In this oracle, we have seen the conquests of Alexander, the great contrast with the humility of Christ, and the success of the Maccabean revolt against the Seleucid dynasty. We come now to the next stage of redemptive history — the apostasy of the Jews and God’s judgment against them in the time of the Messiah.
In a short lyric poem, the desolation to come is pictured as a storm coming from the north. The cedars are mighty trees, and together with other great trees, they stand here as a picture of the rulers of the land, who are going to be blown to nothing. The glory is departed, and the shepherds wail. The pride of the Jordan is lost (vv. 1-3).
The prophet speaks as a shepherd, standing in the place of God. God had been scrupulous in His care for Israel, but they showed nothing but contempt for Him. And so He continues to feed them, but now it is for slaughter. Just as a cattleman does not feel sorry for the future hamburger under his care, so the Lord would have no compassion on His flock (vv. 4-5).
There would first be the judgment of infighting. When the Old Testament closes, the Persians were in control of Palestine. When the New Testament opens, the Romans are in power. How did that come about? It was prophesied here — God gave them over to internal dissension. After the Maccabean revolt against the Greeks, the victorious Jews began fighting among themselves. One faction called the Romans in to help (v. 6). Not a good idea.
The Lord had two shepherd’s crooks, both of which He breaks later in this passage as a sign of His rejection of the flock. One staff is Beauty (or order). The other is Bonds (or union). He had pastored the flock, but the flock detested Him, and He loathed them (v. 8). Finally, the Lord says, “Let them be.” The wrath of God should be understood as God giving man over to his own devices. The wrath of God is the point where God decides to let man run headlong.
Over forty suggestions by commentators have been made over the identity of the three fired shepherds, and so dogmatism is probably out of place here. The most reasonable suggestion is that the Lord Jesus assumed the role of prophet, priest, and king in His own person, and dismissed those unfaithful men who held these three positions.
We then come to the famous “thirty pieces of silver.” The Lord first removed their order, their beauty (vv. 10-11). When the Lord is not the shepherd of a people, their order, their constitution, becomes imbecilic. Without the ordered blessing of God, a great people will begin to walk like a drunk down the sidewalk.
“Give me my wages” — the Lord sarcastically asks for the money they owe Him for all the care He has provided. They figure it out — He was worth thirty pieces of silver, the price of a slave (v. 12).
Matthew (27:9) refers to some general prophecies by Jeremiah (18-19; 32:9), and sums up the situation by paraphrasing these words from Zechariah. The death of Christ resulted in the dissolution of Old Israel (v. 14).
The betrayal by Judas for this sum was not the fulfillment of a strict verbal prediction. It is the fulfillment of a typological prediction. The Lord shepherded Israel, they contemptuously paid him the silver, and the Lord threw it back to them for use in their Temple. Israel is the type; Judas is the antitype.
The prophet Zechariah then acts out the role of a foolish shepherd, one who plunders the flock (v. 15). How is it that Israel came to be pastored by those who do not care for the flock? It was the hand of God on them (v. 16). In seeking reformation in the Church, we flee from the hand of God to the hands of God. But as far as unbelieving Israel was concerned, the curse falls anyway — woe to the worthless shepherd! God raised him up, and then God takes him down for his proud cruelty (v. 17).