- Home
- Bible
- Zechariah
- Chapter 11
- Verse 11
Zechariah 11:12
Verse
Context
Sermons
Rolfe Barnard
Don McClure
Bill Gallatin
Chuck Smith
John Wesley
Walter BeuttlerSummary
Commentary
- Adam Clarke
- Keil-Delitzsch
- Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
- John Gill
- Tyndale
Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
If ye think good, give me my price - "Give me my hire." And we find they rated it contemptuously; thirty pieces of silver being the price of a slave, Exo 21:32.
Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary
With the breaking of the staff Favour, the shepherd of the Lord has indeed withdrawn one side of his pastoral care from the flock that he had to feed, but his connection with it is not yet entirely dissolved. This takes place first of all in Zac 11:12-14, when the flock rewards him for his service with base ingratitude. Zac 11:12. "And I said to them, If it seem good to you, give me my wages; but if not, let it alone: and they weighed me as wages thirty silverlings. Zac 11:13. Then Jehovah said to me, Throw it to the potter, the splendid price at which I am valued by them; and so I took the thirty silverlings, and threw it into the house of Jehovah to the potter. Zac 11:14. And I broke my second staff Bands, to destroy the brotherhood between Judah and Israel." אליהם (to them), so far as the grammatical construction is concerned, might be addressed to the wretched among the sheep, inasmuch as they were mentioned last. But when we bear in mind that the shepherd began to feed not only the wretched of the sheep, but the whole flock, and that he did not give up any one portion of the flock by breaking the staff Favour, we are forced to the conclusion that the words are addressed to the whole flock, and that the demand for wages is only intended to give the flock an opportunity for explaining whether it is willing to acknowledge his feeding, and appreciate it rightly. The fact that the prophet asks for wages from the sheep may be explained very simply from the fact that the sheep represent men. The demand for wages is not to be understood as implying that the shepherd intended to lay down his office as soon as he had been paid for his service; for in that case he would have asked for the wages before breaking the first staff. But as he does not ask for it till afterwards, and leaves it to the sheep to say whether they are willing to give it or not ("if it seem good to you"), this demand cannot have any other object than to call upon the sheep to declare whether they acknowledge his service, and desire it to be continued. By the wages the commentators have very properly understood repentance and faith, or piety of heart, humble obedience, and heartfelt, grateful love. These are the only wages with which man can discharge his debt to God. They weighed him now as wages thirty shekels of silver (on the omission of sheqel or keseph, see Ges. 120, 4, Anm. 2). "Thirty," - not to reward him for the one month, or for thirty days - that is to say, to give him a shekel a day for his service (Hofm., Klief.): for, in the first place, it is not stated in Zac 11:8 that he did not feed them longer than a month; and secondly, a shekel was not such very small wages for a day's work, as the wages actually paid are represented as being in Zac 11:13. They rather pay him thirty shekels, with an allusion to the fact that this sum was the compensation for a slave that had been killed (Exo 21:32), so that it was the price at which a bond-slave could be purchased (see at Hos 3:2). By paying thirty shekels, they therefore give him to understand that they did not estimate his service higher than the labour of a purchased slave. To offer such wages was in fact "more offensive than a direct refusal" (Hengstenberg). Jehovah therefore describes the wages ironically as "a splendid value that has been set upon me." As the prophet fed the flock in the name of Jehovah, Jehovah regards the wages paid to His shepherd as paid to Himself, as the value set upon His personal work on behalf of the nation, and commands the prophet to throw this miserable sum to the potter. But the verb hishlı̄kh (throw) and the contemptuous expression used in relation to the sum paid down, prove unmistakeably that the words "throw to the potter" denote the actual casting away of the money. And this alone is sufficient to show that the view founded upon the last clause of the verse, "I threw it into the house of Jehovah to the potter," viz., that hayyōtsēr signifies the temple treasury, and that yōtsēr is a secondary form or a copyist's error for אוצר, is simply a mistaken attempt to solve the real difficulty. God could not possibly say to the prophet, They wages paid for my service are indeed a miserable amount, yet put it in the temple treasury, for it is at any rate better than nothing. The phrase "throw to the potter" (for the use of hishlı̄kh with 'el pers. compare Kg1 19:19) is apparently a proverbial expression for contemptuous treatment (= to the knacker), although we have no means of tracing the origin of the phrase satisfactorily. Hengstenberg's assumption, that "to the potter" is the same as to an unclean place, is founded upon the assumption that the potter who worked for the temple had his workshop in the valley of Ben-hinnom, which, having been formerly the scene of the abominable worship of Moloch, was regarded with abhorrence as an unclean place after its defilement by Josiah (Kg2 23:10), and served as the slaughter-house for the city. But it by no means follows from Jer 18:2 and Jer 19:2, that this potter dwelt in the valley of Ben-hinnom; whereas Jer 19:1, Jer 19:2 lead rather to the opposite conclusion. If, for example, God there says to Jeremiah, "Go and buy a pitcher of the potter (Jer 19:1), and go out into the valley of Ben-hinnom, which lies in front of the potter's gate" (Jer 19:2), it follows pretty clearly from these words that the pottery itself stood within the city gate. But even if the potter had had his workshop in the valley of Ben-hinnom, which was regarded as unclean, he would not have become unclean himself in consequence, so that men could say "to the potter," just as we should say "zum Schinder" (to the knacker); and if he had been looked upon as unclean in this way, he could not possibly have worked for the temple, or supplied the cooking utensils for use in the service of God - namely, for boiling the holy sacrificial flesh. The attempts at an explanation made by Grotius and Hofmann are equally unsatisfactory. The former supposes that throwing anything before the potter was equivalent to throwing it upon the heap of potsherds; the latter, that it was equivalent to throwing it into the dirt. But the potter had not to do with potsherds only, and potter's clay is not street mire. The explanation given by Koehler is more satisfactory; namely, that the meaning is, "The amount is just large enough to pay a potter for the pitchers and pots that have been received from him, and which are thought of so little value, that men easily comfort themselves when one or the other is broken." But this does not do justice to hishlı̄kh involves the idea of contempt, and earthen pots were things of insignificant worth. The execution of the command, "I threw it ('ōthō, the wages paid me) into the house of Jehovah to the potter," cannot be understood as signifying "into the house of Jehovah, that it might be taken thence to the potter" (Hengstenberg). If this were the meaning, it should have been expressed more clearly. As the words read, they can only be understood as signifying that the potter was in the house of Jehovah when the money was thrown to him; that he had either some work to do there, or that he had come there to bring some earthenware for the temple kitchens (cf. Zac 14:20). This circumstance is not doubt a significant one; but the meaning is not merely to show that it was as the servant of the Lord, or in the name and by the command of Jehovah, that the prophet did this, instead of keeping the money (Koehler); for Zechariah could have expressed this in two or three words in a much simpler and clearer manner. The house of Jehovah came into consideration here rather as the place where the people appeared in the presence of their God, either to receive or to solicit the blessings of the covenant from Him. What took place in the temple, was done before the face of God, that God might call His people to account for it.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
I said--The prophet here represents the person of Jehovah-Messiah. If ye think good--literally, "If it be good in your eyes." Glancing at their self-sufficient pride in not deigning to give Him that return which His great love in coming down to them from heaven merited, namely, their love and obedience. "My price"; my reward for pastoral care, both during the whole of Israel's history from the Exodus, and especially the three and a half years of Messiah's ministry. He speaks as their "servant," which He was to them in order to fulfil the Father's will (Phi 2:7). if not, forbear--They withheld that which He sought as His only reward, their love; yet He will not force them, but leave His cause with God (Isa 49:4-5). Compare the type Jacob cheated of his wages by Laban, but leaving his cause in the hands of God (Gen 31:41-42). So . . . thirty pieces of silver--thirty shekels. They not only refused Him His due, but added insult to injury by giving for Him the price of a gored bond-servant (Exo 21:32; Mat 26:15). A freeman was rated at twice that sum.
John Gill Bible Commentary
And I said unto them, If ye think good,.... Not to the poor of the flock that waited on him, and knew the word of the Lord, and valued it; but to the other Jews that despised Christ and his Gospel: give me my price; or, "give my price" (i); what I am valued at by you, to Judas the betrayer: or the price due unto him for feeding the flock, such as faith in him, love to him, reverence and worship of him. So the Targum paraphrases it, "do my will". Kimchi says the price is repentance, and good works: and if not, forbear; unless all is done freely, willingly, and cheerfully; see Eze 2:5 or, if worth nothing, give nothing: So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver; the price a servant was valued at, Exo 21:32 see the fulfilment of this prophecy in Mat 26:15. The Jews own (k) that this prophecy belongs to the Messiah; but wrongly interpret it of thirty precepts given by him: in just retaliation and righteous judgment, thirty Jews were sold by the Romans for a penny, by way of contempt of them (l). (i) "date mercedem meam", Vatablus, Calvin, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Cocceius. (k) Bereshit Rabba, sect. 98. fol. 85. 3. (l) Egesippus de Urb. excidio Anacep. p. 680.
Tyndale Open Study Notes
11:12 Thirty pieces of silver was the price of a slave (see Exod 21:32). In the allegory, the silver was severance pay for the shepherd (Zech 11:9). The Gospel writers find the fulfillment of this passage in the betrayal of Jesus for thirty silver coins by Judas (see Matt 26:15; 27:9-10).
Zechariah 11:12
Thirty Pieces of Silver
11It was revoked on that day, and so the afflicted of the flock who were watching me knew that it was the word of the LORD.12Then I told them, “If it seems right to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.” So they weighed out my wages, thirty pieces of silver.
- Scripture
- Sermons
- Commentary
A Great Revival Is Coming
By Rolfe Barnard3.0K49:51JER 31:18ZEC 11:12MAT 7:21MAT 16:18JHN 3:3ROM 11:25EPH 2:8In this sermon, the preacher emphasizes the need for revival in the church. He mentions that two things are necessary for revival to occur, which are closely knit bonds of love among believers and the constant proclamation of Jesus as the crucified and exalted Lord. The preacher criticizes the current portrayal of Jesus in churches, stating that the Jesus preached today lacks power and cannot save. He highlights the importance of revival and mentions that it is a work of God that cannot be controlled or explained. The preacher encourages believers to have faith in a big God and to strive for unity in the body of Christ in order to experience the power of the gospel.
Grace & Peace
By Don McClure1.8K49:35PSA 34:20PSA 110:1ISA 52:13ZEC 11:12MAT 26:14MAT 26:59JHN 19:33ACT 1:9ROM 1:1In this sermon, the preacher discusses the events leading up to Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection. He highlights how Jesus was betrayed by a close friend for 30 pieces of silver, accused by false witnesses, and mocked and struck. Despite the suffering, Jesus' sacrifice was for the sins of the world. The preacher then reads from Romans 1:1-7, emphasizing that the gospel of Jesus Christ is not something new, but rather a fulfillment of what was promised by the prophets in the Holy Scriptures.
Acts 1
By Bill Gallatin1.4K1:12:46ExpositionalPSA 69:25PSA 119:11ZEC 11:12ACT 1:3ACT 1:15In this sermon, the preacher emphasizes the unshakable security that believers have in Jesus Christ. He highlights that nothing can hinder God's plan of redemption and the establishment of His kingdom. The preacher also discusses the responsibility given to believers to use their talents and resources for God's glory and to be diligent in their work until Christ's return. He contrasts the concept of spiritual beggars in other religions with the call for believers to be active and productive in God's kingdom.
Zechariah 11:12
By Chuck Smith0Value of Relationship with GodBetrayalZEC 11:12MAT 26:14Chuck Smith explores the profound implications of Zechariah 11:12, emphasizing that the crucifixion of Jesus was a divine plan foretold centuries in advance. He highlights Judas's betrayal for thirty pieces of silver, illustrating the stark contrast between how man values God and how God values humanity. Smith challenges listeners to reflect on their own lives and the 'price' they may have accepted in exchange for their relationship with Jesus, urging them to recognize the immense worth God places on each individual. The sermon serves as a reminder of the love God has for humanity and the tragic folly of undervaluing that relationship.
John Wesley's Explanatory Notes - Matthew 27
By John Wesley0Fulfillment of ProphecyThe CrucifixionPSA 22:1ZEC 11:12MAT 27:1John Wesley expounds on Matthew 27, detailing the events leading to the crucifixion of Jesus, including the betrayal by Judas, the unjust condemnation by the Sanhedrin, and the role of Pilate in the trial. He emphasizes the fulfillment of prophecy and the significance of Jesus' suffering, highlighting the darkness that fell during His crucifixion as a divine testimony against the wickedness of the act. Wesley also notes the tearing of the temple veil at Jesus' death, symbolizing the new access to God for all believers, and concludes with the centurion's declaration of Jesus as the Son of God, affirming His divine identity amidst the tragedy.
Commentary Notes - Zechariah
By Walter Beuttler0ZEC 4:6ZEC 8:3ZEC 9:9ZEC 11:12ZEC 12:10Walter Beuttler preaches on the Book of Zechariah, highlighting the prophet's role in encouraging the Jews to rebuild the temple amidst opposition, with a promise of a bright future. Zechariah's prophecies extend to the rejection of Christ, apocalyptic judgments, and the final conversion of Jews and Gentiles, emphasizing God's power and restoration. The key themes of 'jealous' and 'jealousy' run through the book, pointing to God's zeal for His people and His plan for their redemption.
- Adam Clarke
- Keil-Delitzsch
- Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
- John Gill
- Tyndale
Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
If ye think good, give me my price - "Give me my hire." And we find they rated it contemptuously; thirty pieces of silver being the price of a slave, Exo 21:32.
Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary
With the breaking of the staff Favour, the shepherd of the Lord has indeed withdrawn one side of his pastoral care from the flock that he had to feed, but his connection with it is not yet entirely dissolved. This takes place first of all in Zac 11:12-14, when the flock rewards him for his service with base ingratitude. Zac 11:12. "And I said to them, If it seem good to you, give me my wages; but if not, let it alone: and they weighed me as wages thirty silverlings. Zac 11:13. Then Jehovah said to me, Throw it to the potter, the splendid price at which I am valued by them; and so I took the thirty silverlings, and threw it into the house of Jehovah to the potter. Zac 11:14. And I broke my second staff Bands, to destroy the brotherhood between Judah and Israel." אליהם (to them), so far as the grammatical construction is concerned, might be addressed to the wretched among the sheep, inasmuch as they were mentioned last. But when we bear in mind that the shepherd began to feed not only the wretched of the sheep, but the whole flock, and that he did not give up any one portion of the flock by breaking the staff Favour, we are forced to the conclusion that the words are addressed to the whole flock, and that the demand for wages is only intended to give the flock an opportunity for explaining whether it is willing to acknowledge his feeding, and appreciate it rightly. The fact that the prophet asks for wages from the sheep may be explained very simply from the fact that the sheep represent men. The demand for wages is not to be understood as implying that the shepherd intended to lay down his office as soon as he had been paid for his service; for in that case he would have asked for the wages before breaking the first staff. But as he does not ask for it till afterwards, and leaves it to the sheep to say whether they are willing to give it or not ("if it seem good to you"), this demand cannot have any other object than to call upon the sheep to declare whether they acknowledge his service, and desire it to be continued. By the wages the commentators have very properly understood repentance and faith, or piety of heart, humble obedience, and heartfelt, grateful love. These are the only wages with which man can discharge his debt to God. They weighed him now as wages thirty shekels of silver (on the omission of sheqel or keseph, see Ges. 120, 4, Anm. 2). "Thirty," - not to reward him for the one month, or for thirty days - that is to say, to give him a shekel a day for his service (Hofm., Klief.): for, in the first place, it is not stated in Zac 11:8 that he did not feed them longer than a month; and secondly, a shekel was not such very small wages for a day's work, as the wages actually paid are represented as being in Zac 11:13. They rather pay him thirty shekels, with an allusion to the fact that this sum was the compensation for a slave that had been killed (Exo 21:32), so that it was the price at which a bond-slave could be purchased (see at Hos 3:2). By paying thirty shekels, they therefore give him to understand that they did not estimate his service higher than the labour of a purchased slave. To offer such wages was in fact "more offensive than a direct refusal" (Hengstenberg). Jehovah therefore describes the wages ironically as "a splendid value that has been set upon me." As the prophet fed the flock in the name of Jehovah, Jehovah regards the wages paid to His shepherd as paid to Himself, as the value set upon His personal work on behalf of the nation, and commands the prophet to throw this miserable sum to the potter. But the verb hishlı̄kh (throw) and the contemptuous expression used in relation to the sum paid down, prove unmistakeably that the words "throw to the potter" denote the actual casting away of the money. And this alone is sufficient to show that the view founded upon the last clause of the verse, "I threw it into the house of Jehovah to the potter," viz., that hayyōtsēr signifies the temple treasury, and that yōtsēr is a secondary form or a copyist's error for אוצר, is simply a mistaken attempt to solve the real difficulty. God could not possibly say to the prophet, They wages paid for my service are indeed a miserable amount, yet put it in the temple treasury, for it is at any rate better than nothing. The phrase "throw to the potter" (for the use of hishlı̄kh with 'el pers. compare Kg1 19:19) is apparently a proverbial expression for contemptuous treatment (= to the knacker), although we have no means of tracing the origin of the phrase satisfactorily. Hengstenberg's assumption, that "to the potter" is the same as to an unclean place, is founded upon the assumption that the potter who worked for the temple had his workshop in the valley of Ben-hinnom, which, having been formerly the scene of the abominable worship of Moloch, was regarded with abhorrence as an unclean place after its defilement by Josiah (Kg2 23:10), and served as the slaughter-house for the city. But it by no means follows from Jer 18:2 and Jer 19:2, that this potter dwelt in the valley of Ben-hinnom; whereas Jer 19:1, Jer 19:2 lead rather to the opposite conclusion. If, for example, God there says to Jeremiah, "Go and buy a pitcher of the potter (Jer 19:1), and go out into the valley of Ben-hinnom, which lies in front of the potter's gate" (Jer 19:2), it follows pretty clearly from these words that the pottery itself stood within the city gate. But even if the potter had had his workshop in the valley of Ben-hinnom, which was regarded as unclean, he would not have become unclean himself in consequence, so that men could say "to the potter," just as we should say "zum Schinder" (to the knacker); and if he had been looked upon as unclean in this way, he could not possibly have worked for the temple, or supplied the cooking utensils for use in the service of God - namely, for boiling the holy sacrificial flesh. The attempts at an explanation made by Grotius and Hofmann are equally unsatisfactory. The former supposes that throwing anything before the potter was equivalent to throwing it upon the heap of potsherds; the latter, that it was equivalent to throwing it into the dirt. But the potter had not to do with potsherds only, and potter's clay is not street mire. The explanation given by Koehler is more satisfactory; namely, that the meaning is, "The amount is just large enough to pay a potter for the pitchers and pots that have been received from him, and which are thought of so little value, that men easily comfort themselves when one or the other is broken." But this does not do justice to hishlı̄kh involves the idea of contempt, and earthen pots were things of insignificant worth. The execution of the command, "I threw it ('ōthō, the wages paid me) into the house of Jehovah to the potter," cannot be understood as signifying "into the house of Jehovah, that it might be taken thence to the potter" (Hengstenberg). If this were the meaning, it should have been expressed more clearly. As the words read, they can only be understood as signifying that the potter was in the house of Jehovah when the money was thrown to him; that he had either some work to do there, or that he had come there to bring some earthenware for the temple kitchens (cf. Zac 14:20). This circumstance is not doubt a significant one; but the meaning is not merely to show that it was as the servant of the Lord, or in the name and by the command of Jehovah, that the prophet did this, instead of keeping the money (Koehler); for Zechariah could have expressed this in two or three words in a much simpler and clearer manner. The house of Jehovah came into consideration here rather as the place where the people appeared in the presence of their God, either to receive or to solicit the blessings of the covenant from Him. What took place in the temple, was done before the face of God, that God might call His people to account for it.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
I said--The prophet here represents the person of Jehovah-Messiah. If ye think good--literally, "If it be good in your eyes." Glancing at their self-sufficient pride in not deigning to give Him that return which His great love in coming down to them from heaven merited, namely, their love and obedience. "My price"; my reward for pastoral care, both during the whole of Israel's history from the Exodus, and especially the three and a half years of Messiah's ministry. He speaks as their "servant," which He was to them in order to fulfil the Father's will (Phi 2:7). if not, forbear--They withheld that which He sought as His only reward, their love; yet He will not force them, but leave His cause with God (Isa 49:4-5). Compare the type Jacob cheated of his wages by Laban, but leaving his cause in the hands of God (Gen 31:41-42). So . . . thirty pieces of silver--thirty shekels. They not only refused Him His due, but added insult to injury by giving for Him the price of a gored bond-servant (Exo 21:32; Mat 26:15). A freeman was rated at twice that sum.
John Gill Bible Commentary
And I said unto them, If ye think good,.... Not to the poor of the flock that waited on him, and knew the word of the Lord, and valued it; but to the other Jews that despised Christ and his Gospel: give me my price; or, "give my price" (i); what I am valued at by you, to Judas the betrayer: or the price due unto him for feeding the flock, such as faith in him, love to him, reverence and worship of him. So the Targum paraphrases it, "do my will". Kimchi says the price is repentance, and good works: and if not, forbear; unless all is done freely, willingly, and cheerfully; see Eze 2:5 or, if worth nothing, give nothing: So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver; the price a servant was valued at, Exo 21:32 see the fulfilment of this prophecy in Mat 26:15. The Jews own (k) that this prophecy belongs to the Messiah; but wrongly interpret it of thirty precepts given by him: in just retaliation and righteous judgment, thirty Jews were sold by the Romans for a penny, by way of contempt of them (l). (i) "date mercedem meam", Vatablus, Calvin, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Cocceius. (k) Bereshit Rabba, sect. 98. fol. 85. 3. (l) Egesippus de Urb. excidio Anacep. p. 680.
Tyndale Open Study Notes
11:12 Thirty pieces of silver was the price of a slave (see Exod 21:32). In the allegory, the silver was severance pay for the shepherd (Zech 11:9). The Gospel writers find the fulfillment of this passage in the betrayal of Jesus for thirty silver coins by Judas (see Matt 26:15; 27:9-10).