Trying to parse the scriptures about the End

[Selah7]

…Continued…

Let’s do one teaching at a time.  (maybe from the Bible, not a paste job?)

 

[Justin Adams]

Dispensationalists—those enamored with the notion that Christ will return to the earth to establish a political kingdom over which he will reign for one thousand years—rely heavily upon Zechariah, chapter fourteen, as an important Old Testament element of the premillennial scheme. Dispensational writer Hobert E. Freeman characterizes this chapter as a description of “the destruction of Israel’s enemies, salvation of Jerusalem and the millennial reign of the Messiah over all the world from Zion.” He further states:

The prophecy of Zechariah is to the Old Testament what the book of Revelation is to the New. It is the Apocalypse of the Old Testament which portrays God’s future dealings with His chosen people Israel . . . . The book of Zechariah, especially chapter 14, stands as a continual corrective to all those theories which deny the literal, future restoration of Israel, after a period of chastening, in her own land, over whom the Messiah will reign in Zion (1968, 334-335).

Dramatically, advocates of dispensational theology allege that Zechariah 14:1-3 contains a description of the approaching “battle of Armageddon,” which supposedly will be consummated by the descent of Christ “upon the mount of Olives” (v. 4) to overthrow his enemies and to commence his millennial reign.

The truth of the matter is, Zechariah 14 has no reference whatever to a millennial reign of Christ upon the earth. The Bible indisputably teaches that the second coming of the Lord will terminate all earthly affairs (2 Peter 3:4, 10).

A Look at the Text

The prophet Zechariah foretells a coming “day of Jehovah” when the nations will be gathered against “Jerusalem” for a great battle. The horrors of the conflict are interrupted when the Lord intervenes and defends the city against the nations. The mount of Olives east of Jerusalem is rent asunder, providing a passageway of escape for the faithful. The enemies of God are punished with fearful plagues and henceforth Jerusalem dwells in safety, and from year to year the people worship Jehovah who is “King over the whole earth.”

Concerning this exciting chapter, let us note the following:

(1) How would one determine that this prophecy has to do with a “millennial reign” of Christ upon the earth? Did Jesus, during his earthly ministry, so interpret it? Did any inspired New Testament writer quote from Zechariah 14, giving it a dispensational interpretation? The answer is, “No.” There is no evidence at all that would point this prophecy in the direction of premillennialism.

Actually, New Testament writers repeatedly stress that the prophetic thrust of the Old Testament was concerning the salvation of grace (1 Peter 1:10-11) which burst into bloom with the dawning of the gospel dispensation. Peter affirmed that “all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days” (Acts 3:24). The “these days” were the days of the Christian age. The dispensational view of Zechariah 14 is arbitrary and without evidential proof.

(2) A fundamental problem with premillennial theology is its inability to discern the difference between the literal and figurative elements of the Scriptures. Much of the prophecy of Old Testament literature is couched in figurative jargon, and those who do not recognize this principle are doomed to failure in their interpretation of the text. In his classic book, Biblical Hermeneutics, Professor Milton Terry wrote: “A thorough interpretation of the prophetic portions of the holy Scripture is largely dependent upon a mastery of the principles and laws of figurative language, and of types and symbols” (1890, 313).

The Folly of Literalizing Zechariah 14

A careful study of Zechariah 14 will reveal that those who attempt to literalize the message of this chapter, as the premillennialists do, are pursuing a disastrous course of interpretation.

Consider the following:

(1) If this chapter refers to the literal return of Christ (i.e., the second coming) upon the mount of Olives, exactly who is it that will make that escape flight to the east when the mountain is cleft? It cannot be the wicked, for the Bible plainly teaches that they will be destroyed when the Lord returns (Matthew 25:31-46; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9). Moreover, it cannot be the righteous, for they will be “caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air” (1 Thessalonians 4:17). Who else, pray tell, is left?

(2) Verse eight speaks of living waters going forth from Jerusalem in summer and in winter. Since summer and winter will occur only as long as the earth remains (Genesis 8:22), and as the earth will not remain beyond the coming of Christ (2 Peter 3:4, 10), it is obvious that the events of this verse cannot transpire after the literal return of Jesus—which supposedly is alluded to in verse four.

(3) Verse twelve tells of Jehovah smiting his enemies and their “flesh” being consumed. Again, this cannot refer to a period after the literal return of Christ; the coming of the Lord will signal “the end,” at which point the dead will be raised, and the living—in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye—will be changed from flesh to a new, spiritual essence. We will pass from corruption to incorruption, from mortality to immortality (1 Corinthians 15:23-24, 51-53).

Consequences Resulting from the Dispensational View of Zechariah 14

The dispensational view of Zechariah 14 strikes at the very heart of the nature of Christ’s atoning work at the cross.

Verses sixteen and twenty-one speak of those who go up to observe the feast of tabernacles, and who offer sacrifices. Again, dispensationalists literalize the language, asserting that Judaism, with all its carnality (cf. Hebrews 9:10) and animal blood, will be revived in the “millennial” age. A thoughtful writer focuses upon the weaknesses of this view:

Are these interpreters ready to accept the restoration of the Old Testament feast with its offering of animal sacrifices? During the feast of tabernacles, which began on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, daily offerings of animals were made by fire, 199 animals of all kinds were offered, “besides the continual burn-offering, and the meal offerings thereof, and the drink offerings thereof” (Num. 29:12-38). Among these daily offerings was “one he-goat for a sin-offering.” Jesus is our sin-offering, and if we go back to offering he-goats for sin-offerings we must reject Jesus as a sufficient offering for our sins (Lanier 1965, 633).

The Old Testament law, with its rivers of animal blood, was abolished at the cross (Ephesians 2:15-16), hence has been “taken” (erken—in the perfect tense, denoting the permanent abolition of the law of Moses) away for ever (Colossians 2:14).

Truly, dispensationalism is a Judaistic, materialistic, and infidelic system. (For more information on the implications associated with dispensational premillennialism, see our article, Examining Premillennialism.)

Conclusion

Whatever else the meaning of Zechariah 14 may be, it cannot be harmonized with premillennial theology. Two common views of this remarkable chapter, entertained by non-millennial scholars, are as follows:

(1) Some hold it to be a symbolic prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, together with a spread of the gospel throughout the Christian age thereafter (cf. Collins 1954, 761-763; Wallace 1960, 246-248).

(2) The better view, in this writer’s judgment, suggests that the language is a figurative depiction of the history of spiritual “Jerusalem” (the church), from the time of its commencement on the day of Pentecost throughout the Christian age (see Hengstenberg n.d., 1155-1182; Laetsch 1956, 493-506). Woudstra had a nice summary of the matter:

From the mixed character of the imagery employed, referring now to cataclysmic upheavals, now to regular pilgrimages to Jerusalem, it seems to this writer that no such literal interpretation of the passages is intended. The prophecy has in view various aspects of the gospel age with particular emphasis on its conclusion (1960, 377-378).

The millennialist view of Zechariah 14 is to be rejected summarily.

Related Articles

Examining Premillennialism

Jehovah’s Righteous Branch

The Regeneration – A Study of Matthew 19:28

A Study of Matthew 24

Armageddon: The Next of the “Left-Behind” Series

Matthew’s Use of the Term “Fulfilled”

Messianic Previews in the Book of Zechariah

Romans 8:21 — Creation Delivered

Behold, the Man!

Jesus Foretells the Coming Kingdom

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/120-dispensationalism-and-zechariah-14

Edited June 24, 2021 by Justin Adams

[Selah7]

@Justin Adams  It would be nice to take one teaching at a time proved or disproved by the the true Word of God.  

[Justin Adams]

5 minutes ago, Selah7 said:

@Justin Adams  It would be nice to take one teaching at a time proved or disproved by the the true Word of God.  

I have laid out precisely the Dispensational views.

All the normal views were pretty much the same until Darby came along. Then 200 years ago we got the pre-mil etc doctrine forced on the church by free copies of Scofield's bible etc ect. It is an errant set of doctrines and principles and so elusive that many do not even realise where it came from. Dispensational dogma and indoctrination is just plain aberrant.  

Edited June 24, 2021 by Justin Adams

[Selah7]

1 minute ago, Justin Adams said:

I have laid out precisely the Dispensational views.

All the normal views were pretty much the same until Darby came along. Then 200 years ago we got the pre-mil etc doctrine forced on the church by free copies of Scofield's bible etc ect. It is an errant set of doctrines and principles and so elusive that many do not even realise where it came from. Dispensational dogma and indoctrination.

I don’t know who Darby is or what principles he teaches.  I don’t have a Scofield Bible.  I use the King James Bible.  I would like to hear your own beliefs without using a paste job.  These articles are wayyy biased and extremely condescending; thus without integrity.  The only thing that will change anyone’s mind is simple Scripture—the TRUTH of God’s Word in context.  If I believed everything you paste, then this would be no different than believing whatever Darby says, whoever he is.  See what I mean? 

[Justin Adams]

1 minute ago, Selah7 said:

whatever Darby says, whoever he is

My point entirely. Most of us never research what comes from the pulpit. We do not even know why and where most stuff is preached to us. Most pre-mil believers and rapturists get their millennium ideas from a wrong teaching about Daniel and Revelation. Read my 'Futurist' OP to understand it more.

One must be steeped in Tanakh 'prophet speak' to get an inkling of much of the new Testament.

[Alive]

I have been thinking much lately about redemptive history and prophecy in terms of covenants and how 'Grace' has been since the beginning, been THE covenant that all others not just point to, but also illustrate and encompass. In a conversation with a brother, I mentioned the first was Gen 3.15 and he wisely stated that even 'Creation' was Grace.

Perhaps an OP on this would help.

A covenant always has conditions and a ratification.

Also, most prophecy has multiple aspects regarding fulfillment, so there is partial fulfillment and then the rest later. The most glaring is the Messianic prophecies.

The concept of 'Israel' is another.

Ask yourself--what was the covenant made with Israel. Not Abraham, but Israel the nation. What was the 'condition'? What was the "IF" and "IF NOT"?

What covenant and fulfillment did Israel represent? Hint--there are two wrapped up in One.

[Selah7]

49 minutes ago, Alive said:

I have been thinking much lately about redemptive history and prophecy in terms of covenants and how 'Grace' has been since the beginning, been THE covenant that all others not just point to, but also illustrate and encompass. In a conversation with a brother, I mentioned the first was Gen 3.15 and he wisely stated that even 'Creation' was Grace.

Perhaps an OP on this would help.

A covenant always has conditions and a ratification.

Also, most prophecy has multiple aspects regarding fulfillment, so there is partial fulfillment and then the rest later. The most glaring is the Messianic prophecies.

The concept of 'Israel' is another.

Ask yourself--what was the covenant made with Israel. Not Abraham, but Israel the nation. What was the 'condition'? What was the "IF" and "IF NOT"?

What covenant and fulfillment did Israel represent? Hint--there are two wrapped up in One.

I believe Israel represents Grace—Jesus Christ.

Genesis 49:24

24 But his bow remained in strength,
And the arms of his hands were [a]made strong
By the hands of the Mighty God of Jacob
(From there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel),

 

[Alive]

22 minutes ago, Selah7 said:

I believe Israel represents Grace—Jesus Christ.

Genesis 49:24

24 But his bow remained in strength,
And the arms of his hands were [a]made strong
By the hands of the Mighty God of Jacob
(From there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel),

 

Yes--just as all covenants do. Consider that 'Israel' the nation and land also represent a set aside area where God's Kingdom/Authority extend into the earth in a practical and illustrative manner.

Then follow that line of thinking.

What happened and then what happened?

:-)

[Selah7]

31 minutes ago, Alive said:

Yes--just as all covenants do. Consider that 'Israel' the nation and land also represent a set aside area where God's Kingdom/Authority extend into the earth in a practical and illustrative manner.

Then follow that line of thinking.

What happened and then what happened?

:-)

Uhhhh… If I’m thinking along the lines of the Promised Land would I be way off?  I like challenges.