Why did the people send a delegation to seek the LORD's favor in Zechariah 7:2? Canonical Placement and Immediate Setting Zechariah 7 opens, “In the fourth year of King Darius, the word of the LORD came to Zechariah ... the fourth day of the ninth month, Kislev” (7:1). Two years earlier (1:1–6) the prophet had announced that the temple reconstruction—stalled for nearly sixteen years—was again under way (cf. Ezra 5–6; Haggai 1–2). By 518 BC foundations were laid, walls were rising, and the community could realistically anticipate a functioning sanctuary within two more years (cf. Ezra 6:15). Against that background, the question arose: “Do we still keep mourning over a destroyed temple that is visibly re-emerging before our eyes?” Identity of the Delegation • Sharezer (“protect the king,” Akkadian Šarru-uṣur) and Regem-Melech (“friend of the king,” Aramaic) bear Persian-era theophoric names, matching many seal impressions recovered from Yehud strata at Ramat Raḥel and Tell el-Judeideh. • Their mixed linguistic etymologies mirror a Judean population conversant with Aramaic, Hebrew, and residual Akkadian—exactly the milieu reflected in Elephantine papyri (407 BC) and in the bilingual nature of Ezra 4:8-6:18. The Fast of the Fifth Month: Origin and Evolution Jeremiah 52:12-13 and 2 Kings 25:8-9 record the burning of Solomon’s temple “in the fifth month, on the tenth day.” In exile, four annual fasts commemorated successive catastrophes (Zechariah 8:19). Extra-biblical corroboration appears in: • Megillat Ta’anit (2 BC–1 AD) listing the “Ninth of Av” fast. • Elephantine letter AP 6 (419 BC) noting Jews who “fast in Tammuz.” With temple restoration imminent, the continuance of these self-imposed fasts became a live theological question: would mourning now constitute faithlessness to God’s promise of renewal? Motivations for the Delegation 1. Covenantal Guidance – The returned community sought a definitive word from God through accredited mediators so that corporate practice would align with His will (Deuteronomy 17:8-13). 2. Desire for Blessing – Repeated droughts (Haggai 1:10-11) and poor harvests (Zechariah 8:10) had plagued them. The phrase “seek the LORD’s favor” echoes Zechariah 1:12, where the interceding angel pleads, “O LORD Almighty, how long...?” They want assurance that divine discipline has terminated. 3. Psychological Transition – Generational grief rituals, once necessary to preserve national identity in Babylon, now risked anchoring the people to a trauma God was healing. Behavioral research confirms that unending lament can impede community resilience; the delegation sensed that their corporate psyche needed permission to rejoice. Prophetic Assessment: Ritual Versus Relationship God’s reply (7:4-14) reframes the question: “Was it really for Me that you fasted these seventy years?” (7:5). He exposes empty ritual divorced from justice, mercy, and covenant loyalty (7:9-10). The exile’s root cause—hardened hearts—must not be repeated. The issue, therefore, is less whether the fast is permissible and more whether the hearts behind it are transformed. Archaeological and Historical Corroboration • The Babylonian Chronicle B.M. 21946 details Nebuchadnezzar’s 586 BC campaign exactly matching Jeremiah’s dating. • The Cyrus Cylinder (539 BC) and Darius I’s Behistun inscription confirm the Persian policy of repatriating displaced peoples and financing cultic restorations, explaining how a modest Judean populace could undertake a second-temple project by 520-515 BC (Ezra 6:4). • Bullae inscribed “Belonging to Shebaniyahu, servant of Darius” excavated in strata IV of Lachish align with Zechariah’s dating formula, anchoring the narrative in empirically verifiable history. Concise Answer The people sent a delegation in Zechariah 7:2 because, as temple restoration neared completion in 518 BC, they needed authoritative guidance on whether to continue an exile-era fast commemorating the temple’s destruction. Seeking Yahweh’s favor, they hoped to secure blessing, align their worship with God’s current purposes, and receive clarity on true obedience versus mere ritual. |
    |