Last week, I polled my readers as to what they believe is the most difficult Bible book to understand. No one chose Ecclesiastes, but one each went for Daniel and Hebrews. Song of Solomon and Zechariah tied with five votes and Isaiah picked up six. Six others chose “other,” but left no hint as to what that might be. The far-and-away winner was Revelation, with eighteen votes.
I’m going to suggest why Revelation might have won, even though it is not the correct answer. I think that Bible readers tend to have more familiarity with Revelation than with a book like Zechariah because it is in the New Testament. They ‘ve probably read it more, and they almost certainly have heard it taught more. One of the favorite mantras of teachers is that it is just a difficult book. I think if you hear that enough, you start to believe it.
I’m not trying to suggest that Revelation is easy. It’s not. It has plenty of symbols that are challenging to understand. But I think some people make it harder than it is. After all, it starts with seven letters which, though having some cryptic statements, are generally clear to the modern reader (chs. 2-3). Then it goes to the throne room of God, and although you may not know the identity of the 24 elders, the main points are not difficult (chs. 4-5). Starting in chapter 6, it gets more difficult, but one thing is clear: you have a sequence of judgments. Some people think the seals, trumpets, and bowls are repeating the same judgment, but there’s a lot of narrative which makes the average reader think there’s a story unfolding here. Lots of bad things happen to bad people and then Jesus comes. That part about the woman called Babylon get a bit hairy, but chapters 19-22 make sense in their broad outlines without a commentary in hand. John keeps using phrases like “then I saw” and it’s clear that at the end, everything comes out very, very good.
Now this post isn’t about Revelation, but about Zechariah. I think that the prophet is more difficult to understand than the apocalypse for a few reasons. First, we tend to know its general contents less. I suspect that this is the reason why this book didn’t receive more votes—blog readers didn’t pull out their Bibles and re-read the book and they couldn’t remember a whole lot about it. Second, the book is loaded with visions. There’s no storyline in the first six chapters; it’s just one vision after another. Usually Zechariah is given an explanation, but sometimes even he doesn’t get it and he has to ask again (e.g., Zech 4:11).
Third, in the middle section of the book we get a story (chs. 7-8). Some guys come and ask the prophet whether they should continue fasting or not. God helpfully provides four messages in response. Unfortunately, he never answers the question: should we or should we not fast? And this is the easy part of the book.
The final section of the book is the portion you probably know best. It talks about a king riding on a donkey, about a man who throws his thirty pieces of silver into the temple, about Israel mourning over the one they pierced, about the shepherd being stricken so that the sheep are scattered. It also describes the Mount of Olives being divided into two when the Lord comes. You know these because all of them (except the last) are quoted in the New Testament. But what is the message of Zechariah 9-14? It’s not nearly as easy as those verses suggest.
To say it another way, the ending of the book of Zechariah is pretty clear (ch. 14), but getting there is really tough. Unlike Revelation, Zechariah does have recapitulation. He’s not telling the story in order. He’s more of a painter, sketching one scene before moving on to another. In brief, this is why I believe the book is more difficult than Revelation. Remember too that Revelation was written after the first coming was already history, whereas Zechariah has both comings woven together.
The point of this post is not to “tell you the answer” (as if I have it), but to provoke you to consider trying to figure Zechariah out one day. I believe it will be worth your investment. Jesus and the apostles clearly understood the book, as is evident from their frequent citations of it in the NT (41 citations or allusions).
Here is how I summarized the book in one paragraph:
The book of Zechariah looks forward to the fulfillment of God’s glorious promises for his city and his temple for the purpose of motivating the returning exiles to build the temple and live according to God’s covenant. The anticipation of future repentance and obedience demands present faithfulness, for only the one who longs for that day will receive it. In the eight visions, Zechariah receives encouraging messages for those building the temple (chs. 1-6). They were to be stimulated by the certainty that the Lord would defeat the nations, restore Jerusalem, and return to live in his temple. These visions also point to a unique individual who would be not only the Davidic Branch but who would also have priestly authority. At this point, a series of messages tightly connects the future hope to the present imperative, as the prophet challenges the people to live appropriately given the promised glory (chs. 7-8). The following oracles develop the revelations of the eight visions, with glimpses of a rejected shepherd, a pierced associate of the Lord, and a shepherd struck by God (chs. 9-14). The nation repents of its sin and is purified. Then the Lord comes to defeat the nations and establish his kingdom on earth. God’s dwelling place is indeed important, for one day he will live there and all will be completely pure.
One last point: a lack of understanding of Isaiah, Daniel, and Zechariah (and some other OT prophets) will certainly hinder a correct interpretation of Revelation. Try picking up Tolkein’s Return of the King and reading the last chapter if you’ve never read the triology. There’s a reason that it won’t make sense.
