The Conundrum of Zechariah Ch. 14

[Davidpt]

Why would I want to pretend the last/final day of the day of the Lord that came in these last days has already come? The FINAL or LAST DAY of the Day of the Lord shall be darkness when it finally comes when the seventh/last trumpet begins to sound. The woe shall be upon all who shall be unaware of it coming. Yes, I believe we have been living in the DOTL since the advent of Christ when He came in His day/age/time to usher in the Kingdom of God in heaven.

My [point is, there is only one DOTL post Christ's birth, and that it hasn't arrived yet, in any sense. The NT knows zero about a DOTL that already began 2000 years ago and is still in progress. And since Zechariah 14 also involves the DOTL, and is also meaning post Christ's birth, that should tell any objective unbiased person that it's the same DOTL that the NT speaks of. Except we are seeing it from another angle. What's funny about it, the way you have chosen to view the DOTL, well, even Zechariah 14:1 obviously can't fit that.

Plus, clearly, the DOTL is not a single day event. You of course agree with that, except I'm not meaning it like you are taking it to mean. I'm simply saying that once the DOTL begins it's not going to be an event that ends the same day it begins. In my view the 7 vials of wrath are poured out during the DOTL. And no way could all of those things involve a single day or less.

Isaiah 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

Revelation 15:1 And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.

Revelation 16:1 And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.

All 3 passages have this in common---wrath and great anger.

You are apparently ignoring what some of these texts are actually saying. Let's use the text in Acts 2 as an example. You are conflating some of these things below rather than separating them.

Acts 2:14 ¶But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

In verse 20, do you not see this word 'before'? It would be like saying---First, Christ's first advent and the 2000 years that follow, before that great and notable day come, thus involving His 2nd coming at some point during the DOTL.

No one, including you, would insist we have been experiencing His 2nd coming for the past 2000 years. His 2nd coming doesn't belong with this part--Christ's first advent and the 2000 years that follow

And in the same way, that great and notable day, thus the DOTL, does not belong with this part--verses 16-18, 21. It follows those parts. After all, there is a 'before' in verse 20. And everyone, including you, knows what a 'before' means. 'Before' never means parallel with something.

But if it does, provide some examples then. A good example would be my analogy involving the 1st and 2nd advent. Prove how the 2nd advent can run in parallel with the first advent for the past 2000 years, rather than the first advent and the 2000 years that follow it have to occur before the 2nd advent can occur.

 

[rwb]

My [point is, there is only one DOTL post Christ's birth, and that it hasn't arrived yet, in any sense. The NT knows zero about a DOTL that already began 2000 years ago and is still in progress. And since Zechariah 14 also involves the DOTL, and is also meaning post Christ's birth, that should tell any objective unbiased person that it's the same DOTL that the NT speaks of. Except we are seeing it from another angle. What's funny about it, the way you have chosen to view the DOTL, well, even Zechariah 14:1 obviously can't fit that.

Plus, clearly, the DOTL is not a single day event. You of course agree with that, except I'm not meaning it like you are taking it to mean. I'm simply saying that once the DOTL begins it's not going to be an event that ends the same day it begins. In my view the 7 vials of wrath are poured out during the DOTL. And no way could all of those things involve a single day or less.

Isaiah 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

Revelation 15:1 And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.

Revelation 16:1 And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.

All 3 passages have this in common---wrath and great anger.

You are apparently ignoring what some of these texts are actually saying. Let's use the text in Acts 2 as an example. You are conflating some of these things below rather than separating them.

Acts 2:14 ¶But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

In verse 20, do you not see this word 'before'? It would be like saying---First, Christ's first advent and the 2000 years that follow, before that great and notable day come, thus involving His 2nd coming at some point during the DOTL.

No one, including you, would insist we have been experiencing His 2nd coming for the past 2000 years. His 2nd 2nd coming doesn't belong with this part--Christ's first advent and the 2000 years that follow

And in the same way, that great and notable day, thus the DOTL, does not belong with this part--verses 16-18, 21. It follows those parts. After all, there is a 'before' in verse 20. And everyone, including you, knows what a 'before' means. 'Before' never means parallel with something.

But if it does, provide some examples then. A good example would be my analogy involving the 1st and 2nd advent. Prove how the 2nd advent can run in parallel with the first advent for the past 2000 years, rather than the first advent and the 2000 years that follow it have to occur before the 2nd advent can occur.

You apparently ignore that 'before' in verse 20 above and have all these other things running in parallel with that great and notable day rather than all these other things have to be fulfilled first, before that great and notable day can even come.

The Prophets of Old prophesy of the DOTL that was to come when man would call upon the name of the Lord to be saved. I would hope that you would not deny that man has been calling upon His name since He came to earth a man.

The prophesies from the Prophets of Old also speak of the DOTL that was coming as both "great and terrible", with both salvation and wrath. What the Prophets don't say is that this speaks of two different time periods of the DOTL.

Peter also, when quoting the Prophet Joel speaks of the DOTL that came to pass at Pentecost in these last days when man would call upon the name of the Lord to be saved. But Peter also says the great and notable DOTL shall also be in these last days when man calling upon the name of the Lord and when the "sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood". Neither Joel, nor Peter are showing two separate time periods for the DOTL. Peter is not contradicting himself but showing how the prophesy from Joel is being and shall be fulfilled in these last days, he quotes from Joel as being the DOTL. The Prophets of Old also prophesy of the DOTL that would come would be when man calls upon the name of the Lord, but they also prophesy of the DOTL as being a time of the Lord's wrath and fierce anger when He shall destroy the sinners. When His great anger will shake the heavens in that day.

Isaiah 13:9 (KJV) Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

Isaiah 13:13 (KJV) Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.

We only find mention of the DOTL in the New Testament as the last/final day of these last days the Prophets of Old foretell as the DOTL. When the New Testament records what shall come to pass on the DOTL it is always of Christ coming again the second and only time at the end of this age.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The Prophets of Old call connect these last days with the DOTL, I quote from them!!! Why do I have to spell everything out for you ALL the time?

LOL. They all indicate that the last days lead up to the day of the Lord just like Peter does in Acts 2:16-21 and 2 Peter 3:3-13.

You never say the fulfillment of the above what has not begun???

Read what you said here and see if even you can understand it. Can you try asking this again in a way that can be understood?

You have repeatedly said the DOTL will come when Christ comes again!

Yes, I have.

But then you also acknowledge that much of what the prophets foretell has come in these last days???

That is correct.

Things that pertain to the DOTL!

Things that lead up to the day of the Lord that scripture says will come unexpectedly like a thief in the and bring sudden destruction by fire upon unbelievers from which they shall not escape.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

My [point is, there is only one DOTL post Christ's birth, and that it hasn't arrived yet, in any sense. The NT knows zero about a DOTL that already began 2000 years ago and is still in progress. And since Zechariah 14 also involves the DOTL, and is also meaning post Christ's birth, that should tell any objective unbiased person that it's the same DOTL that the NT speaks of. Except we are seeing it from another angle. What's funny about it, the way you have chosen to view the DOTL, well, even Zechariah 14:1 obviously can't fit that.

Plus, clearly, the DOTL is not a single day event. You of course agree with that, except I'm not meaning it like you are taking it to mean.

Not recognizing it as a single day event, as it is portrayed by Paul and Peter (1 Thess 4:14-5:4, 2 Peter 3:10-12), is why both of you are so confused. It's why he tries to change the reference to "the day of the Lord" in 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 into "the final day of the Lord" and it's why you interpret Zechariah 14 in a way that blatantly contradicts those two passages.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The Prophets of Old prophesy of the DOTL that was to come when man would call upon the name of the Lord to be saved.

You completely ignored what he said to you about this and didn't address it. Let's look at the text itself.

Acts 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: 18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: 19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come: 21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

What Peter did here is quote Joel 2:28-32. And what it indicates is that the time period during which people would call upon the name of the Lord to be saved is called "the last days". And they happen "BEFORE the great and notable day of the Lord come". So, Peter indicated that the last days lead up to the day of the Lord. But, you keep trying to say that the last days and the day of the Lord are the same thing. That is not what scripture teaches. It's not what Peter indicated. Or should I say it's not what Joel indicated since he was just quoting Joel.

 

[Davidpt]

Here is something interesting that I noticed just today, where pretty much everyone appears to be overlooking. Amils of course won't find it interesting since most of them in this thread insist the 1st advent and the 2000 years that follow is what is in view throughout Zechariah 14. And not the final days of this age, followed by the 2nd coming, followed by what follows the 2nd coming, such as verses 6-11.

Zechariah 14:6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.


This---that at evening time it shall be light---seems to imply that a time of darkness preceded this. How then can this time of darkness not be meaning the DOTL? Plus, what, in any sense, if we were to apply the following to the here and now can possibly explain this--that at evening time it shall be light?

Ummm...at evening time it it generally dark not still light. Should we take this in the literal sense then? Why not if it will be involving the NHNE and NJ, my view? Therefore, maybe it fits the following---And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there(Revelation 21:23-25).

Seriously now, in what universe could this---that at evening time it shall be light--not be meaning this---for there shall be no night there?

Do we interpret Scripture with Scripture or not? What is the point in agreeing with that then contradicting that by not even interpreting Scripture with Scripture in this case?

 

[rwb]

You completely ignored what he said to you about this and didn't address it. Let's look at the text itself.

Acts 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: 18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: 19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come: 21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

What Peter did here is quote Joel 2:28-32. And what it indicates is that the time period during which people would call upon the name of the Lord to be saved is called "the last days". And they happen "BEFORE the great and notable day of the Lord come". So, Peter indicated that the last days lead up to the day of the Lord. But, you keep trying to say that the last days and the day of the Lord are the same thing. That is not what scripture teaches. It's not what Peter indicated. Or should I say it's not what Joel indicated since he was just quoting Joel.

In the last days, that is the days we have been living since the advent of Christ come to earth a man. Have you changed your mind, do you no longer believe we have been living in the last days since the advent of Christ? Peter quotes Joel, who speaks of this time (last days) as the DOTL. You've already quoted it; do I need to quote it again for you?

Hebrews 1:1-2 (KJV) God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

These last days spoken by Joel and quoted by Peter have been leading up to the last day of these last days the Prophets of Old speak of as the DOTL. Even a child knows the last day of these last days of the LORD have not yet come, but we know with blessed assurance that all that is written shall come to pass when the last day of the DOTL comes, shall make an end, finish, complete the DOTL that came when Christ came to earth a man. The things that Peter writes would come to pass before the day of the DOTL comes, is what we read elsewhere in Scripture as things which accompany Christ coming again when these last days in which the DOTL has come shall come to an end.

Acts 2:19-20 (KJV) And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

Why can you not understand the DOTL has both a beginning and an end, but both the beginning and the end together are still called the DOTL, and these last days? Peter indicates that the DOTL began to be fulfilled with the out-pouring of the Holy Spirit in whosoever believes on Christ, and if the same Spirit is in you when Christ comes again on the last day, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also make alive our mortal body by His Spirit that dwells within.

Romans 8:11 (KJV) But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

1 Peter 3:18 (KJV) For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

John 6:39 (KJV) And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

John 6:40 (KJV) And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:44 (KJV) No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:54 (KJV) Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

 

[rwb]

Here is something interesting that I noticed just today, where pretty much everyone appears to be overlooking. Amils of course won't find it interesting since most of them in this thread insist the 1st advent and the 2000 years that follow is what is in view throughout Zechariah 14. And not the final days of this age, followed by the 2nd coming, followed by what follows the 2nd coming, such as verses 6-11.

Zechariah 14:6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.


This---that at evening time it shall be light---seems to imply that a time of darkness preceded this. How then can this time of darkness not be meaning the DOTL? Plus, what, in any sense, if we were to apply the following to the here and now can possibly explain this--that at evening time it shall be light?

Ummm...at evening time it it generally dark not still light. Should we take this in the literal sense then? Why not if it will be involving the NHNE and NJ, my view? Therefore, maybe it fits the following---And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there(Revelation 21:23-25).

Seriously now, in what universe could this---that at evening time it shall be light--not be meaning this---for there shall be no night there?

Do we interpret Scripture with Scripture or not? What is the point in agreeing with that then contradicting that by not even interpreting Scripture with Scripture in this case?

Zechariah seems to be pointing to the darkest day before the dawn. Is it reference to the day the blood of Christ was shed upon the cross? A day known only to the LORD followed by light that shines in the darkness, as living waters began to go out from Jerusalem and the LORD became King over all the earth?

Zechariah 14:7-9 (KJV) But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light. And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be. And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Ellicott's Bible Commentary for English Readers
Zechariah 14:7

(7) One day.—i.e., an extraordinary, unique day. (Comp. Eze 7:5.) "An evil, an only (literally, one) evil, behold, is come." (Also Jer 30:7.)

Not day, nor night.—But a kind of murky gloom, such as accompanies a sand-storm in the deserts of the East.

It shall be.—Better, there shall be. As the darkest hour precedes the dawn, so the climax of man's direst need is the precursor of the day-spring of God's saving power. And so now, when "at evening time" they shall be expecting the gross darkness of night to set in, suddenly they shall be flooded with the light of God's salvation. This second half of Zec 14:7 is to Zec 14:6-7 (a) what Zec 14:3 is to Zec 14:1-2. In each case the brightness of the Theophany dispels the darkness of despair.

 

[Marty fox]

Here is something interesting that I noticed just today, where pretty much everyone appears to be overlooking. Amils of course won't find it interesting since most of them in this thread insist the 1st advent and the 2000 years that follow is what is in view throughout Zechariah 14. And not the final days of this age, followed by the 2nd coming, followed by what follows the 2nd coming, such as verses 6-11.

Zechariah 14:6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.


This---that at evening time it shall be light---seems to imply that a time of darkness preceded this. How then can this time of darkness not be meaning the DOTL? Plus, what, in any sense, if we were to apply the following to the here and now can possibly explain this--that at evening time it shall be light?

Ummm...at evening time it it generally dark not still light. Should we take this in the literal sense then? Why not if it will be involving the NHNE and NJ, my view? Therefore, maybe it fits the following---And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there(Revelation 21:23-25).

Seriously now, in what universe could this---that at evening time it shall be light--not be meaning this---for there shall be no night there?

Do we interpret Scripture with Scripture or not? What is the point in agreeing with that then contradicting that by not even interpreting Scripture with Scripture in this case?

This is symbolic for the day of the Lord the day of the cross.

Zechariah 14
6 On that day there will be neither sunlight nor cold, frosty darkness. 7 It will be a unique day—a day known only to the Lord—with no distinction between day and night. When evening comes, there will be light.

The sun was literally blacked out when Jesus died, but then came the light in the evening, Jesus is the light of the world that overcomes the darkness

Notice that its not sunlight in verse 7 like it was in verse 6?

The lack of sunlight and the presence of cold frosty darkness brings death but the light of the world brings life, then living water flowed out from Jerusalem like we see literally in the book of Acts through the church.

The church is also symbolic for the New Jerusalem.

Don't you see that there's so much more in seeing the symbolic interpretation of the scriptures? Its more alive

 

[Davidpt]

Zechariah seems to be pointing to the darkest day before the dawn. Is it reference to the day the blood of Christ was shed upon the cross? A day known only to the LORD followed by light that shines in the darkness, as living waters began to go out from Jerusalem and the LORD became King over all the earth?

Zechariah 14:7-9 (KJV) But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light. And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be. And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Ellicott's Bible Commentary for English Readers
Zechariah 14:7

(7) One day.—i.e., an extraordinary, unique day. (Comp. Eze 7:5.) "An evil, an only (literally, one) evil, behold, is come." (Also Jer 30:7.)

Not day, nor night.—But a kind of murky gloom, such as accompanies a sand-storm in the deserts of the East.

It shall be.—Better, there shall be. As the darkest hour precedes the dawn, so the climax of man's direst need is the precursor of the day-spring of God's saving power. And so now, when "at evening time" they shall be expecting the gross darkness of night to set in, suddenly they shall be flooded with the light of God's salvation. This second half of Zec 14:7 is to Zec 14:6-7 (a) what Zec 14:3 is to Zec 14:1-2. In each case the brightness of the Theophany dispels the darkness of despair.

I can see the logic in this yet I disagree. Verse 1 already establishes that the final days of the age are in view. THe DOTL referenced in verse 1 is not relevant to the first advent. The NT never associates the DOTL with that of the first advent. Therefore, verse 2 must be understood as great tribulation upon the church in it's final hours of this age. And clearly, verses 6-11 are meaning post verse 2. It's not like Christ does not return in order to fight against those that have been coming against His church. But let's just make nonsense out of Zechariah 14 throughout instead, by disregarding how ch 14 begins. It does not begin with the first century and first advent. The DOTL is not relevant to the first century. And no, verse 2 is not involving 70 AD like some interpreters would have us believe. Yet, the DOTL per verse 1 follows verse 2, thus verses 3,5, 12, to name a few. And according to the NT, great tribulation precedes the DOTL. Probably just a coincidence. Right? That Zechariah 14 mirrors this pattern if verse 2 symbolizes great tribulation upon the church, and verses 3-5, 12, involve the DOTL and Christ's 2nd coming.

 

[rwb]

This is symbolic for the day of the Lord the day of the cross.

Zechariah 14
6 On that day there will be neither sunlight nor cold, frosty darkness. 7 It will be a unique day—a day known only to the Lord—with no distinction between day and night. When evening comes, there will be light.

The sun was literally blacked out when Jesus died, but then came the light in the evening, Jesus is the light of the world that overcomes the darkness

Notice that its not sunlight in verse 7 like it was in verse 6?

The lack of sunlight and the presence of cold frosty darkness brings death but the light of the world brings life, then living water flowed out from Jerusalem like we see literally in the book of Acts through the church.

The church is also symbolic for the New Jerusalem.

Don't you see that there's so much more in seeing the symbolic interpretation of the scriptures? Its more alive

Good understanding Marty, it's good to have confirmation from others for our understanding of Scripture! I also agree the Scriptures do indeed come more alive when our mind is opened to receive spiritual/symbolic interpretation. Thanks Marty.

 

[Marty fox]

Good understanding Marty, it's good to have confirmation from others for our understanding of Scripture! I also agree the Scriptures do indeed come more alive when our mind is opened to receive spiritual/symbolic interpretation. Thanks Marty.

Yes, it is thanks and also good to agree with you

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

In the last days, that is the days we have been living since the advent of Christ come to earth a man.

Correct.

Have you changed your mind, do you no longer believe we have been living in the last days since the advent of Christ?

What in the world would lead you to ask that question? Of course I haven't changed my mind from what I've said many times repeatedly.

Peter quotes Joel, who speaks of this time (last days) as the DOTL. You've already quoted it; do I need to quote it again for you?

Hebrews 1:1-2 (KJV) God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

What is wrong with you? This is a 100% serious question. Why do you have such serious reading comprehension problems? I'd really love to know. Why would you think you need to tell me this when I have said many times I agree with this. We are in the last days. The last days refer to the time period between the first and second coming of Christ. How many times do I have to say it before you will stop asking me if I believe that?

These last days spoken by Joel and quoted by Peter have been leading up to the last day of these last days the Prophets of Old speak of as the DOTL.

Where does scripture equate the day of the Lord with the last days? No, it's equivalent to the last day of the last days. According to Peter in 2 Peter 3:3-13, scoffers scoff at the promise of the second coming of Christ DURING the last days and they do so right up until the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night bringing fire upon the earth, including those who scoff at the promise of the coming of that day. What don't you understand about this? Paul and Peter call that day that Jesus will come as a thief in the night "the day of the Lord". Why don't you?

Even a child knows the last day of these last days of the LORD have not yet come,

Who said it has? Not me! Learn how to read so that you stop misrepresenting what I believe! What a joke! Unbelievable!

 

[rwb]

I can see the logic in this yet I disagree. Verse 1 already establishes that the final days of the age are in view. THe DOTL referenced in verse 1 is not relevant to the first advent. The NT never associates the DOTL with that of the first advent. Therefore, verse 2 must be understood as great tribulation upon the church in it's final hours of this age. And clearly, verses 6-11 are meaning post verse 2. It's not like Christ does not return in order to fight against those that have been coming against His church. But let's just make nonsense out of Zechariah 14 throughout instead.

Sorry you view this understanding as nonsense David. Still praying for you, and your wife also. I was sorry to hear she is battling cancer.

Edit: Now I'm not certain if it is your wife or the other David's wife struggling with cancer??? However I have been praying for you and yours for years now, and continuing to pray. blessings, rwb

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Here is something interesting that I noticed just today, where pretty much everyone appears to be overlooking.

LOL! Yes, you are always the only one who has ever noticed certain things in scripture. You and all the other lone wolves on this forum who each think they alone understand scripture. You can't get any more arrogant and delusional than that.

Amils of course won't find it interesting since most of them in this thread insist the 1st advent and the 2000 years that follow is what is in view throughout Zechariah 14. And not the final days of this age, followed by the 2nd coming, followed by what follows the 2nd coming, such as verses 6-11.

Zechariah 14:6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.


This---that at evening time it shall be light---seems to imply that a time of darkness preceded this. How then can this time of darkness not be meaning the DOTL? Plus, what, in any sense, if we were to apply the following to the here and now can possibly explain this--that at evening time it shall be light?

Ummm...at evening time it it generally dark not still light. Should we take this in the literal sense then? Why not if it will be involving the NHNE and NJ, my view?

I would allow for it to relate to the NHNE, but the problem with your understanding of the NHNE is that there will be no more death when the NHNE are ushered in (Revelation 21:4), but you say there will be.

Therefore, maybe it fits the following---And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there(Revelation 21:23-25).

Seriously now, in what universe could this---that at evening time it shall be light--not be meaning this---for there shall be no night there?

Do we interpret Scripture with Scripture or not? What is the point in agreeing with that then contradicting that by not even interpreting Scripture with Scripture in this case?

How are you interpreting scripture with scripture by forcing Zechariah 14 to contradict passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4 and 2 Peter 3:10-12?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

This is symbolic for the day of the Lord the day of the cross.

Zechariah 14
6 On that day there will be neither sunlight nor cold, frosty darkness. 7 It will be a unique day—a day known only to the Lord—with no distinction between day and night. When evening comes, there will be light.

The sun was literally blacked out when Jesus died, but then came the light in the evening, Jesus is the light of the world that overcomes the darkness

Notice that its not sunlight in verse 7 like it was in verse 6?

The lack of sunlight and the presence of cold frosty darkness brings death but the light of the world brings life, then living water flowed out from Jerusalem like we see literally in the book of Acts through the church.

The church is also symbolic for the New Jerusalem.

Don't you see that there's so much more in seeing the symbolic interpretation of the scriptures? Its more alive

I see this as a viable interpretation of that text. It also is reminiscent of things that are written in Revelation 21:23-25, as @Davidpt pointed out. So, it can be difficult to tell how it should be applied. But, as always, you take a much more humble approach to this than he does. You don't say things like "Here is something interesting that I noticed just today, where pretty much everyone appears to be overlooking.". You just humble offer how you understand the passage and I appreciate that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I can see the logic in this yet I disagree. Verse 1 already establishes that the final days of the age are in view. THe DOTL referenced in verse 1 is not relevant to the first advent. The NT never associates the DOTL with that of the first advent. Therefore, verse 2 must be understood as great tribulation upon the church in it's final hours of this age. And clearly, verses 6-11 are meaning post verse 2. It's not like Christ does not return in order to fight against those that have been coming against His church. But let's just make nonsense out of Zechariah 14 throughout instead, by disregarding how ch 14 begins. It does not begin with the first century and first advent. The DOTL is not relevant to the first century. And no, verse 2 is not involving 70 AD like some interpreters would have us believe. Yet, the DOTL per verse 1 follows verse 2, thus verses 3,5, 12, to name a few. And according to the NT, great tribulation precedes the DOTL. Probably just a coincidence. Right? That Zechariah 14 mirrors this pattern if verse 2 symbolizes great tribulation upon the church, and verses 3-5, 12, involve the DOTL and Christ's 2nd coming.

What an arrogant fool you have become. First, you say you can see the logic in what Marty said, but you disagree. So, in light of that, it seems like you'd be willing to just agree to disagree with him respectfully. But, no. You have to follow that up by saying "But let's just make nonsense out of Zechariah 14 throughout instead". Get off your high horse! Repent of your arrogance!

 

[Marty fox]

I see this as a viable interpretation of that text. It also is reminiscent of things that are written in Revelation 21:23-25, as @Davidpt pointed out. So, it can be difficult to tell how it should be applied. But, as always, you take a much more humble approach to this than he does. You don't say things like "Here is something interesting that I noticed just today, where pretty much everyone appears to be overlooking.". You just humble offer how you understand the passage and I appreciate that.

Thanks I appreciate this,

 

[Davidpt]

LOL! Yes, you are always the only one who has ever noticed certain things in scripture. You and all the other lone wolves on this forum who each think they alone understand scripture. You can't get any more arrogant and delusional than that.


I would allow for it to relate to the NHNE, but the problem with your understanding of the NHNE is that there will be no more death when the NHNE are ushered in (Revelation 21:4), but you say there will be.


How are you interpreting scripture with scripture by forcing Zechariah 14 to contradict passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4 and 2 Peter 3:10-12?

Why does it have to be arrogant when it can simply be something insightful others might have missed? If you said something insightful others might have missed, I seriously doubt I would be pulling the arrogant card out on you. You act as if everything there is to know about Scripture, it is already known, that no one can see something in Scripture others may have overlooked. Until just today I never noticed any of this. Then it just popped out of nowhere and that I then noticed this. Then when I bring it up it means I'm arrogant.

You don't get get a free pass when Christ returns where you don't have to stand in front of Him and give an account of yourself and how you interacted with others you disagree with. No wonder much of the world want nothing to do with Christianity. They observe how we interact with each other, me just as guilty in some cases as some of the rest of you, and they then say thanks, but no thanks.

Obviously, because they never noticed anyone in the NT ridiculing each other throughout like we sometimes do. Therefore, in their mind, what is so great about this gospel these professed Christians are going on about? These professed Christians are doing the polar opposite of what the gospel commands them to do at all times, including me, and especially including you.

The Holy Spirit does not mock anyone. Therefore, anyone with a mocking spirit, whether that be me, or you, or someone else, is clearly not operating under the influence of the Holy Spirit per these discussions. And if you don't think those looking in from the outside don't notice that, you then have lost all touch with reality in that case.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Why does it have to be arrogant when it can simply be something insightful others might have missed?

Because you're saying that everyone else missed it.

If you said something insightful others might have missed, I seriously doubt I would be pulling the arrogant card out on you.

I would never claim that I would discover something that no one else has ever noticed before, as if God somehow would only reveal it to me.

You act as if everything there is to know about Scripture, it is already known, that no one can see something in Scripture others may have overlooked.

After thousands of years, I highly doubt that there's anything we can discover that no one else has discovered before. That's ridiculous.

Until just today I never noticed any of this.

So, that means no one else ever has? I actually have noticed that same thing myself before (the similarity to Revelation 21:23-25). And, probably a good number of others have as well. But, people also see the similarity that Marty described. So, it takes more digging to try to figure out what the passage is really all about. But, to think that you might be the first to ever interpret the passage correctly? If you can't see how arrogant you come across by thinking that, then I don't know what to tell you.

Then it just popped out of nowhere and that I then noticed this. Then when I bring it up it means I'm arrogant.

How can you not know why I said that? Out of the millions of Christians who have studied this before, you're somehow the first to discover the real meaning of the passage? Really?

You don't get get a free pass when Christ returns where you don't have to stand in front of Him and give an account of yourself and how you interacted with others you disagree with.

Exactly. So, just remember that. You have been nothing but rude with Marty in every interaction with him. You will have to answer for that. I just call it out when you're doing that and you don't like it. I don't care if you like being called out for it or not.

No wonder much of the world want nothing to do with Christianity. They observe how we interact with each other, me just as guilty in some cases as some of the rest of you, and they then say thanks, but no thanks.

Look in the mirror! Look how rude you are to Marty every time you talk to him. How about taking the log out of your own eye before removing the speck out of others' eyes?

Obviously, because they never noticed anyone in the NT ridiculing each other throughout like we sometimes do. Therefore, in their mind, what is so great about this gospel these professed Christians are going on about? These professed Christians are doing the polar opposite of what the gospel commands them to do at all times, including me, and especially including you.

The Holy Spirit does not mock anyone. Therefore, anyone with a mocking spirit, whether that be me, or you, or someone else, is clearly not operating under the influence of the Holy Spirit per these discussions. And if you don't think those looking in from the outside don't notice that, you then have lost all touch with reality in that case.

People aren't stupid enough to think that Christians are going to agree on everything, so it would be very stupid for them to conclude that Christianity can't be true just because we don't agree about everything. And, you are wrong about the Holy Spirit, who, of course, is God. God does mock people sometimes for various reasons, including for their arrogance, in scripture.

Psalm 2:4 He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; The Lord shall hold them in derision.

Psalm 37:12 The wicked plots against the just, And gnashes at him with his teeth. 13 The Lord laughs at him, For He sees that his day is coming.

Here is a case where someone representing God, Elijah, mocked others for their nonsense.

1 Kings 18:27 And so it was, at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, “Cry aloud, for he is a god; either he is meditating, or he is busy, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is sleeping and must be awakened.”

So, I have no concern for being judged for mocking the wickedness of others on this forum as well as their nonsensical beliefs.