Which view does Zechariah 14 support? Premil or Amil?

[Davidpt]

One way way to try and determine that is by comparing how Premils interpret these events as opposed to how Amils interpret them. Then seeing which view is agreeing with what the text indicates, which includes events that involve chronology. For example, verse 2 as opposed to verses 16-19. Would anyone argue, chronologically speaking, that verses 16-19 can be fulfilled before verse 2 is even fulfilled first? It would be like arguing that Christ's 2nd advent can precede His 1st advent. Clearly then, when it comes to events in the Bible, especially in regards to prophetic events, chronology matters, thus is relevant.

And what do chronological events do? They lead from one thing into another, etc.

Zechariah 14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
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.
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle

One thing that is already crystal clear here, none of this can be involving 70 AD. For example, compare the following.

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.

With that of this.

Luke 21:5 And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,
6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Does it sound like any of that fits this---and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city

Obviously then, since Zechariah 14:2 can't logically fit 70 AD, it still has to fit somewhere, though. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out, that if it can't fit 70 AD, it has to fit an era of time post 70 AD.

The question is, is verse 2 supposed to be interpreted in the literal sense to begin with? Is it involving literal Jerusalem in the middle east being literally surrounded by all nations on the planet? If we factor in verse 4, how can Jerusalem not be understood in the literal sense here? Is there a way to understand the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, in a sense that is not even literal? Do things pertaining to the non literal typically involve compass directions? Is it literally true that the mount of Olives, that it is before Jerusalem on the east?

Zechariah 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.


What should we make of this verse, keeping in mind that chronology is relevant here. IOW, we can't have this verse meaning during a time when Jesus literally walked upon the earth prior to His death, then have verse 2 involving an era of time post his death, and that we then think that makes good sense of the text. Because, clearly, verse 4 is pertaining to verse 3 and that verse 3 is pertaining to verse 2. That's how chronology works, as in, how one event leads into another event, so on and so on.

I think I will stop here for now. There's a lot more to discuss/debate involving this chapter. But first we need to make sense of these first 4 verses before we can try and make sense of any of the verses that follow.

 

[Randy Kluth]

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

Luke 21:5 And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,
6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Zechariah 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

I agree that it appears logical to see Luke 21 different from Zech 14. In my view Luke 21/the Olivet Discourse speaks of the literal surrounding of Jerusalem by Roman armies, leading to an age-long Jewish Diaspora called the "Great Tribulation." I realize this is not a popular rendering in many places.

On the other hand, Zech 14 seems different from this and focused on the literal Israel in the Middle East, where the battle of Armageddon will take place. However and whenever Zech 14 takes place, it appears to be endtime, since it leads into the establishment of God's Kingdom on earth.

It mentions Jerusalem "never again" to be destroyed, which is a common prophetic theme in the OT Prophets when speaking of the Messianic Kingdom. The "living water" sounds very much like the description of the river in the New Jerusalem, as it is described in Revelation, as well as in Ezekiel's endtime vision of Jerusalem.

What makes interpreting this not determinative in the Amil/Premil discussion is the fact that apocalyptic language always suggests a symbolic interpretation is possible or perhaps even likely. Then the conversation becomes, Does this symbolic language suggest an Amil or a Premil application?

Since this conversation has not been resolved for many centuries, I doubt it will be resolved except by how we approach it with our presuppositions? But you raise the pertinent issues, I think?

For one, many Christians interpret the Olivet Discourse as an endtime event. So for them, the Olivet Discourse, Zech 14, and perhaps even Eze 40-48 could refer to the endtime.

Again, it depends on your presupposition to start with. One has to try to be as objective as he or she can be. Even if we agree that Zech 14 is endtime, and not 70 AD, what follows that battle in the text? Is it a Millennial Age or the Eternal Kingdom? It depends on your eschatology. It depends on how symbolic you view the language as.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

And in that day it shall be
That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem,
Half of them toward [e]the eastern sea
And half of them toward [f]the western sea;
In both summer and winter it shall occur.
9 And the Lord shall be King over all the earth.
In that day it shall be—
“The Lord is one,”
And His name one.

10 All the land shall be turned into a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem. [g]Jerusalem shall be raised up and inhabited in her place from Benjamin’s Gate to the place of the First Gate and the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the king’s winepresses.


11 The people shall dwell in it;
And no longer shall there be utter destruction,
But Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

Considering these things have not happened yet till this day.

 

[marks]

I think I will stop here for now. There's a lot more to discuss/debate involving this chapter. But first we need to make sense of these first 4 verses before we can try and make sense of any of the verses that follow.

For me, this is easily answerable.

Zechariah 14:1-4 KJV
1) Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
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.
3) Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4) And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

This passage means what it says.

We know it has not been fulfilled yet, because these are actual events which will take place, and yes, with a certain chronology.

The sea split before Moses, and the mount shall split under Jesus' foot. That has not happened yet.

Much love!

 

[DavidTaylor]

John the Baptist speaking of his forerunning of Jesus’ arrival:

“Luke 3:2 the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. 3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; 6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”

How do premillennials be consistent in demaning the mountain verses of Zech 14 be required to only be literally (not figuratevily) interpretted, but choose not to apply that same approach to the above verse?

I have not heard any premillennials teach that the Luke 3 valleys and mountains were so moved literally as John prepared the way of Jesus?

Why the literal-only inconsistency?

 

[Marty fox]

John the Baptist speaking of his forerunning of Jesus’ arrival:

“Luke 3:2 the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. 3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; 6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”

How do premillennials be consistent in demaning the mountain verses of Zech 14 be required to only be literally (not figuratevily) interpretted, but choose not to apply that same approach to the above verse?

I have not heard any premillennials teach that the Luke 3 valleys and mountains were so moved literally as John prepared the way of Jesus?

Why the literal-only inconsistency?

Yes amen great post David they cherry pick which ones to be literal

 

[PinSeeker]

First, a digression, although with a very pointed purpose... Here's an account of my Christmas season:

1. I really enjoyed the Advent Season of 2023. It certainly ended on a triumphant note!
2. We worshiped God and celebrated Christ's first Advent for the full month of December and even into early January, as the twelve days of Christmas were not over until January 5 ~ even among many who did not and do not share in the same focus as we did/do.
3. We went to my older sister's house on Christmas Eve; it was a festive time with our extended family.
4. I went and saw a couple of great movies, also.

Now. Does #2 above follow #1, and #3 above follow #2, and #4 above follow #3? Is it all in strict chronological order? Well, no, of course not... But does it give a full picture of the entire (almost) month and a half? Absolutely...

And now, a quote of what I said in another thread recently:

Zechariah 14:16-18 is in the midst of one of these kingdom prophecies which can have more than one application. Like certain parts of Revelation, it is about those who attack the Church and God’s judgment on such people, but it is also about the final judgment and salvation. Besides, it is in apocalyptic language, which is cryptic and must be understood in the symbolic way in which it is written. I say that “on that day” in Zechariah 14:20-21 is a reference to end times and to the final kingdom of God. There is little doubt that this is an apocalyptic description of heaven. As for Zechariah 14:16-18, this, like in most of Revelation, is a prophecy about the current “Church age.” It appears to be a reference to people who would oppose the Church. The use of the Feast of Tabernacle is intended for us to think of being in a relationship with God. Verse 18 seems to be a statement that those who do not repent and become part of the Church will be judged. So, although Zechariah 14:20-21 seems to be about heaven, Zechariah 14:16-19 is about the time between when the Church was established and when Jesus will come back. Which we are in the midst of now. But again, there are allusions and implications here to Christ's return and the final Judgment.

Grace and peace to all.

 

[Davidpt]

What makes interpreting this not determinative in the Amil/Premil discussion is the fact that apocalyptic language always suggests a symbolic interpretation is possible or perhaps even likely. Then the conversation becomes, Does this symbolic language suggest an Amil or a Premil application?

Even with that, can't chronology solve this problem? For instance, verse 5. If that is involving the 2nd coming like many of us Premils take it to involve, and that verses 16-19 are meaning post that of verse 5, it is then a matter of, do verses 16-19 appear to be involving all of eternity, or does it instead apear to be involving an era of time with a beginning and an ending?

Per Amil, there is no era of time that can explain the following post the 2nd coming, assuming verses 16-19 are not involving all of eternity but are involving an era of time that has a beginning and an ending. Meaning this---that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts(Zechariah 14:16)

No matter how one looks at it, no matter how one wants to understand this verse, it is impossible to go up from year to year in a single 24 hour day or less. Keeping in mind, per Amil there are no more days post the last day of this age. And if Premils are correct that verses 16-19 are meaning post the 2nd coming, something has to be able to explain this, assuming forever and ever is not meant here---shall even go up from year to year. Keeping in mind that there is the threat of being punished with plagues if refusing to comply. Therefore, does it sound reasonable, that all throughout eternity there will be this threat hanging over everyone's' head, that one can be punished for failing to comply?

 

[Davidpt]

Yes amen great post David they cherry pick which ones to be literal

Too bad you are unable to argue something of value, but instead use opinions to try and prove a position wrong. Why not instead show how Zechariah 14 fits Amil to a T? And then let's see if what you are proposing makes sense of the text or doesn't.

BTW, just because some of Zechariah 14 might be meaning post the 2nd coming, doesn't mean everything has to be taken in a literal sense throughout. For example, verses 20-21. If that is a problem post the 2nd coming why is it not also a problem prior to the 2nd coming? If those verses don't have to be understood in a literal sense if one were to apply them to this present age, why do they have to be understood in a literal sense if being applied to post the 2nd coming? Who made up those rules? Amils?

 

[Davidpt]

First, a digression, although with a definite purpose... Here's an account of my Christmas season:

1. I really enjoyed the Advent Season of 2023. It certainly ended on a triumphant note!
2. We worshiped God and celebrated Christ's first Advent for the full month of December and even into early January, as the twelve days of Christmas were not over until January 5 ~ even among many who did not and do not share in the same focus as we did/do.
3. We went to my older sister's house on Christmas Eve; it was a festive time with our extended family.
4. I went and saw a couple of great movies, also.

Now. Does #2 above follow #1, and #3 above follow #2, and #4 above follow #3? Is it all in strict chronological order? Well, no, of course not... But does it give a full picture of the entire (almost) month and a half? Absolutely...

And now, a quote of what I said in another thread recently:

Zechariah 14:16-18 is in the midst of one of these kingdom prophecies which can have more than one application. Like certain parts of Revelation, it is about those who attack the Church and God’s judgment on such people, but it is also about the final judgment and salvation. Besides, it is in apocalyptic language, which is cryptic and must be understood in the symbolic way in which it is written. I say that “on that day” in Zechariah 14:20-21 is a reference to end times and to the final kingdom of God. There is little doubt that this is an apocalyptic description of heaven. As for Zechariah 14:16-18, this, like in most of Revelation, is a prophecy about the current “Church age.” It appears to be a reference to people who would oppose the Church. The use of the Feast of Tabernacle is intended for us to think of being in a relationship with God. Verse 18 seems to be a statement that those who do not repent and become part of the Church will be judged. So, although Zechariah 14:20-21 seems to be about heaven, Zechariah 14:16-19 is about the time between when the Church was established and when Jesus will come back. Which we are in the midst of now. But again, there are allusions and implications here to Christ's return and the final Judgment.

Grace and peace to all.

As to Zechariah 14, it is mostly chronological throughout, except a few places which are referring back to something that happened earlier in time.

I see verse 1 through verse 11 being strictly chronological. I see no reason to think it isn't. Verse 2 leads to the Lord intervening on their behalf, which in turn involves His bodily coming. Where then in verse 6 we have trnsitioned into another era of time, meaning post His 2nd coming, where verses 6-11 are describing this era of time in more detail.

Then when we get to verse 12 through verse 15, it is reminding us what happened as the result of the Lord God coming, and all the saints with Him, per verse 5. Thus is meaning before the time involving verses 6-11.

And now we are at the era of time involving verses 16-19, which appears to fit during the time involving verses 6-11.

Some of what you said, in particular, your last paragraph, only makes sense if pertaining to an era of time preceding the 2nd coming recorded in verse 5. But until the 2nd coming takes place, the following can't occur in the meantime, meaning verse 12. And that verses 16-19 can't take place until verse 12 takes place first, the fact what happens to these in verse 12 doesn't happen to these per verse 16 as well. After all, it does say this---And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year

Obviously, they can't do that if verse 12 happened to them instead. Don't some of you grasp what it means, that if every one that is left of all the nations, that it means there were survivors? Would you argue, for example, an earthquake totals an entire city. It kills almost everyone in the city, yet some remain alive and eventually begin rebuilding the city. That this then equals that this earthquake killed every single person in this city since the entire city was totaled?

Of course you wouldn't argue something silly like that, so why argue something silly like that per Zechariah 14:16, that regardless that that verse indicates there are survivors that came against Jerusalem, thus Zechariah is lying to us here, and verse 12 proves it since no one could survive that? Of course no one could survive that if that is what actually happened to them. Except that is not what actually happened to these in verse 16 if they remain instead, thus not dead. After all, surely physically dead ppl are not expected to go up from year to year.

 

[Truth7t7]

One way way to try and determine that is by comparing how Premils interpret these events as opposed to how Amils interpret them. Then seeing which view is agreeing with what the text indicates, which includes events that involve chronology. For example, verse 2 as opposed to verses 16-19. Would anyone argue, chronologically speaking, that verses 16-19 can be fulfilled before verse 2 is even fulfilled first? It would be like arguing that Christ's 2nd advent can precede His 1st advent. Clearly then, when it comes to events in the Bible, especially in regards to prophetic events, chronology matters, thus is relevant.

And what do chronological events do? They lead from one thing into another, etc.

Zechariah 14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
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.
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle

One thing that is already crystal clear here, none of this can be involving 70 AD. For example, compare the following.

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.

With that of this.

Luke 21:5 And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,
6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Does it sound like any of that fits this---and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city

Obviously then, since Zechariah 14:2 can't logically fit 70 AD, it still has to fit somewhere, though. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out, that if it can't fit 70 AD, it has to fit an era of time post 70 AD.

The question is, is verse 2 supposed to be interpreted in the literal sense to begin with? Is it involving literal Jerusalem in the middle east being literally surrounded by all nations on the planet? If we factor in verse 4, how can Jerusalem not be understood in the literal sense here? Is there a way to understand the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, in a sense that is not even literal? Do things pertaining to the non literal typically involve compass directions? Is it literally true that the mount of Olives, that it is before Jerusalem on the east?

Zechariah 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.


What should we make of this verse, keeping in mind that chronology is relevant here. IOW, we can't have this verse meaning during a time when Jesus literally walked upon the earth prior to His death, then have verse 2 involving an era of time post his death, and that we then think that makes good sense of the text. Because, clearly, verse 4 is pertaining to verse 3 and that verse 3 is pertaining to verse 2. That's how chronology works, as in, how one event leads into another event, so on and so on.

I think I will stop here for now. There's a lot more to discuss/debate involving this chapter. But first we need to make sense of these first 4 verses before we can try and make sense of any of the verses that follow.

Zechariah Chapter 14 Is The Eternal Kingdom

Zechariah 14:1-12 below shows the Lords return to earth in fire in final judgement.

(Verse 1) shows "The Day Of The Lord" also seen in 2 Peter 3:10-13 "Fire Judgement" below

(Verse 2) Shows that all nations are gathered for the final battle of armageddon.

(Verses 3-5) shows the Lords return, and his eternal feet touch down on the earthly Mt, of Olives, and in the "Twinkling Of An Eye" 1 Cor 15:52 takes place, in the catching up, resurrection, final judgement by fire, and the New Heavens, Earth, and Jerusalem being revealed for eternity, judgement complete, eternity begins.

(Verses 6-7) Eternal light seen, in the eternal kingdom, Rev 22:1-5

(Verse 8) The river of life is seen, Rev 22:1-5

(Verse 10) The New creation is being revealed, the plain is lifted up.

(Verse 12) "The Day Of The Lord" showing the "Last Day" judgement by the Lords fire, as men are consumed as they stand on their feet, 2 Peter 3:10-13

2 Peter 3:10KJV
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.

Revelation 22:1KJV
And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

"The Eternal Kingdom"!

Zechariah 14:1-12KJV
14 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
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.
3 Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
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.
8 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.
9 And the Lordshall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.
10 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin’s gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king’s winepresses.
11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.
12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

 

[marks]

Of course you wouldn't argue something silly like that, so why argue something silly like that per Zechariah 14:16, that regardless that that verse indicates there are survivors that came against Jerusalem, thus Zechariah is lying to us here, and verse 12 proves it since no one could survive that? Of course no one could survive that if that is what actually happened to them. Except that is not what actually happened to these in verse 16 if they remain instead, thus not dead. After all, surely physically dead ppl are not expected to go up from year to year.

Joel 3 and Matthew 25 both foretell the time after Jesus returns and regathers Israel the 2nd time that He will judge the nations, and that some will be invited into the kingdom having cared for the Israelites.

And this prophecy continues the same narrative, the nations who survive will go year by year to worship at Jerusalem.

God's original covenant with Israel,

Exodus 19:5-8 KJV
5) Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
6) And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
7) And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him.
8) And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

that they would be a kingdom of priests in return for their obedience, fulfilled on their behalf by Jesus Christ, is brought to fruition,

Zechariah 14:20-21 KJV
20) In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD'S house shall be like the bowls before the altar.
21) Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.

as "every pot in Jerusalem and Judah" will be used for sacrifices.

Much love!

 

[Davidpt]

Zechariah Chapter 14 Is The Eternal Kingdom


Zechariah 14:1-12 below shows the Lords return to earth in fire in final judgement.

(Verse 1) shows "The Day Of The Lord" also seen in 2 Peter 3:10-13 "Fire Judgement" below

(Verse 2) Shows that all nations are gathered for the final battle of armageddon.

(Verses 3-5) shows the Lords return, and his eternal feet touch down on the earthly Mt, of Olives, and in the "Twinkling Of An Eye" 1 Cor 15:52 takes place, in the catching up, resurrection, final judgement by fire, and the New Heavens, Earth, and Jerusalem being revealed for eternity, judgement complete, eternity begins.

(Verses 6-7) Eternal light seen, in the eternal kingdom, Rev 22:1-5

(Verse 8) The river of life is seen, Rev 22:1-5

(Verse 10) The New creation is being revealed, the plain is lifted up.

(Verse 12) "The Day Of The Lord" showing the "Last Day" judgement by the Lords fire, as men are consumed as they stand on their feet, 2 Peter 3:10-13

2 Peter 3:10KJV
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.

Revelation 22:1KJV
And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

"The Eternal Kingdom"!

Zechariah 14:1-12KJV
14 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
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.
3 Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
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.
8 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.
9 And the Lordshall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.
10 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin’s gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king’s winepresses.
11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.
12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

Since you are not denying that some of Zechariah 14 is involving the 2nd coming and post the 2nd coming, pretty much what you have submitted thus far, I would say we are probably on the same page to some degree. Yet, I notice that you failed to factor in verses 16-19 as well. Why did you not mention those as well? Those are the verses that mainly lead some of us to conclude Zechariah 14 supports Premil. Because, like I argued earlier, until verse 12 happens first, verses 16-19 can't come to pass in the meantime.

And that you already admit that verse 12 is involving the day of the Lord coming in wrath. And do not verses 16-19 indicate one can be punished for failing to comply? How does that make sense if we try and apply that to all of eternity? Keeping in mind, unless you or someone else can convincingly prove otherwise, verses 16-19 are meaning post that of verse 12, not prior to it instead. Also keeping in mind that they are to go up from year to year, regardless what that might look like, therefore, the point being, it obviously requires numerous years in order to go up from year to year. Meaning they begin doing this post that of verse 12, otherwise, no rain, so on and so on.

I still liked your post for the most part, except I think you need to explain verses 16-19 as well.

 

[Truth7t7]

Since you are not denying that some of Zechariah 14 is involving the 2nd coming and post the 2nd coming, pretty much what you have submitted thus far, I would say we are probably on the same page to some degree. Yet, I notice that you failed to factor in verses 16-19 as well. Why did you not mention those as well? Those are the verses that mainly lead some of us to conclude Zechariah 14 supports Premil. Because, like I argued earlier, until verse 12 happens first, verses 16-19 can't come to pass in the meantime.

And that you already admit that verse 12 is involving the day of the Lord coming in wrath. And do not verses 16-19 indicate one can be punished for failing to comply? How does that make sense if we try and apply that to all of eternity? Keeping in mind, unless you or someone else can convincingly prove otherwise, verses 16-19 are meaning post that of verse 12, not prior to it instead. Also keeping in mind that they are to go up from year to year, regardless what that might look like, therefore, the point being, it obviously requires numerous years in order to go up from year to year. Meaning they begin doing this post that of verse 12, otherwise, no rain, so on and so on.

I still liked your post for the most part, except I think you need to explain verses 16-19 as well.

Zechariah 14:16 Who Will Be Left Of The Nations?​

You will closely note, Zechariah 14:16 & Isaiah 4:3-4 are "Parallel" readings of the same event, as Isaiah gives a clear account of those who are left, those who are found in the book of life, the final judgement has passed, eternity has begun "After" The Day Of The Lord

You will closely note in Isaiah 4:4 below, Jerusalem will be purged by the spirit of (Judgement) & (Burning)

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

Only The Righteous Are Left, The Book Of Life "Was" Opened (Every One That Is Written Among The Living)

Zechariah 14:16KJV
16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.

Isaiah 4:3-4KJV
3 And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem:
4 When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning.

Revelation 21:24-27KJV
24 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.
25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.
26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.
27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Even with that, can't chronology solve this problem? For instance, verse 5. If that is involving the 2nd coming like many of us Premils take it to involve, and that verses 16-19 are meaning post that of verse 5, it is then a matter of, do verses 16-19 appear to be involving all of eternity, or does it instead apear to be involving an era of time with a beginning and an ending?

Of course, as a Premil I would agree with you for that very reason. It would probably be best to hear what Amils have to say about it, since I already have a bias.

I've read some of the commentaries from old-time Amils, and they seem in disagreement and somewhat disjointed or sparing in their contributions? Some view Zech 14 as 70 AD, and some as the endtime.

I view this as a very strong argument for Premil, but I'm sure there will be opposing thoughts. The argument will most likely hinge on the idea of Symbolic Language, as I suggested--not saying I agree with it! Thanks.

 

[Randy Kluth]

John the Baptist speaking of his forerunning of Jesus’ arrival:

“Luke 3:2 the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. 3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; 6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”

How do premillennials be consistent in demaning the mountain verses of Zech 14 be required to only be literally (not figuratevily) interpretted, but choose not to apply that same approach to the above verse?

I have not heard any premillennials teach that the Luke 3 valleys and mountains were so moved literally as John prepared the way of Jesus?

Why the literal-only inconsistency?

I raised the matter myself, as a Premil! The Amil argument would, I suggested, be answered by "Symbolic Interpretation." How do we detect when something is to be interpreted figuratively and when not? By the context!

This is something we all must do individually in determining what the strongest argument is. But yes, "mountains brought low" would likely refer to the abasement of arrogant kingdoms. It is debatable whether a "split mountain" is equally clear?

Since it is not clear to me that a "split mountain" is to be taken literally, I would have to look at the rest of the language and the rest of the context to see if it requires a literal application. Is this a literal history being referred to, or an imaginative, figurative history of something eternal?

 

[ScottA]

Which view does Zechariah 14 support? Premil or Amil?​

One way way to try and determine that is by comparing how Premils interpret these events as opposed to how Amils interpret them. Then seeing which view is agreeing with what the text indicates, which includes events that involve chronology. For example, verse 2 as opposed to verses 16-19. Would anyone argue, chronologically speaking, that verses 16-19 can be fulfilled before verse 2 is even fulfilled first? It would be like arguing that Christ's 2nd advent can precede His 1st advent. Clearly then, when it comes to events in the Bible, especially in regards to prophetic events, chronology matters, thus is relevant.

And what do chronological events do? They lead from one thing into another, etc.

Zechariah 14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
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.
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle

One thing that is already crystal clear here, none of this can be involving 70 AD. For example, compare the following.

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.

With that of this.

Luke 21:5 And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,
6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Does it sound like any of that fits this---and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city

Obviously then, since Zechariah 14:2 can't logically fit 70 AD, it still has to fit somewhere, though. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out, that if it can't fit 70 AD, it has to fit an era of time post 70 AD.

The question is, is verse 2 supposed to be interpreted in the literal sense to begin with? Is it involving literal Jerusalem in the middle east being literally surrounded by all nations on the planet? If we factor in verse 4, how can Jerusalem not be understood in the literal sense here? Is there a way to understand the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, in a sense that is not even literal? Do things pertaining to the non literal typically involve compass directions? Is it literally true that the mount of Olives, that it is before Jerusalem on the east?

Zechariah 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.


What should we make of this verse, keeping in mind that chronology is relevant here. IOW, we can't have this verse meaning during a time when Jesus literally walked upon the earth prior to His death, then have verse 2 involving an era of time post his death, and that we then think that makes good sense of the text. Because, clearly, verse 4 is pertaining to verse 3 and that verse 3 is pertaining to verse 2. That's how chronology works, as in, how one event leads into another event, so on and so on.

I think I will stop here for now. There's a lot more to discuss/debate involving this chapter. But first we need to make sense of these first 4 verses before we can try and make sense of any of the verses that follow.

Neither. The words "are spirit."

One indication is: "half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city." Meaning, the matter and context are much greater, as stated here from the beginning:

Genesis 1:4​

And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.​

Which sets the context of Zechariah 14 and Luke 21 as regarding all of time divided in "half" by light and darkness.

But regarding all references of time, whether a day or a thousand years, it is best reconciled as "a time, times, and half a time." This is from Daniel's prophecy (which includes no "gap"...but there's that word "half" again--by no coincidence.

• "A Time" refers to all of "time."
• "times" refers the "times" before and after Christ and the cross, meaning before and after the salvation/atonement/fix.
• "and half a time" refers to the times being "divided" in "half", the dividing of "the light from the darkness."

 

[Marty fox]

Too bad you are unable to argue something of value, but instead use opinions to try and prove a position wrong. Why not instead show how Zechariah 14 fits Amil to a T? And then let's see if what you are proposing makes sense of the text or doesn't.

BTW, just because some of Zechariah 14 might be meaning post the 2nd coming, doesn't mean everything has to be taken in a literal sense throughout. For example, verses 20-21. If that is a problem post the 2nd coming why is it not also a problem prior to the 2nd coming? If those verses don't have to be understood in a literal sense if one were to apply them to this present age, why do they have to be understood in a literal sense if being applied to post the 2nd coming? Who made up those rules? Amils?

If you read chapters 12-14 you will see many first advent events mentioned

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.

13:7 “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.


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.

You will also read that it repeatedly states "in that day" throughout those chapters. So is "in that day" during the first advent and century or does it include the last 2000 years?

You will also see that it says "in that day" Jerusalem will be surrounded and destroyed.

It also says "in that day" Jerusalem will be surrounded but God will protect it and it will be an unmovable rock.

So once again when exactually is "in that day?

The only way that it makes sense about Jerusalem is if one is the literal city which was destroyed and the other in the New Jerusalem the church which was born in the first century in that day.

Weather what you believe the "in that day" includes the first century.

 

[marks]

Since it is not clear to me that a "split mountain" is to be taken literally, I would have to look at the rest of the language and the rest of the context to see if it requires a literal application. Is this a literal history being referred to, or an imaginative, figurative history of something eternal?

Not just a "split mountain", though, "you shall flee through the valley that was created", God gives certain instructions to the people who are there at the time.

I think this is "the winepress of God's wrath", that just like the Red Sea closed on the Egyptians killing them all, so to that the armies of the beast will chase them through this valley, to find themselves crushed, a river of blood flowing out for miles and miles.

Much love!

 

[Timtofly]

John the Baptist speaking of his forerunning of Jesus’ arrival:

“Luke 3:2 the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. 3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; 6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”

How do premillennials be consistent in demaning the mountain verses of Zech 14 be required to only be literally (not figuratevily) interpretted, but choose not to apply that same approach to the above verse?

I have not heard any premillennials teach that the Luke 3 valleys and mountains were so moved literally as John prepared the way of Jesus?

Why the literal-only inconsistency?

Because the literal fulfillment has not happened yet, just like there is not a literal kingdom on earth yet. Christ sitting on a throne in Jerusalem has not been literally fulfilled either.

The spiritual preparation did not happen either, as those mountains were not made straight, nor did religious leaders accept Jesus as their Messiah in the spiritual sense.