The Pierced Messiah: A Grammatical and Theological Analysis of Zechariah 12:10

J. Neil Daniels

Nota Bene: A "Deep Dive" audio overview is available here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TSolSl1N_eN1uWVbJFvmzMbAhOHsamS2/view?usp=drivesdk

Introduction

The messianic interpretation of Zechariah 12:10 has been a subject of intense scholarly debate for centuries. The verse reads: "And they will look at Me whom they pierced. They will mourn for Him as one mourns for an only child and weep bitterly for Him as one weeps for a firstborn" (HCSB). This passage presents significant interpretive challenges, particularly regarding the identity of the "pierced one" and the implications for messianic prophecy. While early rabbis and Christian expositors traditionally interpreted this text as messianic, many contemporary scholars have rejected this interpretation, preferring to identify the pierced figure with slain Israelites or Jewish martyrs.¹

The crux of the interpretive debate centers on the grammatical analysis of the Hebrew text and the theological implications of God being described as "pierced." This essay will defend the messianic interpretation through careful examination of the textual evidence, grammatical analysis, and contextual considerations, demonstrating that Zechariah 12:10 prophetically describes a future event where Israel will pierce the Lord, thereby opening theological space for the New Testament's claim that Jesus is God incarnate who was pierced at His crucifixion.

Historical Context and Interpretive Tradition

Early Jewish Interpretation

The messianic interpretation of Zechariah 12:10 has deep historical roots in Jewish tradition. Early rabbis identified the pierced figure with Messiah ben Joseph, a suffering messianic figure who dies in battle.² Notable rabbinic authorities including Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Abarvanel, and Alshech all preferred this messianic interpretation over alternative readings that identified the pierced one with ordinary Israelites.³ For example, Rashi stated: "The words, 'The land shall mourn,' are found in the prophecy of Zechariah, and he prophesies of the future, that they shall mourn on account of Messiah, the son of Joseph, who shall be slain in the war of Gog and Magog."⁴

This widespread rabbinic consensus reveals "the antiquity of the 'messianic interpretation'" and suggests that the earliest Jewish interpreters understood this passage as referring to a divine or messianic figure rather than ordinary human casualties.⁵ While this represents argument from tradition rather than direct textual evidence, it demonstrates that the messianic reading was not a later Christian innovation but had established precedent in Jewish hermeneutics.

Contemporary Scholarly Challenges

Modern scholarship has increasingly challenged the traditional messianic interpretation. As Rex Mason observes, the lack of consensus among commentators has produced numerous competing theories regarding the identity of the pierced one: "Many have found it difficult to understand how the people [of Israel] could have been said to 'pierce' Yahweh, and so they have emended the text... Others have taken it to mean that they have pierced Yahweh by their treatment of his representative... Several have attempted to identify the 'pierced one' with some historical figure... while still others have taken the 'him' in a collective sense to represent the godly community which has been persecuted."⁶

This proliferation of interpretive options reflects the theological difficulty posed by the text's apparent claim that God Himself can be pierced, leading many scholars to seek alternative explanations that avoid this theological tension.

Textual and Grammatical Analysis

The Integrity of "To Me"

The most fundamental textual issue concerns whether the Hebrew text originally read "to me" or "to him." The Masoretic Text clearly reads "to me," but some medieval manuscripts contain "to him," creating the potential for significantly different interpretations. H.G. Mitchell and other scholars have questioned the reliability of "to me" precisely because it makes God the object of the piercing, arguing that this creates an impossible theological scenario.⁷

However, the textual evidence overwhelmingly supports "to me" as the original reading. All ancient versions including "the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, the Aramaic Targums, Syriac Peshitta, Old Latin Bible, and the Latin Vulgate all support the integrity of 'to me.'"⁸ The variant reading "to him" appears only as marginal notes in some manuscripts, suggesting scribal attempts to resolve the theological difficulty rather than preserve an original reading.

The principles of textual criticism also support "to me." David Baron explains that "'To him' originated in the very natural difficulty, from the Jewish point of view, of conceiving how God, who is undoubtedly the speaker in the first part of the verse [...] can be 'pierced.'"⁹ This represents the common scribal tendency to soften theological problems rather than create them, making "to me" the more difficult and therefore more likely original reading.

Grammatical Analysis of "Whom"

The Hebrew phrase 'et 'asher has been translated various ways, significantly affecting the verse's meaning. The Holman Christian Standard Bible renders it as "whom," creating a direct object relationship where Israel pierces the Lord. However, other translations attempt to avoid this conclusion through alternative renderings.

The Septuagint translates 'et 'asher as "because" (anth hōn), but this appears to result from a translation error. The LXX translator apparently confused the Hebrew word daqar (pierce) with raqad (dance), leading to the reading "they danced in mockery" rather than "they pierced."¹⁰ To make sense of this mistranslation, the translator was forced to use "because" rather than "whom," producing the rendering "they will look on me because they danced in mockery."¹¹

Grammatically, when the definite direct object marker ('et) appears before 'asher, as in Zechariah 12:10, "the word means 'who, that, which.'"¹² The New Testament's quotation of this passage in John 19:37 and allusion in Revelation 1:7 both support the "whom" translation, with John writing: "They will look on the one whom they have pierced."¹³

Some modern Jewish translations attempt to avoid the theological implications by inserting "those" before "whom," making the verse refer to plural Israelites rather than the singular divine figure. However, this requires adding words not present in the Hebrew text and fails to account for the singular pronouns used throughout the mourning description.¹⁴

The Meaning of "Pierce"

The Hebrew word daqar (pierce) appears thirteen times in the Old Testament and consistently refers to literal piercing of the human body, typically resulting in death. The verb describes violent penetration with weapons such as spears or swords, often in contexts of shameful or significant deaths.¹⁵ Some scholars argue for a metaphorical interpretation in Zechariah 12:10, suggesting that Israel "pierced" God's heart through rejection or blasphemy.

However, several factors argue against the metaphorical interpretation. First, if Zechariah intended metaphorical usage, he could have chosen naqav, which has a broader semantic range than daqar.¹⁶ Second, Zechariah uses the same verb again in 13:3, where it clearly refers to literal piercing of a false prophet. This juxtaposition suggests that "the pierced one in 12:10 deserved honor but received the ultimate expression of disrespect—execution. The malefactor in 13:3 also suffered piercing, but he deserved his punishment."¹⁷

The context of excessive mourning in verses 12:11-14, described as mourning for the dead, combined with the verb's consistent usage throughout the Old Testament, supports a literal interpretation of the piercing.

Contextual and Theological Considerations

Future Eschatological Setting

The temporal setting of Zechariah 12:10 is crucial for understanding its messianic potential. The verb "pierced" appears in Hebrew perfect form, which can describe past, present, or future actions depending on context. Mitchell argues that the perfect form indicates a past event from Zechariah's perspective, thus ruling out messianic interpretation.¹⁸

However, the futuristic context of Zechariah 9-14 strongly suggests a future orientation. The prophet uses the phrase "on that day" seventeen times in chapters 12–14, creating what Meyers and Meyers describe as "stereotyped terminology heralding God's final judgment of all the world."¹⁹ This eschatological framework supports interpreting the perfect verb as either a prophetic perfect (expressing certainty about future events) or a future perfect (describing one future action that precedes another).²⁰

Connection to Cleansing and Repentance

The relationship between Zechariah 12:10 and 13:1 provides important interpretive context. Chapter 13:1 describes a fountain opened for cleansing from sin and impurity, specifically for "the house of David" and "the inhabitants of Jerusalem." Four factors connect this cleansing to the piercing in 12:10: the continued use of "on that day," repeated references to the house of David and Jerusalem residents, the fountain imagery connecting to the "pouring out" of God's spirit, and the second use of "pierce" in 13:3.²¹

This connection suggests that Israel's participation in the piercing constitutes a sin requiring cleansing. The terms "sin" (chatta't) and "impurity" (niddah) in 13:1 appear in contexts requiring purification after contact with a corpse, correlating with the death described in 12:10–14.²² Therefore, the text presents Israel as needing cleansing specifically because of their role in piercing the Lord.

Innerbiblical Connections

The piercing motif in Zechariah 12:10 connects with broader biblical themes of suffering messiah figures. Isaiah 53:5 describes the Servant as "pierced" (chalal), using a synonym for daqar. The Servant and the Shepherd of Zechariah 13:7 both suffer "striking" (nakah), and both are closely associated with the Lord while maintaining shepherding imagery.²³

The Lord's description of the Shepherd as his "fellow" ('amiyti) in Zechariah 13:7 is particularly significant. This term "expresses the relation of fellow-Israelite, or fellow-man, and points out an identity of nature," suggesting that the Shepherd "is of the same nature or substance, that is, he is very God."²⁴ This provides theological framework for understanding how the divine Lord can be pierced through an associated figure who shares His nature.

Theological Implications and New Testament Fulfillment

The Incarnational Solution

The primary theological difficulty with Zechariah 12:10 concerns how an immaterial God can be literally pierced. The New Testament resolves this tension through the doctrine of incarnation, where the divine Word becomes flesh (John 1:1, 14). John 19:37 directly quotes Zechariah 12:10 in reference to Jesus' crucifixion, identifying Jesus as both the divine "Me" who is pierced and the "Him" who is mourned.²⁵

This interpretive move is not arbitrary but builds on the theological groundwork laid in the Old Testament. Isaiah 53 and Zechariah 9–14 provide "the theological framework necessary to understand the incarnation and crucifixion" so that when God would come to suffer in the person of Jesus, "He would come to a people theologically prepared for the idea."²⁶

Eschatological Fulfillment

While the crucifixion provides historical fulfillment of the piercing, the full realization of Zechariah 12:10 awaits future eschatological fulfillment. Revelation 1:7 alludes to this passage in describing Christ's second coming: "Look! He is returning with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all the tribes on the earth will mourn because of him."²⁷ This suggests that the mourning described in Zechariah 12:10–14 will find its ultimate fulfillment when Israel recognizes Jesus as the divine Messiah they pierced.

The text's emphasis on the house of David and Jerusalem's inhabitants suggests a particular focus on Israel's recognition and repentance. As Walter Kaiser notes, while this describes Israel's role in the Messiah's death, "caution must be exercised" to avoid the "Christ-killer" accusation, recognizing that "the Messiah was put to death by the Jews and the Romans" and "for the sins of all the world."²⁸

Conclusion

The grammatical and contextual evidence supports interpreting Zechariah 12:10 as a messianic prophecy describing the future piercing of the Lord by Israel. The textual integrity of "to me" is firmly established by ancient versions and textual critical principles. The Hebrew grammar requires "whom" rather than "because," making the Lord the direct object of Israel's piercing. The verb "pierce" should be understood literally rather than metaphorically, consistent with its usage throughout the Old Testament.

The eschatological context of Zechariah 9–14 places this event in the future, while the connection to the cleansing fountain in 13:1 demonstrates that the piercing constitutes a sin requiring divine forgiveness. The innerbiblical connections to Isaiah's Servant Songs and Zechariah's Shepherd figure provide theological precedent for understanding a divine figure who can suffer and die.

The New Testament's identification of Jesus as both God incarnate and the pierced one of Zechariah 12:10 provides the theological resolution to the text's apparent difficulty. Through the incarnation, the immaterial God becomes capable of literal piercing, while maintaining his divine nature. This interpretation honors both the grammatical integrity of the Hebrew text and the theological coherence of biblical revelation, demonstrating that Zechariah indeed foresaw the piercing of the Lord by his covenant people and their subsequent repentance and cleansing.

Endnotes

1. As reflected in translations like the Koren Jerusalem Bible: "and they shall look towards me, regarding those whom the nations have thrust through. And they shall mourn for him (that is slain) as one mourns for an only son."

2. For example, the Babylonian Talmud (Succah 52a) and the Targumic Tosefta on Zechariah 12:10.

3. For detailed citations of these rabbinic authorities, see A. M'Caul, Rabbi David Kimchi’s Commentary Upon the Prophecies of Zechariah: Translated from the Hebrew with Notes, and Observations on the Passages Relating to the Messiah (London: James Duncan, 1837).

4. Ibid, 161.

5. David C. Mitchell, "Messiah bar Ephraim in the Targums," Aramaic Studies 4.2 (2006): 227.

6. Rex Mason, The Books of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi (Cambridge: University, 1977), 118–19.

7. H. G. Mitchell, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai and Zechariah, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1912), 334.

8. David Baron, The Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2002), 438.

9. Ibid., 443.

10. Randolph Bynum, "The Fourth Gospel and the Scriptures: Illuminating the Form and Meaning of Scriptural Citation in John 19:37," Supplements to Novum Testamentum 144 (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2012), 96.

11. Ibid., 95-96.

12. Bruce K. Waltke and M. O'Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax §10.3.1, a12–15.

13. John 19:37 (NET); cf. Revelation 1:7.

14. A. M'Caul, Rabbi David Kimchi's Commentary upon the Prophecies of Zechariah, 158.

15. Herbert Wolf, "daqar," in Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody, 1980), 449a.

16. Milton C. Fisher, "naqav," Theological Word Book of the Old Testament, 1409d.

17. George L. Klein, Zechariah, New American Commentary (Nashville: B&H, 2008), 379.

18. H. G. Mitchell, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai and Zechariah, 330.

19. C. L. Meyers and E. M. Meyers, Zechariah 9–14, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 316–17.

20. George L. Klein, "The Prophetic Perfect," Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 16 (1990): 45–60.

21. Al Wolters, Zechariah: Historical Commentary on the Old Testament (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2014), 424.

22. Cf. Numbers 19:13 regarding purification after contact with the dead.

23. Isaiah 50:6; 53:4 use the same verb (nakah) applied to the Shepherd in Zechariah 13:7.

24. A. M'Caul, Rabbi David Kimchi's Commentary upon the Prophecies of Zechariah, 175.

25. John 19:37 directly quotes Zechariah 12:10 in reference to Jesus' pierced side.

26. The theological framework provided by Isaiah 53 and Zechariah 9–14 prepared Israel for understanding incarnation and crucifixion.

27. Revelation 1:7 (NET).

28. Walter C. Kaiser Jr., The Messiah in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 223.