This verse abounds with problems. The traditional Hebrew text is ambiguous in its grammatical structure, curious in its order of clauses, and perhaps incomplete. A number of changes or omissions have been suggested by various scholars, and some of these have been accepted in some modern versions.

There are three main questions that translators must answer before rendering this verse.
(1) What is the object of the verb take?
(2) Does the word exiles refer to those Jews who had already returned from Babylon, or to those still living there?
(3) How many people are spoken of as coming from Babylon at this time?

We will discuss these questions, and others, as we go through the Revised Standard Version text.

Take from the exiles Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have arrived from Babylon: Revised Standard Version is itself grammatically ambiguous at this point. The names Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah could be either the object of the verb take, or else they could be a list of those exiles that the prophet is to take something from. The Revised Standard Version sentence continues in such a way as to give the impression that the first of these alternatives was what the translators intended. There are two objections to this interpretation. The first is that in terms of the whole paragraph, the prophet does nothing further with these men. Rather it is their gifts that are the focus of his actions.

The second objection is that the Hebrew text does not treat the men as the object of the verb take but rather suggests that the prophet should take something from them. The identity of this something is revealed in verse 11 as “silver and gold.” Revised Standard Version is supported only by New American Bible among modern versions in making the men the object of take. This interpretation complicates rather than clarifies the rest of the paragraph, and we do not recommend it to translators. Since verse 11 states what the prophet was to take, it is better to anticipate the explanation in verse 10 with a general term like “gifts,” as in Good News Translation “Take the gifts given by the exiles Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah.” Compare Jerusalem Bible “Take the offerings….” This view is also held by such recent scholars as Petersen, R. L. Smith, and Meyers & Meyers. Some scholars add one letter to one word of the Hebrew text to make this meaning clearer, but this is not necessary. Moffatt, New English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, and Contemporary English Version actually mention the silver and gold at this point, and other translators could consider doing so also; for example, New Jerusalem Bible says “Collect silver and gold from the exiles, from Heldai, Tobijah and Jedaiah” (similarly New Revised Standard Version). To sum up, then, we answer question (1) above by saying that the object of take is best understood as the gifts brought by the men rather than the men themselves.

The word translated exiles gives rise to question (2) above. The Hebrew word golah is used elsewhere both of the Jews still captive in Babylonia (Jer 29.1; Ezek 1.1) and of those who had returned from captivity to Jerusalem, the former captives (Ezra 4.1; Ezra 9.4). Some scholars such as Mitchell wish to see the second meaning in this passage (compare the Jerusalem Bible footnote), but the clause who have arrived from Babylon seems to support the first meaning, as is seen by other scholars such as Petersen, Meyers & Meyers, and Merrill. The difficulty is that in the Hebrew text this clause does not come at the point where we would expect it, but is added very awkwardly at the end of the verse. This makes the Hebrew structure clumsy, but if we take golah to mean people who had returned from exile some time previously, then we are forced to look for some other interpretation for who have arrived from Babylon. This procedure raises more problems than it solves, as we shall see later. So we answer question (2) by saying that exiles should be understood as those people still living in Babylon who had just arrived from there on a visit to Jerusalem (so also Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

The men Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah are not mentioned elsewhere as a group, though the name Tobijah occurs in Ezra 2.60 (where it is spelled “Tobiah” in Revised Standard Version), and Jedaiah occurs also in Ezra 2.36. The name Heldai occurs also in 1 Chr 27.15 and in a different form in verse 14. See the notes there. The Septuagint understood these words not as proper names at all, but as descriptions, but no modern version follows it in this respect.

Go the same day to the house of Josiah, the son of Zephaniah: In both Hebrew and English, a second person imperative verb does not normally have a subject, but the Hebrew does contain an emphatic “you” at this point (compare King James Version and Revised Version “come thou”). This is brought out in Bible de Jérusalem and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible but is missed in the modern English versions with the exception of New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh (“and you, in turn, proceed…”) and New Jerusalem Bible (“you yourself go…”). In simpler language translators could say “you yourself must go….”

The phrase the same day is somewhat awkward as there is no previous reference to any particular day. Good News Translation takes it to refer to the day that Zechariah received the “message” (verse 9), and so translates “go at once.” This awkwardness has led some scholars to consider the command go the same day to the house of to be unnecessary, and it is omitted in whole or in part by Moffatt, Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible, Contemporary English Version, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch. However, even if the style is rough, the meaning is plain, and translators should not omit anything. Good News Translation is a satisfactory model.

In Hebrew the expression the house of can refer either to a building or to a family. As the text stands, the house of follows the verb go … to and must therefore in this context refer to a building.

Josiah is the only one of the four men whose ancestry is mentioned. Zephaniah his father (or perhaps his grandfather) may have been the priest mentioned in Jer 29.29 who was executed by the Babylonians after the fall of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 25.18-21). There is no indication that Josiah himself was a priest, but if he was, it would be appropriate for him to be selected as a witness to the crowning of the high priest in verse 11.

The mention of Josiah brings us to question (3) in the introduction to this verse, namely, How many people are spoken of as coming from Babylon? As we have said already, the clause who have arrived from Babylon comes in Hebrew at the end of the verse after Josiah, the son of Zephaniah. This makes it possible that Josiah is himself one of the visitors, and Moffatt, New American Bible, New English Bible, and Good News Translation accordingly translate as if all four of the men named had just come from Babylon. This view is also held by R. L. Smith and Meyers & Meyers. Bible de Jérusalem and Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible follow the Septuagint in understanding that it was only Josiah who had arrived from Babylon. But this involves changing the verb from plural to singular, a change that, with the support of Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament and Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, we consider to be unnecessary (even though it is found in the ancient Greek and Syriac versions). The position of the clause who have arrived from Babylon would allow Josiah to be included, but the general context does not support this view. The fact that Josiah’s ancestry is stated, whereas that of the other three men is not, suggests that he was better known to Zechariah than they were. The fact that he already had a house in Jerusalem virtually proves that he was not arriving in the city for the first time. We conclude therefore in answer to question (3) that only three men, Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, had just arrived from Babylon. This is the view of Petersen, Merrill, and Redditt (1995). In all likelihood they were lodging at the house of Josiah (as understood by Bible en français courant and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente; compare New American Standard Bible “where they have arrived from Babylon”) and that was why Zechariah was told to go there to meet them.

We sum up the discussion by suggesting the following as a translation base for this verse. It restructures the Hebrew in a more logical order, somewhat after the example of Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch:

• You yourself must go this very day to the home of Josiah the son of Zephaniah. There you will receive a gift from Heldai, Tobijah and Jedaiah, who have just arrived from the exiles in Babylon.

This verse is a good example of how statements that are basically simple can become very difficult for translators to sort out. Textual problems, perhaps arising from rather poor style on the part of the prophet himself, can complicate even the easiest material. Translators have to become aware of the problems and think them through; yet as far as possible, they must protect their readers from them. Even if translators cannot be completely confident that they have understood a passage in exactly the sense that was originally intended, nevertheless they can be sure that it did originally make sense. And especially in a common language version, it must continue to make sense, a sense that is free from unintentional ambiguities, and that fits the context. In this way the reader who knows nothing of Hebrew grammar or textual problems will at least be able to appreciate the thrust of a whole paragraph without being bothered by the problems in the details.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .