Follow Bible Fiber wherever you listen to your podcasts or subscribe to your Youtube channel

Zechariah 3 contains the prophet’s fourth vision of eight. The end of Zechariah’s third vision segues into the opening scene of his fourth. The prophet was calling for silence from “all flesh” out of reverence for Yahweh, who “roused himself from his holy dwelling” (2:13). Then the prophet awoke to find that God had transported him to a heavenly throne room (3:1). Among those in the divine council, Zechariah identified three characters: Joshua the High Priest, the Angel of the Lord, and the accuser.

Fourth vision

Joshua is the first historical character introduced in Zechariah’s visions. Other biblical books include Joshua among the first wave of returnees from Babylon in 538 BCE (Hag. 1:1, Ezra 2:2, Neh. 12:1). Zechariah and Joshua were both leaders in the postexilic community and knew each other personally. In this vision, Joshua was standing before the Angel of the Lord (3:1). When the Bible uses the Hebrew verb for “standing before,” it often has a tribunal connotation, with the person “standing before” usually being judged. This verb is the reason most commentaries analyze Zechariah’s fourth vision as if it were a tribunal.

Joshua was a descendant of Levi and therefore a legitimate candidate for High Priest. The survival of the Zadokite priesthood was miraculous, considering the community’s history. In the Hebrew religion the priests intervened with Yahweh on behalf of the community (Ex. 29:44-46). Restoration of the priesthood had to precede the revival of sacrificial worship. Yet, God had selected Joshua as High Priest before he even had a temple to service.

The accuser in Zechariah’s vision is unnamed. Some Bible commentaries equate the accuser with Satan, the supernatural enemy of God. Others conjecture that the accuser must have been a human historical figure, an opponent of Joshua. Satan as a named figure is, at this point in the Hebrew scriptures, undeveloped. The aspects of Satan’s character familiar to us today came much later in Jewish and Christian tradition.

Except for Genesis, Job, and Zechariah, there are few references to Satan in the rest of the Hebrew scriptures. In Job, the accuser was presenting himself before the Lord with other heavenly beings. God was asking the accuser where he came from, to which he answered, “from going to and fro on the earth and from walking up and down on it” (Job 1:8).

In both Job and Zechariah, the Hebrew word satan has a definite article: ha satan. Translators see hasatan more as a title than a name, so they translate it “the accuser.” The definite article is frequently omitted when referring to satan in the Psalms and elsewhere in the Bible. Those instances of the word always refer to humans and are translated as accuser, opponent, or adversary.

There are enough parallels between Job’s accuser and Joshua’s accuser to wonder if they are the same. In Job, Satan was arguing with God about the righteousness of his servant Job. In Zechariah’s vision, Satan was silent, but the reader presumes Satan was claiming that Joshua was unfit for the priesthood. Both Job and Zechariah have the accuser freely entering the abode of heaven to file his complaints. Apart from Job and Zechariah, the only other time the Old Testament uses the term accuser with the definite article (“the accuser”) is when David allowed Satan to incite his pride and conduct an unwarranted census (1 Chron. 21:1).

In Zechariah’s vision, the angel in the divine council represents Yahweh as a judge. The angel in the fourth vision is the same Angel of the Lord that had mounted the red horse in the first vision and that had spoken to Zechariah in the third vision. The angel spoke on behalf of Yahweh as judge, but occasionally, Yahweh would interrupt to speak directly to Joshua or to the accuser. In the first scene, Yahweh had rebuked the accuser for bearing false witness. He said, “The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this man a brand plucked from the fire?” (3:1).

The prophet Amos also had used the idiom “brand plucked from the fire” when he described the coming judgment (Amos 4:11). In Amos, the fire was Yahweh’s tool of discipline. Zechariah likened the exile to fire, a punishment that had scorched but did not consume the remnant. The way God phrased this question demonstrates his unwillingness to discipline the people any further. If he had wanted to, God could have let them disappear into permanent exile. However, he had preserved them while in exile and then moved the heart of Cyrus to allow them to return to Jerusalem. God’s intervention on behalf of the exiles proved to the accuser that he would be lenient on Joshua too.

Joshua stood before the angel “wearing filthy clothes” (3:3). The Hebrew word translated “filthy” only occurs this one time in Zechariah and nowhere else in the Bible. However, there are similar Hebrew words (with the same consonantal roots) in the Bible, and those synonyms for filthy almost always pertain to bodily fluids: excrement, vomit, and urine (Deut. 23:13, Ezek. 4:12, Isa. 36:12, 2 Kings 18:27). The communicative intent of the writer of Zechariah was to shock the audience by using the worst possible word for filthy.

The accuser’s case against Joshua remains unrecorded, as does Joshua’s response. Yahweh was controlling the dialogue in the entire scene. However, Joshua’s filthy clothes reinforce the accuser’s case without him needing to say a word. Judging from the defiled garments, Joshua was unfit for the priesthood.

Normally, priestly garments were impeccably clean. On the Day of Atonement, when the consecrated High Priest approached the Holy of Holies, he wore fine white linen vestments and a jeweled ephod. In the wilderness, even the least imperfection in a priest disqualified him from service in the tabernacle (Lev. 22:3). Here, Joshua stood before Yahweh in a wretched state.

However, Joshua’s appearance did not repulse the angel. Instead, he was compassionate. He commanded helping angels to remove Joshua’s filthy clothes. The angel explained to Zechariah the meaning of the scene. The removal of the defiled garments symbolized the removal of Joshua’s guilt (3:4). As a priest, Joshua was a stand-in for the entire community. His purification had broader implications for all of Judah.

Angelic assistants removed the filthy clothes from Joshua and put “fine apparel” on him to symbolize Yahweh’s forgiveness, purification, and reaffirmation of Judah (3:4). Remember, at the outset of Zechariah, the prophet had chronicled the sins of their ancestors. In response, the people had repented, separating themselves from their forefathers’ path of rebellion. That repentance allowed for the removal of filthy garments and their replacement with new clothes.

Watching the ritual robing ceremony, Zechariah was so moved that he spoke out, “Let them put a clean turban on his head!” (3:5). In previous visions, Zechariah had asked his interpreting angel for the meaning of the visions, but as a priest, the vision made sense to Zechariah, and he did not inquire about its meaning.

Instead of prompting a question, the scene induced the prophet’s unsolicited interjection. Zechariah knew the headpiece was the last part of the priestly ordination (Lev. 8:12). Even though he had used a unique Hebrew word, many scholars believe Zechariah was calling for Joshua to wear the High Priest’s golden crown inscribed with the words “Holy to Yahweh” (Ex. 39:30). Zechariah understood the implication of adding the golden crown, which was only worn on the Day of Atonement. He wanted to see Joshua’s purification completed. The Day of Atonement signified the highest order of forgiveness, transitioning the whole community from a state of impurity to purity. Zechariah hoped that God would remove Judah’s transgressions “in a single day,” just like on the Day of Atonement (3:9).

The covenant was still a two-way commitment. Yahweh reminded Joshua that he needed to be obedient. If he was, Yahweh would place Joshua in charge of the restored temple (3:7). God exhorted, “If you will walk in my ways and keep my requirements, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts” (3:7). House and courts are both synonymous with Yahweh’s temple.

Yahweh was repeating the words of Moses, exhorting the people to “walk in my ways,” which, in context, meant keeping God’s laws (Ex. 19:5). The original plan after the Exodus was for Israel to be a holy kingdom of priests (Ex. 19:6). After the golden calf affair, they lost that privilege. From then on, only the Levites could uphold the priestly holiness standard (Lev. 21). Throughout the Kingdom of Judah, the leaders balanced power dynamics between the courts, the royal household, the elite, and the priests. In the later postexilic period, since there was no royal household, the role of the High Priest became more significant. This was also the time that the community focused on rebuilding the temple, which elevated the priests to the most important leadership role.

Priest and king

Zerubbabel was in the line of King David, but the Persian empire had given its provincial leaders the title of governor. God had commissioned Joshua to the priesthood, but without a king, the position assumed additional responsibilities. Perhaps this is what God meant when he told Joshua to “take charge of my courts” and “I will give you the right of access” (3:7).

Even though Yahweh was blessing the expanded role of the priest for the moment, he also was calling out to a future reinstallation of Judah’s royal house. In the vision, God told Joshua, “I am going to bring my servant the Branch” (3:8). The Branch is a term introduced by the prophet Jeremiah when he was describing the rise of the ideal Davidic ruler (Jer. 23:5; 33:15). It is possible that Zechariah hoped Zerubbabel was the one who would restore the royal line.

In summary, the fourth vision of the priestly dressing ritual was about the sanctification of the priesthood and the broader community. Going back to God’s opening rebuke of the accuser, notice the careful selection of Yahweh’s words: “The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you!” (3:2). Yahweh was not countering the accuser’s case against Joshua by invoking Joshua’s righteousness or justifying his position based on his right doings. Instead, Yahweh emphasized Joshua’s election. God added, “I have taken your guilt away from you” (3:4), absolving Joshua, not only of his outer impurities, but also of his spiritual state. We see that the upgrade in Joshua’s garments from filthy to fine was deeper than ritual purity. There was a full spiritual renewal happening.

One misconception Christians often have of the Jewish faith is the assumption that Judaism lacks the language for mercy and only wields the language of law. Nothing could be further from the truth. Instead, Christianity got its language, its ideas and its theology from the law, prophets, and Psalms. The Hebrew scripture celebrates God’s mercy and grace, which is why Zechariah’s vision drips with those attributes of God’s love.

The New Testament is a continuation of the theology of hope and grace. Paul wrote, “And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified” (8:30). God appointed Joshua High Priest to mediate on behalf of the remnant. Jesus is our High Priest mediating on our behalf.