Who Is The "One Who Is Weakest Among" Jerusalem And Is "As David"?

[rakovsky]

The One Who Was the Weakest

According to Zechariah 12:8-12 (Jewish Publication Society):

8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that stumbleth among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as a godlike being, as the angel of the LORD before them.

9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born...

12And the land shall mourn, every family apart: the family of the house of David apart

Zechariah 8 is also translated as:

(King James Version) In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David [shall be] as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

(Judaica Press Tanakh) On that day the Lord shall protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the weakest of them shall be, on that day, like David. And the house of David shall be like angels, like the angel of the Lord before them.

How could one who stumbles, or is weak, be "as David"? The answer I see is that David describes himself in the Psalms as one who suffers, is persecuted, and has troubles. In Psalm 22 (Septuagint, Syriac Manuscripts, and Dead Sea Scrolls), David even describes his hands and feet as "pierced", like the pierced one in Zechariah 12.

Could the one who "stumbles" among Jerusalem's inhabitants be Jesus who stumbled among Jerusalem's crowds with a cross? Was he the "weakest of them" when he was rejected as a blasphemer and crucified? Did Christ not become the weakest when he took on the stripes of Adam, before "entering into his glory"?

Saying that the House of David will be as a Godlike being sounds like a reference to the Messiah, who is of the House of David, and 2 Samuel 11-14 says will be God's Son.

And logically speaking, wouldn't the pronoun "him", as in "they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through," naturally refer to a previous noun in the paragraph?


The Traditional Christian View?

But the general Christian interpretation I find on the internet is that the one who is weak and stumbles refers to Jerusalem's inhabitants at a future time. "That day" when God destroys nations that attack Jerusalem is supposed to be a future Apocalyptic "Day of Atonement", because Revelation 1:7 (KJV) says:

Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. concerning him. Yes and amen.

So is the traditional Christian interpretation that only in That Day, the Apocalyptic Day of Atonement, will David's House be a Godlike being, and the one who stumbles will be as David?


The Day of Atonement, the Pentecost, or Another "Day"?

But What about how the Holy Spirit poured down its spirit, "a spirit of grace and supplication" (Zechariah 12:10), on Jerusalem at the Pentecost?

Following Zechariah 12, Zechariah 13(JPS) continues:

2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that... I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
3 And it shall come to pass that, when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begot him shall say unto him: 'Thou shalt not live, for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD'; and his father and his mother that begot him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.  
4 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the prophets shall be brought to shame every one through his vision, when he prophesieth; neither shall they wear a hairy mantle to deceive;
5 but he shall say: 'I am no prophet, I am a tiller of the ground; for I have been made a bondman from my youth.'
6 And one shall say unto him: 'What are these wounds between thy hands?' Then he shall answer: 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.'

7 Awake, O sword, against My shepherd, and against the man that is near unto Me, saith the LORD of hosts; smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered; and I will turn My hand upon the little ones.

Maybe "That Day" is the Day of Atonement after all:

It is strange to read about prophets who are thrust through by their parents, who say to them that they lied. And it's strange to read about prophets who are ashamed, won't deceive, and say their friends wounded their hands. This suggests to me false prophets who had their hands wounded to deceive people that they fulfilled Psalm 22 ("they have pierced my hands and my feet.")

This doesn't sound like Christ's time, does it? I am not aware of Christ supposedly admitting that his hand wounds were fakes made by his friends.

It sounds more like a future time about people admitting their Stigmata were fakes, doesn't it?

And when did God defend Jerusalem against invading armies?

But Maybe "That Day" Is the First Thousand Years of Christianity:

Zechariah 13:1 says:

"In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for purification and for sprinkling."

Was there not such a fount available to them when the disciples baptized, when Christ preached, and when the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost?

2 Peter 3:8(KJV) says:

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

And Psalm 90:4 (JPS) says:

For a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night

It's true that in the first thousand years of Christianity the inhabitants of Jerusalem did become Christian and mourn for Christ as for a first-born.

On the other hand, while the descendants of the Old Testament prophets were sorry that they had killed Christ, I don't think they mourned after him like a first born. But maybe if you pick apart Zechariah 12:12, you can say that it doesn't explicitly say whether the mourning houses of the prophets were mourning for Him as for a first-born, or if those who mourn for Him as for a first-born were just Jerusalem's inhabitants.

Perhaps Jesus Christ spoke of "That Day" in Matthew 26:31-31 (KJV) as a day in which He woud be crucified:

31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.

32 But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.

Jesus here spoke of Zechariah 13:7 ("smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered"). Ezekial 34:23-24 describes the Messiah son of David as a shephard.

But maybe Zechariah 13:7-9 is a separate paragraph from the rest of Zechariah and doesn't mean that the Shephard happens on that Day?


Was "That Day" in Zechariah 12-13 the Day of Atonement, the Pentecost, the first thousand years of Christianity, or another day?

Thanks!

[deusveritasest]

Shouldn't the context of the rest of the Zechariah 12 after that point show that it is actually Jesus who is being referred to?

[Azul]

"The weakest to be like David" refers to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that the inhabitants of Jerusalem will have.. That could be refered to the special jews before the coming of Christ, and even to the most holy of the Heavenly Jerusalem.

[rakovsky]

Shouldn't the context of the rest of the Zechariah 12 after that point show that it is actually Jesus who is being referred to?

DeusVeritas,

Thank you very much for your reply. I did not realize it when I read it a couple times and wrote on my blog(rakovskii.livejournal.com) about it, but now it seems that it refers to the Davidic Messiah who is pierced later in the passage.

Since I think that Jesus was the Davidic Messiah, it seems that you are right that "the context of the rest of the Zechariah 12 after that point show that it is actually Jesus who is being referred to".

After mentioning The "One Who Is Weakest Among" Jerusalem And Is "As David", the passage later says: "they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through; and they shall mourn for him". "They" refers to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Grammatically speaking, what is the noun that the pronoun "him" refers to?

Grammatically speaking, the most previously-mentioned person to whom "he" could refer is David. But David wasn't pierced. So it seems to refer to the one who stumbles and is "as David."


One big problem I have with considering the One who is Weakest Among Them and/or Who Stumbles to be the Messiah as that here it describes the person as weak and/or stumbling, but it seems that the moment when Jerusalem and the Houses of Israel would lament for Him would be after His resurrection. So I am confused.

The passage seems to describe a future day when He who is weak/stumbles is as David and was pierced will be lamented about by Israel's Houses. There seem to be two possibilities:

(1) In the future era when the Messiah would make His second coming after being killed by piercing, he would be called one who is weak / who stumbles. That does not sound like a triumphant kingly Messiah, I think. It's possible, of course, since Jesus was able to show His wounds to Thomas, that Jesus could appear as one who is weak and/or stumbles, but it just seems to contradict our traditional image of Him at His second coming

(2) The passage doesn't describe an apocalyptic second coming, but simply describes His crucifixion and the time of it. The Houses of David are mourning, but it must mean that they are mourning in heaven, or that Jesus' followers were the Houses in a poetic way, because at the time of His crucifixion, the commonly-recognized-by-the-masses' Houses of Israel didn't recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

So the passage seems to refer to the Davidic Messiah as one who is weak/ who stumbles in the Messianic Age, but I am confused about how this is.

Happy Nativity

Azul,

Thanks for replying. Your words make sense when you write: ""The weakest to be like David" refers to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that the inhabitants of Jerusalem will have.. That could be refered to the special jews before the coming of Christ, and even to the most holy of the Heavenly Jerusalem.".

In fact, this was my own viewpoint. It makes sense to understand "the weakest" as a collective group, and say that the passage speaks of their state, being like David, when they have the Holy Spirit. And the Holy Spirit applies to the passage because it mentions a Spirit of Grace and Supplication that God would pour on Jerusalem's inhabitants.

One problem with this view is that it doesn't say that the weakest would be like "Davids", which would mean a plural, but rather that they will be as "David,", which is singular. This also suggests that the verse is talking about a single person.

Also, I am not sure why it would specifically refer to "special Jews", since I am not sure why they would be described as weak and/or stumbling.

I am no longer sure about this previous viewpoint of mine, that the weakest simply refers to unspecified inhabitant(s), since DeusVeritas has made a good suggestion, that the context from later in the passage, which says that "he" was pierced, appears to refer to the weakest one, based on grammar principles of referring to the previous male single noun that could fit.

Second, your proposal runs up against the same problem that DeusVeritas does, when you write that the "weakest", which can also mean "he who stumbles", can refer "even to the most holy of the Heavenly Jerusalem." The problem is that it is confusing to think that the weakest/he who stumbles would refer to the most holy. I am aware that Jesus was weak at His crucifixion, but the problem is that it seems confusing to think about the most holy one in the Heavenly Jerusalem to still be weak and/or one who stumbles.

Happy Nativity.

[rakovsky]

Would anyone happen to know whether in Hebrew Zechariah 12:10 says "they have pierced", or "who has been pierced?"

Zechariah 12:10(Judaica Press Tanakh) says Jerusalem "shall look to me because of those who have been thrust through".

However, the old 1917 Jewish Publication Society translation suggests that Jerusalem's inhabitants "shall look unto Me because they[Jerusalem] have thrust him through".

It's possible "they" refers to "the nations" thrusting him through. However, the rest of the passage uses "they to refer to Jerusalem's inhabitants:

9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.  
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.

So if it says "they have pierced", it sounds like Jerusalem pierced the person, but if it says "who has been pierced", then it's unclear.

Is the person or persons pierced in Zechariah 12:10 one of those pierced by his parents in Zechariah 13:1-3?

Zechariah 12, descibes important families mourning for the pierced one(s) like one mourns for an only son.
Doesn't this match Zechariah 13:1-3's words about parents piercing their child(ren) who prophesy?

When Zechariah 12 says each family mourns "apart" or "by themselves", does it suggest that each family had lost their own child? Why would they be mourning each by themselves if it was for a collective loss, like mourning for the Messiah?

Finally, Zechariah 13:3 says that the person's mother and father pierced him. But Jesus' mother and father didn't pierce him.


I see two differences between the pierced ones in Zechariah 12 and 13.
(1) Zechariah 13 introduces the piercing of the prophets AFTER Zechariah 12 already describes the mourning.
(2) Zechariah 12:10 says that they mourned LIKE one mourns for an only son, not that they were actually mourning for their own children.

Someone could claim a 3rd difference, that Zechariah 13 describes false prophets. However, Zechariah 13:3 says that any who prophesy will be pierced, not just false prophets.

[rakovsky]

Efrem the Syrian proposes that the "one who is weakest" refers either to the Church or to Jesus' idea that the one who is least is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.

In the first case, Efrem the Syrian means that the Church is like those who are weakest in the heavenly Jerusalem.

(12:8) И будет в день онь, защитит Господь живущих в Иерусалиме, и будут немощный в них яко Давид.

В смысле таинственном немощный означает у Пророка Церковь, сей духовный Иерусалим, или означает того, кто есть мний в обществе верующих, и о ком Господь наш говорит, что он болий есть Иоанна Крестителя (Мф.11:11); здесь же приточно называется Давидом.
See: http://karatuz.prihod.ru/tolkovanie_biblii/view/id/31709

By the way, the Hebrew term here is better translated as "one who stumbles" rather than simply "is weak", considering the word's usage in other contexts:
http://concordances.org/hebrew/strongs_3782.htm

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Faith Issues (Moderator: Michał Kalina) > Topic: Who Is The "One Who Is Weakest Among" Jerusalem And Is "As David"?