The Pronoun in Zechariah 14:5: "With Thee" or "With Him"?

Zechariah 14:5 sits in a highly eschatological passage, traditionally understood by both Jews and Christians as describing the coming of the Messiah to the Mount of Olives and the associated judgment events. The verse in question reads in the King James Version:

"ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee."

The crux of your question is the final phrase, "with thee," and whether the Hebrew term there allows flexibility that might justify translating it as "with him," as many modern versions do.

subsection*1. The Hebrew Form: "Imach" and Its Function

The word under discussion is עִמָּךְ (imach), built from:

• The preposition עִם ("with"),
• Plus a pronominal suffix.

In biblical Hebrew, the preposition plus suffix combination carries both:

• The meaning "with," and
• The person/number/gender of the pronoun attached.

The form עִמָּךְ is the second person singular feminine form: "with you" (addressed to a singular "you"). Functionally, it is equivalent to saying "with thee" in early modern English.

Key points:

• It does not naturally mean "with him."
• It is not an undifferentiated "with" that could be attached to any pronoun at will.
• The personal element (you, him, them, etc.) is built into the Hebrew form itself.

Therefore, at the level of the underlying grammar, the word indicates "with you (singular)," not "with him."

subsection*2. Why "Thee" in the King James?

The King James translators rendered the form straightforwardly, in line with Hebrew morphology: "with thee." Young's Literal Translation does essentially the same thing: "and come in hath Jehovah my God, all holy ones are with thee." In both cases:

• They respect the person and number indicated in the Hebrew suffix.
• They preserve the direct address, even though it creates a shift in perspective that feels slightly abrupt in English.

In other words, they follow the form of the original: "with thee."

subsection*3. Why Do Some Modern Versions Say "With Him"?

Modern translations such as NASB and ESV render the phrase along the lines of "and the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him."

This is not linguistically driven by the Hebrew suffix itself. It is interpretive. The reasons are likely:

1. Smoothing the Narrative Flow The preceding clause speaks of "the LORD my God" in the third person: beginitemize
2. "the LORD my God shall come..."

From an English stylistic standpoint, it feels natural to continue with third‑person reference: "and all the holy ones with him." Modern translators are often willing to alter person or perspective when they judge that the sense is preserved and the English becomes smoother. item Assuming a Continuous Narrator Voice Many modern translation philosophies emphasize consistency of narrative voice. The King James allows for the speaker to shift from talking about the Lord ("the LORD my God shall come") to addressing Him directly ("and all the saints with thee"), even if only for a brief phrase. Modern versions frequently collapse such shifts for the sake of an even reading. item Theological Expectation Since the holy ones are clearly coming in connection with "the LORD my God," translators may feel justified in treating "with thee" functionally as "with Him," in the sense that the reference point is unmistakably the Lord. They choose to translate the practical referent (Him) rather than the grammatical form (thee). endenumerate

Yet this remains an interpretive decision that overrides the explicit grammatical person indicated in the Hebrew.

subsection*4. Is There Real Flexibility in the Hebrew Here?

Regarding your question about flexibility:

• The basic Hebrew form itself does not flex among "you/him/them."
• It is not a neutral "with" that requires a separate pronoun; the pronoun is embedded.

Thus, strictly at the level of morphology and syntax, the form points to "with you [singular]," not "with him." To get to "with him," one must prioritize a reconstructed narrative logic over the explicit person signaled in the text.

subsection*5. What Is Zechariah Doing with the Pronoun Shift?

The interesting question is why Zechariah (or the prophetic speaker) appears to shift from speaking about the Lord to addressing Him.

Observe the structure:

• "and the LORD my God shall come"
• "and all the saints with thee"

The simplest reading is:

• In the first clause, the prophet speaks to his audience about "the LORD my God."
• In the second clause, his focus turns toward the Lord, and he addresses Him directly: "and all the saints with You."

This type of rapid shift is not unusual in prophetic literature. The prophets frequently move:

• From third‑person description of God,
• To second‑person address to God,
• And back again.

Sometimes this happens in a single verse or even a single breath. It reflects the intensity of prophetic speech, which can function as:

• proclamation to the people,
• prayer or praise to God,
• and visionary narration,

all interwoven.

If we then look at the immediately following context (Zechariah 14:6--7), the perspective returns to a third‑person style:

• "And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark: But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD..."

So verse 5 briefly includes a direct address ("with thee") before the narrative returns to third‑person description in verses 6--7. The King James preserves this momentary address; modern versions smooth it away.

subsection*6. Evaluating the King James Choice

With this in mind, your question, "Did the King James translators supply the appropriate pronoun?" can be answered more precisely:

• They did not supply a pronoun arbitrarily; they followed the one present in the Hebrew suffix.
• What they "supplied" was the understanding that the embedded pronoun is second person singular ("thee"), and they rendered it accordingly.
• They did not attempt to harmonize the person of the verb with the earlier third‑person reference to "the LORD my God." They let the Hebrew pattern stand even though it creates an abrupt, yet perfectly legitimate, rhetorical turn.

In that sense, the King James is actually closer to the formal features of the Hebrew text at this point than modern translations that read "with him."

subsection*7. Implications for Interpretation

Theologically and contextually, the difference between "with thee" and "with him" does not alter the major eschatological picture:

• The Lord is coming.
• The holy ones---understood by many as angels, by others as saints, or both---are coming with Him.

Whether the prophet momentarily pivots to address God directly or continues in third person does not change that core reality.

However, from the standpoint of textual sensitivity:

• Recognizing this shift helps us appreciate the prophetic style.
• It warns us about translation choices that prioritize English smoothness over exactness of person and address.
• It illustrates how modern translations sometimes incorporate interpretation into the text itself rather than leaving subtle grammatical phenomena visible to the reader.

In conclusion, the Hebrew form imach in Zechariah 14:5 does not inherently offer flexibility between "with thee" and "with him." It points to "with you" (singular). The King James preserves that second‑person address, reflecting a brief but real switch in the prophet's orientation from speaking about the Lord to speaking to Him. Modern versions that read "with him" are making an interpretive, stylistic adjustment rather than following the strict grammatical form of the Hebrew.

newpage