought with a price. What that price
was, let the service of the Church at this seasondescribe. Noteven for a
moment can a sincere disciple of Christ forgetthe words of the Apostle: "Ye
are not your own, for ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in
your body, and in your spirit, which are God's."
(John Nance, D. D.)
COMMENTARIES
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
11:4-14 Christ came into this world for judgment to the Jewishchurch and
nation, which were wretchedlycorrupt and degenerate. Thosehave their

minds wofully blinded, who do ill, and justify themselves in it; but God will
not hold those guiltless who hold themselves so. How can we go to God to beg
a blessing on unlawful methods of getting wealth, or to return thanks for
successin them? There was a generaldecayof religion among them, and they
regardedit not. The Good Shepherd would feedhis flock, but his attention
would chiefly be directed to the poor. As an emblem, the prophet seems to
have takentwo staves;Beauty, denoted the privileges of the Jewishnation, in
their national covenant; the other he calledBands, denoting the harmony
which hitherto united them as the flock of God. But they chose to cleave to
false teachers. The carnalmind and the friendship of the world are enmity to
God; and God hates all the workers ofiniquity: it is easyto foresee whatthis
will end in. The prophet demanded wages,ora reward, and receivedthirty
pieces of silver. By Divine direction he castit to the potter, as in disdain for
the smallness ofthe sum. This shadowedforth the bargainof Judas to betray
Christ, and the final method of applying it. Nothing ruins a people so
certainly, as weakening the brotherhood among them. This follows the
dissolving of the covenant betweenGod and them: when sin abounds, love
waxes cold, and civil contests follow. No wonderif those fall out among
themselves, who have provoked God to fall out with them. Wilful contempt of
Christ is the greatcause of men's ruin. And if professors rightly valued
Christ, they would not contend about little matters.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
And the Lord saidunto me, Castit - As a thing vile and rejected, as torn flesh
was to be castto dogs Exodus 22:31, or a corpse was castunburied Isaiah
14:19;Isaiah 34:3; Jeremiah14:16; Jeremiah22:19; Jeremiah26:23;
Jeremiah36:30, or the dead body of Absalom was castinto the pit 2 Samuel
18:17, or the dust of the idolaltars into the brook Kedron by Josiah2 Kings
23:12, or the idols to the moles and the bats (Isaiah 2:20, add Ezekiel20:8); or
Judah and Israel from the face of God 2 Kings 13:23;2 Kings 17:20; 2 Kings
24:21;Jeremiah 52:3 into a strange land (Deuteronomy 29:27, (28 English);
Coniah and his seed, a vesselin which is no pleasure, Jeremiah22:28, into a
land which they knew not; or the rebels againstGod, said, "let us castaway
their cards from us" Psalm2:3; or wickednesswas castinto the Ephah
Zechariah 5:1-11 :18; once it is added, "for loathing" Ezekiel16:5.

Unto the potter - The words exactly correspondwith the event, that the
"thirty pieces ofsilver" were "cast" orflung awayo; that their ultimate
destination was the potter, whose field was bought with them; but that they
were not castdirectly to him, (which were a contemptuous act, such as would
not be used whether for a gift or a purchase), but were castto him "in the
house of the Lord." They were "flung away" by the remorse of Judas, and, in
God's Providence, came to the potter. Whether any portion of this was a
direct symbolic actionof the prophet, or whether it was a prophetic vision, in
which Zechariah himself was an actor, and saw himself in the characterwhich
he described, doing what he relates, cannotnow be said certainly, since God
has not told us. It seems to me more probable, that these actions belongedto
the vision, because in other symbolic actions of the prophets, no other actors
take part; and it is to the lastdegree unlikely, that Zechariah, at whose
preaching. Zerubbabel and Joshua and all the people set themselves earnestly
to rebuild the temple, should have had so worthless a price offered to him;
and the casting a price, which God condemned, into the house of God, at the
command of God, and so implying His acceptanceofit, were inconsistent. It
was fulfilled, in actconsistently, in Judas' remorse;in that he "flung awaythe
pieces of silver," which had stained his soul with innocent blood, "in the
temple," perhaps remembering the words of Zechariah; perhaps wishing to
give to pious uses, too late, money which was the price of his soul; whereas
God, even through the chief priests, rejectedit, and so it came to the potter, its
ultimate destination in the Providence of God. Osorius: "He saith, "castit
unto the potter," that they might understand that they would be brokenas a
potter's vessel."
A goodly price, that I was prized at of them - Literally, "the magnificence of
the value, at which I was valued of them!" The strong irony is carried on by
the, "at which I was valued of them," as in the idiom, "thou wert precious in
my sight" 1 Samuel 26:21;Psalm 72:14;2 Kings 1:13-14;Isaiah43:4. Precious
the thought of God to David Psalm 139:17;precious the redemption of the
soul of man Psalm49:9; and precious was the Shepherd who came to them;
precious was the value, whereatHe was valued by them o. And yet He, who
was so valued, was Almighty God. For so it stands: "Thus saith the Lord God,

Castit unto the potter, the goodly price that I was prized at of them." The
name, "the potter," connects the prophecy with that former prophecy of
JeremiahJer 19:1-15, denouncing the judgment of God for the shedding of
innocent blood, whereby they had defiled "the valley of the sonof Hinnom,
which was at the entry of the gate of the pottery, o, and which, through the
vengeance ofGod there, should be called"the valley of slaughter" Jeremiah
19:6.
The price of this innocent Blood, by the shedding of which the iniquities of
their fathers were filled up, should reston that same place, for whose sake
God said, "I will break this people and this city, as one breaketha potter's
vessel, that cannotbe made whole again" Jeremiah19:11. So then Matthew
may have quoted this prophecy as Jeremiah's, to signify how the woes,
denounced on the sins committed in this same place, should be brought upon
it through this last crowning sin, and "all the righteous blood which had been
shed, should come upon that generation" o
None of the other cases ofmixed quotation come up to this. Mark quotes two
prophecies, of Malachiand of Isaiahas Isaiah's Mark 1:2-3. Matthew blends
in one, words of Isaiah Isa 62:1 and Zechariah Zechariah9:9 as "the
prophet" Matthew 21:4-5. Our Lord unites Isaiah 56:7, and Jeremiah7:11,
with the words," It is written."
Of earlier fathers "Tertullian" simply quotes the prophecy as Jeremiah's
(adv. Marc. iv. 40). "Origen" says, "Jeremiahis not said to have prophesied
this anywhere in his books, eitherwhat are read in the Churches, or reported
(referuntur) among the Jews. I suspectthat it is an error of writing, or that it
is some secretwriting of Jeremiahwherein it is written." (in Matt. p. 916.)
"Euscbius" says, "Considersince this, is not in the prophet Jeremiah,
whether we must think that it was removed from it by some wickedness,or

whether it was a clericaierror of those who made the copies ofthe Gospels
carelessly." Dem. Ev. x. p. 481).
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
13. Castit unto the potter—proverbial: Throw it to the temple potter, the
most suitable person to whom to castthe despicable sum, plying his trade as
he did in the polluted valley (2Ki 23:10) of Hinnom, because it furnished him
with the most suitable clay. This same valley, and the potter's shop, were
made the scene ofsymbolic actions by Jeremiah(Jer 18:1-19:15)when
prophesying of this very period of Jewishhistory. Zechariah connects his
prophecy here with the older one of Jeremiah:showing the further
application of the same divine threat againsthis unfaithful people in their
destruction under Rome, as before in that under Nebuchadnezzar. Hence Mt
27:9, in English Version, and in the oldestauthorities, quotes Zechariah's
words as Jeremiah's, the latter being the original author from whom
Zechariah derived the groundwork of the prophecy. Compare the parallel
case ofMr 1:2, 3 in the oldestmanuscripts (though not in English Version),
quoting Malachi's words as those of "Isaiah," the original source of the
prophecy. Compare my [1189]Introductionto Zechariah. The "potter" is
significant of God's absolute power over the clay framed by His own hands
(Isa 45:9; Jer18:6; Ro 9:20, 21).
in the house of the Lord—The thirty pieces are thrown down in the temple, as
the house of Jehovah, the fit place for the money of Jehovah-Messiahbeing
deposited, in the treasury, and the very place accordinglywhere Judas "cast
them down." The thirty pieces were cast"to the potter," because it was to him
they were "appointed by the Lord" ultimately to go, as a worthless price
(compare Mt 27:6, 7, 10). For "I took," "I threw," here Matthew has "they
took," "theygave them"; because their (the Jews'and Judas')act was all His
"appointment" (which Matthew also expresses), and therefore is here
attributed to Him (compare Ac 2:23; 4:28). It is curious that some old
translators translate, for "to the potter," "to the treasury" (so Maurer),

agreeing with Mt 27:6. But English Version agrees betterwith Hebrew and
Mt 27:10.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
The Lord, God the Father, with detestationof so vile an affront and
undervalue of his Son, said unto me; to Zechariah, in this theatre personating
Christ sometimes.
Castit unto the potter; as being so little it would hardly purchase any thing
but what was cheapestamong them, a little earthenware.
A goodly price that I was prized at of them: in an irony Godupbraids the
shepherds of his people, who prized the greatShepherd no higher.
I took;Zechariah, who in this part now emblematically doth what Judas will
with horror do when he hath soldinnocent blood and betrayed it.
Castthem to the potter in the house of the Lord; or rather, eastthem into the
house of the Lord for the potter, all which the Jewishrulers actover in their
prosecuting Christ unto death.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And the Lord saidunto me,.... The Prophet Zechariah, in a visionary way
representing the sanhedrim of the Jews, the chief priests, scribes, and elders:
Castit unto the potter; for the purchase of his field, in order to make a
burying ground of it for strangers:

a goodly price that I was prised at of them; this is sarcasticallysaid; meaning
that it was a very poor price; and showedthat they had no notion of the worth
and value of Christ, the Pearlof great price:
and I took the thirty pieces ofsilver, and castthem to the potter in the house
of the Lord; it is a question with some what these pieces ofsilver were;they
are commonly understood of silver shekels.So the Targum, in Genesis 20:16
renders pieces ofsilver by shekels ofsilver; and Eusebius (m) calls these here
thirty staters, the same with shekels;which, if common shekels, reckonedat
one shilling and three pence, made but thirty sevenshillings and sixpence;and
if shekels ofthe sanctuary, which at most were but two shillings and sixpence,
thirty of these would make but three pounds fifteen shillings; and therefore
may be truly called, ironically speaking, "a goodlyprice";being no more than
the price of a servant, as before observed: but Drusius objects to this, seeing a
potter's field was bought with this money; and asks,who can believe that a
field near so populous a city as Jerusalemcouldbe bought for thirty shekels?
and observes, from R. Elias Levita (n), that it is a rule with their doctors, that
all silver mentioned in the law signifies shekels;in the prophets, pounds; and
in the Hagiographa, talents:this is said, but not proved: to understand these
of pounds, indeed, would make the price considerable, and sufficient for the
purchase of a large field; for a silver maneh or pound with the Jews was ofthe
value of sixty shekels, Ezekiel45:12 and thirty of these make two hundred and
seventy pounds; but then this would not in an ironical way be called"a goodly
price": and as to the objectionabout the purchase of a field with such a sum
of money as thirty shekels amount to, it may be observed, what Grotius seems
rightly to conjecture, that this was a field the potter had dug up, and had
made the most of it, and so was goodfor nothing but for such an use, for
which it was bought, to bury strangers in. It is also a difficulty to fix it
certainly to whom this money was ordered to be given, and was given. It is
here said "to the potter"; but Jarchiand Kimchi observe, that some of their
interpreters render it the "treasurer";and being sometimes changedfor one
another; thus, the Targum paraphrases it,

"under the hand of the treasurer;''
and so others (o); and indeed the money was given to the chief priests and
elders, some of whom might be in that office, Matthew 27:3 though there is no
need of such an alterationof the word, since the money Judas took for
betraying Christ, and castinto the temple to the priests, they took up, and
gave it to the potter for the field they bought of him with it; and, in the
evangelist, the phrase by way of explanation is rendered, "for the potter's
field", and may be here properly enough translated, "for the potter"; as the
particle is sometimes used (p); that is, to be given to him for purchase money
(q): and whereas the money is said to be cast, or given to him, "in the house of
the Lord", i.e. in the temple, it appears a fact, in the accomplishmentof this
prophecy, that it was castinto the temple, Matthew 27:5 and was took up by
the priests;who, in all probability, sent for the potter thither, and agreedwith
him for his field, and paid him his money there; for there is no reasonto
believe that he had a workhouse forhis business in the temple; though it may
be he had one near it; see Jeremiah18:1 and workedfor the service of it, since
earthen vessels were usedin temple service (r). The accomplishmentof all this
is in Matthew 27:7.
(m) Demonstr. Evangel. l. 10. p. 479. (n) In Tishbi, p. 130. (o) "Ad
thesaurarium", Pagninus, Vatablus. (p) Vid. Nold. Ebr. Part. Concord. p. 63.
(q) "pro figulo", Cocceius;"conferendos in figulum", Junius & Tremellius,
Piscator;"ut detur ad figulum", Burkius. (r) Vid. Misn. Parah, c. 5. sect. 1.
Geneva Study Bible
And the LORD said to me, Castit to the {q} potter: a glorious price that I was
valued at by them. And I took the thirty pieces ofsilver, and castthem to the
potter in the house of the LORD.

(q) Showing that it was too little to pay his wages with, which could hardly
suffice to make a few tiles to coverthe temple.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
13. Castit] “as a thing vile and rejected, as torn flesh was to be castto dogs
(Exodus 22:31), or a corpse was castunburied (Isaiah 14:19), or the dead body
of Absalom was castinto the pit (2 Samuel 18:17), or the dust of the idol-altars
into the brook Kidron by Josiah(2 Kings 23:12), or the idols to the moles and
the bats (Isaiah 2:20), or Judah and Israel from the face of God into a strange
land (2 Kings 13:23);Coniah and his seed, a vesselin which is no pleasure,
into a land which they knew not (Jeremiah22:28), or the rebels againstGod
said, let us castawaytheir cords from us (Psalm2:3), or wickednesswas cast
into the Ephah (Zechariah 5:8); once it is added, for loathing (Ezekiel16:5).”
Pusey.
a goodly price] or, the goodly price, R. V. This is, of course, ironical.
to the potter in the house of the Lord] to the potter; because his business was
to make the most worthless of vessels,the lastand least“to honour” of those
found “in a great house” (2 Timothy 2:20), and thus the unworthiness of the
“price” was shewn, as being only deserving of such a destiny. In the house of
the Lord: both because He it was who, whether in the personof His servants
or of His Son, was the real subjectof the insulting valuation, and also because
a formal and national characterwas given to the transaction, by its thus
taking place before Jehovahand in His House. This explanation, which seems
to be the simplest and most satisfactory, ofthis confessedlydifficult passage,
does not necessarilyinvolve the supposition that the potter was in the house of
the Lord, when the pieces of silver were castcontemptuously down there. It is

enough if, in the vision or symbolical actionof Zechariah, they were in some
way clearlydeclared to be for him.
Like the earlierprophecy of the King (Zechariah 9:9), this prophecy of the
Shepherd is remarkable for its literal fulfilment. The “thirty pieces of silver”
were literally the “goodlyprice” paid for Him, “whom they of the children of
Israeldid value. “The potter” was literally the recipient of it, as the purchase-
money of his exhausted field for an unclean purpose (Matthew 27:5-10).
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 13. - The Lord said unto me. The Lord takes the insult as offered to
himself in the personof his representative. Castit unto the potter; Κάθες
αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ χωνευ τήριον, "Lay them in the foundry, and I will see if it is
approved;" Vulgate; Projice illud ad statuarium; the Syriac and Targum
have, "Put it into the treasury" (Malachi3:10). This involves an alteration of
the text, and is in itself an improbable reading, as God could not be made to
tell the prophet to throw this despicable wage into his treasury, unless,
perchance, it is said ironically. There may be an undesigned coincidence here.
In Matthew 27:5 the council discuss the propriety of putting the thirty pieces
of silver into the treasury. But taking our presenttext as genuine,
commentators usually considerthe phrase as a proverbial expressionfor
contemptuous treatment; as the Greeks said, ἐς κόρακας,as the Germans say,
"zum Schinder," "to the knacker,"and we, "to the dogs." There is, however,
no trace elsewhere ofany such proverb, nor do we know how it could have
arisen; it likewise does notvery well suit the last clause of the verse, "I cast
them to the potter in the house of the Lord." If we substitute the supposed
analogous expression, "Ithrew them to the dogs," we see how unseemly would
be the proverb in this connection. The rendering of the Jews in old time,
adopted recently by Knabenbauer, "Castthem to the Creator," is considered
by Dr. Puseyto be unidiomatic, and involves greatdifficulties. It seems
simpler to considerthat the command, "castit to the potter," implies
contemptuous rejectionof the sum, and at the same time intimates the
ultimate destination to which, in the sight of Omniscience, it was directed. The

potter is named as the workmanwho makes the meanestutensils out of the
vilest material. That this was orderedand executedin vision is plain; how
much the prophet understood we cannot tell. The ambiguous and highly
typical order was explained and fulfilled to the letter by the actionof Judas
Iscariot, as the evangelisttestifies (Matthew 27:5-10). A (the) goodly price, etc.
This is ironical, of course. Suchwas the price at which they estimated the good
Shepherd's services. Castthem to the potter in the house of the Lord. This
rejectionof the paltry wage took place in the house of the Lord (in the vision),
because the insult had been really offered to him, and this was the natural
place where oblations would be made; thus the transactionwas representedas
formal and national. Whether the potter was seenin the temple we know not.
The prophet was made to connecthim in some way with the business; and we
learn from the fulfilment that the potter did in the end receive the money,
which was paid for his field applied to an uncleanpurpose. In Matthew 27:9
the two verses, 12, 13, with some variations, are quoted as "spokenby Jeremy
the prophet." Hence some attribute this part of Zechariah to Jeremiah; and
others think that in St. Matthew the presentname is a mistake. The
probability is that the evangelistdid not name any prophet, but that some
early transcriber, remembering the purchase of the field in Jeremiah32:6-12,
attributed the quotation to that prophet. Or we may suppose that inspiration
did not extend to all minor details, nor save the writers from unimportant
errors.
Keil and DelitzschBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament
Zechariah 1:8. "I saw by night, and behold a man riding upon a red horse,
and he stoodamong the myrtles which were in the hollow;and behind him
red, speckled, and white horses. Zechariah1:9. And I said, What are these,
my lord? Then the angelthat talkedwith me saidto me, I will show thee what
these are. Zechariah 1:10. And the man who stoodamong the myrtles
answeredand said, These are they whom Jehovahhath sent to go through the
earth. Zechariah1:11. And they answeredthe angelof Jehovahwho stood
among the myrtles, and said, We have gone through the earth, and, behold,
the whole earth sits still, and at rest. Zechariah1:12. Then the angel of
Jehovahansweredand said, Jehovahof hosts, how long wilt Thou not have
compassionupon Jerusalemand the cities of Judah, with whom Thou hast

been angry these seventy years? Zechariah1:13. And Jehovahansweredthe
angelthat talked with me goodwords, comforting words. Zechariah 1:14. And
the angelthat talkedwith me saidto me, Preach, and say, Thus saith Jehovah
of hosts, I have been jealous for Jerusalemand Zion with greatjealousy,
Zechariah 1:15 and with greatwrath I am angry againstthe nations at rest:
for I had been angry for a little, but they helped for harm. Zechariah 1:16.
Therefore thus saith Jehovah, I turn againto Jerusalemwith compassion:my
house shall be built in it, is the saying of Jehovahof hosts, and the measuring
line shall be drawn over Jerusalem. Zechariah1:17. Preachas yet, and say,
Thus saith Jehovahof hosts, My cities shall yet swellover with good, and
Jehovahwill yet comfort Zion, and will yet choose Jerusalem." The prophet
sees, during the night of the day described in Zechariah 1:7 (‫הליּלה‬ is the
accusative ofduration), in an ecstatic vision, not in a dream but in a waking
condition, a rider upon a red horse in a myrtle-bush, stopping in a deep
hollow, and behind him a number of riders upon red, speckled, andwhite
horses (sūsı̄m are horses with riders, and the reasonwhy the latter are not
speciallymentioned is that they do not appearduring the course ofthe vision
as taking any active part, whilst the colour of their horses is the only
significant feature). At the same time he also sees,in direct proximity to
himself, an angelwho interprets the vision, and farther off (Zechariah 1:11)
the angelof Jehovahalso standing or stopping among the myrtle-bushes, and
therefore in front of the man upon a red horse, to whom the riders bring a
report, that they have gone through the earth by Jehovah's command and
have found the whole earth quiet and at rest; whereupon the angelof Jehovah
addresses a prayer to Jehovahfor pity upon Jerusalemand the cities of
Judah, and receives a goodconsolatoryanswer, whichthe interpreting angel
conveys to the prophet, and the latter publicly proclaims in Zechariah1:14-
17.
The rider upon the red horse is not to be identified with the angelof Jehovah,
nor the latter with the angelus interpres. It is true that the identity of the rider
and the angel of Jehovah, which many commentators assume, is apparently
favoured by the circumstance that they are both standing among the myrtles
(‛ōmēd, stood; see Zechariah1:8, Zechariah 1:10, and Zechariah 1:11); but all
that follows from this is that the rider stopped at the place where the angelof

Jehovahwas standing, i.e., in front of him, to present a report to him of the
state of the earth, which he had gone through with his retinue. This very
circumstance rather favours the diversity of the two, inasmuch as it is evident
from this that the rider upon the red horse was simply the front one, or leader
of the whole company, who is brought prominently forward as the spokesman
and reporter. If the man upon the red horse had been the angelof Jehovah
Himself, and the troop of horsemen had merely come to bring information to
the man upon the red horse, the troop of horsemencould not have stood
behind him, but would have stood either opposite to him or in front of him.
And the different epithets applied to the two furnish a decisive proof that the
angelof the Lord and "the angelthat talkedwith me" are not one and the
same. The angel, who gives or conveys to the prophet the interpretation of the
vision, is constantly called"the angelthat talked with me," not only in
Zechariah 1:9, where it is preceded by an address on the part of the prophet
to this same angel, but also in Zechariah1:13 and Zechariah 1:14, and in the
visions which follow (Zechariah 2:2, Zechariah2:7; Zechariah 4:1, Zechariah
4:4; Zechariah5:5, Zechariah5:10; Zechariah 6:4), from which it is perfectly
obvious that ‫ּדי‬ ‫ר‬ ‫הּב‬ denotes the function which this angelperforms in these
visions (dibber be, signifying the speaking ofGod or of an angelwithin a man,
as in Hosea 1:2; Habakkuk 2:1; Numbers 12:6, Numbers 12:8). His
occupation, therefore, was to interpret the visions to the prophet, and convey
the divine revelations, so that he was only an angelus interpres or collocutor.
This angelappears in the other visions in company with other angels, and
receives instructions from them (Zechariah 2:5-8); and his whole activity is
restrictedto the duty of conveying higher instructions to the prophet, and
giving him an insight into the meaning of the visions, whereas the angel of
Jehovahstands on an equality with God, being sometimes identified with
Jehovah, and at other times distinguished from Him. (Compare the remarks
upon this subject in the comm. on Genesis, Pent. pp. 118ff.)In the face of
these facts, it is impossible to establishthe identity of the two by the
arguments that have been adduced in support of it. It by no means follows
from Zechariah 1:9, where the prophet addresses the mediator as "my lord,"
that the words are addressedto the angelof the Lord; for neither he nor the
angelus interpres has been mentioned before;and in the visions persons are
frequently introduced as speaking, according to their dramatic character,

without having been mentioned before, so that it is only from what they sayor
do that it is possible to discoverwho they are. Again, the circumstance that in
Zechariah 1:12 the angelof the Lord presents a petition to the Supreme God
on behalf of the covenantnation, and that according to Zechariah 1:13
Jehovahanswers the angelus interpres in good, comforting words, does not
prove that he who receives the answermust be the same personas the
intercessor:for it might be stated in reply to this, as it has been by Vitringa,
that Zechariahhas simply omitted to mention that the answerwas first of all
addressedto the angel of the Lord, and that it was through him that it
reachedthe mediating angel;or we might assume, as Hengstenberg has done,
that "Jehovahaddressedthe answerdirectly to the mediating angel, because
the angelof the Lord had askedthe question, not for his own sake, but simply
for the purpose of conveying consolationand hope through the mediator to
the prophet, and through him to the nation generally."
There is no doubt that, in this vision, both the locality in which the rider upon
the red horse, with his troop, and the angelof the Lord had takenup their
position, and also the colourof the horses, are significant. But they are neither
of them easyto interpret. Even the meaning of metsullâh is questionable.
Some explain it as signifying a "shady place," from ‫,ּלצ‬ a shadow;but in that
case we should expectthe form metsillâh. There is more authority for the
assumption that metsullâh is only another form for metsūlâh, which is the
reading in many codd., and which ordinarily stands for the depth of the sea,
just as in Exodus 15:10 tsâlal signifies to sink into the deep. The Vulgate
adopts this rendering: in profundo. Here it signifies, in all probability, a deep
hollow, possibly with water in it, as myrtles flourish particularly wellin damp
soils and by the side of rivers (see Virgil, Georg. ii. 112, iv. 124). The article in
bammetsullâh defines the hollow as the one which the prophet saw in the
vision, not the ravine of the fountain of Siloah, as Hofmann supposes
(Weissagung u. Erfllung, i. p. 333). The hollow here is not a symbol of the
powerof the world, or the abyss-like powerof the kingdoms of the world
(Hengstenberg and M. Baumgarten), as the author of the Chaldee paraphrase
in Babele evidently thought; for this cannotbe proved from such passagesas
Zechariah 10:1-1215:59IsaZechariah44:27, and Psalm 107:24. In the myrtle-

bushes, or myrtle grove, we have no doubt a symbol of the theocracy, orof the
land of Judah as a land that was dear and lovely in the estimation of the Lord
(cf. Daniel 8:9; Daniel 11:16), for the myrtle is a lovely ornamental plant.
Hence the hollow in which the myrtle grove was situated, can only be a
figurative representationof the deep degradationinto which the land and
people of God had fallen at that time. There is a greatdiversity of opinion as
to the significance ofthe colourof the horses, althoughall the commentators
agree that the colouris significant, as in Zechariah 6:2. and Revelation6:2.,
and that this is the only reasonwhy the horses are described according to
their colours, and the riders are not mentioned at all. About two of the colours
there is no dispute. ‫,םודא‬ red, the colourof the blood; and ‫ּל‬ ‫,ן‬ white, brilliant
white, the reflection of heavenly and divine glory (Matthew 17:2; Matthew
28:3; Acts 1:10), hence the symbol of a glorious victory (Revelation6:2). The
meaning of seruqqı̄m is a disputed one. The lxx have rendered it ψαροὶ καὶ
ποικίλοι, like ‫איּדים‬ ‫ּדרּבים‬ in Zechariah 6:3; the Itala and Vulgate, varii; the
Peshito, versicolores.Hence sūsı̄m seruqqı̄m would correspondto the ἵππος
χλωρός of Revelation6:8. The word seruqqı̄m only occurs againin the Old
Testamentin Isaiah16:8, where it is applied to the tendrils or branches of the
vine, for which sōrēq (Isaiah5:2; Jeremiah 2:21) or serēqâh(Genesis 49:11) is
used elsewhere.On the other hand, Gesenius (Thes. s.v.)and others defend the
meaning red, after the Arabic ašqaru, the red horse, the fox, from šaqira, to
be bright red; and Koehler understands by sūsı̄m seruqqı̄m, bright red, fire-
coloured, or bay horses. But this meaning cannotbe shownto be in
accordancewith Hebrew usage:for it is a groundless conjecture that the vine
branch is calledsōrēqfrom the dark-red grapes (Hitzig on Isaiah5:2); and
the incorrectnessofit is evident from the fact, that even the Arabic šaqira
does not denote dark-red, but bright, fiery red. The Arabic translatorhas
therefore rendered the Greek πυῤῥός by Arab. ašqaruin Sol 5:9; but πυῤῥός
answers to the Hebrew ‫,אדום‬ and the lxx have expressedsūsı̄m'ădummı̄m by
ἵπποι πυῤῥοί both here and in Zechariah6:2. If we compare this with ch.
Zechariah 6:2, where the chariots are drawn by red ('ădummı̄m, πυῤῥοί),
black (shechōrı̄m, μέλανες), white (lebhânı̄m, λευκοί), and speckled
(beruddı̄m, ψαροί) horses, and with Revelation6, where the first rider has a
white horse (λευκός), the seconda red one (πυῥῥός), the third a black one
(μέλας), the fourth a pale horse (χλωρός), there canbe no further doubt that

three of the colours of the horses mentioned here occuragainin the two
passagesquoted, and that the black horse is simply added as a fourth; so that
the seruqqı̄m correspondto the beruddı̄m of Zechariah 6:3, and the ἵππος
χλωρός of Revelation6:8, and consequently sârōqdenotes that starling kind of
grey in which the black ground is mixed with white, so that it is not essentially
different from bârōd, speckled, orblack coveredwith white spots (Genesis
31:10, Genesis 31:12).
By comparing these passageswithone another, we obtain so much as certain
with regard to the meaning of the different colours, - namely, that the colours
neither denote the lands and nations to which the riders had been sent, as
Hvernick, Maurer, Hitzig, Ewald, and others suppose;nor the three imperial
kingdoms, as Jerome, Cyril, and others have attempted to prove. For, apart
from the factthat there is no foundation whateverfor the combination
proposed, of the red colour with the south as the place of light, or of the white
with the west, the fourth quarter of the heavens would be altogetherwanting.
Moreover, the riders mentioned here have unquestionably gone through the
earth in company, according to Zechariah 1:8 and Zechariah 1:11, or at any
rate there is no intimation whateverof their having gone through the different
countries separately, according to the colourof their respective horses;and,
according to Zechariah6:6, not only the chariotwith the black horses, but
that with the white horses also, goesinto the land of the south. Consequently
the colourof the horses canonly be connectedwith the mission which the
riders had to perform. This is confirmed by Revelation6, inasmuch as a great
swordis there given to the rider upon the red horse, to take awaypeace from
the earth, that they may kill one another, and a crownto the rider upon the
white horse, who goes forth conquering and to conquer (Revelation6:2),
whilst the one upon the pale horse receives the name of Death, and has power
given to him to slay the fourth part of the earth with sword, famine, and
pestilence (Revelation6:8). It is true that no such effects as these are
attributed to the riders in the vision before us, but this constitutes no essential
difference. To the prophet's question, mâh-'ēlleh, what are these? i.e., what do
they mean? the angelus interpres, whom he addressesas "my lord" ('ădōnı̄),
answers, "Iwill show thee what these be;" whereupon the man upon the red

horse, as the leaderof the company, gives this reply: "These are they whom
Jehovahhath sent to go through the earth;" and then proceeds to give the
angelof the Lord the report of their mission, viz., "We have been through the
earth, and behold all the earth sitteth still and at rest." The man's answer
(vayya‛an, Zechariah 1:10) is not addressedto the prophet or to the angelus
interpres, but to the angel of the Lord mentioned in Zechariah 1:11, to whom
the former, with his horsemen (hence the plural, "they answered," in
Zechariah 1:11), had given a report of the result of their mission. The verb
‛ânâh, to answer, refers not to any definite question, but to the requestfor an
explanation contained in the conversationbetweenthe prophet and the
interpreting angel. ‫,ץראח‬ in Zechariah 1:10 and Zechariah 1:11, is not the land
of Judah, or any other land, but the earth. The answer, that the whole earth
sits still and at rest (‫ותבׁשי‬ ‫י‬ ‫ית‬ denotes the peacefuland secure condition of a
land and its inhabitants, undisturbed by any foe; cf. Zechariah7:7; 1
Chronicles 4:40, and Judges 18:27), points back to Haggai2:7-8, Haggai2:22-
23. God had there announced that for a little He would shake heavenand
earth, the whole world and all nations, that the nations would come and fill
His temple with glory. The riders sent out by God now return and report that
the earth is by no means shakenand in motion, but the whole world sits quiet
and at rest. We must not, indeed, infer from this accountthat the riders were
all sent for the simple and exclusive purpose of obtaining information
concerning the state of the earth, and communicating it to the Lord. Forit
would have been quite superfluous and unmeaning to send out an entire
troop, on horses of different colours, for this purpose alone. Their mission was
rather to take an active part in the agitationof the nations, if any such existed,
and guide it to the divinely appointed end, and that in the manner indicated
by the colourof their horses;viz., according to Revelation6, those upon the
red horses by warand bloodshed; those upon the starling-grey, or speckled
horses, by famine, pestilence, and other plagues;and lastly, those upon the
white horses, by victory and the conquestof the world.
In the secondyearof Darius there prevailed universal peace;all the nations of
the earlierChaldaeanempire were at rest, and lived in undisturbed
prosperity. Only Judaea, the home of the nation of God, was still for the most

part lying waste, and Jerusalemwas still without walls, and exposedin the
most defencelessmanner to all the insults of the opponents of the Jews. Sucha
state of things as this necessarilytended to produce great conflicts in the
minds of the more godly men, and to confirm the frivolous in their
indifference towards the Lord. As long as the nations of the world enjoyed
undisturbed peace, Judah could not expectany essentialimprovement in its
condition. Even though Darius had granted permission for the building of the
temple to be continued, the people were still under the bondage of the power
of the world, without any prospect of the realization of the glory predicted by
the earlierprophets (Jeremiah 31;Isaiah 40), which was to dawn upon the
nation of God when redeemedfrom Babylon. Hence the angelof the Lord
addresses the intercessoryprayer to Jehovahin Zechariah 1:12 : How long
wilt Thou not have compassionupon Jerusalem, etc.? Forthe very factthat
the angelof the Lord, through whom Jehovahhad formerly led His people
and brought them into the promised land and smitten all the enemies before
Israel, now appears again, contains in itself one source of consolation. His
coming was a signthat Jehovahhad not forsakenHis people, and His
intercessioncouldnot fail to remove every doubt as to the fulfilment of the
divine promises. The circumstance that the angelof Jehovah addressesan
intercessoryprayer to Jehovahon behalf of Judah, is no more a disproof of
his essentialunity with Jehovah, than the intercessoryprayer of Christ in
John 17 is a disproof of His divinity. The words, "overwhich Thou hast now
been angry for seventy years," do not imply that the seventyyears of the
Babylonian captivity predicted by Jeremiah(Jeremiah 25:11 and Jeremiah
29:10)were only just drawing to a close. Theyhad already expired in the first
year of the reign of Cyrus (2 Chronicles 36:22;Ezra 1:1). At the same time,
the remark made by Vitringa, Hengstenberg, and others, must not be
overlooked, -namely, that these seventy years were completedtwice,
inasmuch as there were also (not perhaps quite, but nearly) seventy years
betweenthe destruction of Jerusalemand of the temple, and the secondyear
of Darius. Now, since the temple was still lying in ruins in the secondyear of
Darius, notwithstanding the command to rebuild it that had been issuedby
Cyrus (Haggai1:4), it might very well appear as though the troubles of the
captivity would never come to an end. Under such circumstances,the longing
for an end to be put to the mournful condition of Judah could not fail to

become greaterand greater;and the prayer, "Put an end, O Lord, put an end
to all our distress," more importunate than ever.
Jehovahreplied to the intercessionofthe angel of the Lord with goodand
comforting words. Debhârı̄m tōbhı̄m are words which promise good, i.e.,
salvation(cf. Joshua 23:14; Jeremiah29:10). So far as they set before the
people the prospectof the mitigation of their distress, they are nichummı̄m,
consolations.The word nichummı̄m is a substantive, and in apposition to
debhârı̄m. Instead of the form nichummı̄m, the keri has the form nichumı̄m,
which is grammaticallythe more correctof the two, and which is written still
more accuratelynichūmı̄m in some of the codd. in Kennicott. The contents of
these words, which are addressedto the interpreting angeleither directly or
through the medium of the angel of Jehovah, follow in the announcement
which the latter orders the prophet to make in Zechariah 1:14-17. ‫ארב‬
(Zechariah 1:14) as in Isaiah 40:6. The word of the Lord contains two things:
(1) the assurance ofenergetic love on the part of God towards Jerusalem
(Zechariah 1:14, Zechariah 1:15); and (2) the promise that this love will show
itself in the restorationand prosperity of Jerusalem(Zechariah 1:16,
Zechariah 1:17). ‫,בּנא‬ to be jealous, applied to the jealousyof love as in Joel
2:18; Numbers 25:11, Numbers 25:13, etc., is strengthenedby ‫דוּלה‬ ‫.בלאה‬
Observe, too, the use of the perfect ‫,בּנאיי‬ as distinguished from the participle
efrep ehT .‫בצף‬ct is not merely used in the sense of"I have become jealous,"
expressing the fact that Jehovahwas inspired with burning jealousy, to take
Jerusalemto Himself (Koehler), but includes the thought that God has
already manifested this zeal, or begun to put it in action, namely by liberating
His people from exile. Zion, namely the mountain of Zion, is mentioned along
with Jerusalemas being the site on which the temple stood, so that Jerusalem
only comes into considerationas the capitalof the kingdom. Jehovahis also
angry with the self-secure andpeacefulnations. The participle qōtsēph
designates the wrath as lasting. Sha'ănân, quiet and carelessin their
confidence in their own powerand prosperity, which they regardas secured
for ever. The following word, ‫,אתר‬ quod, introduces the reasonwhy God is
angry, viz., because, whereasHe was only a little angry with Israel, they
assistedforevil. ‫יעׁש‬ refers to the duration, not to the greatness ofthe anger

(cf. Isaiah 54:8). ‫ּלרעה‬ ‫,עערל‬ they helped, so that evil was the result (‫הערּל‬ as in
Jeremiah44:11), i.e., they assistednot only as the instruments of God for the
chastisementof Judah, but so that harm arose from it, inasmuch as they
endeavouredto destroyIsrael altogether(cf. Isaiah 47:6). It is no ground of
objectionto this definition of the meaning of the words, that ‫הערּל‬ in that case
does not form an appropriate antithesis to ‫,ׁשעי‬ which relates to time
(Koehler); for the factthat the angeronly lasteda short time, was in itself a
proof that God did not intend to destroy His people. To understand ‫ּלרעה‬‫עערל‬
as only referring to the prolonged oppressionand captivity, does not
sufficiently answerto the words. Therefore (lâkhēn, Zechariah1:16), because
Jehovahis jealous with love for His people, and very angry with the heathen,
He has now turned with compassiontowards Jerusalem. The perfect ‫בי‬ ‫ת‬ is
not purely prophetic, but describes the event as having already commenced,
and as still continuing. This compassionwill show itself in the fact that the
house of Godis to be built in Jerusalem, and the city itself restored, and all
the obstaclesto this are to be clearedout of the way. The measuring line is
drawn overa city, to mark off the space it is to occupy, and the plan upon
which it is to be arranged. The chethib ‫הוב‬ bihtehc , probably to be read ‫,הוב‬ is
the obsolete form, which occurs againin 1 Kings 7:23 and Jeremiah31:39,
and was displacedby the contractedform ‫וב‬ (keri). But the compassionof
God will not be restrictedto this. The prophet is to proclaim still more ("cry
yet," Zechariah1:17, referring to the "cry" in Zechariah 1:14). The cities of
Jehovah, i.e., of the land of the Lord, are still to overflow with good, or with
prosperity. Pūts, to overflow, as in Proverbs 5:16; and ‫בּנלצּנה‬ for ‫בּנלצילה‬ (vid.,
Ewald, 196, c). The last two clauses round off the promise. When the Lord
shall restore the temple and city, then will Zion and Jerusalemlearn that He is
comforting her, and has chosenher still. The last thought is repeatedin
Zechariah 2:1-13 :16 and Zechariah 3:2.
In this vision it is shownto the prophet, and through him to the people, that
although the immediate condition of things presents no prospectof the
fulfilment of the promised restorationand glorificationof Israel, the Lord has
nevertheless alreadyappointed the instruments of His judgment, and sent
them out to overthrow the nations of the world, that are still living at rest and

in security, and to perfect His Zion. The fulfilment of this consolatorypromise
is neither to be transferred to the end of the presentcourse of this world, as is
supposedby Hofmann (Weiss. u. Erfll. i. 335), who refers to Zechariah 14:18-
19 in support of this, nor to be restricted to what was done in the immediate
future for the rebuilding of the temple and of the city of Jerusalem. The
promise embraces the whole of the future of the kingdom of God; so that
whilst the commencementof the fulfilment is to be seenin the fact that the
building of the temple was finished in the sixth year of Darius, and Jerusalem
itself was also restoredby Nehemiah in the reign of Artaxerxes, these
commencements of the fulfilment sim
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
WILL POUNDS
Zechariah 11:12-13 the Price of a Slave
Traitor. It is a horrible, detestable vulgar word. It is the "blackest
ingratitude" of supreme contempt for other people. In the passagebefore us
an even greaterinsult is the "wage"ofthe traitor.
In one of the most remarkable prophetic visions in the Bible the Hebrew
prophet Zechariah sees himselftaking the role of the GoodShepherd. The

wickedshepherds had neglectedand oppressedthe poor sheep of Israel. The
faithful Shepherd regards it as His sacredduty to shepherd His sheep. God in
His grace soughtto reunite the lost sheepof the house of Israel. With two
staffs, the Messiah, typified by Zechariah, beganhis work in vv. 8-11.
The two staffs are called "Favor," and"Union" (v. 7). The beautiful staff
called"Favor" in the NASB, is full of grace, loving-kindness, friendliness and
pleasantness.Godmade a covenantwith Israel out of His love. The other staff
"Union" meaning cords, binding, or union reminds us of the brotherhood
betweenJudah and Israel (v. 14).
Becauseoftheir obstinate rebellion in v. 9, the Shepherd, symbolized by the
prophet, will no longer"pasture" them so He cut into pieces His staff
"Favor." He withdraws His grace and turns them over to their enemies.
The New Testamentparallelis to be found in Luke 19:41-44 whenChrist wept
over Jerusalemsaying, "For the days will come upon you when your enemies
will throw up a barricade againstyou, and surround you and hem you in on
every side, and they will level you to the ground and your children within you,
and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because youdid not
recognize the time of your visitation" (vv. 43-44). A little later Jesus said, " . . .
and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the
nations; and Jerusalemwill be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the
times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" (21:24).
THE REJECTIONOF THE SHEPHERD
In the verses that follow we see the justice of God upon the nation. It comes in
punishment of their ingratitude and contemptuous treatment of the Good

Shepherd (vv. 12-14). Insteadof humble, repentance, faith, love and obedience
they treated Him with contempt and hatred. The prophet askedforhis wages
due a faithful shepherd. The "wages" Goddesiredwere a humble heart of
repentance and faith. That is the only return worthy of the GoodShepherd.
With "devilish ingenuity" they offer Him a wage and at the same time add
insult to their hated rejectionof Him.
Carefully they weigh out thirty pieces ofsilver, the exactsum fixed in God's
Law as payment to the owner of a slave goredto death by an ox (Ex. 21:32).
Imagine the faithful Shepherd, Jehovahtheir Righteousness(Jer. 23:6), worth
no more to them than the price of a lowly slave!(Acts 3:13-15). Jehovahis one
with his Messengerand to insult the Messengeris to insult Jehovah.
Hengstenberg reminds us of the Lord looking for figs on the fig tree of the
Jewishnation, at a time when it has lost its capacityto produce what God
desired (Matt. 21:19). The parallel passage in Mark tells us Jesus wentinto
the temple and cleansedit (11:12-18).
In verse 12 we see Zechariahacting the role of the coming Messiah. Because
the people rejectedthe GoodShepherd's ministry, He askedas His wages only
the price of a slave. "The goodlysum" was literally "the magnificence of the
value at which I was valued by them!"
The religious and civil leaders negotiatedthe price, not as shepherds, but as
part of the flock itself.
In his vision the prophet castthe silver in the house of the Lord. The prophet
writes with vivid words:

I said to them, "If it is goodin your sight, give me my wages;but if not, never
mind!" So they weighedout thirty shekels ofsilver as my wages.Thenthe
Lord said to me, "Throw it to the potter, that magnificent price at which I was
valued by them." So I took the thirty shekels ofsilver and threw them to the
potter in the house of the LORD."
Thirty shekels ofsilver
They "weighedout thirty pieces of silver" which is the price of a slave. Before
money was coinedrings or bars of silver were used for money. The silver was
weighedon a scale and therefore the unit of weight was calleda shekel.
The allusion is to the sum of compensationfor a slave that had been killed
(Ex. 21:32) and the price at which a slave could be purchased(Hos. 3:2). So
when they weighedout thirty shekels they made him understand clearlythey
did not estimate his service higher than the labor of a household slave.
Hengstenberg says to offer such a wage was in fact more offensive than a
direct refusal. Yahweh's response was anironical "a splendid value that has
been setupon Me." It was an insult to God! Yahweh regarded the wages paid
to His shepherd as paid to Himself. This is how much they valued His work on
their behalf as a nation. Therefore, Godcommands the prophet to throw this
miserable sum of silver to the potter. He was casting awaythe money.
Laetschtries to bring out the play on words in vv. 12, 13. "Theyweighed;cast
it away!I cast;and again, the price I was priced."
"The insignificant remuneration paid to the betrayer was really an expression
of contempt towards the shepherd," correctlyobserves Hengstenberg. The

insult would seemto make it evident that they intended to take the life of the
GoodShepherd (cf. 12:10;13:7).
Keil and Delitzschconclude:"JehovahHimself speaks ofthese wagesas the
price at which He was valued by the people;and it is only from the gospel
history that we learn that it was not Jehovahthe super-terrestrialGod, but
the Sonof God, who became incarnate in Christ, i.e. the Messiah, who was
betrayed and sold for such a price as this."
THE HISTORICAL FULFILLMENT
The statement"I took the thirty shekels ofsilver and threw them to the potter
in the house of the LORD" has puzzled the scholars who have refused to
acceptthe historicalfulfillment in the New Testament. Matthew 27:3-10 gives
the historicalrecordof the omniscient Ruler of the universe in control of
events. The same thirty pieces of silver paid out to Judas Iscariotby the chief
priests for delivering Jesus to them (Matt. 26:15) were castinto the house of
the Lord by Judas (27:5). The chief priests took the same silver pieces and
gave them to the potter from whom they bought the field to bury strangers
(vv. 6-7).
Matthew 27:9-10 reads, "Thenthat which was spokenthrough Jeremiah the
prophet was fulfilled: "And they took the thirty pieces ofsilver, the price of
the one whose price had been setby the sons of Israel; and they gave them for
the Potter's Field, as the Lord directed me."
Keil and Delitzschmake this observation: "The payment of the wages to the
shepherd in the prophetical announcement is simply the symbolical form in
which the nation manifests its ingratitude for the love and fidelity shown

towards it by the shepherd, and the sign that it will no longer have him as its
shepherd, and therefore a sign of the blackestingratitude, and of hard-
heartedness in return for the love displayed by the shepherd. The same
ingratitude and the same hardness of heart are manifestedin the resolution of
the representatives ofthe Jewishnation, the high priests and elders, to put
Jesus their Savior to death, and to take Him prisoner by bribing the betrayer.
The payment of thirty silverlings to the betrayer was in fact the wages with
which the Jewishnation repaid Jesus forwhat He had done for the salvation
of Israel; and the contemptible sum which they paid to the betrayer was an
expressionof the deep contempt which they felt for Jesus. . . . The high priests
would not put the money into the divine treasury, because it was blood-
money, but applied it to the purchase of a potter's field, which receivedthe
name of a field of blood. . . . The prophecy was almostliterally fulfilled; but,
so far as the sense is concerned, it was so exactly fulfilled, that every one could
see that the same God who had spokenthrough, the prophet, had by the secret
operationof His omnipotent power, which extends even to the ungodly, so
arrangedthe matter that Judas threw the money into the temple, to bring it
before the face of God as blood-money, and to call down the vengeance ofGod
upon the nation, and that the high priest, by purchasing the potter's field for
this money, which receivedthe name of "field of blood" in consequence"unto
this day" (Matt. 27:8), perpetuated the memorial of the sin committed against
their Messiah."
Everything that happened that fateful day was "in accordancewith the
purpose of God." We should not be amazed at how exactly the prophecy was
fulfilled. God did it!
The priests carried the money awayfrom the temple, as being impure, and
bought a wretchedpiece of ground in the very same valley, which had once
before been defiled by innocent blood and had calleddown the vengeance of
God upon Jerusalem, as predicted by Jeremiah, and on the very same spot
where Jeremiah had formerly proclaimed to the people their rejectionby the

Lord. Here, then, was the blood-money deposited(Matt. 27:6), the rewardfor
betraying the innocent blood (v. 4), from which the field receivedthe name of
"field of blood" (v. 8; Acts 1:19), and here did it lie as a witness againstIsrael,
a pledge by which the nation had bound itself to submit to the punishment of
God . . . . Tradition also places the field of blood in the valley of Hinnon, in
perfect accordancewith the results when you compare the words of Jeremiah
and Zechariahwith the New Testamentaccounts (Hengstenberg, Christology
of the Old Testament).
Did Matthew make a mistake calling ZechariahJeremiah in 27:9? Did he get
confusedand write Jeremiahwhen he was quoting Zechariah? Matthew says
the word spokenby the prophet was fulfilled by the purchase of the potter's
field for thirty shekels ofsilver, the price of the Messiah. However, Jeremiah
says nothing of the betrayal, but says the Lord "directedhim" to buy the field
(v. 10;Jer. 32:6-8). Zechariah mentions the price. It seems reasonable that
Matthew combines both of these prophecies and gives credit to the major
prophet Jeremiahwhose information he stressesin the purchase of the field.
Matthew does the same thing in 21:5 where he combines two prophecies of
Isaiahand Zechariah and gives the credit to the famous "prophet." Mark 1:2
does the same thing with Malachiand Isaiahgiving credit to Isaiah. The
Minor Prophets are rarely quoted by name though their information is
frequently used throughout the New Testament. Hosea, JoelandJonah are
the only ones named, but others are quoted without citing them. Matthew had
the words of our verse in mind for a long time before he wrote them at this
point in his Gospel.
THE BROKEN STAFF
In verse fourteen as a result of the shameful payment for his service, the
Shepherd breaks his secondstaffas a sign that He will no longerfeed the
ungrateful nation and leave it to its bitter fate. He breaks or destroys the

relationship betweenJudah and Israel. It is a divine decree. Theyare
completely ripe for judgment.
The religious leaders would have no king but Caesar(John19:15). Therefore
God delivered them into the hands of their self-chosenking, the Roman
emperor. This made it convenient for the Roman soldiers carriedout the
destruction prophesied. That was the judgment upon Judah as a nation (1
Thess. 2:16;Isa. 6:1-13; 65:1-14;Acts 28:23-28;Rom. 9:22-23;11:7f). God
sent no deliverer.
But even this chastisementworks for God's eternal purpose with Israelas
seenin Romans 11:1-36. Their hearts were hardened for a time "until the
fullness of the Gentiles has come in." When the church is complete "all Israel
will be saved." This need not mean every Jew without a single exception, but
Israelas a whole, the nation who is the eternal objects of God's electing love.
It will no longer be just a savedremnant, but a savedmass of people. The
hardening will have terminated and evangelistic wildfire will break out among
the Jewishpeople. There is no ground for spiritualization here because the
reference is to the Jewishpeople as a whole nation. The rejectionof Israel is
not permanent.
As we have seenthe context refers to the days of the Messiah, so the reference
to the siege and destruction of Jerusalemwould be expectedin the same
setting. The invading armies of Rome A. D. 70-71 devastatedthe entire land of
Judah and Jerusalem. Becauseofher rejection of Him, the Jewishnation
would be rejectedby her Lord and His Shepherd (vv. 4-14). Verse nine was
literally fulfilled in the Romaninvasion of Jerusalemwhen the Jews destroyed
one another in the furry of their contentious spirit. In desperationthey were
left no other choice but literally "to eatone another's flesh."

The effort of the GoodShepherd was not all in vain. There was a remnant of
Jewishpeople who discernedthe Messiahin the Shepherd and believed on
Jesus Christ as the anointed of the Lord and were saved. The ruin of the
nation by the Roman war was acceleratedsoonafterthe rejectionof Christ by
the majority.
It is my prayer that you will let Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, the
Messiahbecome the desire of your heart. He will give you His perfect peace
right now is you will believe on Him. If you need help in knowing Him in an
intimate personalrelationship here is A Free Gift for You.
Title: Zechariah 11:12-13 The Price of a Slave
ADAM CLARKE
Verse 13
And the Lord saidunto me, Castit unto the potter - Jehovahcalls the price of
his prophet his own price; and commands that it should not be accepted, but
given to a potter, to foreshadow the transactionrelated Matthew 27:7.
"Earthenvessels were usedin the temple; and we may suppose that some
Levites were employed within the sacredprecincts to furnish them. To these,
the humblest of his ministers in the temple, God commands that the degrading
price should be cast." This is the substance ofthe notes on these two verses,
given by Abp. Newcome.

We may look at it in another light, Give me my price! ‫ירכש‬ ‫ה‬ ‫ו‬ habu sichri,
bring my price, or give him any price; that is, Give the money to Judas which
you have agreedto give him; for he can neither betray me nor you crucify me,
but my own permission. But if not, forbear; take time to considerthis bloody
business, and in time forbear. For though I permit you to do it, yet remember
that the permission does not necessitate youto do it; and the salvation of the
world may be effectedwithout this treacheryand murder.
See my notes on this place, Matthew 27:9, where I have examined the evidence
for the reading of "Zechariahthe prophet," insteadof "Jeremiah.
BRIAN BELL
(12) 30 pieces of silver! –Probably intended as an insult to the shepherd.
3.8.1. The price of a goredslave – “If the ox gores a male or female
servant, he shall give to their master thirty shekels ofsilver, and the
ox shall be stoned.” Ex.21:32
4
3.8.2. This was far worse then outright rejection. Messiahwas placedon
par w/an injured slave.
3.9. (13)Throw it…for the potter – To show divine displeasure w/their
estimate of His Son.
3.10. Thatprincely price – or “the handsome price”(NIV) Obvious use of
irony.
3.10.1.This prophecy was fulfilled in Judas.

STEVEN COLE
The Tragedyof Rejecting Christ (Zechariah 11:1-17)
RelatedMedia
Nobody likes tragedies. Wars, famines, epidemics, earthquakes, floods,
tornadoes, terrible accidents—allresultin tragic loss of human life and in
difficult consequencesforthe survivors.
Nobody likes to study tragedies. I suppose that we all have a morbid curiosity
that attracts us to read the papers and watch the evening news when great
tragedies occur, but it would be unbearably depressing to dwell on these
things constantly. And yet the study of tragedies canyield positive results if
we learn to avoid the factors that led to the tragedy and to prepare ourselves
for the time when we may face similar circumstances.
Zechariah 11 is an anatomy of history’s greatesttragedy. The interesting
thing is, this analysis of this tragedy was not written after the fact. It was
penned 500 years in advance!And yet it outlines with amazing detail the
tragedy of the nation Israelrejecting Jesus as their Messiahand the awful
consequencesthatwould follow. It teaches us a vital lesson:
The greatesttragedypossible is to rejectChrist, the GoodShepherd.

Zechariah 11 stands in stark contrastto the glowing promises of chapters 9
and 10. The prophet has just spokenof how God will save and regatherHis
chosenpeople, restore them, and strengthen them so that they will walk in His
name. But then chapter11 hits with predictions of ruin and doom. What’s
going on here?
In order for God’s people to appreciate and not neglecttheir greatsalvation
(Heb. 2:3), they need to keepthe alternative in view, namely, what it means to
rejectChrist and come under God’s awful judgment. We’re all prone to
develop a ho-hum attitude towardthe things of God and even toward the
Savior who shed His blood for us. It’s easyfor those of us raisedin the church
to become so familiar with the story of salvationthat we think, “That’s nice!”
But we go out the door and pursue our careers, ourfamilies, and our hobbies,
without giving much thought or effort during the week to the things of God.
Zechariah 11 was written to God’s covenantpeople to warn them about the
ultimate tragedy of rejecting the GoodShepherd. Yes, godless pagansneedto
be warned about the consequencesofrejecting Jesus Christ, but so do those
who attend church regularly. Though we profess to have acceptedChrist as
Savior, it’s easyto fall into a way of life where practically we rejectHim.
Our text falls into three sections. Verses 1-3 describe the ruin of the land when
God’s judgment is unleashed. Verses 4-14 portray, through a prophetic
parable actedout by Zechariah, the nation’s rejectionof the GoodShepherd,
the Lord Jesus Christ, and the consequences. Verses 15-17 predictthe nation’s
subjection to the foolish or worthless shepherd, who will exploit them and
then come under judgment himself. So Zechariahgraphically portrays
Israel’s suffering for rejecting the Good Shepherd. First, we need to explain
the text; then we will apply it.

Explanation of the text:
Some scholars understand 11:1-3 as a generaldescription that could fit any
invasion of the land. But, as James Boice argues (The Minor Prophets
[Baker], 2:538), since chapter 9 specificallydescribedboth the invasion of
Alexander the Great and the Maccabeanwars, it is reasonable to think that
these verses describe a specific situation. The context of chapter 11 indicates
that verses 1-3 refer to the destruction of the land that occurredin the Roman
wars of A.D. 66-70, whenTitus destroyedJerusalemand slaughteredthe
Jews. The survivors were scatteredworldwide and Israelceasedto exist as a
nation for 1,900 years.
Lebanon, Bashan, and the Jordan (11:1-3)represent the whole of the land.
The destruction of Lebanon’s statelycedarforests was literal, but also may
figuratively portray judgment on the nation’s leaders. Even the shepherds
wail over the end of their peacefulway of life.
Verses 4-17 describe a prophetic drama that Zechariah was to act out for the
nation. First, he portrays the GoodShepherd, Jesus Christ (11:4-14); and then
the worthless shepherd(11:15-17). Godtells Zechariah to pasture the flock
doomed to slaughter (11:4). This may refer to the sheep being kept for temple
sacrifice. The shepherds didn’t care about the welfare of this flock. They just
saw the flock as a means toward their own prosperity (11:5). This ultimately
refers to the greedy religious leaders of Jesus’day, who made a comfortable
living off of religion, but had no concernfor the people. God interjects that He
will no longer have pity on the people of the land, but will give them up to
those who strike the land (11:6).
In obedience to God’s command, Zechariahtakes two staffs, one calledFavor
(picturing God’s favor on Israel)and the other calledUnion (picturing the
brotherhood betweenJudah and Israel). In one month he gets rid of the three
shepherds (presumably by firing them). One commentator (Joyce Baldwin,

Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi[IVP], p. 181)says that the first words of verse 8
“probably are the most enigmatic of the whole Old Testament”!No less than
40 interpretations have been suggested, so we canonly be tentative.
The best view is probably that the three shepherds represent the three main
offices in Israel:prophet, priest, and king. “One month” represents a
relatively short period of time. Becausethe religious and political leaders
rejectedJesus as Messiahand abused their roles for personalgain, and
because in His personJesus fulfilled the roles of prophet, priest, and king, He
abolishedthose roles during His earthly ministry. John the Baptist was the
last of the prophets. After A.D. 70, there was no temple and no high priest to
offer sacrifices.And after that time there would be no king of the Jews,
because there was no Jewishnation.
Then (11:8b) the shepherd grows impatient with the flock and they grow
wearyof him. So he gives up his role as shepherd and leaves the flock to its
fate. Some die, others are annihilated, and the remainder eatone another’s
flesh. This happened literally during Titus’ siege ofJerusalem, as the Jewish
historian Josephus described(The Wars of the Jews [VI:III:4]).
Then (11:10) the shepherd breaks his staff calledFavor, signifying breaking
his covenantwith the nations. God had previously restrained the nations from
destroying Israel, but now that restraint is lifted, allowing Titus to destroy the
city and the nation. The afflicted of the flock (11:11), who recognize that this
is the word of the Lord, may refer to believers in Jerusalemduring the siege.
Titus unaccountably lifted the siege fora few days. The Christians
remembered the Lord’s warning to flee (Matt. 24:16) and left the city for
Pella, thus escaping the fate that shortly fell on the rest.

Verses 12-13 describe the nation’s rejection of the shepherd. He asks forhis
wages,signifying the termination of his role as shepherd. They weigh out for
him 30 pieces of silver, which was the price of a slave who had been goredby
an ox (Exod. 21:32). This shows how cheaply they valued his service!It was
like saying, “You’re about as useful to us as a goredslave!” The Lord, with
sarcasm, instructs him to throw this “magnificentprice” to the potter.
Zechariah does so in the house of the Lord.
Matthew 27:3-10 describes the fulfillment of this prophecy. Judas betrayed
Jesus for 30 pieces of silver, but then felt remorse and tried to return the
money to the Jewishleaders. When they refusedit, he flung it at their feet in
the temple and went out and hanged himself. The chief priests, who paid
Judas to betray Jesus so that they could kill Him, were too scrupulous to put
blood money in the temple treasury. So they used it to buy a potter’s field as a
burial place for strangers, thus fulfilling Zechariah’s prophecy.
There is a difficulty in Matthew 27:9 in that Matthew ascribes the Old
Testamentquotation about the 30 pieces of silver and the potter’s field to
Jeremiah, not to Zechariah. This is a thorny problem, with severalproposed
solutions (see D. A. Carson, Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Zondervan],
8:562-566;or, Hobart Freeman, An Introduction to the Old Testament
Prophets [Moody Press], 340-342). Some saythat since Jeremiah was at the
beginning of some lists of the prophetic writings, Matthew may have used his
name (“the Jeremiah scroll”)to refer to the sectionfrom which the less
prominent prophet, Zechariah, was contained. A more complicated, but
perhaps better, answeris that Matthew brought togetherprophecies from
both Jeremiahand from Zechariah 11, and refers to them by the name of the
more prominent prophet.
There is also debate about why the money was thrown to a potter. Probably
the potter was seenas one of the lowestof the working classes.Claypots were

for common use and cheaply replacedwhen broken. By throwing the money
before the potter in the temple, the prophet reinforced the message ofhow
cheaply Israelregardedits shepherd (Charles Feinberg, God Remembers
[American Boardof Missionto the Jews], pp. 209-210).
After throwing the silver to the potter, the shepherd cuts his secondstaff,
Union, into pieces, signifying the breaking of the brotherhood betweenJudah
and Israel(11:14). This predicts the intense fighting among the Jews that
Josephus describes, whichled to the Roman invasion and final conquestof
A.D. 70 (T. V. Moore, Zechariah[Banner of Truth], pp. 182-183).
Betweenverses 14 and 15 is the entire church age. Then, in the final section
(11:15-17), the Lord instructs Zechariah to take up the equipment of a foolish
(morally corrupt) shepherd to show that God will raise up a self-seeking,
worthless shepherd, who will ravage the flock for his own advantage. After he
serves God’s purpose, God will then judge him by withering his arm and
blinding his right eye. His arm that should have been used to defend the flock,
destroyedit. His eye that should have kept watchover the flock instead looked
for opportunities for personaladvantage. Thus God judges him (Merrill
Unger, Zechariah: Prophet of Messiah’s Glory[Zondervan], p. 204).
Who is this evil shepherd? Some argue that it is Rome, which became the
“shepherd” of Israel after her leaders cried out, “We have no king but
Caesar”(John19:15; see Moore, pp. 184-185). While Rome may representan
initial fulfillment, the prophecy probably also looks aheadto the Antichrist. In
league with Antichrist will be a powerful false prophet, a religious figure, who
will cause the world to worship Antichrist (Rev. 13:11-18). In contrastto
Jesus, the Good Shepherd, who laid down His life for the sheep, this false
shepherd will devour the flock for his own greedy purposes. But when God,
who raisedhim up as an instrument of judgment, is finished with him, God
will judge him.

We had to work through that lengthy explanation in order to apply the text
properly!
Application of the text:
1. REJECTING CHRIST RESULTS IN GREAT TRAGEDY, BOTH
PERSONALLYAND NATIONALLY.
When a nation comes under God’s judgment, the individuals in the nation
suffer greatly. While the Jewishnation was in many respects primarily liable
for rejecting and killing her Messiah(1 Thess. 2:13-16), whenany nation
defiantly turns againstthe light that Godhas given it, it comes under His
judgment (Rom. 1:18-32). What Israel did nationally in crucifying her Savior,
every sinner has done individually. When the Lord no longerhas pity on you
and gives you over to ruthless rulers and to wickedpeople who are out to
destroy you (Zech. 11:6), you’re in a bad situation! Our text reveals four
horrible tragedies that stem from rejecting Christ.
A. REJECTING CHRIST RESULTS IN BEING EXPLOITED BY
RUTHLESS SHEPHERDS.
Bob Dylan has a song, “You Gotta Serve Somebody.” If you don’t serve the
Lord Jesus Christ, you will be subject to selfish shepherds who will use you
for their ownpurposes. The devil, the world, and sin are not friendly
shepherds! They promise you fun and freedom and they give you enough
initial payoff to lure you in. Having sex outside of marriage is pleasurable, at
first. Doing drugs at a party makes you forgetyour troubles for a while. Piling
up a fortune to spend on yourself can bring a very comfortable lifestyle. But
living for selfishpleasure is short-sighted, because it forgets the inevitable fact
of death and eternity. Living for sin ultimately corrupts and enslaves you,
leading to eternal doom (2 Pet. 2:18-19).

Phillip Keller, in A Shepherd Looks atPsalm 23 [Zondervan], describes
watching a flock of sheepbeing led down to a pristine, clearmountain stream
to drink. But some of the sheepcouldn’t wait for what the shepherd was
leading them to. So they stopped to drink at filthy pools along the way that
had been contaminatedby the manure and urine of previous flocks. It
quenched their immediate thirst, but they didn’t realize that it would
eventually infect them with parasites and disease. ThenKeller observes (p.
57),
People often try this pursuit or that with the causalcomment, “So what? I
can’t see that it’s going to do any harm!” Little do they appreciate that often
there is a delayed reactionand that considerable time may elapse before the
full impact of their misjudgment strikes home. Then suddenly they are in deep
trouble and wonderwhy.
As Charles Feinberg sums it up, “Nothing in the world is so disastrous as sin”
(The Minor Prophets [Moody Press], p. 325). You’ve gotta serve somebody!
Will it be Christ, the GoodShepherd, or the evil shepherd who kills and
destroys (John 10:10-14)?
B. REJECTING CHRIST RESULTS IN BEING EXPLOITED BY YOUR
FELLOW MAN.
This comes through repeatedly in the chapter: “I shall cause the men to fall,
eachinto another’s power” (11:6). “Let those who are left eat one another’s
flesh” (11:9). “Then I cut my secondstaff, Union, in pieces, to break the
brotherhood betweenJudah and Israel” (11:14).
If you don’t have Jesus Christ as your Shepherd, you are thrown into a dog-
eat-dog world. It’s you againstthe next guy, because everyone is looking out
for number one. When I was in BootCamp in the CoastGuard, James 3:16

hit me in a fresh way. It sums up life in the world: “Forwhere jealousyand
selfishambition exist, there is disorder and every evil thing.” Or, as he goes on
to say, “Whatis the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the
source your pleasures that wage warin your members? You lust and do not
have, so you commit murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight
and quarrel” (James 4:1-2). That’s the spirit of the world: exploit the other
guy for my advantage!
While because of the flesh we’re all prone to seek our own way, the fruit of the
Spirit stands in stark contrastto James’description:“Love, joy, peace,
patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, andself-control” (Gal.
5:22-23). Our relationships in our homes and our church should be markedby
these qualities, not by the deeds of the flesh (Gal. 5:19-21).
C. REJECTING CHRIST RESULTS IN THE DEVASTATION OF THE
LAND.
Verses 1-3 in poetic form lament the destruction of the land. In the Bible, the
land of Israel is describedas heavily forestedin parts, with lush pastureland
in other parts. Today, because of wars and God’s judgment, the place is
largely a desert(although they’re working on reforestation). Around the
globe, greedyentrepreneurs wipe out the rain forests and deplete natural
resources fortheir own profit. Poachersthreatenendangeredspecies without
any concernfor the future. Christians should worship the Creator, not the
creation. But also, we should be goodstewards of the environment, because
God entrusted His creationto our care.
D. REJECTING CHRIST RESULTS ULTIMATELY IN BEING
ABANDONED BY GOD.
Israelrejectedher Shepherd and her Shepherd rejectedIsrael(11:6, 8-9).
Some of the most chilling words in the Bible are when the Jewishleaders

shouted to Pilate concerning Jesus, “His blood shall be on us and on our
children!” (Matt. 27:25). What a horrible judgment to calldown on yourself!
Think of the history of the Jews forthe past 1,900 years, culminating in the
Holocaust!As we know from Romans 11 (and from Zechariah), the Lord has
not permanently rejectedIsrael. He will yet redeemthem and use them in His
sovereignpurpose. But there is nothing worse than rejecting the Lord Jesus
Christ to the point that He finally consigns you to eternal judgment!
But we need to consider briefly what it means to rejectChrist and the
opposite, what it means to acceptHim. If religious people like the Jews, who
professedto believe the Scriptures, could reject their Good Shepherd, we must
take care so as not to make the same mistake!
2. TO REJECT CHRIST MEANS NOT TO VALUE HIM PROPERLY.
The real meaning of whether or not you truly acceptorreject Christ is tied up
in your response to His request (11:12), “Give me my wages.” The wagesthat
the Lord desiredfrom Israelwere their love, devotion, and obedience. But
instead they valued Him at the price of a worthless slave.
It’s a question that eachof us needs to considercarefully: At what price do I
value the Lord? If we value the Lord, it will be reflectedin the waywe live. Do
we value the pleasures of sin above the pleasure of knowing Christ? Do we
give Him a couple of hours on Sunday now and then, but live the rest of the
week for ourselves? Do we drop a few bucks in the offering plate when our
guilt level rises, while we squander the rest on our toys? Or, do we submit all
that we are and have to His lordship? Our time is not ours, but His. Our
money is not ours, but His. Our lives are not ours, but His.
3. THE ALTERNATIVE TO REJECTINGCHRIST IS TO VALUE HIM
PROPERLY.

In Matthew 13:44-46, Jesus said,
The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man
found and hid again;and from joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and
buys that field. Again, the kingdom of heavenis like a merchant seeking fine
pearls, and upon finding one pearl of greatvalue, he went and sold all that he
had and bought it.
Do those examples describe how you value Jesus? With Paul, can you say, “I
count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ
Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them
but rubbish so that I may gainChrist” (Phil. 3:8)?
To realize and apprehend all that Jesus is worth is a lifelong quest. As Paul
went on to say, he had not yet arrived, but he pressedon toward the goal
(Phil. 3:13, 14). But ask yourself, “Is Jesus more precious to me now than He
was a year ago, orfive years ago?” Is there progress in my life in valuing
Jesus above everything and everyone else?
The starting point is to value His death on the cross for you as the supreme
gift. To acceptthat gift, you trash your goodworks, your love of sin, and your
love of self. You say, “Lord, I should be the one to die, because I have sinned
and am guilty in Your sight. But I trust in Your death on my behalf as the just
penalty for my sins. I submit myself to You as my Good Shepherd.”
Conclusion
Jesus told the story (Luke 14:16-24)of a man giving a dinner, who sent out
invitations. But those he invited made up excuses forwhy they could not
attend. “I have bought a piece of land and need to go out and look at it.” “I

have bought some oxen and need to try them out.” “I have married a wife and
need to spend time with her.” Those excuses are not sinful activities in and of
themselves. There is nothing wrong with purchasing land or oxen, or with
getting married. What’s wrong is when we value those activities more than we
value dinner with Jesus!
Even so, those who know the gospelinvitation need to be warned about the
tragedy of rejecting the invitation. Those who are familiar with the things of
God can rejectChrist because they value other legitimate things more than
they value the GoodShepherd.
Lucy and Linus were talking. Linus said, “I’ve been thinking. Charlie Brown
has really been a dedicatedbaseballmanager. He’s devoted his whole life to
the team. We should give him a testimonial dinner.”
Lucy replies, “Is he that deserving? How about a testimonial snack?”
Make sure that you don’t just give Jesus a testimonial snack!
DiscussionQuestions
Does a love for this world indicate that a person is not savedor not sanctified?
See 1 John 2:15-17.
How would you answera young person who says, “I want to enjoy life before I
yield to Jesus Christ; I’ll do that later”?
To what extent should Christians be concernedabout the environment?
Where’s the biblical balance?

How can we grow to value Jesus properly? What are some common
hindrances in this process?
Copyright, Steven J. Cole, 2003,All Rights Reserved.
THOMAS CONSTABLE
Verse 13
The Lord instructed Zechariahto throw the30 shekels ofsilver to the potter
since it was, ironically, such a handsome price. His service had been worth far
more than that. So Zechariah threw the30 shekels ofsilver to the potter in the
temple. Evidently the setting of Zechariah"s visionary allegorywas the temple
courtyard. Throwing something to the potter was evidently a proverbial way
of expressing disdain for it since potters were typically poor and lowly
craftsmen. [Note: Unger, p200;Leupold, p217.]
"The fulfillment of this prophecy in Matthew 27:3-10 is proof enough that the
money was flung down in the temple and immediately takenup by the priests
to purchase a field of a potter for a burying ground for the poor." [Note:
Unger, p200. ]
Matthew attributed this prophecy to Jeremiah ( Matthew 27:9-10). Probably
Matthew was referring to Jeremiah 32:6-9, which he condensedusing mainly
the phraseologyofZechariah 11:12-13 becauseofits similarity to Judas"
situation. Joining (conflating) two quotations from two Old Testamentbooks
and assigning them to one prophet follows the custom of mentioning only the
more notable prophet. Compare Mark 1:2-3, in which Isaiah40:3 and
Malachi3:1 are quoted but are assignedto Isaiah. [Note:For further

discussion, see Hobart E. Freeman, An Introduction to the Old Testament
Prophets, pp340-42.]
"Like the earlierprophecy of the King (ix9), the prophecy of the Shepherd is
remarkable for its literal fulfillment. The "thirty pieces of silver" were
literally the "goodlyprice" paid for Him, "whom they of the children of Israel
did value." "The potter" was literally the recipient of it, as the purchase
money of his exhausted field for an unclean purpose (Matt. xxvii5-10)." [Note:
Perowne, p127.]
RON DANIEL
11:10-14 FavorAnd Union Cut In Pieces
Now we see the purpose of the staffs having names: Zechariah cut them in
pieces to demonstrate that the Good Shepherd would break apart the
conditional covenants and the brotherhood of Israel's union.
Thirty Shekels OfSilver
After being rejectedby the flock, the GoodShepherd was still to be paid. But
the wagesmeasuredout were an offense:thirty pieces ofsilver was the
ransom price for a slave who was wrongfully killed. The Law of Moses stated,
Exod. 21:32 If the ox gores a male or female slave, the ownershall give his {or
her} master thirty shekels ofsilver...

Jesus was betrayed for the price of a slave

Jesus was betrayed for the price of a slave

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was betrayed for the price of a slave

Similar to Jesus was betrayed for the price of a slave (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was betrayed for the price of a slave