Overview time line chart of the 7 years

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, it is not.

The second coming of Jesus is His presence back on planet earth.

Differently, Jesus's coming again in John 14:2-3 is for the resurrection/rapture event.

This is complete nonsense.

John 14:2 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.

For Jesus to come AGAIN means He had to have come the first time, which we all know He did long ago. So, to deny that this passage is about the second coming of Jesus is utterly ludicrous. It's clearly about His coming AGAIN, so that makes it about His second coming.

 

[Douggg]

This is complete nonsense.

John 14:2 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.

For Jesus to come AGAIN means He had to have come the first time, which we all know He did long ago. So, to deny that this passage is about the second coming of Jesus is utterly ludicrous. It's clearly about His coming AGAIN, so that makes it about His second coming.

We've been through those things already.

My question to you is regarding your post-trib view is -

Do you believe that Jesus will resurrect the dead in Christ and rapture the living in Christ after He has returned to stand on the mount of Olives splitting it in half ?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

We've been through those things already.

I don't recall ever correcting you before on your mistaken understanding of John 14:1-3. Why aren't you willing to address what I said? He said He is coming again. If that isn't a reference to His second coming, I don't know what is, yet you deny the verse is referring to His second coming. You are blatantly denying the obvious here and all you can say is that we've been through this already? Why haven't you corrected your false interpretation of the passage by now if I've already corrected you about this before?

My question to you is regarding your post-trib view is -

Do you believe that Jesus will resurrect the dead in Christ and rapture the living in Christ after He has returned to stand on the mount of Olives splitting it in half ?

I don't believe that He will return to stand on the mount of Olives with the mount of Olives literally splitting in half. How can you repeatedly forget that I'm an amillennialist, Douggg? I've told you that I'm an amill several times. I've told you several times how I interpret 2 Peter 3:10-12. He won't be standing on the mount of Olives after burning up the earth. You know amills don't interpret Zechariah 14 the way premills like you do, right?

 

[Douggg]

I don't believe that He will return to stand on the mount of Olives with the mount of Olives literally splitting in half.

Then who do you believe will stand on the mount of Olives splitting it in half in Zechariah 14:4 ?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Then who do you believe will stand on the mount of Olives splitting it in half in Zechariah 14:4 ?

LOL. No one. What don't you understand about the fact that I don't interpret Zechariah 14:4 the way you do, Douggg? Just like you don't interpret 2 Peter 3:10-13 the way I do. You think Zechariah 14:4 has Jesus coming to the earth and standing on the mount of Olives when He returns, but that contradicts Peter saying that the earth will be burned up when Jesus returns. You need to find a way to reconcile Zechariah 14:4 with 2 Peter 3:10-13 instead of causing them to contradict each other. Jesus stood on the mount of Olives already long ago. Zechariah 14:4 is symbolic and not literal. It symbolically refers to the division/split that Jesus caused amongst people with His first coming.

Matthew 10:34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’

By interpreting Zechariah 14 in a literal, futurist way, as you do, it causes contradictions with other scripture, such as the already mentioned 2 Peter 3:10-13. Believing that there will be future animal sacrifices contradicts Hebrews 8-10 which says that Jesus's sacrifice made animal sacrifices and offerings obsolete. Believing that people will again have to go to Jerusalem to worship God contradicts John 4:19-24 which says that God desires for people to worship Him wherever they are in spirit and in truth rather than having to go to Jerusalem to worship Him.

 

[Douggg]

Zechariah 14:4 is symbolic and not literal. It symbolically refers to the division/split that Jesus caused amongst people with His first coming.

symbolic ?

Splitting the mount of Olives in half is symbolic - and won't happen in the Amil view of Zechariah 14 ?

Jesus coming with all his saints with Him in Zechariah 14:5 - will not happen in the Amil view of Zechariah 14 ?

The problem is not with the futurist view, but with the Amil view that contradicts what Zechariah 14 is prophesying to happen.

By interpreting Zechariah 14 in a literal, futurist way, as you do, it causes contradictions with other scripture, such as the already mentioned 2 Peter 3:10-13.

No, the futurist view does not contradict 2Peter3:10-13. The destruction of this present earth and its heaven will happen right before the Great White Throne judgment. Read Revelation 20:11.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

symbolic ?

Yes. Do you need a definition of the word?

Splitting the mount of Olives in half is symbolic - and won't happen in the Amil view of Zechariah 14 ?

Not literally. That's what symbolic means. You do know that much of Bible prophecy is symbolic, don't you? Are you somehow unaware that there is a good amount of symbolism within the book of Zechariah?

Zechariah 4:1 Then the angel who talked with me returned and woke me up, like someone awakened from sleep. 2 He asked me, “What do you see?” I answered, “I see a solid gold lampstand with a bowl at the top and seven lamps on it, with seven channels to the lamps. 3 Also there are two olive trees by it, one on the right of the bowl and the other on its left.”

Do you think the above passage is talking about a literal "solid gold lampstand with a bowl at the top and seven lamps on it, with seven channels to the lamps" with a literal "two olive trees by it, one on the right of the bowl and the other on its left"?

Zechariah 6:1 Then I turned and raised my eyes and looked, and behold, four chariots were coming from between two mountains, and the mountains were mountains of bronze. 2 With the first chariot were red horses, with the second chariot black horses, 3 with the third chariot white horses, and with the fourth chariot dappled horses—strong steeds.

Do you think this is talking about four literal chariots coming between two literal bronze mountains? Do you think this is talking about literal red, black, white and dappled horses with the four chariots?

Zechariah 13:1 “In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.

Is this verse talking about a literal fountain being opened?

Zechariah 13:7 “Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, Against the Man who is My Companion,” Says the Lord of hosts. “Strike the Shepherd,
And the sheep will be scattered; Then I will turn My hand against the little ones.

Is this verse talking about a literal shephered and literal sheep?

Hopefully, you are getting the point. Why you would assume that everything you read in Zechariah 14 is meant to be taken literally when we can find symbolism throughout the book of Zechariah is beyond me. I'm not saying everything in the book is symbolic, but much of it is.

Jesus coming with all his saints with Him in Zechariah 14:5 - will not happen in the Amil view of Zechariah 14 ?

It refers to the LORD, which normally in the Old Testament refers to God the Father, as coming with all his holy ones. It isn't necessarily referring to His saints, but could rather be referring to His angels. There are passages in the Old Testament that can seem to be talking about the second coming of Christ on the surface, but are instead talking about past events. One example is Isaiah 13. Like Zechariah 14, it refers to a day of the Lord (translated as "the day of the Lord" in some translations). It's not referring to the future day of the Lord that we read about in the NT in passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12, but rather past events. In the case of Isaiah 13, it's talking about when the Medes and Persians (Media-Persian empire) brought an end to the Babylonian empire.

The problem is not with the futurist view, but with the Amil view that contradicts what Zechariah 14 is prophesying to happen.

Your view of Zechariah 14:16-21 contradicts the fact that animal sacrifices have been made obsolete and the fact that God made it so that people need to worship Him in spirit and truth wherever they are rather than having to go to Jerusalem to worship Him.

No, the futurist view does not contradict 2Peter3:10-13.

There are amillennial futurists, so try to use terms that actually apply to what we're talking about here. The premillennialist view that you hold to says that there will be mortal survivors of Christ's return who then populate the earth for a thousand years, but 2 Peter 3:10-13 does not allow for any mortal survivors of Christ's return.

The destruction of this present earth and its heaven will happen right before the Great White Throne judgment. Read Revelation 20:11.

We all agree on that. What premills like you and amills like me disagree about is when the destruction of this present earth and the heavens will occur in relation to the second coming of Jesus Christ.