Which view does Zechariah 14 support? Premil or Amil?

[CadyandZoe]

Zechariah 14 describes the Millennial Period. Take verse 16, for example.

16 Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Booths.

This is describing the Millennial period.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The reign of the Lord in His kingdom was not established in AD 70.

In a very real sense, that reign of the Lord has always existed. The Psalms are full of this, with the phrase, "The Lord reigneth...". For example, Ps. 103:19, "The Lord hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all." And another in Ps. 145:13, "Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endureth throughout all generations." And another in Ps. 146:10, "The Lord shall reign for ever, even thy God, O Zion, unto all generations. Praise ye the Lord."

That "everlasting kingdom" has manifested itself in various ways over history. The incarnate Christ told the multitudes that the proof that the kingdom had come unto them was shown by His casting out devils during His earthly ministry. The kingdom of God was then presently "at hand" and "in your midst" in the person of the incarnate Christ (Mark 1:15, Luke 17:21)

Peter told the multitudes at Pentecost in Acts 2:29-36 that King David's prophecy of an enthroned Christ as Lord had been fulfilled by the newly-ascended Jesus. This enthronement in heaven was Jesus having been consecrated as a high priest King of kings upon His heavenly throne. This was a new facet of the Lord's everlasting reign, with Jesus's New Covenant role beginning as our deathless mediator / intercessor Great High Priest. This was the single kingdom given to the Son of Man in Daniel 7:13-14's account of Christ's ascension.

After Christ's AD 70 return, Satan and the entire demonic realm was destroyed, leaving all of those "many crowns" (Rev. 19:12) of the "Prince of this world" confiscated by the still-reigning Christ. Satan had once boasted to Christ in Luke 4:5-6 that the glory and power of the kingdoms of this world had been given to him. With Satan's AD 70 death, whatever power and glory was behind those kingdoms of the world clearly belonged to Christ, as pictured by the "many crowns" added to the kingdom which Christ already ruled.

I could agree with how you worded much of this all the way up until you said that Satan was destroyed after Jesus' ascension. I agree that God has always been King in heaven, and that as the divine man, Jesus has also always been King of heaven. And I would agree that his Kingdom has not yet come to dominate the earth--that awaits, I believe, the 2nd Coming.

So even when Jesus came the 1st time, it had to be recognized that the Kingdom of Heaven had *drawn near,* had come to contact people on earth even though the Kingdom itself had not yet been fully realized. People, in meeting Jesus, had met the King of Heaven, and so, the Kingdom of Heaven had come down to make contact with people. But we both agree--the Kingdom of Heaven had not yet been established on earth.

Since the Kingdom of Heaven has not yet been established on earth, but only exists presently in Heaven, I see no reason to assume that Satan has been bound on earth. God has always had authority over Satan as King over all. But God has also let Satan run loose in order to bring both Man and Angel under judgment at the same time. Satan will, I believe, be bound at the appropriate time, when Christ returns.

 

[WPM]

Zechariah 14 describes the Millennial Period. Take verse 16, for example.

16 Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Booths.

This is describing the Millennial period.

Is Christ not king of all the earth now? Is true Jerusalem not above today?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Is Christ not king of all the earth now? Is true Jerusalem not above today?

No, Christ is not ruling over all the earth now.

 

[Marty fox]

No, Christ is not ruling over all the earth now.

Is He not?

Psaim 103
19 The Lord has established his throne in heaven,
and his kingdom rules over all.

 

[WPM]

No, Christ is not ruling over all the earth now.

Yes He is! This is where Amils and Premils strongly disagree.

Paul confirms:

1 Corinthians 15:25-26: “For he must reign (present, active infinitive), till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.”

Here he shows that Christ is reigning now. It is written in the present, active infinitive sense. How long does he reign? He confirms: “till he hath put all enemies under his feet.” Again, this couldn’t be clearer! Every last enemy will be subjugated and subdued at the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. The last enemy is identified as death!

There you have it! The second coming sees the final subjugation of all:

· rule
· authority
· power
· death

Paul then reinforces this thought:

1 Corinthians 15:27-28 “For ‘he hath put’ (aorist active indicative) (hupotasso or subordinated or submitted to) all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under (hupotasso or subordinated or submitted to) him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put (hupotasso or subordinated or submitted to) all things under him. And when all things shall be (hupotasso) subdued (or subordinated or submitted to) unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him (hupotasso or subordinated or submitted to), that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”

Paul, again, repeats the great truth that God “hath put all things under his feet” as He reigns in majestic glory upon high. The reign described here is aorist active indicative, meaning it is ongoing. He also shows, whilst Christ is reigning over His enemies as Lord and God, they will NOT be made His footstool, subdued and put down until the second coming.

The whole focus here is the current reign of Christ upon the heavenly throne that will culminate in the final downfall of all his enemies when he appears. Then we'll his enemies finally be subdued, put down, and made his footstool.

Hebrews 1:2, 3, 2:9 says, “Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things … Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high … Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.”

There it is! He is the supreme power. He is the government. He carries all authority. Whilst new enemies are being born every day, while new wicked regimes continually arise, Christ determines what He allows and what He doesn't. There is nothing that is not under Him. The world is NOT out of control. God has a plan and that plan will be fulfilled, when God sees fit.

1 Peter 3:22 says, that Christ, “who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God (now!!!); angels and authorities and powers being (currently!!!) made subject unto him.”

Without a doubt Christ is reigning over His enemies since the resurrection, waiting for their final predetermined put down. Those who question Christ’s current reign do great assault upon the truth of God’s Word and undermine the current sovereign kingly position that He now assuredly holds. They also circumvent clear New Testament writings that teach Christ is reigning now.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Is He not?

Psaim 103
19 The Lord has established his throne in heaven,
and his kingdom rules over all

Wouldn't you agree this verse was true before the birth of Jesus and his ministry? If so, then David's word has always been true from the first day of creation. Wouldn't you agree that David is speaking about Yahweh?

What about Jesus, the Son?

Consider Luke 1:32 "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David . . ."

In this context, Gabriel is speaking to Mary about her child Jesus. Gabriel says that the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David. What is David's dominion? And is Jesus ruling over that dominion now? I don't think so.

 

[WPM]

Wouldn't you agree this verse was true before the birth of Jesus and his ministry? If so, then David's word has always been true from the first day of creation. Wouldn't you agree that David is speaking about Yahweh?

What about Jesus, the Son?

Consider Luke 1:32 "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David . . ."

In this context, Gabriel is speaking to Mary about her child Jesus. Gabriel says that the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David. What is David's dominion? And is Jesus ruling over that dominion now? I don't think so.

Listen to Peter preaching on Psalm 110:1, when speaking about David and his throne, says, “For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance [referring to Psalms 16:8-10]. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne [referring to Psalms 132:12]; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption [referring to Psalms 16:10]. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, the Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool [referring to Psalm 110:1]. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:25-36).

Peter shows us that Psalm 110:1 is currently being fulfilled since Christ destroyed the power of the grave, and ascended to the right hand of majesty on high. No objective Bible student could fail to see the focus and message of this narrative. This reading is concentrated upon the victory of the resurrection of Christ nearly 2,000 years ago and the resulting current kingly Messianic reign of Christ at “the right hand of God exalted” in heaven. It confirms that Israel’s Messiah now sits enthroned upon David’s throne, and locates the timing of His assumption of the same to after “the resurrection of Christ.” As Messiah, Christ fulfilled every human demand of Him, thus rightfully assuming the kingship of Israel through His impeccable life, His atoning death and His glorious resurrection.

Christ taking David’s throne does not refer to Him sitting on some long-preserved literal physical in the Middle East (as non-believing Jews and Premils apply this to in the future), but rather Him assuming heavenly authority over the people of God and fulfilling the Messianic prophecies as Israel’s true king. As we see in the New Testament, the people of God or true Israel does not relate exclusively to a physical race but to spiritual grace on God’s elect. Peter is showing that Christ now reigns over His people in fulfilment of the Old Testament predictions.

Peter ties up his whole argument in Acts 2:36 by saying: “let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

 

[Earburner]

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.

First and foremost, one has to accept the reality between the "Age of God's Indignation" and the "Age of God's Grace", all of which has been ordered by God the Father and the Son (Elohim), before the foundation of the world.

However, ever since the world was destroyed by water, in the days of Noah, the Age of Indignation began, whereby God set in order of how all the world should give heed to His "Ten Commandments", upto and after the promise and coming of the Messiah, who is Jesus.

On the Day of Jesus' resurrection, the Age of Indignation ENDED, which BEGAN the Age of God's Grace, of which we are all still in at this time.
If it were not for the fact of Jesus, who was to come, and DID come, the complete end of this world and the earth, with everything in it, would have been destroyed by Fire THEN, at the END of the Age of God's Indignation.
1 Cor. 10[11] Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world ARE come.

2 Peter 3[7] But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Yes He is! This is where Amils and Premils strongly disagree.

I know. In your view, we are in the Millennial period now, since (among other things) Christ rules over his subjects presently. And the fact that the Father has given all authority to his son Jesus Christ is without controversy. The scriptures you cited provide evidence of this fact.

But let us not be diverted away from the central issue. Your argument is not relevant to the topic in question.

The locus of the central issue is focused on Jesus' role as the Savior General who will free Israel from her enemies.

The topic comes into focus in the prophetic word of Zacharias as recorded by Luke:

Luke 1:
“Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited us and accomplished redemption for His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of David His servant—
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from of old—
71 Salvation from our enemies,
And from the hand of all who hate us;
72 To show mercy toward our fathers,
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to Abraham our father,
74 To grant us that we, being rescued from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all our days.

During the Millennial Period, Jesus will return to earth and act as Israel's savior general, defeating Israel's enemies that she might worship him without fear. This aspect of God's will is missing from the Amillennial view point.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I could agree with how you worded much of this all the way up until you said that Satan was destroyed after Jesus' ascension.

That's not what I wrote. Satan was loosed from his millennial chain for a "short time" and a "little season" at the time of Christ's ascension in AD 33. He and his devils were cast out of heaven down to earth in great wrath after that AD 33 war in heaven. It was Christ's blood sacrifice arriving in heaven on His ascension day which ruined Satan's ability to accuse the brethren anymore. John warned the believers in Revelation 12:12 that Satan's "short time" of harassing the inhabitants of the world on earth had begun already (at the end of the millennium). Satan's deception of the nations had been bound during the millennium before then, but after Christ's ascension, Satan's active deception of the nations ramped up again big time.

This is why the Ephesians "armor of God" against Satan's attacks was so necessary in those first-century days - Satan like a "roaring lion" was in full battle mode for that brief period of time, knowing it would not last very long. In AD 70, Satan's "short time" was over, and God slew that Dragon, just as He had predicted in both Isaiah 27:1 and Ezekiel 28:18-19, so that Satan would no longer exist.

Satan will, I believe, be bound at the appropriate time, when Christ returns.

Satan is not bound anymore. He's dead - burned to literal ashes on the earth in the sight of kings, just like God promised in Ezekiel 28:18-19. Satan's period of being bound for the millennium years was long before Christ's earthly ministry of casting out devils. The mere fact that Christ was able to do this was proof that Satan had already "FIRST" been bound, because Christ was spoiling Satan's goods, just like the "strong man" had to be bound FIRST, and only then could his goods be plundered.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Christ taking David’s throne does not refer to Him sitting on some long-preserved literal physical in the Middle East (as non-believing Jews and Premils apply this to in the future), but rather Him assuming heavenly authority over the people of God and fulfilling the Messianic prophecies as Israel’s true king.

I understand this is your position. But your position is faulty since it neglects to take seriously David's dominion. Where did David have dominion if not over Israel and the surrounding territories? And who are Israel's enemies if not the countries that surround Israel?

Therefore, the prophets will be vindicated when Jesus picks up his father's scepter, ruling over Israel and protecting her from her enemies?

 

[Davidpt]

Is Christ not king of all the earth now? Is true Jerusalem not above today?

Read what the text actually says, meaning all of what that verse says, not just some of what it says.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

in that day shall there be one LORD

Now compare that with this, for example.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


Does it sound like, during the era of time 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving, the LORD is king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one? How can there only be one LORD to worship at the time if there is still a beast that is directing worship to itself instead? When the text says there is one LORD, it simply means there are no other alternatives at the time. Obviously, no one can any longer worship the beast if it has been cast into the LOF prior to the fulfilling of Zechariah 14:9. Which then equals there only being one LORD total, not multiple ones instead.

Does it sound like, during the era of time 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving, that the 7th trumpet has already sounded, thus---The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever(Revelation 11:15)? After all, how can Zechariah 14:9 be fulfilled before Revelation 11:15 is even fulfilled?

Clearly then, regardless whether Premil is true or not, the era involving Zechariah 14:9 is meaning post the 2nd coming, and certainly isn't involving this present age.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Now compare that with this, for example.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

This was fulfilled by the Zealot leader Menahem in Jerusalem in AD 66. He "exalted himself" over every other Zealot contender for Daniel's prophesied Messiah role. Every one of these competing Zealot leaders was essentially calling themselves "God" by trying to claim the title "King of the Jews".

In AD 66, Menahem murdered the moderate high priest Ananias who had been restraining him from rising to power in Jerusalem until then. Menahem then presented himself in the temple along with his armored troops, having dressed himself in King Herod's royal garments stolen from Masada. This was a clear declaration of Menahem's intention to exalt himself as "King of the Jews" by presenting himself as such in Jerusalem's temple. A few short weeks later, Menahem in turn was murdered by Ananias' son Eleazar in vengeance for his father's murder.

None of those Zealot leaders attempting to exalt themselves as the "King of the Jews" made it past the close of AD 70. They were all destroyed, as God intended. Christ Jesus is the King over all the earth, and his reign is forever, as the angel Gabriel predicted to Mary. "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end."

 

[Davidpt]

This was fulfilled by the Zealot leader Menahem in Jerusalem in AD 66. He "exalted himself" over every other Zealot contender for Daniel's prophesied Messiah role. Every one of these competing Zealot leaders was essentially calling themselves "God" by trying to claim the title "King of the Jews".

In AD 66, Menahem murdered the moderate high priest Ananias who had been restraining him from rising to power in Jerusalem until then. Menahem then presented himself in the temple along with his armored troops, having dressed himself in King Herod's royal garments stolen from Masada. This was a clear declaration of Menahem's intention to exalt himself as "King of the Jews" by presenting himself as such in Jerusalem's temple. A few short weeks later, Menahem in turn was murdered by Ananias' son Eleazar in vengeance for his father's murder.

None of those Zealot leaders attempting to exalt themselves as the "King of the Jews" made it past the close of AD 70. They were all destroyed, as God intended. Christ Jesus is the King over all the earth, and his reign is forever, as the angel Gabriel predicted to Mary. "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end."

Even though I don't agree with you here, does this at least mean that you agree that Zechariah 14:9 can't parallel the era of time involving 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and can't come to pass until the 7th trumpet has sounded first, since I'm assuming, unless you tell me otherwise, that you likely also think the 7th trumpet already sounded 2000 years ago as well?

If yes to those things, this indicates that you and I think a lot alike. And where we are differing on some of these things is the era of time we assume they fit. As to other interpreters, some of them are not even taking any of these things into consideration to begin with before deciding how to interpret Zechariah 14:9, that it has to be meaning after the 7th trumpet has sounded, and that it can't be paralleling the era of time involving 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

 

[WPM]

I know. In your view, we are in the Millennial period now, since (among other things) Christ rules over his subjects presently. And the fact that the Father has given all authority to his son Jesus Christ is without controversy. The scriptures you cited provide evidence of this fact.

But let us not be diverted away from the central issue. Your argument is not relevant to the topic in question.

The locus of the central issue is focused on Jesus' role as the Savior General who will free Israel from her enemies.

The topic comes into focus in the prophetic word of Zacharias as recorded by Luke:

Luke 1:
“Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited us and accomplished redemption for His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of David His servant—
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from of old—
71 Salvation from our enemies,
And from the hand of all who hate us;
72 To show mercy toward our fathers,
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to Abraham our father,
74 To grant us that we, being rescued from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all our days.

During the Millennial Period, Jesus will return to earth and act as Israel's savior general, defeating Israel's enemies that she might worship him without fear. This aspect of God's will is missing from the Amillennial view point.

Once again, you fail to address one single point or one single Scripture. That is because the inspired text i presented exposes your claims. This is why it is hard to take Premil arguments serious.

 

[WPM]

I understand this is your position. But your position is faulty since it neglects to take seriously David's dominion. Where did David have dominion if not over Israel and the surrounding territories? And who are Israel's enemies if not the countries that surround Israel?

Therefore, the prophets will be vindicated when Jesus picks up his father's scepter, ruling over Israel and protecting her from her enemies?

You are so fixated with natural Christ-rejecting Israel and so reluctant to move from the old covenant arrangement to the new that you fail to see the new covenant meaning of this Messianic prophecy. The OT kings, priests, judges and prophets were simply a typical foreshadowing of the NT fulfillment. This did not mean that Israel's king was going to arrive and reign in the same way the literalist Jews of Christ's days expected and which our Premil brethren imagine. No! Quite the opposite. That is why many rejected Christ. He did not fit their expectation.

I showed you Scripture that proves that Christ assumed David's throne in heaven since His resurrection. This is a spiritual reign over the Israel of God (God's elect). Their enemies are God's enemies. Jesus is Messiah and King now.

Christ taking David’s throne does not refer to Him sitting on some long-preserved literal physical in the Middle East (as non-believing Jews and Premils apply this to in the future), but rather Him assuming heavenly authority over the people of God and fulfilling the Messianic prophecies as Israel’s true king. As we see in the New Testament, the people of God or true Israel does not relate exclusively to a physical race but to spiritual grace on God’s elect. Peter is showing that Christ now reigns over His people in fulfilment of the Old Testament predictions.

Peter made it clear that Christ was currently sitting “by the right hand of God exalted.” He immediately demonstrated that this was the fulfilment of the Messianic hope. We see this in the fact he quotes Psalm 110 as part of his argument in Acts 2:34-35.

Christ is shown in the New Testament to be the fulfilment the Messianic prophecies Job 12:14-15 and Isaiah 22:21-25. What is more, He is shown to be currently exercising Davidic key/authority upon high over David’s house. John says in Revelation 3:7, “These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath (present active particle) the key (or authority) of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth.”

This passage reinforces the fact that Christ is exercising His Davidic kingship over mankind now. The Old Testament kings were mere types of the one true King. He didn’t come to replicate the imperfect shadow and type, He came to introduce the true and eternal kingship of Israel.

Keys in Scripture symbolically represents authority. Here it specifically relates to the position of Christ after He rose from the dead and notably linked to His Davidic (Messianic) power. Adam Clark confirms “the key of David is the regal right or authority of David.” Revelation 3:7 describes how Christ now exercises His Davidic kingship. The phrase “that hath” is translated from the Greek word echo is a primary verb meaning “to hold.” It is used in the present active particle, proving that this is an ongoing present authority. Christ is shown here to be ruling now in Davidic power on David’s throne.

The powerful language that accompanies the mention of Christ holding the key of David proves that this is referring to His majestic power and might. It says, “he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth.” This speaks of spiritual power. The key allows Christ to sovereignly open and shut in a way that no man can thwart or override.

We can see from the grammatical tense that this is written in the present active particle tense, which proves this is happening now.

The New Testament presents the reign of Judah’s true king repeatedly as a present reality and shows Christ to be currently fulfilling it in heaven.

 

[WPM]

Read what the text actually says, meaning all of what that verse says, not just some of what it says.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

in that day shall there be one LORD

Now compare that with this, for example.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


Does it sound like, during the era of time 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving, the LORD is king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one? How can there only be one LORD to worship at the time if there is still a beast that is directing worship to itself instead? When the text says there is one LORD, it simply means there are no other alternatives at the time. Obviously, no one can any longer worship the beast if it has been cast into the LOF prior to the fulfilling of Zechariah 14:9. Which then equals there only being one LORD total, not multiple ones instead.

Does it sound like, during the era of time 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving, that the 7th trumpet has already sounded, thus---The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever(Revelation 11:15)? After all, how can Zechariah 14:9 be fulfilled before Revelation 11:15 is even fulfilled?

Clearly then, regardless whether Premil is true or not, the era involving Zechariah 14:9 is meaning post the 2nd coming, and certainly isn't involving this present age.

Of course He is currently Lord and King. He rules over all principalities, powers, rulers and kingdoms. God has always ruled and reigned. The existence of evil is not a proof that that is not the case. Like Joseph said in the book of Genesis:

Gen 50:19 Fear not: for am I in the place of God?
Gen 50:20 But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.

Within these words is confirmation that God uses evil for good.

How does God allow evil work for good?

It was only by being separated from his brethren that Joseph’s could enter into the place were God wanted him. In fact, if he hadn’t been sold into slavery, he could never have been the deliverer of his people. Joseph inspired statement at the end of Genesis stands out in flashing lights and capital letters in this story and should be a comfort for every battling child of God today.

As Sovereign Lord, God often brings good out of evil or painful situations; He allows testing circumstances to arise in order to fulfil His purposes in us and others. Not that He is the instigator of evil, but that in His infinite wisdom He uses people and events for our good.

We need to trust the Lord when He lets something happen that we do not understand or He tells us to do something that doesn’t make sense. That will only come by recognizing who He is. Many times, I imagine I am going somewhere for such and such a purpose, when in fact, God has me going there for another reason.

He even uses the hurts that we sustain as part of Him getting us to where He wants. Joseph knew who was governing His life.

Romans 8:28 tells us: “all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.”

R.C. Sproul addresses this: “unless God has sovereign power over evil, He will not be able to keep that promise … It is not that God is saying those bad things are good things, but He is saying that they are working for good. I am using these for good.”

You (notably) ignore the irrefutable evidence presented (as you do), you rubbish Christ's current kingship and dethrone Him from His high and lofty position ruling over His new creation as Christ and all creation as Lord, all because of your theology.

 

[WPM]

Read what the text actually says, meaning all of what that verse says, not just some of what it says.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

in that day shall there be one LORD

Now compare that with this, for example.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


Does it sound like, during the era of time 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving, the LORD is king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one? How can there only be one LORD to worship at the time if there is still a beast that is directing worship to itself instead? When the text says there is one LORD, it simply means there are no other alternatives at the time. Obviously, no one can any longer worship the beast if it has been cast into the LOF prior to the fulfilling of Zechariah 14:9. Which then equals there only being one LORD total, not multiple ones instead.

Does it sound like, during the era of time 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving, that the 7th trumpet has already sounded, thus---The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever(Revelation 11:15)? After all, how can Zechariah 14:9 be fulfilled before Revelation 11:15 is even fulfilled?

Clearly then, regardless whether Premil is true or not, the era involving Zechariah 14:9 is meaning post the 2nd coming, and certainly isn't involving this present age.

Who are these billions of wicked who overrun your supposed future millennium as the sand of the sea? Where do they come from? Does their foolish deceptive behavior feigning worship to Christ for 1000 years negate His kingship?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Once again, you fail to address one single point or one single Scripture. That is because the inspired text i presented exposes your claims. This is why it is hard to take Premil arguments serious.

I didn't address them because, as I said, they are irrelevant for the reasons I gave you. You and I have already had lengthy conversations about the Amil view. And I have spent a long time considering why we disagree. The locus of our disagreement is centered on the future role of Jesus as the Savior General in the classic sense. This role is clearly defined in scripture, but ignored by the Amil position.