The Conundrum of Zechariah Ch. 14

[Spiritual Israelite]

But it has to come down from God out of heaven first, which clearly hasn't happened yet. Which then means, verses 6-10, which are undeniably meaning when verse 11 is meaning, can't even get fulfilled unto the NJ comes down from heaven first.

Do you somehow not understand that the heavenly Jerusalem is written about in a different context than that as well in scripture? If the text is figurative, then it doesn't have to be talking about when the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven. It could be talking in the same kind of context as what we see here...

Hebrews 12:18 For you have not come to the mountain that may be touched and that burned with fire, and to blackness and darkness and tempest.....22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

This passage says we have come to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. Do you understand what that is saying? It's present tense. So, it's speaking of the heavenly Jerusalem in a different sense than we see in Revelation 21. What this passage is saying is that we have spiritually become citizens of the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem because of belonging to Jesus Christ. So, why can't Zechariah 14 be speaking in that sense rather than in the sense of when the new heavenly Jerusalem comes down from heaven? There's no reason why not. Even you don't take all of Zechariah 14 literally, right? That's not how you interpret verses 16 to 21. So, why can't verse 8 and/or verse 11 be figurative instead of literal as well?

Yet some of you would have us believe absurd nonsense that verse 8 was already fulfilled 2000 years ago in spite of that verse 11 is yet to be fulfilled.

I think it's absurd for you to think that these verses have to all be taken literally in a physical sense.

Zechariah 14:8 And in that day it shall be That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, Half of them toward the eastern sea And half of them toward the western sea; In both summer and winter it shall occur.

Why can't this verse relate to this passage...

John 7:37 On the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. 38 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.” 39 But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Why can't the living waters referenced in Zechariah 14:8 represent the same thing as the "rivers of living water" that Jesus referenced, which represent the Holy Spirit?

Also, notice that Jesus indicated that He was referencing Scripture there. There are no scriptures which contain the exact words He used there, but I would say it's quite possible that He was referencing Zechariah 14:8 there while paraphrasing the verse rather than quoting it directly.

It is absurd to divorce verse 8 from verse 11. It is when Jerusalem is safely inhabited that verse 8 is meaning.

Who is doing that? Why can't verse 11 be talking about the heavenly Jerusalem being safely inhabited in the sense that we are currently in the heavenly Jerusalem spiritually right now and are safe from God's wrath because of that? Why do you assume that certain verses in Zechariah 14 have to be taken literally when you don't take verses 16 to 21 literally?

I don't know where some of you got your teachings of Zechariah 14 from?

LOL! Nowhere. No honest person can act as if they have Zechariah 14 all figured out. You are fooling yourself here. It's one of the most difficult passages in all of scripture to interpret and, yet, your doctrine is mostly based on that passage. Talk about a doctrine that's on shaky ground. Why don't you want to base your doctrine on more clear, straightforward passages instead?

But man they were some confused teachers if they insist verse 8 was fulfilled 2000 years ago, when verse 8 is meaning during verse 11, but that verse 11 is yet to be fulfilled.

LOL. Do you think anyone is going to take any of these types of comments from you seriously? Someone who tried to rely on some AI to understand Matthew 24:15-21? Don't you know that you have no credibility here? These kinds of comments from you are completely meaningless.

Why can't you figure out of any of these things on your own? Why should I have to tell you that verse 8 can't be meaning 2000 years ago when it is meaning during verse 11, but that verse 11 hasn't been fulfilled yet?

LOL. Why should anyone here want you to tell them anything about Bible doctrine when you consult AI for understanding?

It obviously defies common sense, that if verse 8 is meaning during verse 11, but that verse 11 is future still, that this means verse 8 was fulfilled 2000 years ago.

Yes, that would be true in that scenario, but who is saying otherwise exactly? Give me names.

Nor can you logically apply verse 11 to the here and now in any sense, since the church has to face the 42 month reign of the beast and great tribulation.

HAHAHA! You are so hilarious, David. So, you think we have no choice but to agree with your nonsensical understanding of the 42 month reign of the beast. Think again! Everything you're saying here is based on the assumption that everyone should agree with your overall end times doctrinal beliefs. Nonsense. Yeah, what you're saying would be true if they agreed with how you understand other scriptures, but otherwise there is no reason for anyone to agree with you about this.

Where neither equal what verse 11 records, that being a Jerusalem that is safely inhabited. As if being persecuted, and in some cases martyred, equals being safely inhabited.

Do you understand that we are citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem right now, as Hebrews 12:22 indicates? If we are persecuted, and even martyred, does that mean we are no longer citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem?

No reasonable person would insist being persecuted, and in some cases martyred, equals safely inhabited. Therefore, there is nothing per the past 2000 years that explain verse 11. Which means verse 11 is future still. Which means verses 6-10 are also future still, since they are undeniably meaning when verse 11 is meaning. And I haven't even brought up that verses 16-19 have to fit somewhere as well. Obviously, during when verses 6-11 is meaning.

You of course argue that Scripture interprets Scripture, then have disputes with Scripture doing exactly that.

No, I do not. Your lies do nothing to support your case. You are failing to take into consideration current spiritual realities because of your carnal way of thinking. And you have no explanation for a futurist fulfillment of verses 16 to 19. You can't even offer a guess as to how to apply those verses to the future. But, we're supposed to believe you have a strong grasp on the rest of Zechariah 14? LOL. Think again.

Clearly, this in Revelation 11:15---The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever--is the interpretation of this in Zechariah 14:9--And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one..

Do you understand that in Revelation 11:15 "our Lord" refers to God the Father? It's saying He shall reign forever at that point. That is when Jesus will deliver the kingdom to the Father after He comes again (1 Corinthians 15:22-24). We both agree that Zechariah 14:9 is talking about Jesus and not God the Father. So, Zechariah 14:9 could be referring to the fact that Jesus was given all authority in heaven and earth after His resurrection (Matthew 28:18) and He alone is king over the earth regardless of the presence of any other gods or kings.

Where it is then plainly obvious that Revelation 11:15 is meaning after 2 Thessalonians 2:4 has been fulfilled, which then makes sense of Zechariah 14:9, because now all that remains is just 1 Lord, not two lords. IOW, Zechariah 14:9 cannot be true until 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is no longer true. Because, while 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is still true does not equal there shall be one LORD, and his name one

Are you going to argue that the one meant in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is not trying to make itself the lord over anyone? Yet, Zechariah 14:9 records, that when it is meaning, there shall be one LORD, and his name one. 2 Thessalonians 2:4 clearly contradicts that if Zechariah 14:9 is meaning when 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is meaning.

Someone claiming to be God doesn't change the fact that there is only one God. There is only one LORD and king over the earth right now and that is Jesus. He said so Himself (Matthew 28:18). So, this argument you're making here is extremely weak. As most of your arguments are.

Let me ask you this. What time period do you think Zechariah 12 and 13 refer to in relation to the first and/or second coming of Christ?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It's obvious to me which one it is meaning. It is meaning the new Jerusalem that comes down from God out of heaven. Except it hasn't arrived yet. Maybe spiritually it has in some sense, but not in the sense Revelation 21-22 is meaning, though.

So, you acknowledge that maybe the new Jerusalem has spiritually come in some sense, but, for some reason, you won't even allow for the possibility that Zechariah 14 could be talking about it in that sense. That's why I say you have doctrinal bias. Your bias prevents you from even considering any other views besides Premill.

Therefore, in Zechariah 14, verses 6-11, 16-21, are meaning after the NJ comes down from God out of heaven during the 2nd coming.

Unless those verses are meant to be understood spiritually in some sense. But, you won't even consider that because you are determined to believe in Premill no matter what evidence is given to you to show that Premill is false.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

100% false claim and misrepresentation of my written words

LOL. Don't blame me that your written words come across as total gibberish. You have a view of Daniel 9:24-27 all to yourself. It's utter nonsense. Do you think that God reveals things only to you? Why would He do that?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

How exactly do you think the six things listed in this verse (Daniel 9:24) will be fulfilled? For example, don't you think that Jesus already made reconciliation for iniquity with His death on the cross?

Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

@Truth7t7 Was the question that I asked you here too difficult for you to answer?

 

[Earburner]

I Disagree, the events are future unfulfilled

You disagree because of your false belief and indoctrination by church-ianity to push the 70th week of Dan. 9 out into the far future, looking for their fabricated, one man band, that they love to call "THE" Antichrist.

 

[Earburner]

From my post #57
The (blind) wisdom of men through visible church- ianity have altogether NEGLECTED to understand or teach the most wonderful fact of all from God's perspective. Which is since Pentecost, for the FIRST time God the Father COULD NOW PERMANENTLY dwell/ live within man THROUGH His Son Jesus.
For those of us who ARE born again of His Holy Spirit, we are NOW living in the reality of The Feast of Tabernacles aka (booths-temporary shelter). NO! Not for us or for the Jews to do, but rather for God the Father Himself to do, which is what He worked for and "longsuffered" over for thousands of years, ever since the situation of man's fall into sin, in The Garden. See 2 Peter 3:9

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You disagree because of your false belief and indoctrination by church-ianity to push the 70th week of Dan. 9 out into the far future, looking for their fabricated, one man band, that they love to call "THE" Antichrist.

I have to disagree with you here as far as claiming that his view is because of being indoctrinated by churchianity. Did you read how he interprets Daniel 9:24-27? He thinks the 70 weeks refer to 490 days. A vast majority of the rest of us understand that the 70 weeks represent 490 years. So, he didn't get his view of the duration of the 70 weeks from "churchianity". He got it from his own imagination. But, as far as his belief in an individual future Antichrist, I would agree that he got that idea from "churchianity".

 

[Earburner]

I have to disagree with you here as far as claiming that his view is because of being indoctrinated by churchianity. Did you read how he interprets Daniel 9:24-27? He thinks the 70 weeks refer to 490 days. A vast majority of the rest of us understand that the 70 weeks represent 490 years. So, he didn't get his view of the duration of the 70 weeks from "churchianity". He got it from his own imagination. But, as far as his belief in an individual future Antichrist, I would agree that he got that idea from "churchianity".

Yes! I did correct him on that, as well as any onlookers in my post #48.

 

[Truth7t7]

I have to disagree with you here as far as claiming that his view is because of being indoctrinated by churchianity. Did you read how he interprets Daniel 9:24-27? He thinks the 70 weeks refer to 490 days. A vast majority of the rest of us understand that the 70 weeks represent 490 years. So, he didn't get his view of the duration of the 70 weeks from "churchianity". He got it from his own imagination. But, as far as his belief in an individual future Antichrist, I would agree that he got that idea from "churchianity".

My Holy Bible KJV states "Seventy Weeks" not "Four Hundred Ninety Years", you have obtained your belief from "Man" not God's words

Daniel 9:24-27, Seventy Literal Weeks Explained "Future"?

Daniel's 70 weeks are literal 7 day periods, or 490 literal days.

If Daniel meant 490 years he would have written

(Four Hundred Ninety Years)

Daniel had no restrictions in "Writing" exact numerology as seen below.

Daniel 6:1KJV
It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over the whole kingdom;

Daniel 8:14KJV
And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Daniel 12:11KJV
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

Below in Daniel 10:2-3 we see just another example of Daniel's literal weeks, as Daniel mourned and fasted for 3 literal weeks or 21 days.

Daniel 10:2-3KJV
2 In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks.
3 I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled.

Below in Daniel 9:24-27 we see 70 literal "Future" weeks or 490 days.

When the "Future" call/commandment goes out in Jerusalem to build unto the Jewish Meshiach/Messiah that they wait for (They Denied Jesus Christ) this will start the 7 week period in preparing to build.

62 literal weeks will be in building, and Meshiach/Messiah will be cut off by the future armies surrounding Jerusalem, this stops the building. Luke 21:24, Rev 11:2

The 70th literal week will see (The Beast/The Antichrist) revealed in making a covenant, and in the middle of this literal week he proclaims to be Meshiach/Messiah God to the Jews, and Jesus returned to the apostate church, to start a Millennium on earth.

The 3.5 year tribulation starts at this time.

Daniel 9:24-27KJV
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

[Davidpt]

I think it's absurd for you to think that these verses have to all be taken literally in a physical sense.

Zechariah 14:8 And in that day it shall be That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, Half of them toward the eastern sea And half of them toward the western sea; In both summer and winter it shall occur.

Why can't this verse relate to this passage...

John 7:37 On the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. 38 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.” 39 But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Why can't the living waters referenced in Zechariah 14:8 represent the same thing as the "rivers of living water" that Jesus referenced, which represent the Holy Spirit?

Also, notice that Jesus indicated that He was referencing Scripture there. There are no scriptures which contain the exact words He used there, but I would say it's quite possible that He was referencing Zechariah 14:8 there while paraphrasing the verse rather than quoting it directly.


Who is doing that? Why can't verse 11 be talking about the heavenly Jerusalem being safely inhabited in the sense that we are currently in the heavenly Jerusalem spiritually right now and are safe from God's wrath because of that? Why do you assume that certain verses in Zechariah 14 have to be taken literally when you don't take verses 16 to 21 literally?


LOL! Nowhere. No honest person can act as if they have Zechariah 14 all figured out. You are fooling yourself here. It's one of the most difficult passages in all of scripture to interpret and, yet, your doctrine is mostly based on that passage. Talk about a doctrine that's on shaky ground. Why don't you want to base your doctrine on more clear, straightforward passages instead?

Let's start with the following since I first need to try and understand your mindset in regard to all of the following. And then how your reasoning trumps the way I am reasoning these same things. Unlike you in this case, thus not applying this to you universally, I tend to try and interpret these things in context, not out of context.

And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east--Zechariah 14:4.

How you are applying that and what you are applying it to, what does it have to do with what the remainder of the verse says--and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south?

And how you are applying that and what you are applying it to, what does it have to do with what is recorded in verses 1-3, 5?

Next let's consider verse 8 how you are applying that and what you are applying it to. What does that have to do with what is recorded in verses 6-7? Obviously, verses 6-7 have to fit with something in Zechariah 14 somewhere. If not with verse 8, with what then?

Look next at what verse 12 says.

Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.


Do you agree or disagree that this is meaning before verses 8-11 are meaning? In verse 11 it is not depicting any fighting against Jerusalem in any sense. Right? That means one of two two things then. Either verse 12 is meaning before verses 8-11 are fulfilled. Or that verse 12 is meaning after verses 8-11 have already been fulfiiled.

If we apply verse 12 after that of verses 8-11 it could simply mean verses 8-11 are only focusing on a time period when Christ literally walked the earth 2000 years ago since this would have been basically true at the time--And men shall dwell in it, but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

But guess what would not remain true, the fact 70 AD happened later---and there shall be no more utter destruction? Therefore, it is absurd to apply verse 11 to that of when Christ walked the earth 2000 years ago, when this---and there shall be no more utter destruction--would be contradicted by the events of 70 AD.

Which means we can safely check that off the list, that maybe verse 12 is meaning post verse 11. What does that leave remaining as the only valid option? That verse 12 is meaning before verse 11. Now there is no contradiction with this in verse 11---and there shall be no more utter destruction--as long as we apply verse 11 to an era of time post the 2nd coming. Plus we have to keep in mind that verses 8-10 are clearly meaning during verse 11. And that it absurd to apply verses 8-10 to the past and verse 11 to the future.

But let me guess, though. In your case a contradiction is the better idea since it doesn't conflict with any of your doctrines. IOW, you are obviously being doctrinally biased here if you can't even admit that verse 12 doesn't fit after verses 8-11, that it fits before verses 8-11. And this in verse 11 in light of 70 AD, and in light of Jerusalem is once again on the map, but not even remotely safely inhabited, proves it---and there shall be no more utter destruction

And like I pointed out in other posts. Even if we take verse 11 to be meaning the here and now involving the NT church, the NT church being safely inhabited simply can't fit the text, in any sense. Great tribulation, great wrath of satan, etc, does not equal safely inhabited in any way shape or form.

In verse 11 destruction is the Hebrew word--

khay'-rem
or (Zecheriah 14:11) cherem {kheh'-rem}; from 'charam' (2763); physical (as shutting in) a net (either literally or figuratively); usually a doomed object; abstr. extermination:--(ac-)curse(-d, -d thing), dedicated thing, things which should have been utterly destroyed, (appointed to) utter destruction, devoted (thing), net.


Some see a connection with this no more destruction with this in Revelation 22:3-- And there shall be no more curse. Could they be correct to make the connection? Maybe. It's not like 'curse' can't fit one of the defs of tht Hebrew word in question. Maybe this might even disprove Premil if these things are connected? I guess it boils down to, if the curse is removed entirely, as of Zechariah 14:11, can a rebellion follow the removal of the curse?

 

[Earburner]

My Holy Bible KJV states "Seventy Weeks" not "Four Hundred Ninety Years", you have obtained your belief from "Man" not God's words

Daniel 9:24-27, Seventy Literal Weeks Explained "Future"?

Daniel's 70 weeks are literal 7 day periods, or 490 literal days.

If Daniel meant 490 years he would have written

(Four Hundred Ninety Years)

Daniel had no restrictions in "Writing" exact numerology as seen below.

Daniel 6:1KJV
It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over the whole kingdom;

Daniel 8:14KJV
And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Daniel 12:11KJV
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

Below in Daniel 10:2-3 we see just another example of Daniel's literal weeks, as Daniel mourned and fasted for 3 literal weeks or 21 days.

Daniel 10:2-3KJV
2 In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks.
3 I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled.

Below in Daniel 9:24-27 we see 70 literal "Future" weeks or 490 days.

When the "Future" call/commandment goes out in Jerusalem to build unto the Jewish Meshiach/Messiah that they wait for (They Denied Jesus Christ) this will start the 7 week period in preparing to build.

62 literal weeks will be in building, and Meshiach/Messiah will be cut off by the future armies surrounding Jerusalem, this stops the building. Luke 21:24, Rev 11:2

The 70th literal week will see (The Beast/The Antichrist) revealed in making a covenant, and in the middle of this literal week he proclaims to be Meshiach/Messiah God to the Jews, and Jesus returned to the apostate church, to start a Millennium on earth.

The 3.5 year tribulation starts at this time.

Daniel 9:24-27KJV
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Again and again, you do not understand that God the Father attempted to keep His Son's coming to be a SECRET from the princes of this world, yet provide enough information for those who love God with all their heart to KNOW of His coming.
Romans 16:25
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

I keep telling all to read and study 1 Cor. Ch. 2, but you never seem to improve.
1 Corinthians 2:6-8
Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would NOT have crucified the Lord of glory.

Do YOU UNDERSTAND what would've happened to God's work for our Salvation (Dan. 9:24) if Jesus was ALLOWED TO LIVE OUT his natural life, and NEVER WAS SACRIFICED AS.....THE LAMB OF GOD, who taketh away the sin of the world??
Ans. NO ONE'S sins would have been forgiven......EVER!!!

 

[Davidpt]

So, you acknowledge that maybe the new Jerusalem has spiritually come in some sense, but, for some reason, you won't even allow for the possibility that Zechariah 14 could be talking about it in that sense. That's why I say you have doctrinal bias. Your bias prevents you from even considering any other views besides Premill.


Unless those verses are meant to be understood spiritually in some sense. But, you won't even consider that because you are determined to believe in Premill no matter what evidence is given to you to show that Premill is false.

In my view, the sense it is meaning now is not meaning forever. Verse 11 requires a Jerusalem that is safely inhabited forever. IOW, you cannot fit forever into an age that is finite. If the sense the heavenly Jerusalem is being understood in, in the here and now is meaning it will forever be understood in that sense, then what is Revelation 21-22 rambling on about? Why would the NJ need to come down from God out of heaven in the future if it is already here forever in the sense it is being spiritually taken pertaining to the here and now?

In the here and now we live by faith not by sight. You would think the exact opposite will be true once He bodily returns. The way the heavenly Jerusalem is being understood in the here and now is connected with faith not sight. How can when Revelation 21-22 is meaning still involve faith rather than sight? That doesn't mean we have to take every single thing in Revelation 21-22 in the literal sense. Yet it still involves seeing and experiencing something that can be seen rather than unseen, like now.

 

[Marty fox]

Let's start with the following since I first need to try and understand your mindset in regard to all of the following. And then how your reasoning trumps the way I am reasoning these same things. Unlike you in this case, thus not applying this to you universally, I tend to try and interpret these things in context, not out of context.

And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east--Zechariah 14:4.

How you are applying that and what you are applying it to, what does it have to do with what the remainder of the verse says--and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south?

And how you are applying that and what you are applying it to, what does it have to do with what is recorded in verses 1-3, 5?

Next let's consider verse 8 how you are applying that and what you are applying it to. What does that have to do with what is recorded in verses 6-7? Obviously, verses 6-7 have to fit with something in Zechariah 14 somewhere. If not with verse 8, with what then?

Look next at what verse 12 says.

Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.


Do you agree or disagree that this is meaning before verses 8-11 are meaning? In verse 11 it is not depicting any fighting against Jerusalem in any sense. Right? That means one of two two things then. Either verse 12 is meaning before verses 8-11 are fulfilled. Or that verse 12 is meaning after verses 8-11 have already been fulfiiled.

If we apply verse 12 after that of verses 8-11 it could simply mean verses 8-11 are only focusing on a time period when Christ literally walked the earth 2000 years ago since this would have been basically true at the time--And men shall dwell in it, but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

But guess what would not remain true, the fact 70 AD happened later---and there shall be no more utter destruction? Therefore, it is absurd to apply verse 11 to that of when Christ walked the earth 2000 years ago, when this---and there shall be no more utter destruction--would be contradicted by the events of 70 AD.

Which means we can safely check that off the list, that maybe verse 12 is meaning post verse 11. What does that leave remaining as the only valid option? That verse 12 is meaning before verse 11. Now there is no contradiction with this in verse 11---and there shall be no more utter destruction--as long as we apply verse 11 to an era of time post the 2nd coming. Plus we have to keep in mind that verses 8-10 are clearly meaning during verse 11. And that it absurd to apply verses 8-10 to the past and verse 11 to the future.

But let me guess, though. In your case a contradiction is the better idea since it doesn't conflict with any of your doctrines. IOW, you are obviously being doctrinally biased here if you can't even admit that verse 12 doesn't fit after verses 8-11, that it fits before verses 8-11.

Well, when was "that day"

Zechariah 14
10 “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit[a] of grace and supplication. They will look on[b] me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. 11 On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be as great as the weeping of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo.

When was a spirit of grace poured out?

When did people look at Jesus pierced on a cross and weep and mourn?

13
1 “On that day a fountain will be opened to the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and impurity.

When did a fountain open to cleanse people from sin and impurity?

7 “Awake, sword, against my shepherd,
against the man who is close to me!”
declares the Lord Almighty.
“Strike the shepherd,
and the sheep will be scattered,
and I will turn my hand against the little ones.

When was the Shepard struck and the sheep scatter?

14
A day of the Lord is coming, Jerusalem, when your possessions will be plundered and divided up within your very walls.

2 I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city

When was Jerusalem sieged and plundered by the surrounding nations?

4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south

When did Jesus stand on the mount of Olives?

8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter.

When did living water flow from Jerusalem to the nations?

"In that day" started at the first advent.

Until one realizes that these chapters in Zechariah talks about Literal Jerusalem and spiritual Jerusalem it will never make sense

 

[Davidpt]

When did Jesus stand on the mount of Olives?

8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter.

When did living water flow from Jerusalem to the nations?

"In that day" started at the first advent.

Until one realizes that these chapters in Zechariah talks about Literal Jerusalem and spiritual Jerusalem it will never make sense

What is your view of verse 2 and 5, since it is obviously connected with Him standing on the mount of Olives in verse 4? No mattrer how you look at it then, no matter how one interprets verse 2, verse 2 is clearly meaning post the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Christ back into heaven. Which then means what is recorded in verse 4 is applicable after when verse 2 is meaning, and not before verse 2 is meaning. To apply it in the latter manner is an example of sloppy eisegesis, not exegesis, since it would have verse 4 out of context, thus having zero to do with any of the verses that precede it, nor with verse 5 that follows it.

Unless you can convincingly show the connection between verse 4 with that of verses 1-3, 5, your interpretation of verse 4 is nonsensical in the meantime.

 

[Earburner]

My Holy Bible KJV states "Seventy Weeks" not "Four Hundred Ninety Years", you have obtained your belief from "Man" not God's words

Daniel 9:24-27, Seventy Literal Weeks Explained "Future"?

Daniel's 70 weeks are literal 7 day periods, or 490 literal days.

If Daniel meant 490 years he would have written

(Four Hundred Ninety Years)

Daniel had no restrictions in "Writing" exact numerology as seen below.

Daniel 6:1KJV
It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over the whole kingdom;

Daniel 8:14KJV
And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Daniel 12:11KJV
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

Below in Daniel 10:2-3 we see just another example of Daniel's literal weeks, as Daniel mourned and fasted for 3 literal weeks or 21 days.

Daniel 10:2-3KJV
2 In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks.
3 I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled.

Below in Daniel 9:24-27 we see 70 literal "Future" weeks or 490 days.

When the "Future" call/commandment goes out in Jerusalem to build unto the Jewish Meshiach/Messiah that they wait for (They Denied Jesus Christ) this will start the 7 week period in preparing to build.

62 literal weeks will be in building, and Meshiach/Messiah will be cut off by the future armies surrounding Jerusalem, this stops the building. Luke 21:24, Rev 11:2

The 70th literal week will see (The Beast/The Antichrist) revealed in making a covenant, and in the middle of this literal week he proclaims to be Meshiach/Messiah God to the Jews, and Jesus returned to the apostate church, to start a Millennium on earth.

The 3.5 year tribulation starts at this time.

Daniel 9:24-27KJV
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Ref. my post #48.
And still you are not paying attention!!!
Again, please read what Dan. 9:25 actually says in the first part of that verse. Then, if you can, please tell us the approximate time of when the going forth of the commandment historically took place.
Your clue is in Ezra 1:3 and 6:14

Dan. 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from "the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem" unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

 

[Davidpt]

Until one realizes that these chapters in Zechariah talks about Literal Jerusalem and spiritual Jerusalem it will never make sense

Let me take a guess here. You need Jerusalem to also be meaning in the literal sense on account of verse 2 in Zechariah 14. Since you obviously take verse 2 to mean 70 AD. How can you not when you basically take a lot of things to mean 70 AD?

As if it makes sense that 2000 years ago one lone nation equaled all nations, thus the Roman nation. As if it makes sense that God then fought the Romans on behalf of the occupants of Jerusalem, unbelieving Jews in this case. And here is where it gets really funny per this scenario, as if it's not funny enough already. This indicates that the battle between God and the Romans, the Romans were the victors since they managed to destroy both the city and the temple. Plus slaughtered numerous occupants of the city while Roman casualties were minimal. Imagine that, God is fighting the Romans and can't even manage to destroy very many of them.

Except God is supposed to be defending these things according to verse 3. Yet, the all powerful God per this scenario got outsmarted and defeated by the Romans 2000 years ago. Let's just make God look less powerful than mere humans, is a nice look for Him, right? Since He obviously did not win the battle against the Romans if verse 2 and 3 pertain to those events.

I don't know who some of your teachers were/are that teach you absurd nonsense like this, but they are the last people any of you should be listening to if they have you so brainwashed that you naively believe verse 2 involved 70 AD somehow. How can anyone in their right mind take some of you serious about some of these things? Notice I said 'some of these things' not 'all of these things'. Just because you might be way off about some of these things in ch 14, that doesn't automatically mean you are way off pertaining to other chapters in Zechariah. Maybe some of it you are, maybe some of it you are not.

Take this passage, for example.

Zechariah 8:3 Thus saith the LORD; I am returned unto Zion, and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem: and Jerusalem shall be called a city of truth; and the mountain of the LORD of hosts the holy mountain.
4 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; There shall yet old men and old women dwell in the streets of Jerusalem, and every man with his staff in his hand for very age.
5 And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in the streets thereof.

Can't picture this having already been fulfilled. But I'm betting you can.

 

[Marty fox]

What is your view of verse 2 and 5, since it is obviously connected with Him standing on the mount of Olives in verse 4? No mattrer how you look at it then, no matter how one interprets verse 2, verse 2 is clearly meaning post the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Christ back into heaven. Which then means what is recorded in verse 4 is applicable after when verse 2 is meaning, and not before verse 2 is meaning. To apply it in the latter manner is an example of sloppy eisegesis, not exegesis, since it would have verse 4 out of context, thus having zero to do with any of the verses that precede it, nor with verse 5 that follows it.

Unless you can convincingly show the connection between verse 4 with that of verses 1-3, 5, your interpretation of verse 4 is nonsensical in the meantime.

How about before I answer any of your questions you actually answer each question I asked you first

True Debating isn‘t avoiding questions and then asking questions, how can I possibly debate if you ignore my questions?

We have debated many time in the past and I have answered every question you have ever asked me please give me the same curiosity

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

My Holy Bible KJV states "Seventy Weeks" not "Four Hundred Ninety Years", you have obtained your belief from "Man" not God's words

Yes, because there's no symbolism anywhere in the book of Daniel, right? It's all literal text throughout the book, right?

Daniel 9:24-27, Seventy Literal Weeks Explained "Future"?

Daniel's 70 weeks are literal 7 day periods, or 490 literal days.

If Daniel meant 490 years he would have written

(Four Hundred Ninety Years)

It's hilarious that you think you have the authority to say what Daniel should have written if he meant 490 years. You talk as if everything in the book of Daniel is literal, which it obviously is not.

Daniel had no restrictions in "Writing" exact numerology as seen below.

Daniel 6:1KJV
It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over the whole kingdom;

Daniel 8:14KJV
And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Daniel 12:11KJV
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

Yes, everything he wrote in the book was literal text, obviously. How can I argue with this kind of airtight argument?

Below in Daniel 10:2-3 we see just another example of Daniel's literal weeks, as Daniel mourned and fasted for 3 literal weeks or 21 days.

Daniel 10:2-3KJV
2 In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks.
3 I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled.

Goodness sakes. This is as weak of an argument as there can be. As if he was required to only refer to literal time periods every time he referred to a time period. Why is it that you don't take the thousand years in Revelation 20 literally when you think all of the other time periods in Revelation are literal? Somehow, you have no problem with that, but can't allow for the 70 weeks to not be 70 literal seven day weeks. Why are you so inconsistent like that?

Below in Daniel 9:24-27 we see 70 literal "Future" weeks or 490 days.

When the "Future" call/commandment goes out in Jerusalem to build unto the Jewish Meshiach/Messiah that they wait for (They Denied Jesus Christ) this will start the 7 week period in preparing to build.

62 literal weeks will be in building, and Meshiach/Messiah will be cut off by the future armies surrounding Jerusalem, this stops the building. Luke 21:24, Rev 11:2

This is fairy tale nonsense. The text refers to the Messiah, who is Jesus, not some fake Meshiach/Messiah. Stop changing the text!

Daniel 9:26 “And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. he end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

This verse relates directly to this one:

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment, And who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.

Jesus was cut off from the land of the living (crucified), but not for Himself. It was for the transgressions of His people.

It's unbelievable to me that any Christians would not be able to understand this. It should be obvious, yet you don't get it at all.

The 70th literal week will see (The Beast/The Antichrist) revealed in making a covenant, and in the middle of this literal week he proclaims to be Meshiach/Messiah God to the Jews, and Jesus returned to the apostate church, to start a Millennium on earth.

The 3.5 year tribulation starts at this time.

Daniel 9:24-27KJV
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Such nonsense. Just like dispies do, you take verses that are about Jesus Christ and apply to them some imaginary Antichrist instead. Terrible.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Let's start with the following since I first need to try and understand your mindset in regard to all of the following. And then how your reasoning trumps the way I am reasoning these same things. Unlike you in this case, thus not applying this to you universally, I tend to try and interpret these things in context, not out of context.

You are unable to debate like an adult. All you are able to do is make false accusations. I always try to interpret things in context while being careful to not make scripture contradict itself. You are the one who tries to interpret verses in isolation from the rest of scripture. Context is not just determined by the verse itself or even just the surrounding verses, but by all of scripture. That's a concept that you clearly do not understand at all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

In my view, the sense it is meaning now is not meaning forever. Verse 11 requires a Jerusalem that is safely inhabited forever. IOW, you cannot fit forever into an age that is finite. If the sense the heavenly Jerusalem is being understood in, in the here and now is meaning it will forever be understood in that sense,

I have no idea of what you're trying to say here, so let me just ask you a question. What is your understanding of what the heavenly Jerusalem is, as described in the following verse...

Hebrews 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,

then what is Revelation 21-22 rambling on about?

What are you rambling on about? I would never describe scripture as rambling on about anything. You should have more reverence for scripture than to describe it like that.

Why would the NJ need to come down from God out of heaven in the future if it is already here forever in the sense it is being spiritually taken pertaining to the here and now?

The New Jerusalem is not a literal city that is in heaven. Do you understand that? Probably not. It is described as "the bride, the Lamb's wife" (Revelation 21:9). Tell me what you think is the bride of Christ. Do you not think it's the church? That is what Paul indicated in Ephesians 5:22-32. So, it's simply describing God finally dwelling together with His church for eternity while bringing heaven to the earth in the form of the new (renewed) heaven and new (renewed) earth. If you take these symbolic texts literally, it just causes confusion.

In the here and now we live by faith not by sight. You would think the exact opposite will be true once He bodily returns.

It will be. What are you even talking about? It's impossible to have a discussion with you because you're just all over the place and impossible to follow.

The way the heavenly Jerusalem is being understood in the here and now is connected with faith not sight.

Yeah, so? What is your point?

How can when Revelation 21-22 is meaning still involve faith rather than sight?

It doesn't. Why are you asking this? This is hopeless.

That doesn't mean we have to take every single thing in Revelation 21-22 in the literal sense.

Of course! That's what I'm trying to tell you. That includes the New Jerusalem itself. You seem to want to think of it as some kind of literal city, but it's not.

Yet it still involves seeing and experiencing something that can be seen rather than unseen, like now.

Right. What is your point? I'm not saying that Revelation 21 applies to the here and now. Is that what you thought I was saying. This is a waste of time. Just believe what you want and interpret Zechariah 14 however you want. Meanwhlie, I will base my doctrine on more clear, straightforward passages.