WAYS THAT AMILS GET ZECHARIAH 14 WRONG

[Davidpt]

The second coming of Christ itself is never specifically referenced in the Old Testament anywhere. That is why Jesus said this...

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Jesus very specifically indicated that everything written "in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning" Him was fulfilled by His first coming. You should accept that. This does not mean that the Old Testament does not reference anything that has not yet been fulfilled, including things that will happen when Jesus comes again. Obviously, the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 is not yet fulfilled and the ushering in of the new heavens and new earth referenced in Isaiah 65 and 66 is not yet fulfilled and so on. But, everything that directly references the Messiah in the Old Testament was fulfilled by events related to the first coming of Christ. That is what Jesus Himself indicated.

Let me be clear about what I’m saying, because it seems the point keeps getting misunderstood.

I’m not claiming that the OT prophets explicitly wrote, the Messiah will come twice. What I am saying is that the OT contains both comings---the first plainly, and the second implicitly, later revealed in full through the NT.

When you actually examine the text, it’s impossible to make sense of certain OT prophecies without recognizing a future, physical return of the Messiah.

Take Daniel 12:2, for example.And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake

That resurrection has obviously not yet occurred. It requires Christ's return to be fulfilled. So while Daniel didn’t use the phrase second coming, the prophecy itself points directly toward it.

Or Psalm 110:1---The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.

That 'until' demands an endpoint. The Messiah is not seated at the Father’s right hand forever. He remains there until His enemies are subdued---which necessarily implies His return to complete that process. The NT later reveals this openly, but the foundation was already in the OT.

Then there’s Zechariah 14. The events described there---especially verse 12, where flesh consumes away while people stand on their feet---fit no past event in history. They align instead with the judgments of the day of the Lord described in Revelation. And notice that Zechariah 14:5 is echoed directly in Jude 14–15, which everyone agrees speaks of the Second Coming. It’s inconsistent to affirm that Jude is about Christ’s return but then deny the same of Zechariah 14.

So let’s be honest with the text. The idea of a Second Coming didn’t originate in the NT. The NT simply unveiled what was already embedded in the OT prophecies all along.

To say the OT knows nothing of a second coming ignores these realities. The concept was there all along---concealed at first, then revealed in full. Scripture interprets Scripture, and when you read the OT through the light of the NT, the two comings are not only consistent---they’re inevitable.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

This has been refuted many times by Amils. And it has been ducked around many times by Premils.

Zechariah 14 occurred 2000 years ago. Zechariah 14:1 declares, “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.”

Hinneh Behold
yowm- day
baa' cometh
la-Yahweh the Lord
wªchulaq divides
shªlaaleek the spoils
bªqirbeek in the midst

This passage and especially its rendering in the King James Version has caused confusion to many Bible students over the years. However, a closer examination of the original dispels a lot of ambiguity surrounding the text. Firstly, the Hebrew does not actually say “the day of the Lord” as the King James Version renders it but ‘a day is coming for the Lord’.

There is no doubt, the phrase “the day of the Lord” normally relates to the second coming in Scripture, but Zechariah 14:1 does not state that in the original. We cannot therefore, with any certainty, insist upon the fact that this verse is referring to the day of the Lord. This places a completely different slant on the meaning of the whole chapter. Other versions translate the reading more accurate.

The NASB says: "Behold, a day is coming for the LORD when the spoil taken from you will be divided among you."

The YLT states: "Lo, a day hath come to Jehovah, And divided hath been thy spoil in thy midst."

A perusal of the Greek LXX Septuagint rendering of this passage supports this interpretation:

idou Behold
hmerai day
erxontai comes
tou the
kuriou Lord
kai even (or indeed)
diamerisqhsetai divides
ta the
skula spoils
sou you
en with
soi you

When we look at the usage of the Greek throughout the Old Testament (in the Greek LXX Septuagint) and our New Testament we find a definite pattern in relation to the wording and identification of the day of the Lord in the original.

In the New Testament:

Of the five “day of the Lord” passages in the New Testament, they read in the original:

Three are: “hemera kurios” (Acts 2:20, 1 Thessalonians 5:2, 2 Peter 3:10).

Two are: “hemera ho kurios” (1 Corinthians 5:5, 2 Corinthians 1:14).

In the Greek LXX Septuagint

Of the twenty “day of the Lord” passages in the Old Testament:

Eleven are: “hemera kurios” (Isaiah 13:6, 9, Ezekiel 13:5, 30:3, Joel 1:15, 2:1, 2:31, 3:14, Obadiah 1:15, Zephaniah 1:14, Malachi 4:5)

Four are: “hemera ho kurios” (Joel 2:11, Amos 5:18, 20, Zephaniah 1:7)

We can see, fifteen align precisely with the Greek New Testament wording and confirm that this would be the normal rendering of the coming of Christ in the Greek. That is 75%.

One reads: “hemera ekeinos kurios” (Jeremiah 46:10), also meaning day of the Lord.

One is: “hemera gar kurios” (Isaiah 2:12), literally meaning day for the Lord.

Finally, there are two references (one after the other in Zephaniah) that refer to the same climactic day. One says, “hemera thumos kurios” (Zephaniah 2:2), meaning a day of the Lord’s anger. The other reads, “hemera orge kurios” (Zephaniah 2:3), similarly meaning a day of the Lord’s anger. Plainly, they are both speaking of the same day in the same reading and in the same context.

That brings us to Zechariah 14:1, which is worded completely different from the rest, saying, “hmerai erxontai tou kuriou,” literally meaning “a day is coming for the LORD.” None of the other passages say this. It is not unreasonable to make a distinction between Zechariah’s description and that of the other nineteen references. The only similarity is the King James Version’s translation of the same in the English. Notwithstanding, regardless of how high one values the A.V. one cannot use this as conclusive proof for equating the day Zechariah is speaking of to the other nineteen. The original rendering supersedes any other translations.

Because this does not literally read “the day of the Lord” then we don’t have to understand it as “the day of the Lord.” If it were, it would have most likely read hemera kurios or hemera ho kurios in the Greek LXX Septuagint. Or failing that: hemera ekeinos kurios.

Whilst the wording of Zechariah 14:1 doesn't prevent it referring to the second coming of the Lord Jesus, the phrase ‘a day is coming for the Lord’ and ‘the day of the Lord’ are definitely not synonymous. It is therefore reasonable for us to question Premils identification of it with the second coming of the Lord and to consider the possibility that it relates to Christ’s first advent.

Absolutely right. It's unfortunate that the KJV translates Zechariah 14:1 the way it does, but no one should only ever look at one translation. There are no perfect English translations. So, we should look at multiple translations as well as look at the original Hebrew and Greek words to get an understanding of what was actually written.

Clearly, what is described in Zechariah 14 does not match what is described in 2 Peter 3:10-12. We know for certain that passages like 2 Peter 3:10-12 and 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 are referring to the day of the Lord. All English translations translate it that way in those passages. But, most English translations do not refer to "the day of the Lord" in Zechariah 14:1, but rather have "a day is coming for the Lord" or something similar instead. Those who want to insist that Zechariah 14:1 is referring to the day of the Lord end up shamefully twisting passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 to fit their false Premil interpretation of Zechariah 14 instead of letting the scriptures which clearly refer to the day of the Lord dictate their understanding of the day of the Lord.

 

[Davidpt]

Absolutely right. It's unfortunate that the KJV translates Zechariah 14:1 the way it does, but no one should only ever look at one translation. There are no perfect English translations. So, we should look at multiple translations as well as look at the original Hebrew and Greek words to get an understanding of what was actually written.

Clearly, what is described in Zechariah 14 does not match what is described in 2 Peter 3:10-12. We know for certain that passages like 2 Peter 3:10-12 and 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 are referring to the day of the Lord. All English translations translate it that way in those passages. But, most English translations do not refer to "the day of the Lord" in Zechariah 14:1, but rather have "a day is coming for the Lord" or something similar instead. Those who want to insist that Zechariah 14:1 is referring to the day of the Lord end up shamefully twisting passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 to fit their false Premil interpretation of Zechariah 14 instead of letting the scriptures which clearly refer to the day of the Lord dictate their understanding of the day of the Lord.

Regardless how you look at it, there is nothing in Zechariah 14 meaning before the first coming. You would then have us believe that the NT speaks of two different days of the Lord that happen after the first coming, rather than only 1 day of the Lord? This other day of the Lord pertaining to verse 1 that you apparently see in the text, where can I read about it in the NT? Are you now going to start arguing like Preterists typically do, that the day of the Lord pertained to 70 AD? Keeping in mind, the NT only knows of 1 DOTL event, not 2 or more instead.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I’m not claiming that the OT prophets explicitly wrote, the Messiah will come twice. What I am saying is that the OT contains both comings---the first plainly, and the second implicitly, later revealed in full through the NT.

Yes, I know you are saying that and I disagree. It seems that you don't know what I'm saying. I am saying that His second coming itself is not referenced AT ALL in the OT, whether plainly or implicitly. Otherwise, what He said Himself would not be true.

Luke 24:44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.”

Do you accept what Jesus said here or not? He said that ALL THINGS concerning Him "which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms" were fulfilled by His first coming. He didn't say all of the things that were plainly written about Him were fulfilled. He said all things, even the things that were implicitly written.

Now, when I say this I am NOT saying that there is nothing written in the Old Testament about things that are related to His second coming. Clearly, the resurrection of the dead, the judgment and the new heavens and new earth are written about in the Old Testament and those things are related to His second coming in New Testament scriptures. But, what I'm saying is that His second coming itself is never referred to, explicitly or implicitly, anywhere in the Old Testament. I think I'm being quite clear in what I'm saying here, but tell me if you are understanding my point or not.

When you actually examine the text, it’s impossible to make sense of certain OT prophecies without recognizing a future, physical return of the Messiah.

Take Daniel 12:2, for example.And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake

That resurrection has obviously not yet occurred. It requires Christ's return to be fulfilled. So while Daniel didn’t use the phrase second coming, the prophecy itself points directly toward it.

There is no allusion to Christ's second coming itself in Daniel 12;2. There is no reference to Jesus in that verse. So, when He said all the OT scriptures concerning Him were fulfilled in a first coming context, He was not talking about verses like Daniel 12:2 that don't reference Him. We know now that Daniel 12:2 will be fulfilled in relation to His second coming in the future, but that is not indicated, even implicitly, in that Old Testament text. That was a mystery until it was revealed in the New Testament.

Or Psalm 110:1---The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.

That 'until' demands an endpoint. The Messiah is not seated at the Father’s right hand forever. He remains there until His enemies are subdued---which necessarily implies His return to complete that process. The NT later reveals this openly, but the foundation was already in the OT.

Then there’s Zechariah 14. The events described there---especially verse 12, where flesh consumes away while people stand on their feet---fit no past event in history. They align instead with the judgments of the day of the Lord described in Revelation.

If taken literally and if taken in relation to Christ's second coming, it should make you think of 2 Peter 3:10-12. What are you referring to in Revelation exactly?

And notice that Zechariah 14:5 is echoed directly in Jude 14–15, which everyone agrees speaks of the Second Coming. It’s inconsistent to affirm that Jude is about Christ’s return but then deny the same of Zechariah 14.

But, what do you make of Luke 24:44 then? That verse would be an explicit reference to His second coming if that's what it is about. But, Jesus said all the things written about Him in the prophets, which obviously would include Zechariah, were fulfilled in His first coming. You can't try to interpret Zechariah 14 in isolation from the rest of scripture. You need to reconcile what is written there with the rest of scripture and you never do that.

So let’s be honest with the text.

Are you being honest with the text when you interpret it in such a way that contradicts other scripture? I would say you need to be honest with the text to the point where your interpretation of it doesn't contradict any other scripture.

The idea of a Second Coming didn’t originate in the NT.

It was not revealed until the NT. Why do you think that the disciples were so clueless about His second coming? They didn't even understand that He was supposed to die and rise again from the dead, let alone have any idea that He was going to come again. They didn't understand any of that until after they were born of the Holy Spirit and then began to understand things like that.

The NT simply unveiled what was already embedded in the OT prophecies all along.

Amils have told you things like this many times and you constantly have scoffed at it. Now, look at you saying the same thing we have told you many times. But, Christ's second coming in and of itself is never referenced in the OT. Things related to it are referenced there, but not His second coming itself. But, why would you say something like this after trying to say that Zechariah 14:5 explicitly refers to His return? Do you think it was hidden in the OT or is there explicitly? Make up your mind. The fact is that it's neither, or else what Jesus said in Luke 24:44 would not be true.

To say the OT knows nothing of a second coming ignores these realities.

What realities? You are trying to claim that the second coming is in the OT, but veiled, but then you also try to say it's referenced explicitly in Zechariah 14. So, which is it? You can't seem to make up your mind whether it's written about explicitly or implicitly in the OT. But, again, it's neither or else what Jesus said in Luke 24:44 would not be true.

The concept was there all along---concealed at first, then revealed in full. Scripture interprets Scripture, and when you read the OT through the light of the NT, the two comings are not only consistent---they’re inevitable.

You think it's revealed in full in Zechariah 14, not just the New Testament. Why are you acting otherwise? You correctly say that scripture interprets scripture, so why do you not allow Luke 24:44 to help you understand what Zechariah 14 is about, or at least to help you understand what it can't be about? And other scriptures like 2 Peter 3:10-12 as well?

 

[Davidpt]

Even though Davidpt can't comprehend what you are saying because of having his foggy Premil glasses on, I see your point and agree with it. There is no prophecy in the Old Testament which specifically references the second coming of Christ. That's why He said all the things concerning Him written in the Old Testament scriptures were fulfilled in His first coming (Luke 24:44). No one knew about a second coming of Christ until Jesus started talking about it.

I don’t see how Luke 24:44 settles this question the way Amils suggest. In that verse, Jesus is telling the disciples that everything written about Him in the Law, Prophets, and Psalms had to be fulfilled---and indeed, everything related to His first coming (His suffering, death, and resurrection) was fulfilled at that point.

But notice what the verse doesn’t say. It doesn’t claim that every prophecy concerning the Messiah was completely and finally fulfilled. The context is about His passion and resurrection (verses 46-47), not His future glory and reign. Peter makes the same distinction in 1 Peter 1:10-11, showing that the prophets wrote of both the sufferings of Christ and “the glories that would follow. Those later glories obviously extend beyond the cross.

So Luke 24:44 doesn’t erase unfulfilled messianic prophecy---it simply marks the fulfillment of everything pertaining to His first advent. The OT still contains promises and prophecies awaiting completion at His return. And some of those prophecies still awaiting completion at His return, are recorded in Zechariah 14, believe it or not.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Regardless how you look at it, there is nothing in Zechariah 14 meaning before the first coming. You would then have us believe that the NT speaks of two different days of the Lord that happen after the first coming, rather than only 1 day of the Lord? This other day of the Lord pertaining to verse 1 that you apparently see in the text, where can I read about it in the NT? Are you now going to start arguing like Preterists typically do, that the day of the Lord pertained to 70 AD? Keeping in mind, the NT only knows of 1 DOTL event, not 2 or more instead.

When it comes to "THE day of the Lord", there is only one. Since Zechariah 14 clearly does not line up with other scriptures that undeniably refer to the day of the Lord, such as 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12, we can safely assume that Zechariah 14 is not referring to THE day of the Lord.

You said in your other post that the NT reveals what is veiled in the OT, so why do you not allow the NT to shine light on Zechariah 14 for you? If you really believe that, then why does your interpretation of Zechariah 14 contradict Luke 24:44 where Jesus said all that was written about Him in the prophets was fulfilled in relation to His first coming? If you really believe that, then why does your interpretation of Zechariah 14 contradict 2 Peter 3:10-12? Why not allow the NT scriptures to shine light on the OT scriptures for you? Not just in terms of what they are about, but also in terms of what they are not about. Tell me how Zechariah 14 can possibly be about the second coming of Christ when Christ Himself said all that was written in the prophets about Him was fulfilled in relation to His first coming. Tell me how your interpretation of Zechariah 14 can be reconciled with what is written in 2 Peter 3:10-13.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I don’t see how Luke 24:44 settles this question the way Amils suggest.

Of course you don't. I don't get the sense that you are making much effort, if any, to see our point about that.

In that verse, Jesus is telling the disciples that everything written about Him in the Law, Prophets, and Psalms had to be fulfilled---and indeed, everything related to His first coming (His suffering, death, and resurrection) was fulfilled at that point.

But notice what the verse doesn’t say. It doesn’t claim that every prophecy concerning the Messiah was completely and finally fulfilled. The context is about His passion and resurrection (verses 46-47), not His future glory and reign. Peter makes the same distinction in 1 Peter 1:10-11, showing that the prophets wrote of both the sufferings of Christ and “the glories that would follow. Those later glories obviously extend beyond the cross.

Those glories don't refer to Christ's future glory, they refer to the glories of the inexpressible and glorious joy of the saving of people's souls.

1 Peter 1:8 Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, 9 for you are receiving the end result of your faith, the salvation of your souls. 10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, 11 trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow.

The glories that followed the sufferings of the Messiah are related to believers being "filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy" and receiving "the end result of your faith, the salvation of your souls".

So Luke 24:44 doesn’t erase unfulfilled messianic prophecy

It refers to the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy in a first coming context. You can't get around that.

---it simply marks the fulfillment of everything pertaining to His first advent. The OT still contains promises and prophecies awaiting completion at His return.

Yes, there are still OT prophecies that are not yet fulfilled, as I already acknowledged. Those in relation to things like the resurrection of the dead, the judgment, and the new heavens and new earth. But, again, none of those things are written in relation to the second coming of Christ in the Old Testament. The New Testament reveals those things as being related to the second coming of Christ.

 

[Davidpt]

Absolutely right. It's unfortunate that the KJV translates Zechariah 14:1 the way it does, but no one should only ever look at one translation. There are no perfect English translations. So, we should look at multiple translations as well as look at the original Hebrew and Greek words to get an understanding of what was actually written.

Clearly, what is described in Zechariah 14 does not match what is described in 2 Peter 3:10-12. We know for certain that passages like 2 Peter 3:10-12 and 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 are referring to the day of the Lord. All English translations translate it that way in those passages. But, most English translations do not refer to "the day of the Lord" in Zechariah 14:1, but rather have "a day is coming for the Lord" or something similar instead. Those who want to insist that Zechariah 14:1 is referring to the day of the Lord end up shamefully twisting passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 to fit their false Premil interpretation of Zechariah 14 instead of letting the scriptures which clearly refer to the day of the Lord dictate their understanding of the day of the Lord.

If my other post was not clear enough, let me repeat some of it.

Regardless of how you translate it, there’s nothing in Zechariah 14 that places the prophecy before Christ’s first coming. The entire context is clearly eschatological---it looks ahead to a global confrontation and divine intervention that have never occurred historically.

And even if you prefer a day for the LORD instead of the day of the LORD, you still have to deal with the fact that this day is described in unmistakably apocalyptic terms---nations gathered against Jerusalem, the LORD Himself descending, His feet standing on the Mount of Olives (verse 4), cosmic upheaval, and ultimate victory. That’s not just a day for the LORD in some vague sense; that is the day of the LORD.

If you’re saying this is not the same day of the Lord that the NT consistently refers to---the climactic event tied to Christ’s return (1 Thessalonians 5:2–3, 2 Peter 3:10–12)---then you’ve now introduced two separate ‘days of the Lord’ after the first coming. That’s something the NT never does. The NT writers consistently speak of a single, definitive day of the Lord that brings divine judgment and deliverance together.

So where exactly is this other day of the Lord in the NT? If Zechariah 14’s day is not that day, then you’re forced to invent a separate, undefined one. That’s not exegesis---that’s theological patchwork.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If my other post was not clear enough, let me repeat some of it.

Let me be clear. You are NEVER as clear as you think you are.

Regardless of how you translate it, there’s nothing in Zechariah 14 that places the prophecy before Christ’s first coming.

Is anyone claiming that? No. So, why are you saying that?

The entire context is clearly eschatological---it looks ahead to a global confrontation and divine intervention that have never occurred historically.

You say that based on an assumption that it should all be taken literally. Why would you not allow for the possibility that Zechariah 14 contains figurative text, knowing that a good portion of the rest of the book of Zechariah contains figurative text?

And even if you prefer a day for the LORD instead of the day of the LORD, you still have to deal with the fact that this day is described in unmistakably apocalyptic terms---nations gathered against Jerusalem, the LORD Himself descending, His feet standing on the Mount of Olives (verse 4), cosmic upheaval, and ultimate victory. That’s not just a day for the LORD in some vague sense; that is the day of the LORD.

It can't be THE day of the Lord written about in passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, and 2 Peter 3:10-13 because the text doesn't match what is written in those passages. Why can't you acknowledge that? You say you understand that there are things veiled in the OT that are revealed in the NT, so why not allow the NT to form the foundation of your doctrine to help you understand the more obscure OT text?

If you’re saying this is not the same day of the Lord that the NT consistently refers to---the climactic event tied to Christ’s return (1 Thessalonians 5:2–3, 2 Peter 3:10–12)---then you’ve now introduced two separate ‘days of the Lord’ after the first coming.

So what? In a sense, you could say that the day of Pentecost was a day of the Lord because of the unprecedented things which happened that day. There have been many days of the Lord in different contexts, but in terms of THE day of the Lord, there is just one. On that day, the Lord Jesus will come from heaven and we will be gathered to Him, and the heavens and earth will be burned up with those in spiritual darkness having "sudden destruction" come upon them from which "they shsall not escape".

That’s something the NT never does. The NT writers consistently speak of a single, definitive day of the Lord that brings divine judgment and deliverance together.

That doesn't disallow the possiblity of other days of the Lord that have different contexts. But, in terms of the climactic day of the Lord when Jesus returns, there is just one.

So where exactly is this other day of the Lord in the NT? If Zechariah 14’s day is not that day, then you’re forced to invent a separate, undefined one. That’s not exegesis---that’s theological patchwork.

Again, you could see the day of Pentecost long ago as a day of the Lord and, certainly, the day that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD was a day of the Lord in a sense. Those just were not THE day of the Lord.

 

[WPM]

Regardless how you look at it, there is nothing in Zechariah 14 meaning before the first coming. You would then have us believe that the NT speaks of two different days of the Lord that happen after the first coming, rather than only 1 day of the Lord? This other day of the Lord pertaining to verse 1 that you apparently see in the text, where can I read about it in the NT? Are you now going to start arguing like Preterists typically do, that the day of the Lord pertained to 70 AD? Keeping in mind, the NT only knows of 1 DOTL event, not 2 or more instead.

Zechariah 14:1 declares, “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.”

There are strong grounds for relating this to the great victory that was wrought through Christ’s sinless life, His atoning death and His victorious resurrection. In keeping with the consistent pattern of the book of Zechariah this would seem to be a first Advent passage. It describes the benefits or “spoil” of which He “divided in the midst” of His Church. Christ rescued many from the firm grip of Satan. The devil was stripped of his influence in the lives of millions of sinners. The spoil in Scripture normally referred to the trophies or reward of victory. This must surely refer to the elect that Christ secured through His comprehensive earthly mission.

1 Chronicles 26:27 tells us: “Out of the spoils won in battles did they dedicate to maintain the house of the LORD.”

Are we not the Lord’s spoil from the enemy’s territory? Whilst the Old Testament temple was literal and physical and was so suitably adorned after battle, the New Testament temple is living and spiritual. We are now the spoil of battle – taken from the devil’s dark domain through the shed blood of Jesus at the cross.

Isaiah 53:10-12 confirms this is speaking of Calvary, when he prophesied of Christ’s first Advent and especially Calvary, “it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”

Here we have further confirmation linking the securing of the spoil with the accomplishment of His redemptive work. His redeeming of the elect is presented here as evidence that He had divided the spoil. It reads: “he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death.”

Isaiah 9:2-6 says of the Gospel going out during the intra-Advent period, and the authority and blessings that now is now bestowed in Gentiles through the victory wrought at Cavalry: “The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined. Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the joy, they joy before thee according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil. For thou hast broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the day of Midian. For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire. For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called wonderful, counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting father, the prince of peace.”

The spiritual light enveloping the darkened Gentiles through the earthly ministry Of Christ is here associated with the dividing of the spoil. This would seem to support the idea that the spoil is those who were being liberated from the enemy’s prison. Countless devotees of Satan would be released through the victorious advance of the Gospel through the once-deceived nations (ethnos).

Christ confirms the meaning of these Old Testament prophecies in Luke 11, when He alludes to Zechariah 14, whilst speaking of His own assault upon Satan and his dark kingdom. Jesus said, “if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man (Satan) armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him (namely Jesus), he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils” (Luke 11:20-22).

This is speaking of Christ’s victory over Satan through His victorious life, death and resurrection and the great “spoil” which He “divided in the midst” of His Church. Christ’ earthly ministry and the introduction of the kingdom of heaven on earth began heaven’s great assault upon Satan and his kingdom. This short period saw the spoiling of the devil’s goods and the disarming of devil’s enormous remit of influence. At every point Satan was decisively defeated on his own territory. The victory was finally secured with Christ’s death, burial and resurrection. This opened up the Gospel opportunity to the Gentiles. Jesus also said in Mark 3:27 “No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.”

Calvary was the place where Satan was bound. This resulted in the spoiling of his goods, the liberating of the prisoner and the enlightenment of the darkened nations. The territory that Satan once exclusively controlled has now been massively invaded by the Lord's subjects and His Kingdom. Those that were once in total darkness can now see. Every enemy of heaven has been finally and completely defeated. All we are therefore waiting for is for the final put down. This occurs at the second coming. Colossians 2:14 explains how Calvary saw the “blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.”

The phrase having spoiled is taken from the Greek word apekduomai meaning divested or disarmed. Christ disarmed the demonic realm during His ministry and particularly through the finished work of the Cross. Since Calvary, Satan’s kingdom has been restricted from their previous unchallenged global control – Christ “triumphing over them in it.” New King James Version renders it, “Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.” Satan was exposed time after time as Christ and His disciples defeated the minions of hell with the authority of heaven. The Gospel was now free to invade the once-darkened Gentile nations. Not that every single Gentile would believe, but that the nations would now be free to receive the Gospel.

 

[Marty fox]

Zechariah 14:1 declares, “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.”

There are strong grounds for relating this to the great victory that was wrought through Christ’s sinless life, His atoning death and His victorious resurrection. In keeping with the consistent pattern of the book of Zechariah this would seem to be a first Advent passage. It describes the benefits or “spoil” of which He “divided in the midst” of His Church. Christ rescued many from the firm grip of Satan. The devil was stripped of his influence in the lives of millions of sinners. The spoil in Scripture normally referred to the trophies or reward of victory. This must surely refer to the elect that Christ secured through His comprehensive earthly mission.

1 Chronicles 26:27 tells us: “Out of the spoils won in battles did they dedicate to maintain the house of the LORD.”

Are we not the Lord’s spoil from the enemy’s territory? Whilst the Old Testament temple was literal and physical and was so suitably adorned after battle, the New Testament temple is living and spiritual. We are now the spoil of battle – taken from the devil’s dark domain through the shed blood of Jesus at the cross.

Isaiah 53:10-12 confirms this is speaking of Calvary, when he prophesied of Christ’s first Advent and especially Calvary, “it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”

Here we have further confirmation linking the securing of the spoil with the accomplishment of His redemptive work. His redeeming of the elect is presented here as evidence that He had divided the spoil. It reads: “he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death.”

Isaiah 9:2-6 says of the Gospel going out during the intra-Advent period, and the authority and blessings that now is now bestowed in Gentiles through the victory wrought at Cavalry: “The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined. Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the they joy before thee according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil. For thou hast broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the day of Midian. For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire. For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called wonderful, counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting father, the prince of peace.”

The spiritual light enveloping the darkened Gentiles through the earthly ministry Of Christ is here associated with the dividing of the spoil. This would seem to support the idea that the spoil is those who were being liberated from the enemy’s prison. Countless devotees of Satan would be released through the victorious advance of the Gospel through the once-deceived nations (ethnos).

Christ confirms the meaning of these Old Testament prophecies in Luke 11, when He alludes to Zechariah 14, whilst speaking of His own assault upon Satan and his dark kingdom. Jesus said, “if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man (Satan) armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him (namely Jesus), he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils” (Luke 11:20-22).

This is speaking of Christ’s victory over Satan through His victorious life, death and resurrection and the great “spoil” which He “divided in the midst” of His Church. Christ’ earthly ministry and the introduction of the kingdom of heaven on earth began heaven’s great assault upon Satan and his kingdom. This short period saw the spoiling of the devil’s goods and the disarming of devil’s enormous remit of influence. At every point Satan was decisively defeated on his own territory. The victory was finally secured with Christ’s death, burial and resurrection. This opened up the Gospel opportunity to the Gentiles. Jesus also said in Mark 3:27 “No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.”

Calvary was the place where Satan was bound. This resulted in the spoiling of his goods, the liberating of the prisoner and the enlightenment of the darkened nations. The territory that Satan once exclusively controlled has now been massively invaded by the Lord's subjects and His Kingdom. Those that were once in total darkness can now see. Every enemy of heaven has been finally and completely defeated. All we are therefore waiting for is for the final put down. This occurs at the second coming. Colossians 2:14 explains how Calvary saw the “blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.”

The phrase having spoiled is taken from the Greek word apekduomai meaning divested or disarmed. Christ disarmed the demonic realm during His ministry and particularly through the finished work of the Cross. Since Calvary, Satan’s kingdom has been restricted from their previous unchallenged global control – Christ “triumphing over them in it.” New King James Version renders it, “Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.” Satan was exposed time after time as Christ and His disciples defeated the minions of hell with the authority of heaven. The Gospel was now free to invade the once-darkened Gentile nations. Not that every single Gentile would believe, but that the nations would now be free to receive the Gospel.

Yes, Zechariah chapters 12-14 tie “on that day” to the first advent with events like

12:10 “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.

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.
&
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

14:1
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.

Clearly all first advent and century events

 

[Davidpt]

Is anyone claiming that? No. So, why are you saying that?

I'm not claiming anyone is claiming that. I'm saying that to make a point, that since Zechariah 14 isn't involving anything before the 1st coming, this indicates that ch 14 is taking place during the last days. What is one thing that takes place during the last days? The DOTL, for one. More than one DOTL happening during different eras of time? Or only 1 DOTL?

There are some Premils who are not also Pretribbers, and there are some Premils who are Pretribbers, that would have us believe that the DOTL event meant in 1 Thessalonians 5:2 is not the same DOTL event meant in 2 Peter 3:10.

You, OTOH, just like me, agree that both 1 Thessalonians 5:2 and 2 Peter 3:10 are involving the same DOTL event. But then you would have us believe that the day of the Lord event recorded in Zechariah 14 is a day of the Lord event the NT knows nothing about, even though Zechariah 14 is involving the same last days that the NT is involving.

You say that based on an assumption that it should all be taken literally. Why would you not allow for the possibility that Zechariah 14 contains figurative text, knowing that a good portion of the rest of the book of Zechariah contains figurative text?

Except I'm not taking things in Zechariah 14 literally when it comes to verse 2, for example. Verse 2 reminds me somewhat of some of the following in Revelation, where I'm taking none of the following in a literal sense, that it is involving the literal city Jerusalem in the middle east. No it isn't.

Zechariah 14:2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

Compare with...

Revelation 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.


First of all, Revelation 11:2 clearly depicts a city being surrounded and waging a battle with, which is what Zechariah 14:2 depicts as well.

Revelation 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

I'm not certain what this verse is meaning. Yet it is involving captivity, the same thing Zechariah 14:2 is involving. We know Zechariah 14:2 can't be meaning 70 AD the fact the following doesn't even remotely agree with history---and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. As if it makes sense, that even though the city was destroyed in 70 AD, the residue of the people were not cut off from the city.

Zechariah 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.


If verse 2 is allegedly pertaining to 70 AD, even verse 3 contradicts what took place in 70 AD. This verse says the LORD shall go forth, and fight against those nations. Not 'nation', nations. As in more than one. How many nations were the Romans back then? Where does history ever record that the Lord then went forth and fought the Romans on behalf of the unbelieving Jews? After all, if meaning 70 AD, He wouldn't be fighting anyone on behalf of Christians, the fact Christians did not remain in the city, thus escaped to safety before the city was ever attacked and destroyed.

But let's just ignore details in Zechariah 14 that prove 70 AD can't be meant, assuming one has decided that 70 AD is meant, regardless the fact what is recorded in verse 2 and 3, some of it doesn't even remotely agree with what history recorded.

Something else I would like to point out. IMO, the DOTL meant in Zechariah 14 1 is not meaning during verse 2, it is meaning during verse 3, therefore, verse 3 being when it initially begins. Per my view verse 2 represents great tribulation in the end of this age, thus the 42 month reign of the beast. And that the DOTL is not during great tribulation, it is after great tribulation. Zechariah 14 follows this same pattern. Verse 2 represents great tribulation, verse 3 represents the beginning of hthe DOTL after verse 2 has run it's course first.

 

[rwb]

I'm not claiming anyone is claiming that. I'm saying that to make a point, that since Zechariah 14 isn't involving anything before the 1st coming, this indicates that ch 14 is taking place during the last days. What is one thing that takes place during the last days? The DOTL, for one. More than one DOTL happening during different eras of time? Or only 1 DOTL?

I agree! The day of the Lord and the last days are consecutive. And though both shall be ONE day, both shall also coincide within this period of time defined as these "last days." The day of the Lord has both a beginning day and a last day. It began with the first advent of Christ coming to earth a man and shall end when time given this earth shall be no longer, when the seventh/last trumpet sounds. According to the prophecies of Old, all that is written concerning the day of the Lord coming in the last days must come to pass within this time period because none of the prophets foretell of Christ coming again to fulfill what is written.

Except I'm not taking things in Zechariah 14 literally when it comes to verse 2, for example. Verse 2 reminds me somewhat of some of the following in Revelation, where I'm taking none of the following in a literal sense, that it is involving the literal city Jerusalem in the middle east. No it isn't.

Zechariah 14:2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

This I also agree with! When Zechariah says "all" nations are gathered against Jerusalem to battle, we know it cannot be pointing to AD 70. The only city that ALL nations battle against is not a literal city on this earth. It is Heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. The battle being waged is not a physical battle but is the spiritual battle that began with the advent of Christ that shall culminate after Satan is set free for a little season to gather together Gog & Magog (antichrists & antichristian) to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. (Rev 20:8-9)

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'm not claiming anyone is claiming that. I'm saying that to make a point, that since Zechariah 14 isn't involving anything before the 1st coming, this indicates that ch 14 is taking place during the last days. What is one thing that takes place during the last days? The DOTL, for one. More than one DOTL happening during different eras of time? Or only 1 DOTL?

There are some Premils who are not also Pretribbers, and there are some Premils who are Pretribbers, that would have us believe that the DOTL event meant in 1 Thessalonians 5:2 is not the same DOTL event meant in 2 Peter 3:10.

That's obviously not a reasonable claim.

You, OTOH, just like me, agree that both 1 Thessalonians 5:2 and 2 Peter 3:10 are involving the same DOTL event. But then you would have us believe that the day of the Lord event recorded in Zechariah 14 is a day of the Lord event the NT knows nothing about, even though Zechariah 14 is involving the same last days that the NT is involving.

How many times do I have to tell you that what is described in Zechariah 14 does not line up with what is described in NT passages like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 and 2 Peter 3:10-13 that clearly relate to the DOTL? So, what do you do about that? You change the clearer passages to mean what you want them to mean in favor of your interpretation of Zechariah 14 instead of allowing the clearer passages to help you understand more difficult OT passages. Why you take that approach, I'll never know. It makes no sense to me.

Except I'm not taking things in Zechariah 14 literally when it comes to verse 2, for example.

You seem to go back and forth in Zechariah 14 between taking it literally and non-literally. There never seems to be any consistency in your approach to interpreting scripture.

Verse 2 reminds me somewhat of some of the following in Revelation, where I'm taking none of the following in a literal sense, that it is involving the literal city Jerusalem in the middle east. No it isn't.

Zechariah 14:2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

Compare with...

Revelation 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.


First of all, Revelation 11:2 clearly depicts a city being surrounded and waging a battle with, which is what Zechariah 14:2 depicts as well.

Revelation 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

I'm not certain what this verse is meaning. Yet it is involving captivity, the same thing Zechariah 14:2 is involving. We know Zechariah 14:2 can't be meaning 70 AD the fact the following doesn't even remotely agree with history---and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. As if it makes sense, that even though the city was destroyed in 70 AD, the residue of the people were not cut off from the city.

Zechariah 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.


If verse 2 is allegedly pertaining to 70 AD, even verse 3 contradicts what took place in 70 AD. This verse says the LORD shall go forth, and fight against those nations. Not 'nation', nations. As in more than one. How many nations were the Romans back then? Where does history ever record that the Lord then went forth and fought the Romans on behalf of the unbelieving Jews? After all, if meaning 70 AD, He wouldn't be fighting anyone on behalf of Christians, the fact Christians did not remain in the city, thus escaped to safety before the city was ever attacked and destroyed.

The Hebrew word translated as "nations" can also mean "heathen". But, even if it was talking about the Roman heathen, there is no indication that the Lord fought against them. Instead, He used them to deliver His wrath against unbelieving Jews. So, I would agree that the text doesn't seem to fit what happened in 70 AD since the Lord didn't fight against the Romans at that time.

But, it's obvious that Zechariah 14 is a very difficult passage to interpret in terms of reconciling it with other scripture. With that in mind, why would you use it as part of the foundation of your doctrine instead of more clear scriptures?

But let's just ignore details in Zechariah 14 that prove 70 AD can't be meant, assuming one has decided that 70 AD is meant, regardless the fact what is recorded in verse 2 and 3, some of it doesn't even remotely agree with what history recorded.

I never said it is about 70 AD, so you once again are saying things to me that don't even apply to what I believe. I acknowledge that I'm not certain what Zechariah 14 is all about. But, I'm also not willing to interpret it in such a way that contradicts other more clear and straightforward scriptures. Pre-tribs (and some post-trib premils) interpret some of it in a way that blatantly contradicts other scriptures and they think nothing of it. It's unbelievable.

Something else I would like to point out. IMO, the DOTL meant in Zechariah 14 1 is not meaning during verse 2, it is meaning during verse 3, therefore, verse 3 being when it initially begins.

I don't see any basis for thinking that verse 2 doesn't relate directly to verse 1.

Per my view verse 2 represents great tribulation in the end of this age, thus the 42 month reign of the beast.

Why isn't the beast mentioned in Zechariah 14 then? We know the beast is mentioned in Daniel and many try to relate things in Daniel about the beast to things in Revelation about the beast. I would think if Zechariah 14 had anything to do with the beast, it would say so.

And that the DOTL is not during great tribulation, it is after great tribulation.

That's true in regards to THE day of the Lord, which is the day the Lord Jesus will return.

Zechariah 14 follows this same pattern. Verse 2 represents great tribulation, verse 3 represents the beginning of hthe DOTL after verse 2 has run it's course first.

The problem is that if Zechariah 14 was about THE day of the Lord that is referenced in the NT, then it would contradict 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-13 because those passages make it clear that there will be no unbelieving survivors of Christ's return. And we both know and believe that all believers will be changed to put on bodily immortality at that time.

 

[Davidpt]

I agree! The day of the Lord and the last days are consecutive. And though both shall be ONE day, both shall also coincide within this period of time defined as these "last days." The day of the Lord has both a beginning day and a last day. It began with the first advent of Christ coming to earth a man and shall end when time given this earth shall be no longer, when the seventh/last trumpet sounds. According to the prophecies of Old, all that is written concerning the day of the Lord coming in the last days must come to pass within this time period because none of the prophets foretell of Christ coming again to fulfill what is written.

The DOTL has a beginning and an ending, just like you said. Except it makes zero sense that the beginning began with the first advent 2000 years ago. We are clearly told, in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, for example, what initiates the beginning, that it comes as a thief in the night. 2 Peter 3:10 echoes this. Speaking of 2 Peter 3, have you not noticed the following?

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.


Have you not noticed that verse 9 does not parallel verse 10, but that verse 9 is fulfilled before verse 10 can be fulfilled? When the DOTL begins, this indicates this era of time has come to an end--longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

But you want us to believe that the DOTL somehow runs in parallel with verse 9, the fact verse 9 is obviously referring to the past 2000 years, and that you have the DOTL beginning at the start of this past 2000 years, thus involving this same past 2000 years. Therefore, contradicting both 2 Peter 3:9-10, the fact those verses undeniably prove that verse 9 has to run it's course first before the DOTL can even begin. Also keeping in mind, the DOTL comes as a thief in the night. As in suddenly and unexpectedly. At least in regards to those not being watchful concerning His coming again in the end of this age.

Nothing recorded in 1 Thessalonians 5 nor 2 Peter 3, pertaining to the DOTL, involves the past 2000 years, therefore, did not begin 2000 years ago. 1 Thessalonians 5:2 nor 2 Peter 3:10 has even been fulfilled yet. And the reason why is simple. We are still living in the era of time pertaining to 1 Peter 3:9---longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. And that it is obviously the DOTL that puts an end to this--longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The DOTL has a beginning and an ending, just like you said. Except it makes zero sense that the beginning began with the first advent 2000 years ago. We are clearly told, in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, for example, what initiates the beginning, that it comes as a thief in the night.

It says that because it is the day that Jesus returns. Some time on that future day that no one knows He will return unexpectedly as a thief in the night at an hour that no one knows. We know that scripture says He will come as a thief in the night, so that is what the day of the Lord is about. The day of Christ's second coming.

So, the following passages all refer to the day of the Lord that will come as a thief in the night.

Matthew 24:42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. 43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. 44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

Luke 12:37 Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them. 38 And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. 39 And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through.

Revelation 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.

2 Peter 3:10 echoes this. Speaking of 2 Peter 3, have you not noticed the following?

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.


Have you not noticed that verse 9 does not parallel verse 10, but that verse 9 is fulfilled before verse 10 can be fulfilled? When the DOTL begins, this indicates this era of time has come to an end--longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Right. When the Lord Jesus comes unexpectedly as a thief in the night on the day of the Lord, that will mean that His longsuffering has come to an end at that point and no one will have the chance to repent after that. Except Premils think that people will get a chance to repent after that during the supposed future thousand years. I don't know if you believe that or not, but I think most Premils do.

But you want us to believe that the DOTL somehow runs in parallel with verse 9, the fact verse 9 is obviously referring to the past 2000 years, and that you have the DOTL beginning at the start of this past 2000 years, thus involving this same past 2000 years.

I don't know how he comes to that conclusion, but it's not the typical non-preterist Amil view at all.

Therefore, contradicting both 2 Peter 3:9-10, the fact those verses undeniably prove that verse 9 has to run it's course first before the DOTL can even begin.

Right.

Also keeping in mind, the DOTL comes as a thief in the night.

You think the DOTL lasts for a thousand years. How can a long period of time come as a thief in the night?

As in suddenly and unexpectedly.

How does a thousand years come suddenly and unexpectedly?

At least in regards to those not being watchful concerning His coming again in the end of this age.

Nothing recorded in 1 Thessalonians 5 nor 2 Peter 3, pertaining to the DOTL, involves the past 2000 years, therefore, did not begin 2000 years ago.

Agree. That should be obvious.

1 Thessalonians 5 nor 2 Peter 3 has even been fulfilled yet. And the reason why is simple. We are still living in the era of time pertaining to 1 Peter 3:9---longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. And that it is obviously the DOTL that puts an end to this--longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Right. The day of the Lord obviously hasn't started yet. But, according to Paul, the day of the Lord will be sudden (1 Thess 5:2-3), so it makes no sense to see the thousand years as having anything to do with the day of the Lord.

 

[Davidpt]

Yes, Zechariah chapters 12-14 tie “on that day” to the first advent with events like

12:10 “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.

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.
&
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

14:1
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.

Clearly all first advent and century events

Yet nothing in Zechariah 14 is meaning during a time when Jesus walked the earth. Yet is involving a time after He walked the earth then left the planet. IOW, Zechariah 14, some of it is meaning during His ascension. None of it is meaning before His ascension. And that some of it is meaning during His return after His ascension. And some of it is meaning after He has returned. After all, 'in that day' is obviously involving an era of time. Therefore, it is not unreasonable that 'in that day' can be involving an era of time during His ascension, then His return following His ascension, then an era of time after He has returned.

Keep in mind, I'm only meaning Zechariah 14 here. Clearly, some of the chapters that precede ch 14, is meaning when Christ walked the earth. For example, Zechariah 9:9. Except nothing recorded in ch 14 is meaning during when Zechariah 9:9 is meaning.

 

[rwb]

The DOTL has a beginning and an ending, just like you said. Except it makes zero sense that the beginning began with the first advent 2000 years ago. We are clearly told, in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, for example, what initiates the beginning, that it comes as a thief in the night. 2 Peter 3:10 echoes this. Speaking of 2 Peter 3, have you not noticed the following?

Those living after the first advent of Christ do not speak of the day of the Lord the Old Covenant Prophets foretell would come. The New Testament speaks of the last day of the Lord the Old Covenant Prophets foretell would come when the day of the Lord would come as Christ coming AGAIN and the wrath of God shall come upon all the earth.

1 Thessalonians 5:2 (KJV) For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

1 Thessalonians 5:4-5 (KJV) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.

1 Thessalonians 5:9-10 (KJV) For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

The day of the Lord written in the New Testament always points to the last day of the Lord when Christ shall come again with both wrath for those He comes to as a thief in the night, those appointed to wrath, and that last day of the Lord to come will also be for saints to obtain salvation through immortal & incorruptible bodies of flesh. At the end of this last day of the Lord we "look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." There won't be another day of the Lord that shall come after this earth is burned up beginning with one thousand more years of time!

2 Peter 3:9-13 (KJV) The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yet nothing in Zechariah 14 is meaning during a time when Jesus walked the earth. Yet is involving a time after He walked the earth then left the planet. IOW, Zechariah 14, some of it is meaning during His ascension. None of it is meaning before His ascension. And that some of it is meaning during His return after His ascension. And some of it is meaning after He has returned. After all, 'in that day' is obviously involving an era of time. Therefore, it is not unreasonable that 'in that day' can be involving an era of time during His ascension, then His return following His ascension, then an era of time after He has returned.

Keep in mind, I'm only meaning Zechariah 14 here. Clearly, some of the chapters that precede ch 14, is meaning when Christ walked the earth. For example, Zechariah 9:9. Except nothing recorded in ch 14 is meaning during when Zechariah 9:9 is meaning.

What time period do you think Zechariah 12 and 13 apply to?

 

[WPM]

Yet nothing in Zechariah 14 is meaning during a time when Jesus walked the earth. Yet is involving a time after He walked the earth then left the planet. IOW, Zechariah 14, some of it is meaning during His ascension. None of it is meaning before His ascension. And that some of it is meaning during His return after His ascension. And some of it is meaning after He has returned. After all, 'in that day' is obviously involving an era of time. Therefore, it is not unreasonable that 'in that day' can be involving an era of time during His ascension, then His return following His ascension, then an era of time after He has returned.

Keep in mind, I'm only meaning Zechariah 14 here. Clearly, some of the chapters that precede ch 14, is meaning when Christ walked the earth. For example, Zechariah 9:9. Except nothing recorded in ch 14 is meaning during when Zechariah 9:9 is meaning.

The early father's saw it the way Amils do today.

Tertullian the early Church father who was Chiliast recognized Zechariah 14 as an historic passage fulfilled at the first advent, saying, “But ‘at night He went out to the Mount of Olives.' For thus had Zechariah pointed out: 'And His feet shall stand in that day on the Mount of Olives' [Zech. xiv. 4]." ("Tertullian Against Marcion," Book 4, chapter XL)

The splitting of the Mount of Olives was so that God's people could escape to safety sounds similar to Christ saying faith can move mountains. It is also like God's people passing through the Red Sea.

Eusebius position on the Zechariah 14:4 is also in agreement: “Which it is possible for us to see literally fulfilled in another way even to-day, since believers in Christ all congregate from all parts of the world, not as of old time because of the glory of Jerusalem, nor that they may worship in the ancient Temple at Jerusalem, but they rest there that they may learn both about the city being taken and devastated as the prophets foretold, and that they may worship at the Mount of Olives opposite to the city, whither the glory of the Lord migrated when it left the former city. There stood in truth according to the common and received account the feet of our Lord and Saviour, Himself the Word of God, through that tabernacle of humanity He had borne up the Mount of Olives to the cave that is shewn there; there He prayed and delivered to His disciples on the summit of the Mount of Olives the mysteries of His end, and thence He made His Ascension into heaven, as Luke tells us in the Acts of the Apostles, saying that while the apostles were with Him on the Mount of Olives.”

He adds: “While they beheld he was taken up, and a cloud received him out of their sight. And as they gazed steadfastly into heaven while he went up, behold two men stood by them in white apparel, who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing into heaven? This same Jesus that is taken up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.”