Christology and the Use of Zechariah 13–14 in Mark 13

(avg. read time: 8–16 mins.)

As I have epitomized my published work previously, this time I will be epitomizing my first published article. If you would like more information and more engagement with scholarship on these issues, see:

K. R. Harriman, “The King Arrives, but for What Purpose? The Christological Use of Zechariah 13—14 in Mark 13,” JTI 10 (2016): 283–98.

New Testament Christology has obviously drawn a lot of attention, as people have argued since the earliest days of the Church what exactly is being said of Christ. Scholars have often appealed to precedents in typically post-biblical Second Temple Judaism to provide a context for what Jesus said about himself, what the Gospels said about him, and what the rest of the NT said about him. In our case, we are interested primarily in what Jesus said or otherwise implied about himself according to Mark’s Gospel, and in our particular text, we will find that Second Temple Judaism does not provide an adequate precedent. There is much of interest in Second Temple Judaism when it comes to Christology, as I have noted before and will explore again, but for Mark 13, the Christology on display here is best understood in light of a later biblical text belonging to the early Second Temple era and what it says about God. As several other scholars have done before with different texts, I argue that Jesus here identifies himself with God in the closing chapters of Zechariah by embodying the expectations of the eschatological coming of God. Indeed, one of the key foundations of New Testament Christology is the identification of Jesus with God in the sense of having divine characteristics intrinsic to God’s self-revelation that uniquely identify God, thus Jesus himself is intrinsic to the self-revelation of who God is (as opposed to being an external agent of God). In true Trinitarian fashion, Jesus is identified with the Lord God, even while a distinction is maintained between the Father and Jesus (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36; 15:34).

Mark 13 itself shows the influence of several strands of OT texts, including Isa 13–14; Jer 50–51; Ezek 4–7; Dan 7; 9; and Zech 13–14. The various ways in which Jesus draws on these texts vividly frame the significance of the events, the characterization of Jerusalem, and the self-description of Jesus. Of these texts, the ones that most directly affect Jesus’s self-description are Dan 7 and Zech 13–14. Scholars have given much attention to the former, due to its relation to Jesus’s Son of Man self-identification, but less attention to the latter, and prior to my article little had been said about that portion of Zechariah in relation to this particular text. As such, one of the many things going on with the use of Scripture here had been overlooked: there is a reconfiguration here of Zech 13–14 to convey a Christocentric eschatology, wherein Jesus occupies the place of God in previously established eschatological expectations.

Zechariah 9–14 in Mark

To set the scene, we first need to consider how the larger unit of which Zech 13–14 is used in Mark. Again, this will be treated in a somewhat more cursory fashion than in my article. First, there appears to be a combination of Dan 7:13 with Zech 14:5 in Mark 8:38. We have seen combined citations previously, but there are many other cases of combined allusions, like the Synoptics all featuring Jesus’s allusions to Ps 110 and Dan 7 in his trial. This is one case in which Jesus is identifying himself with what the OT text says of YHWH:

Zech 14:5 (LXX): καὶ ἥξει κύριος ὁ θεός μου καὶ πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ (“The LORD my God will come and all the holy ones with him”)

Mark 8:38: καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου … ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἐν τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ μετὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων τῶν ἁγίων (“The Son of Man … whenever he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels”)

Second, although Zech 9:9 is not quoted in Mark 11 as it is in the parallels in Matthew and John, the story still implies a reliance on the text, since Jesus quite deliberately evokes it by entering Jerusalem on an unridden donkey colt. Third, the story of Jesus’s cleansing of the temple may ironically evoke Zech 14:21 in how Jesus drives out the moneychangers and merchants (as כנעני in Zechariah may be translated as “trader/merchant”) in a proleptic ḥerem anticipating the temple’s destruction because it could not serve as the house of the Lord (Mark 11:12–14, 20–21; 13:2). Furthermore, in contradiction to the hope of Zech 14:16–19, the leaders of Jerusalem have turned the temple from a house of prayer for all the nations into a den of bandits. Fourth, Mark 14:24 may feature Jesus reconfiguring Zech 9:11 as Jesus now describes himself as having the role of establisher of the covenant and Savior:

Zech 9:11 (LXX): “καὶ σὺ ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης σου” (“and you in the blood of your covenant”)

Mark 14:24: “Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης” (“This is my blood of the covenant”)

Fifth, and most directly, Mark 14:27 quotes Zech 13:7 to portray Jesus as God’s shepherd who is struck. While Jesus does not quote the subsequent remnant promises, Mark 14:28 has the same restorative logic. 

Zechariah 13–14 in Mark 13

The links I explore between these texts are not primarily verbal, although these links can serve as anchors. Instead, the links that have the most significance christologically speaking are structural and thematic/conceptual. Still, it is worth exploring—again, in more condensed fashion than my article—all three kinds of links between Zech 13–14 and Mark 13, especially in terms of how they illuminate the christological use of the former text.

Verbal Links

First, it is notable that the description of Jesus’s location at the start of the Olivet Discourse resembles Zech 14:4 with its description of the coming of God:

Zech 14:4 (LXX): “καὶ στήσονται οἱ πόδες αὐτοῦ … ἐπὶ τὸ Ὂρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν τὸ κατέναντι Ἱερουσαλὴμ” (“His feet will stand … on the Mount of Olives opposite Jerusalem”)

Mark 13:3: “καὶ καθημένου αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ Ὂρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν κατέναντι τοῦ ἱεροῦ” (“As he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple”)

Jesus is now sitting to teach, though there may be an implication of judgment as well, given his initial statement about the destruction of the temple.

Second, the presence and activity of false prophets (ψευδοπροφῆται) is a problem in both texts (Zech 13:1–6; Mark 13:6, 22). Of greater interest is Jesus’s claim that many will come speaking falsely “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί μου” (Mark 13:6). With this context, this phrase reflects the charge against the false prophets of speaking lies “επ’ ὀνόματί κυρίου” (Zech 13:3; cf. Deut 18:19–20). Even in Mark, where the use of κύριος is at its least common in the Gospels, Mark and Jesus have situated Jesus in the place of κύριος, sharing the name that identifies God (1:3; 2:28; 5:19; 11:3; 12:36).

The final verbal link I will note for this post—I note others in the article—is the rare verb ἐπισυνάγω (ἐπισυνάξω in Zech 14:2; ἐπισυνάξει in Mark 13:27). The subject in Zechariah is God and in Mark it is the Son of Man. The few other times it appears in the LXX, God is usually the agent (Pss 105:47; 146:2; 2 Macc 1:27; 2:18). When God is the agent, it refers to God’s action of gathering the scattered and outcast covenant people. In Zech 14:2 the object of the verb is the gentiles gathered to make war at Jerusalem, whom God then judges, and the remnant of whom thereafter come to worship God. In Mark the nations are implied as the setting for gathering the elect—since the angels gather them from all over the world—and the Son of Man does not gather them to Jerusalem or Israel, but to himself, as is the case in the other New Testament uses when Jesus is the subject (the parallel in Matt 24:31; also note Matt 23:37 // Luke 13:34). The different connotations of the verb in each context—the Markan use being more in line with its more common sense in the LXX—are results of the different orientations of the prophecies to the groups in question. As such, this potential verbal link is distant at best and can only serve as further support if other connections are sound. However, the “locale” to which people gather in the Markan text is noteworthy since it is not a holy city or land, but simply Jesus himself.

As such, we do not see many peculiar verbal links between these texts. There are others that are more distant or more generic. But it is not primarily the verbal similarities that drive this connection, unlike with quotations or paraphrases in the NT. The structural links are more important and even more illuminating.

Structural Links

The structures of Zech 13–14 and Mark 13 are, to an extent, inverted, and this inversion makes a significant point not only about Christology, but about the purpose of Christ’s coming portrayed in this text compared to Zechariah. Zechariah 13 opens with a condemnation of false prophets and a promise of judgment on them (13:1–6). The chapter closes with a promise of judgment on the majority and a promise to the remnant of covenant renewal after trial by fire (13:7–9). Zechariah 14 opens with the conquest of Jerusalem and the taking of half of its people into exile (14:1–2). Zechariah sees God, accompanied by the holy ones, set foot on the Mount of Olives at the turning point of the story to save the people and to destroy their enemies (except for the remnant of the nations) after splitting the mountain in two (14:3–5). This day of the Lord has unique qualities in terms of weather, light, and the living waters that now come flowing out of Jerusalem (14:6–8). In a modified Shema, Zechariah declares that the Lord will be one and his name one when he becomes king over the whole world (14:9). The presence of the Lord also leads to the hope often articulated in the exilic and postexilic eras that Jerusalem would become secure (14:10–11). The oracle then returns to the scene of the nations gathered against Jerusalem and the destruction inflicted on them (14:12–15). Afterwards, the survivors of the nations come to Jerusalem for the new purpose of worshiping the Lord by participating in the Festival of Booths (with corresponding judgments pending if they do not) at the consummately sanctified Jerusalem, the capital of the universal king (14:16–21).

In Mark Jesus is on the Mount of Olives at the introduction of a discourse that declares judgment on a Jerusalem unprepared to receive its king (13:3; cf. Josephus, Ant. 20.169–71; J.W. 2.259–63). He opens the Olivet Discourse with a warning to his disciples about false prophets and false messianic claimants, but he also reiterates the problem later (13:5–6, 21–23). He then provides general warnings of war, earthquakes, and famines before he specifically warns his disciples about the trials and tribulations they will face and promises them that the Holy Spirit will be with them and that whoever perseveres to the end will be saved (13:7–13). The prophecy shifts to a focus on the abomination of desolation and the time of extreme tribulation, though the instruction to flee appears in the midst of this section, rather than afterwards like Zechariah (13:14–20). After Jesus reiterates the warning of false messiahs and false prophets, the prophecy climaxes with the promise of the arrival of the Son of Man with the angels to gather the elect from all over the world (13:24–27). The discourse ends with two lessons about watchfulness so that the disciples may remain ethically vigilant in anticipation of the coming day (13:28–37).

Unlike in Zechariah, there is no promise of the salvation of Jerusalem and assurance of its everlasting security under the rule of God. In Zechariah the people flee presumably to get out of the way of the coming destruction of Jerusalem’s enemies, but in Mark the people flee in order to avoid getting caught up in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple. Both groups who flee experience salvation, but Mark ties the experience to the gathering to the Son of Man rather than to inhabiting the divinely ruled Jerusalem. There is no destruction of the nations, but there is a notion similar to the remnant of the nations in that the Son of Man commands the gathering of the elect from all over the world. These opposite orientations and the other differences in the prophecies are likely due to the fact that the Jesus interweaves Zechariah with other texts (secondarily) and that Jesus has different purposes in his message (primarily).

Thematic/Conceptual Links

There are many thematic/conceptual links between these texts, of which I will only mention two here. One, it is noteworthy that what happens to the remnant in Zech 13:8–9 resembles what happens to the disciples in Mark 13:9–13 (cf. 13:20, 27). God promises to test and refine the remnant by a fiery trial, resulting in covenant renewal by which the Lord identifies them as the chosen people and they identify the Lord as their God. Jesus similarly foretells that his disciples will suffer for his sake and that whoever perseveres will receive salvation because their suffering and perseverance identify them as Jesus’s people. Jesus thus more specifically identifies the remnant and defines perseverance as faithfulness to him. Zechariah is not the only source of a theme of suffering or a “trial by fire” that confirms the ones who are people of God (Ps 66:10; Isa 48:10), but the specific setting of the prophecy, the proximity to a promised vindication by a divine arrival, the explicit reference to salvation/renewal, and other aforementioned links make it more likely that the Zecharian text—more than any other—informs the discourse at this point.

Two, the central event in both texts is the arrival of God/the Son of Man (Zech 14:3–9; Mark 13:24–27). Scholars have often noted the theophanic qualities of the Son of Man’s coming (cf. Judg 5:4–5; Pss 18:3–19; 77:16–18; Joel 2:30–31; 3:15–16; Mic 1:3–4; Nah 1:2–6; Hab 3:3–13; Sir 16:18–19; 1 En. 1:4–7; 4 Ezra 3:17–19; T. Levi 3:9). Particularly noteworthy is the coming in clouds, a typical feature of divine appearances (Exod 13:21–22; 16:10; 19:9, 16; 34:5; Num 10:34; 11:25; 12:5; 2 Sam 22:12; 1 Kgs 8:10–11; Pss 97:2; 104:3; Isa 4:5; 19:1; Ezek 1:4–6; Nah 1:3). The reference to the Son of Man coming in the clouds most closely alludes to Dan 7:13, but the aforementioned texts also point to another tradition that informs this language: the coming of the Divine Warrior. Though the Zechariah text does not mention God coming in the clouds, it comports with the tradition of God as the warrior-king and with this purpose for both salvation and judgment in God’s appearance. Like Mark 13, Zechariah also associates cosmic phenomena with the day of the Lord (14:6–7).

Christological Implications

In my article I list four christological implications to draw from these various intertextual links. First, we have seen throughout the uses of Zechariah in Mark, including in Mark 13, that Jesus reconfigures the Zecharian text and uses it to reconfigure others with himself at the center of the expectation of the God who is coming. Judgment is coming on Jerusalem because its people had rejected the Messiah, and the ones who are saved from it are those who listen to him (Mark 12:9–11; 13:9–13, 20, 22–23, 27, 34–37; cf. Zech 13:7–9; 14:4–5, 11). Furthermore, the prophets who spoke falsely by the name of the Lord have become the prophets and messiahs who speak falsely about Jesus and by the name of Jesus (Zech 13:2–6; Mark 13:5–6, 21–23). Jesus is thus the Lord who is coming, the one who is the Son of the Father, the personal revelation of God, who himself carries out the work, salvation, and judgment of God. Still, the Father is distinguished as the one who is the source of Jesus’s glory (8:38), as well as his mission in the revelation of God, and the one who knows the day and hour of Jesus’s coming (13:32).

Second, Jesus replaces Jerusalem as the center for the gathering of God’s people. He is the one who defines the elect around himself, as those who are saved are those who listen to him. In Zechariah it is Jerusalem that God makes secure and the site of the gathering of Jews and gentiles because it is the center of the manifest divine presence (8:3–8, 12–13, 20–23; 14:3–5, 9–11, 16–21). But when the Son of Man comes with the angels, he sends them out simply to gather the elect (Mark 13:26–27). By implication, he gathers the elect to himself because he is the “center” of God’s holy presence.

Third, Jesus presents himself in the place of God in multiple functions through his role in establishing the kingdom of God, including in the events of this prophecy. His place on the Mount of Olives, his prophecy of his coming with angels, and the identity of the elect put Jesus in the same roles as Zechariah sees God: the coming one who dispenses judgment and salvation after a time of tribulation and the one with authority over the universal divine kingdom. In this text Jesus’s act of prophesying presupposes his authority to speak on what is to come and it presents a vindication of his authority in terms of the destruction of the temple that now represents his opposition and his sending of the angels to gather the elect.

Fourth, Jesus is presented as more than an agent of God because of his share in the unique authority of God. The description of the Son of Man as the sender of angels (Mark 13:27) develops the role of the angels beyond the accompaniment of the holy ones in Zechariah. The Son of Man’s sending of the angels thereby identifies himself as somehow sharing divine authority, since only God sends angels (Gen 24:7, 40; Exod 23:20; 33:2; Num 20:16; 1 Chron 21:12, 15; 2 Chron 32:21; Dan 3:28; 6:22). The angels of God are the servants of the Son of Man who gather the elect.

What then are the implications of these findings for Christological debates? They show that Mark 13 fits better within a paradigm of Jesus as being identified with God than it does within paradigms of royal or mediatorial figures as precedents for Christology. In texts such as Mark 13, the precedent is in what the Scriptures had proclaimed about God, particularly eschatological expectations of divine action. Quotations or, in this case, allusions to these texts that locate Jesus in the place of God thereby identify Jesus with God.