PDA

View Full Version : Discussion Understanding Zechariah 14



RevLogos
Dec 27th 2008, 04:14 PM
In several other threads on the Millennium we are discussing Zech 14. It was originally brought up as proof-text for the Millennium. Unfortunately these discussions are spread across several threads, and buried in threads that don't obviously deal with Zech 14.

To get a fresher and broader discussion I would like to move those discussions here to a separate thread.

Zech 14 is fairly short. So I have produced the entire section below [NIV] along with notes from my own study file in blue.

The question is, does Zech 14 represent the first coming and destruction of AD 70, the second coming, or life in the Millennium? There are issues with all of these. In my notes I have tried to point out some of the issues without proclaiming one interpretation over another.

Zec 14:1 A day of the LORD is coming when your plunder will be divided among you.

[The KJV has “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh” which is not really correct. It is “a day” not “the day”. This means there is no requirement to regard this chapter as “The Day of the Lord” or the Second Coming. It could be the destruction of Israel in AD 70, or after the Millennium. We must look further.]

Zec 14:2 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.

[Sounds like much of Jerusalem is destroyed, terrible things happen there, but some remain.]

Zec 14:3 Then the LORD will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights in the day of battle.

[After much of Jerusalem is destroyed. This is most commonly interpreted to be the battle of Armageddon.]

Zec 14:4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south.

[This seismic activity provides a means of escape from Jerusalem so that the Messiah, whose feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, may destroy the wicked nations in the Kidron Valley (the v. of Jehoshaphat, or of "judgment of the LORD") without harming the inhabitants of the city.]

Zec 14:5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

[Azal is a place otherwise unknown. The earthquake in the days of King Uzziah, also mentioned in Amo 1:1, is apparently the one attested to at Hazor in 760 B.C. Which direction are people fleeing? Toward Jerusalem, or away?]

Zec 14:6 On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost.

[Besides the fact that cold and ice do not necessarily follow the absence of light, the idea here is that day will be night and night day. The heavenly sources of light "freeze up" as it were, and refuse to shine. Darkness and Light is common in the NT; those in Christ are in the light, the light of the world; those outside are in darkness.]

Zec 14:7 It will be a unique day, without daytime or nighttime—a day known to the LORD. When evening comes, there will be light.

[In the evening there will be light. The normal pattern is that light breaks through in the morning (Gen 1:3) but in the day of the LORD in judgment it would do so in the evening. In a sense the universe will be "de-created" in order to be "recreated."

Talks a lot about living in the light. This harkens forward to the Gospel, where we are of the light, the world is of the darkness.]

Zec 14:8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea and half to the western sea, in summer and in winter.

[Living waters will flow out from Jerusalem. Ezekiel sees this same phenomenon in conjunction with the inauguration of the messianic age (Ezekiel 47; Rev 22:1-5 also Joh 7:38). The eastern sea is a reference to the Dead Sea. The western sea is a reference to the Mediterranean Sea.
This could be that Jesus comes from Israel, and His living Waters flow outward from there to the entire world. This is very First Coming in concept.]

Zec 14:9 The LORD will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one LORD, and his name the only name.

[The expression the LORD will be seen as one with a single name is an unmistakable reference to the so-called Shema, the crystallized statement of faith in the LORD as the covenant God of Israel (Deu 6:4-5). Zechariah, however, universalizes the extent of the LORD's dominion — he will be "king over all the earth."

This is where things start to get difficult. Is the rest an earthly reign of Jesus? Or is this His first coming?]

Zec 14:10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up and remain in its place, from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses.

[Or "like a plain" (similar KJV, NAB, NASB, NCV, NRSV, NLT); or "like a steppe"; "flatlands." The Hebrew term עֲרָבָה ('aravah) refers to an arid plain or steppe, but can be used specifically as the name of the rift valley running from the Sea of Galilee via the Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba. So, everything around Jerusalem becomes an arid plain. Suggests uninhabited.

The expression from Geba to Rimmon is a way of indicating the extent of all Judah from north (2Ki_23:8) to south (Job 15:32; Job 19:7). Since Geba (Heb. גֶּבַע) means "hill" and Rimmon resembles the word for height (Heb. רָמָה, ramah), this could be a play on words suggesting that all the high country will be made low, like the great Arabah valley.

Or "old gate" (NLT); or "former gate" (NRSV). From the Benjamin Gate...on to the Corner Gate marks the northern wall of the city of Jerusalem from east to west. From the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses indicates the extent of Jerusalem from north to south.]

Zec 14:11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

[If we interpret Jerusalem to be the body of believers, rather than a specific place, we could have a first or second coming. This means the body of Christ will be secure.]

Zec 14:12 This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths.
[Does anyone survive?]

Zec 14:13 On that day men will be stricken by the LORD with great panic. Each man will seize the hand of another, and they will attack each other.
[Does anyone survive?]

Zec 14:14 Judah too will fight at Jerusalem. The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be collected—great quantities of gold and silver and clothing.

[The Hebrew phrase בִּירוּשָׁלָם (birushalam) with the verb נִלְחַם (nilkham, "make war") would ordinarily suggest that Judah is fighting against Jerusalem (so NAB, CEV). While this could happen, the context here favors the idea that Judah is fighting alongside Jerusalem against a common enemy. The preposition בְּ (be), then, should be construed as locative ("at"; cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT).

The term translated "collected" is sometimes rendered " gathered up ", although this might suggest a form of taxation, or "confiscated" (which might imply seizure of property against someone's will). The imagery in the context, however, suggests the aftermath of a great battle, where the spoils are being picked up by the victors.]

Zec 14:15 A similar plague will strike the horses and mules, the camels and donkeys, and all the animals in those camps.

Zec 14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year [NET says annually] to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Having imposed his sovereignty over the earth following the Battle of Armageddon, the LORD will receive homage and tribute from all who survive from all the nations. Earlier verses up to 14:12 suggest no one survives.

The Feast of Tabernacles: A feast of thanksgiving and remembrance. God set up a tabernacle among them in the desert to protect them. Jews celebrate for 7 days in “booths” or Sukkot” as they did in the desert. The emphasis is on redemption. Something like the US Thanksgiving?]

Zec 14:17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, they will have no rain.

[The reference to any...who refuse to go up to Jerusalem makes clear the fact that the nations (people) are by no means "converted" to the LORD but are under his compulsory domination. Rain could be spiritual rain, of blessing, of grace and forgiveness.]

Zec 14:18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The LORD will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[And lets look at the KJV too:

[KJV] And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

14:18 requires that heathen, unbelievers, be in this new age. Zech 14 is considered proof-text of the Premil view. Therefore heathen must exist in the Millennium. However for other reasons some Premils believe it is saints only. Some Premils say that only the saints inherit the Millennial kingdom, but by free will, become heathens. Or that their children reject God. It is clear from this we must have survivors who are unbelievers.]

Zec 14:19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Anyone who doesn’t give thanks to the Lord, who values their redemption, is in big trouble. Why would the Lord force people to participate in an uniquely Jewish feast they have no knowledge of nor want to participate in?]

Zec 14:20 On that day HOLY TO THE LORD will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, and the cooking pots in the LORD's house will be like the sacred bowls in front of the altar.

[In the glory of the messianic age there will be no differences between the sacred (the bowls before the altar) and the profane (the cooking pots in the LORD's temple) — all will be dedicated to his use.]

Zec 14:21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the LORD Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD Almighty.

[If this represents life in the millennium, this verse means animal sacrifices for sin would restart in the Millennium. These specific sacrifices are discussed in Lev 6:24-30 and Eze 46:20-24. There is no escape that these are sin sacrifices of animals. This causes an insurmountable problem for Premil in my opinion, if this is taken literally, as the feasts and sacrifices were done away with. It goes against the very core of who Jesus is.

Canaanites are also rendered as "merchant"; "trader" (because Canaanites, especially Phoenicians, were merchants and traders; cf. BDB 489 s.v. I and II כְּנַעֲנִי). English versions have rendered the term as "Canaanite" (KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV), "trader" (RSV, NEB), "traders" (NRSV, NLT), or "merchant" (NAB), although frequently a note is given explaining the other option. Turning out the merchants from the temple is exactly what Jesus did: Joh 2:16.

This is not to preclude the Canaanite (or anyone else) from worship; the point is that in the messianic age all such ethnic and religious distinctions will be erased and all people will be eligible to worship the LORD.]

wpm
Dec 27th 2008, 06:19 PM
Zec 14:15 A similar plague will strike the horses and mules, the camels and donkeys, and all the animals in those camps.

Zec 14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year [NET says annually] to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Having imposed his sovereignty over the earth following the Battle of Armageddon, the LORD will receive homage and tribute from all who survive from all the nations. Earlier verses up to 14:12 suggest no one survives.

The Feast of Tabernacles: A feast of thanksgiving and remembrance. God set up a tabernacle among them in the desert to protect them. Jews celebrate for 7 days in “booths” or Sukkot” as they did in the desert. The emphasis is on redemption. Something like the US Thanksgiving?]

Zec 14:17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, they will have no rain.

[The reference to any...who refuse to go up to Jerusalem makes clear the fact that the nations (people) are by no means "converted" to the LORD but are under his compulsory domination. Rain could be spiritual rain, of blessing, of grace and forgiveness.]

Zec 14:18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The LORD will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[And lets look at the KJV too:

[KJV] And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

14:18 requires that heathen, unbelievers, be in this new age. Zech 14 is considered proof-text of the Premil view. Therefore heathen must exist in the Millennium. However for other reasons some Premils believe it is saints only. Some Premils say that only the saints inherit the Millennial kingdom, but by free will, become heathens. Or that their children reject God. It is clear from this we must have survivors who are unbelievers.]

Zec 14:19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Anyone who doesn’t give thanks to the Lord, who values their redemption, is in big trouble. Why would the Lord force people to participate in an uniquely Jewish feast they have no knowledge of nor want to participate in?]

Zec 14:20 On that day HOLY TO THE LORD will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, and the cooking pots in the LORD's house will be like the sacred bowls in front of the altar.



Zec 14:21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the LORD Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD Almighty.



Many Premils use this and Ezekiel 40-48 to support their idea of the restoration of the old covenant sacrifice system to the new millennial earth. I find this totally unacceptable in the light of the cross. The feast of tabernacles of course involved countless animal sacrifices during its duration.

Leviticus 23:34-38 shows the linkage between the feast of tabernacles and the ceremonial sacrifices:“Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, [I]The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the LORD.On the first day shall be an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: on the eighth day shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: it is a solemn assembly; and ye shall do no servile work therein. These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations,to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day.”

The ‘feast of tabernacles’ or ‘feast of booths’ or ‘feast of ingatherings’, also known as ‘Sukkoth’ or ‘the festival of the harvest’ was one of the annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem. Jews travelled from all over the nation of Israel to keep the feast. It was an autumn festival celebrating the abundance of God’s blessings in connection with the autumn harvest. It was also a memorial of the Exodus, when the Israelites wandered in the wilderness, living in tabernacles, or tents, en route to the Promised Land.

It is believed that no less than 189 animals were sacrificed to God – more, significantly, than at any other festival in Israel's calendar. Numbers 29:12-39 records: “And on the fifteenth day of the seventh month ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work, and ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days: And ye shall offer a burnt offering, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD; thirteen young bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year; they shall be without blemish: And their meat offering shall be of flour mingled with oil, three tenth deals unto every bullock of the thirteen bullocks, two tenth deals to each ram of the two rams, And a several tenth deal to each lamb of the fourteen lambs: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the second day ye shall offer twelve young bullocks, two rams, fourteen lambs of the first year without spot: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and the meat offering thereof, and their drink offerings. And on the third day eleven bullocks, two rams, fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish; And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goatfor a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the fourth day ten bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: Their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one kid of the goatsfor a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the fifth day nine bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without spot: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goatfor a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the sixth day eight bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goatfor a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the seventh day seven bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goatfor a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. On the eighth day ye shall have a solemn assembly: ye shall do no servile work therein: But ye shall offer a burnt offering, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD: one bullock, one ram, seven lambs of the first year without blemish: Their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullock, for the ram, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering. [I]These things ye shall do unto the LORD in your set feasts, beside your vows, and your freewill offerings, for your burnt offerings, and for your meat offerings, and for your drink offerings, and for your peace offerings.”

Keil & Delitzsch scholarly Commentary confirms: “the feast of Tabernacles, the special regulations for the celebration of which are contained in Leviticus 23:34-36 and 39-43, was distinguished above all the other feasts of the year by the great number of burnt-offerings, which raised it into the greatest festival of joy. On the seven feast-days, the first of which was to be celebrated with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting, there were to be offered, in addition to the daily burnt-offering, every day a he-goat for a sin-offering, and seventy oxen in all for a burnt-offering during the seven days, as well as every day two rams and fourteen yearling lambs, with the requisite meat-offerings and drink-offerings. Whilst, therefore, the number of rams and lambs was double the number offered at the Passover and feast of Pentecost, the number of oxen was fivefold; for, instead of fourteen, there were seventy offered during the seven days.”

It concludes: “This multiplication of the oxen was distributed in such a way, that instead of there being ten offered every day, there were thirteen on the first day, twelve on the second, and so on, deducting one every day, so that on the seventh day there were exactly seven offered; the arrangement being probably made for the purpose of securing the holy number seven for this last day, and indicating at the same time, through the gradual diminution in the number of sacrificial oxen, the gradual decrease in the festal character of the seven festal days. The reason for this multiplication in the number of burnt-offerings is to be sought for in the nature of the feast itself. Their living in booths had already visibly represented to the people the defence and blessing of their God; and the foliage of these booths pointed out the glorious advantages of the inheritance received from the Lord.”

Some Premils of late seem uncomfortable with the idea of restoring sin offerings after the Second Coming, claiming that they carry no real purpose in the millennium. But why have them then? Others have tried to divorce the sin offerings from the feast of tabernacles in a supposed future millennium. However, Zechariah's audience was fully aware of the feast of tabernacles and what it entailed. They knew that it involved many sin offerings. Sin offerings were a central part of this autumn festival.

Mark F
Dec 29th 2008, 01:59 AM
Paul,

I have not done any real study on this only reading through it. I also am weak on the feasts. Whenever I read this and Ezek., to me it does "seem" to say that but I agree with you that sacrafice for sin doesn't seem like it would make sense.

Could this be a feast of celebration as in a memorial and worship? A perpetual gathering of the Nations to worship? I would think that they will always be kept as God said they were to be kept forever.

Thoughts?

third hero
Dec 29th 2008, 11:49 PM
Zec 14:2 I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it;

Zec 14:5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

[Azal is a place otherwise unknown. The earthquake in the days of King Uzziah, also mentioned in Amo 1:1, is apparently the one attested to at Hazor in 760 B.C. Which direction are people fleeing? Toward Jerusalem, or away?]

Notice that at the end of this verse, the Lord Himself has come? Where is He but Jerusalem, as mentioned later on in this chapter. This puts this entire chapter into the "second coming" column. Especially since when He first ame to this earth, no one was with Him, for He was born onto this earth, and did not "come" as is stated here.


Zec 14:6 On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost.

[Besides the fact that cold and ice do not necessarily follow the absence of light, the idea here is that day will be night and night day. The heavenly sources of light "freeze up" as it were, and refuse to shine. Darkness and Light is common in the NT; those in Christ are in the light, the light of the world; those outside are in darkness.]

Zec 14:7 It will be a unique day, without daytime or nighttime—a day known to the LORD. When evening comes, there will be light.

[In the evening there will be light. The normal pattern is that light breaks through in the morning (Gen 1:3) but in the day of the LORD in judgment it would do so in the evening. In a sense the universe will be "de-created" in order to be "recreated."

Talks a lot about living in the light. This harkens forward to the Gospel, where we are of the light, the world is of the darkness.]

Honestly, the vision here is one from those who witness the coming of the Lord, where the only light will be Him and all of His "Holy Ones". This collaborates with Joel 3, Matthew 24:29-31, and Revelation 19:11-15. It is obvious at this point that this whole chapter can not be fulfilled at any other point in time except when the Lord returns.


Zec 14:8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea and half to the western sea, in summer and in winter.

[Living waters will flow out from Jerusalem. Ezekiel sees this same phenomenon in conjunction with the inauguration of the messianic age (Ezekiel 47; Rev 22:1-5 also Joh 7:38). The eastern sea is a reference to the Dead Sea. The western sea is a reference to the Mediterranean Sea.
This could be that Jesus comes from Israel, and His living Waters flow outward from there to the entire world. This is very First Coming in concept.]

The Age of the Messiah, where the Lord will rule the earth from Jerusalem. Yes, you are correct.


Zec 14:9 The LORD will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one LORD, and his name the only name.

[The expression the LORD will be seen as one with a single name is an unmistakable reference to the so-called Shema, the crystallized statement of faith in the LORD as the covenant God of Israel (Deu 6:4-5). Zechariah, however, universalizes the extent of the LORD's dominion — he will be "king over all the earth."

This is where things start to get difficult. Is the rest an earthly reign of Jesus? Or is this His first coming?]

Actually, it is not difficult at all. This phrase is so that we all can know that there will be, at that point in time, no longer any discussion as to who is God, or who we all are to serve. The Lord will arrive on earth, and all of the nations shall know Him as God. Lord Jesus will be known as God, and no one will be able to say that God is anyone or anything else. And yes, this is truly an earthly reign, as the rest of the chapter dictates.


Zec 14:10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up and remain in its place, from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses.

[Or "like a plain" (similar KJV, NAB, NASB, NCV, NRSV, NLT); or "like a steppe"; "flatlands." The Hebrew term עֲרָבָה ('aravah) refers to an arid plain or steppe, but can be used specifically as the name of the rift valley running from the Sea of Galilee via the Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba. So, everything around Jerusalem becomes an arid plain. Suggests uninhabited.

The expression from Geba to Rimmon is a way of indicating the extent of all Judah from north (2Ki_23:8) to south (Job 15:32; Job 19:7). Since Geba (Heb. גֶּבַע) means "hill" and Rimmon resembles the word for height (Heb. רָמָה, ramah), this could be a play on words suggesting that all the high country will be made low, like the great Arabah valley.

Or "old gate" (NLT); or "former gate" (NRSV). From the Benjamin Gate...on to the Corner Gate marks the northern wall of the city of Jerusalem from east to west. From the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses indicates the extent of Jerusalem from north to south.]

Honestly, this is the verse that connected every dot in this chapter. Here is why. In Revelation 16, when the seventh bowl of God's wrath is poured, a massive earthquake happens, one that levels all of the cities of the world, with exception for Babylon and Jerusalem. This verse tells us that Jerusalem will not be affected by that earthquake, although the rest of the region will be. This verse is collaboration to Revelation 16:17-20, as evidence of a massive earthquake would cause this event to happen.


Zec 14:11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

[If we interpret Jerusalem to be the body of believers, rather than a specific place, we could have a first or second coming. This means the body of Christ will be secure.]

Here is where the Amil POV falls flat. You suggest that Jerusalem is to be reinterpreted as to mean the body of Christ, or as you put it, the "body of believers". The problem with this interpretation is that if you reinterpret
Jerusalem in the rest of the passage as well, including verse 2, where the Lord declared that you will be attacked by all nations. Not only that, but also in verse 4-5, where suddenly, all of the believers will be at the Mount of Olives nad the Lord will split it to cause the surviving believers to run into it. As you can see, that does not make sense.

IF Jerusalem is described as a city in verse 2, then for contextual and consistency's sake, the definition can not be changed. Jerusalem is the city then, when Zechariah wrote this passage, and it must stay that way.

Therefore, the interpretation of everything up to this point has to revert back to it's original interpretation, where it says that whole chapter is classified as the "Day of the Lord".

Moreover, the fact that Jerusalem is to be inhabited is evidence that Jerusalem can not be Babylon, since Jerusalem, at this point, is to be inhabited, whereas Babylon is to be destroyed. This is also collaboration with Revelation 20, where the "beloved city" is in fact Jerusalem, the city that is the center of the world, the city where the Lord rules the earth from.


Zec 14:12 This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths.
[Does anyone survive?]

Zec 14:13 On that day men will be stricken by the LORD with great panic. Each man will seize the hand of another, and they will attack each other.
[Does anyone survive?]

What does verse 16 say?


Zec 14:14 Judah too will fight at Jerusalem. The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be collected—great quantities of gold and silver and clothing.

[The Hebrew phrase בִּירוּשָׁלָם (birushalam) with the verb נִלְחַם (nilkham, "make war") would ordinarily suggest that Judah is fighting against Jerusalem (so NAB, CEV). While this could happen, the context here favors the idea that Judah is fighting alongside Jerusalem against a common enemy. The preposition בְּ (be), then, should be construed as locative ("at"; cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT).

The term translated "collected" is sometimes rendered " gathered up ", although this might suggest a form of taxation, or "confiscated" (which might imply seizure of property against someone's will). The imagery in the context, however, suggests the aftermath of a great battle, where the spoils are being picked up by the victors.]

This verse is the collaboration of Ezekiel 39, whereas after the Lord defeats the armies of the world, He will not only have Jerusalem as inhabited, but the people will gather up the treasures of the nations who fought against Jerusalem.

Of course Judah would fight alongside Jerusalem, simply because the location of Jerusalme was at that time squarely within the borders of the province of Judah. It is not surprising that Zechariah would state that Judah would fight along with Jerusalem.


Zec 14:15 A similar plague will strike the horses and mules, the camels and donkeys, and all the animals in those camps.

Zec 14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year [NET says annually] to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Having imposed his sovereignty over the earth following the Battle of Armageddon, the LORD will receive homage and tribute from all who survive from all the nations. Earlier verses up to 14:12 suggest no one survives.

Not really. Verse 16 is the answer to your question that you presented in verse 12-13. There are survivors, because verse 16 says that there will be. One can not separate vberse 12 from verse 1 when both are talking about the same topic, the heathen nations who attacked Jerusalem in verse 2.


The Feast of Tabernacles: A feast of thanksgiving and remembrance. God set up a tabernacle among them in the desert to protect them. Jews celebrate for 7 days in “booths” or Sukkot” as they did in the desert. The emphasis is on redemption. Something like the US Thanksgiving?]

I find this to be fitting, because the nations of the world should have been destroyed when the Lord returns. However, the Lord still shows mercy, even to those who do not deserve it, and as noted in Matthew 25:31-45, the heathen nations are judged on their treatment of the believers, whom He calls "my brethern". They should be thankful for the Lord not destroying them, and as such, being made to come to Jerusalem yearly to worship the King there is not a bad thing. They should show appreciation for the Lord honoring Daniel 7:12 and sparing their lives but for a season. The Feast of tabernacles, as you say, is a feast of Thanksgiving, much likened to the US version of Thanksgiving. As you state, the emphasis is NOT on sin sacrifice, but for thanksgiving, thanking the Lord for sparing them.


Zec 14:17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, they will have no rain.

[The reference to any...who refuse to go up to Jerusalem makes clear the fact that the nations (people) are by no means "converted" to the LORD but are under his compulsory domination. Rain could be spiritual rain, of blessing, of grace and forgiveness.]

Actually, this also proves what I have been saying in the other thread concerning Matthew 25:31-45. there are called in verse 18, the heathen. These people are NOT believers, and the heathen nations will be forced to either send a rep to Jerusalem during the Feast of Tabernacles, or the Lord will punish them ACTIVELY, by restricting rain from them. This is not a spiritual passage, but a passage that should be taken at face value.


Zec 14:18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The LORD will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[And lets look at the KJV too:

[KJV] And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

14:18 requires that heathen, unbelievers, be in this new age. Zech 14 is considered proof-text of the Premil view. Therefore heathen must exist in the Millennium. However for other reasons some Premils believe it is saints only. Some Premils say that only the saints inherit the Millennial kingdom, but by free will, become heathens. Or that their children reject God. It is clear from this we must have survivors who are unbelievers.]

You are correct. The people who are to be present at this time are indeed the heathen, as this verse concludes. This verse also debunks the notion that Believers would b ruled over as mortals during this age. The people who are there can not believers, especially because before the Lord rules over all of the earth, at the moment of His coming, He gathers the believers to himself. This eliminates the possibility of there being believers who have willfully betrayed God by serving the Beast.

I believe that this is the beginning of the Messianic Age, the age of God's direct rule over the world through Lord Jesus. I believe that, as Daniel 7 indicates and Revelation 20 confirms, that the saints will rule the world with Lord Jesus until the world ends. (This is vastly different than the "only rule for 1000 years thing" that seems to be the battle cry for some Amils.) This is the time of perpetual peace, as mentioned in Isaiah 65. This period, known as the Messianic age, is a time that starts when the Lord returns, and does not end. The Messianic age continues even into the New Heaven and New earth, where the inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be transferred to the new Earth, and it will continue even after time itself expires.


Zec 14:19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Anyone who doesn’t give thanks to the Lord, who values their redemption, is in big trouble. Why would the Lord force people to participate in an uniquely Jewish feast they have no knowledge of nor want to participate in?]

AS you can see, this verse also gives collaboration to Joel 3, where Egypt is turned into a desolation. Imagine Egypt without any rain at all. Imagine the Nile not overflowing. Egypt would no longer exist, because that entire region would turn into a desert.


Zec 14:20 On that day HOLY TO THE LORD will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, and the cooking pots in the LORD's house will be like the sacred bowls in front of the altar.

[In the glory of the messianic age there will be no differences between the sacred (the bowls before the altar) and the profane (the cooking pots in the LORD's temple) — all will be dedicated to his use.]

Zec 14:21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the LORD Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD Almighty.

[If this represents life in the millennium, this verse means animal sacrifices for sin would restart in the Millennium. These specific sacrifices are discussed in Lev 6:24-30 and Eze 46:20-24. There is no escape that these are sin sacrifices of animals. This causes an insurmountable problem for Premil in my opinion, if this is taken literally, as the feasts and sacrifices were done away with. It goes against the very core of who Jesus is.

Canaanites are also rendered as "merchant"; "trader" (because Canaanites, especially Phoenicians, were merchants and traders; cf. BDB 489 s.v. I and II כְּנַעֲנִי). English versions have rendered the term as "Canaanite" (KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV), "trader" (RSV, NEB), "traders" (NRSV, NLT), or "merchant" (NAB), although frequently a note is given explaining the other option. Turning out the merchants from the temple is exactly what Jesus did: Joh 2:16.

This is not to preclude the Canaanite (or anyone else) from worship; the point is that in the messianic age all such ethnic and religious distinctions will be erased and all people will be eligible to worship the LORD.]

As you can see, that chapter firmly supports the post-trib premil version of events that will happen when the Lord comes back to earth.

wpm
Dec 30th 2008, 12:42 AM
Paul,

I have not done any real study on this only reading through it. I also am weak on the feasts. Whenever I read this and Ezek., to me it does "seem" to say that but I agree with you that sacrafice for sin doesn't seem like it would make sense.

Could this be a feast of celebration as in a memorial and worship? A perpetual gathering of the Nations to worship? I would think that they will always be kept as God said they were to be kept forever.

Thoughts?

I personally relate it to the intra-Advent period. I think that Zechariah was simply trying to impress the great truth of the Gentiles coming to salvation. He gave his prophecy in spiritual terms that he was familiar with and which his audience could identify with. I don't think it is any more or less than that. We are blessed with a full picture of the new arrangement now. Zechariah wasn't. He was looking through a glass darkly toward a glorious new day. With all the limitations of not naturally seeing our day, he gave things as he saw them, and put them in terms he was familiar with. We have had near 2,000 yrs of the Gentiles being brought into true Israel. Zechariah was simply telling us that the Gentile would one day come to Jehovah on an equal footing and on the same terms as the Jew. That was a totally alien concept to the Old Testament Jew and even with the early disciples after Jesus hands on ministry with them in the New Testament.

Remember this was written around 500 yrs before Christ. This prophecy was made within the confines of the old covenant set-up. Natural Jerusalem was still the centre of global worship to the King of Glory. Israel still represented the totality of God’s relationship with mankind, Judah being the choice tribe. It must have been hard for the Old Testament prophet to comprehend the great New Testament revelation of the Gentiles being brought into salvation with God under a completely new arrangement. The abolition of the Judaic sacrificial system would have been inconceivable at that juncture. It would have been like denying the faith or being heretical.

Zachariah was looking forward into the future and articulating the promise of salvation to the nations (something that never before happened). The Gentile nations still hadn't begun to embrace the truth. This would not happen in any significant way until Cornelius’ house. At the time of writing, the idea of the New Testament Church would have been totally inconceivable to the Jewish mind. The different revelations of this future period were therefore done in Old Testament language and with an old covenant understanding.

shepherdsword
Dec 30th 2008, 03:31 AM
What do you think about Zech 5?

Here is an interesting take on it from Micheal Rood.
I have a copy of the Masoretic text and couldn't substantiate his claims about "fire" and "woman" as being interchangeable.
I mean this interpretation would make good sense if I could. We could then define the flying scrolls as a nuclear missle. What do you think?:


Zechariah - Chapter 5

5:1. Then I turned, and lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a flying roll (book).

When we think of books, we think of cut pages of paper bound in some type of firm cover. In Zechariah's day (more than 2,500 years ago), books didn't have pages, but were written on scrolls made of animal skin or papyrus. So, when he says that he sees a flying book (in some translations) or a flying roll, we know that he means a scroll.

Sacred Hebrew writings are still stored on scrolls (megillot) today, just as they were in Zechariah's time.

So, he looks up and sees a scroll flying through the air. Some people interpret this as the ascendency of the word of G-d in the latter days, and that may very well be true...or you might not be reading this right now. But it's possible that this flying scroll has multiple meanings...one of which might be quite literal.

Geometrically, a scroll is a cylinder.



5:2. And he said unto me, What seest thou? And I answered, I see a flying roll; the length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits.

Zechariah and an angel are conversing. The vision begins to be revealed and the angel asks him what he sees. Zechariah describes the dimensions of the object.

The cubit has been variously defined as being between 18 and 36 inches, depending upon your space-time reference. Context is everything. The most reasonable conversions in this case would be based on either the Royal Egyptian cubit or the Sumerian Nippur cubit.

Jacob's tribe spent hundreds of years in Egypt and were pressed into the service of the Pharaonic building trades, in an increasingly subserviant capacity. They would have been intimately familiar with the nature of a cubit. This was a portable type of knowledge and it can certainly be expected that it would have travelled with them during the exodus from Egypt.

The construction of Israel's early cities were based upon use of the Egyptian Royal cubit, as well as a large number of other Egyptian measures. Solomon's Temple would have been constructed using the same cubit as there was no other practical or precise cubit definition that could have rivaled it amongst the tribes they encountered in Canaan.

Following the destruction of the Temple by the forces of king Nebuchadnezzar, many people were taken away as captives to Babylon. They remained in exile during the remainder of the Babylonian empire's influence, and through the subsequent Median and Persian kingdoms that came to control the region. During this time, until they were officially released by the edict of Cyrus the Great, they would have become very familiar with the Nippur cubit.

Zechariah recorded most of his visions during the reign of Darius the Mede, so that is a point in favour of the Nippur measure over the Egyptian. But we may simply be splitting hairs by trying to determine the "exact" size of the cubit involved here; the difference between the smallest and largest versions of the two regional standards is less than 2%. In either case, the result is a cubit between 20.38 and 20.63 inches in length.

In all of the existing translations, the size of the flying scroll is said to be twice as tall as it is wide. That would make for a rather stubby-looking scroll having the same relative proportions as a giant sodapop can. That's one fat megillah.

Is the word used to express the breadth of the scroll specific to the measurement of width? Actually, when the discussion pertains to scrolls, the most important defaults are height (or length) and circumference (not diameter) -- also called the "girth". This is because scrolls are sealed with cord -- and in order to obtain the correct cord length, one must think of the scroll's circumference. This is also very important when considering how many scrolls can fit into an ark, because they must fit in the depth as well as the width. And, furthermore, knowing the circumference of the object allows one to optimise the use of space owing to the rounded nature of the scrolls.

So, if we look at the cubit as being roughly 20.5" and measure its height and circumference, we are left with a scroll that stands at just over 34 feet tall and a little more than 17 feet around. That gives it a width (or diameter) of less than 5.5 feet.



5:3. Then said he unto me, This is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the whole earth: for every one that stealeth shall be cut off as on this side according to it; and every one that sweareth shall be cut off as on that side according to it.

Obviously, these menacing scrolls are going to be everywhere at a certain point in time. Anyone that lies will be threatened with them. The same for anyone that steals. However, since we are talking about a worldwide scale here, we should adjust our scale of "one" to the more aggregative model of nations. This fits well with much that is in the bible, just as Jacob (who is also called Israel) lends his name to an entire nation.

Nations will accuse each other of cheating and lying. They will threaten each other with these accursed flying scrolls.

Geometrically, of course, missiles are cylinders.



5:4. I will bring it forth, saith the LORD of hosts, and it shall enter into the house of the thief, and into the house of him that sweareth falsely by my name: and it shall remain in the midst of his house, and shall consume it with the timber thereof and the stones thereof.

The power of these flying scrolls is beyond what the prophet could ever have imagined. Here are weapons that not only kill people but can completely decimate even stone houses. The "house" in aggregate terms can be a city.



5:5. Then the angel that talked with me went forth, and said unto me, Lift up now thine eyes, and see what is this that goeth forth.

The angel says that Zechariah should note the next item to proliferate upon the earth.



5:6. And I said, What is it? And he said, This is an ephah that goeth forth. He said moreover, This is their resemblance through all the earth.

An "ephah" is a basket or a measurement, and was used in very much the same way that a contemporary farmer might say that he has fifty bushel-baskets of potatoes. The word itself is not originally Hebrew, but Egyptian, and is another example of both a term and a functional mechanism (like the Royal cubit) that was taken out of Egypt when Jacob's tribe departed.

Although the word "ephah" had a very specific volume measurement under Egyptian industrial and agricultural standards, in the common parlance of the post-exodus period the word came to be synonymous with containers in general, rather than a specific standard unit.

The angel tells Zechariah that these containers are going to be in widespread use and that the same basic type of container will be used all over the globe. While this draws our attention to the notion of shipping containers, we'll soon see that these containers, though widely distributed, are highly specialised.



5:7. And, behold, there was lifted up a talent of lead: and this is a woman that sitteth in the midst of the ephah.

In the container, we are told, there sits a woman. However, we must lift up a leaden cover in order to see her. How bizarre, one might think, unless we look at the terms used in this sentence.

The concept of lead, aside from its particular uses that might vary from one culture to another, hasn't changed. We've already negotiated our way toward an understanding of what constitutes an "ephah". So, the only other word that needs to be explored is "woman". It's also the only thing that doesn't really "fit" on a logical basis.

In Michael Rood's analysis, he realises, in a great leap of insight, that there are a number of words in Hebrew that are similar to "ishah", meaning woman. Two of these words are concerned with the concept of fire: aish (or aisha) and isheh. The former (in masculine and feminine form) is used to describe a flame, while the latter means an "offering" by fire. In either case, these words can have a holy aspect, but such power can also have a darker side.



5:8. And he said, This is wickedness. And he cast it into the midst of the ephah; and he cast the weight of lead upon the mouth thereof.

While it would certainly be wicked to keep a woman in a bushel and cover her up with lead, it's much more likely that a powerful form of "fire" could be described as wicked. The angel makes no delay in sealing the container up with lead once again.

Some translations portray the angel as pushing the woman into the basket and shoving lead into her mouth! Not nice at all.

Properly, the lead is cast into the mouth/opening of the ephah, and not the mouth of the woman. Also, the text says that he casts "it" into the ephah, not "her". Errors with the personification of objects can be common in translation of unfamiliar material, especially if there is a poetic twist to the wording, if it is antiquated, or if the concepts are completely foreign to the translator.

Our simple container/ephah now sounds more like a warhead than anything else. In fact, the payload is so wicked that it needs to be encased in lead.



5:9. Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven.

When the prophet looks up again, he sees two "women" (read "fires") with long wings, like a stork. This isn't the "flying scroll" because it is not described as having wings at all. A missile usually only has small fins near its base. The container with the wicked fire is carried away into the sky by something with two flaming engines and broad wings. The passage seems to say that the engines were mounted on--or in--the wings and that air blew through them. He makes it clear that it is the combination of fire and wings that allows the vessel to fly.



5:10. Then said I to the angel that talked with me, Whither do these bear the ephah?

And where does this jet take the warhead...?



5:11. And he said unto me, To build it an house in the land of Shinar: and it shall be established, and set there upon her own base.

They are taking it to a specially-customised facility in Sumeria (an area that formerly comprised most of southern Iraq and southwestern Iran) where it will be set up on its own platform.

Only the "ephah" needed to be flown there as the "scrolls" were already abundant.

ross3421
Dec 30th 2008, 06:30 AM
Paul,

Could this be a feast of celebration as in a memorial and worship? A perpetual gathering of the Nations to worship? I would think that they will always be kept as God said they were to be kept forever.

Thoughts?

As periodically we have a thread surface on this subject, this is how I see it to be interpreted. I think clearly the events in the chapter point ot the second coming, I discredit a 1000 literal year theory, thus it must have to be foretelling life events in eternity.

Mark

ross3421
Dec 30th 2008, 06:55 AM
[FONT=Arial]
The question is, does Zech 14 represent the first coming and destruction of AD 70, the second coming, or life in the Millennium?

How about eternity as an option??????


Zec 14:1 A day of the LORD is coming when your plunder will be divided among you.

[COLOR=Blue][The KJV has “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh” which is not really correct. It is “a day” not “the day”. This means there is no requirement to regard this chapter as “The Day of the Lord” or the Second Coming. It could be the destruction of Israel in AD 70, or after the Millennium. We must look further.]

Zec 14:2 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.

It can't be 70 ad as it says ALL nations.



Zec 14:6 On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost.

[Besides the fact that cold and ice do not necessarily follow the absence of light, the idea here is that day will be night and night day. The heavenly sources of light "freeze up" as it were, and refuse to shine. Darkness and Light is common in the NT; those in Christ are in the light, the light of the world; those outside are in darkness.]

Zec 14:7 It will be a unique day, without daytime or nighttime—a day known to the LORD. When evening comes, there will be light.

[In the evening there will be light. The normal pattern is that light breaks through in the morning (Gen 1:3) but in the day of the LORD in judgment it would do so in the evening. In a sense the universe will be "de-created" in order to be "recreated."

Talks a lot about living in the light. This harkens forward to the Gospel, where we are of the light, the world is of the darkness.]

Events are a parrellel of a day only known to God a day which the son of man will return....no one knows the day. A day in which the sun moon and stars fall and not give their light before the day of the Lord which is mention in the first verse.


Zec 14:8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea and half to the western sea, in summer and in winter.

[Living waters will flow out from Jerusalem. Ezekiel sees this same phenomenon in conjunction with the inauguration of the messianic age (Ezekiel 47; Rev 22:1-5 also Joh 7:38). The eastern sea is a reference to the Dead Sea. The western sea is a reference to the Mediterranean Sea.
This could be that Jesus comes from Israel, and His living Waters flow outward from there to the entire world. This is very First Coming in concept.]

With the understanding of the prior events as the second coming this must parrallel the river of life seen in Rev.


Zec 14:12 This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths.
[Does anyone survive?]

No one survives the second coming except for the nation of Israel 144,000.


Zec 14:14 Judah too will fight at Jerusalem. The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be collected—great quantities of gold and silver and clothing.

[The Hebrew phrase בִּירוּשָׁלָם (birushalam) with the verb נִלְחַם (nilkham, "make war") would ordinarily suggest that Judah is fighting against Jerusalem (so NAB, CEV). While this could happen, the context here favors the idea that Judah is fighting alongside Jerusalem against a common enemy. The preposition בְּ (be), then, should be construed as locative ("at"; cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT).

No Judah is fighting against Jerusalem. Jerusalem is the whore ie Babylon.


Zec 14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year [NET says annually] to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Having imposed his sovereignty over the earth following the Battle of Armageddon, the LORD will receive homage and tribute from all who survive from all the nations. Earlier verses up to 14:12 suggest no one survives.

The survivers of all the nations which came against Jerusalem would be the 144,000 thousand of Israel.



The Feast of Tabernacles: A feast of thanksgiving and remembrance. God set up a tabernacle among them in the desert to protect them. Jews celebrate for 7 days in “booths” or Sukkot” as they did in the desert. The emphasis is on redemption. Something like the US Thanksgiving?]

The 144,000 would do this.....


Zec 14:17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, they will have no rain.

[The reference to any...who refuse to go up to Jerusalem makes clear the fact that the nations (people) are by no means "converted" to the LORD but are under his compulsory domination. Rain could be spiritual rain, of blessing, of grace and forgiveness.]

Zec 14:18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The LORD will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[And lets look at the KJV too:

[KJV] And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

14:18 requires that heathen, unbelievers, be in this new age. Zech 14 is considered proof-text of the Premil view. Therefore heathen must exist in the Millennium. However for other reasons some Premils believe it is saints only. Some Premils say that only the saints inherit the Millennial kingdom, but by free will, become heathens. Or that their children reject God. It is clear from this we must have survivors who are unbelievers.] Zec 14:19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.
[/QUOTE]

There is a option your not seeing...... Scripture is pretty clear that no heathen survives the second coming. So the only other option is that the 144,000 have offspring which will have free will to decide to choose to worship or not to worship the king. This would satify both views and their difference though I speak of events in eternity not millenial reign.


Mark

modanufu
Dec 30th 2008, 02:17 PM
Zec 14:19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.



There is a option your not seeing...... Scripture is pretty clear that no heathen survives the second coming. So the only other option is that the 144,000 have offspring which will have free will to decide to choose to worship or not to worship the king. This would satify both views and their difference though I speak of events in eternity not millenial reign.


Mark


I partly agree with this. Rev. 7 explains the feast of tabernacles (palm-baring company) as eternity in Heaven before God's throne. Rev. 21:24-27 adds that all elect will in the Gospel age come to belief and enter Heaven spiritually and at the Second Coming fully and completely. Rev. 21:27 comments on those that do not enter the Heavenly City: they receive the eternal punishment.
But the 144.000 are all the believers in Christ, identical with the great multitude. They will all enter Heaven and will not get any punishment.

That's how I see things. :)
Dik

John146
Dec 30th 2008, 06:12 PM
AS you can see, this verse also gives collaboration to Joel 3, where Egypt is turned into a desolation. Imagine Egypt without any rain at all. Imagine the Nile not overflowing. Egypt would no longer exist, because that entire region would turn into a desert.There's a big difference between Egypt being made a desolation (no survivors) as Joel 3 talks about and not receiving any rain as Zech 14 talks about. I have yet to see a premil give a convincing case for how Zech 14:18-19 correlates with Joel 3:19.

Nihil Obstat
Dec 30th 2008, 10:50 PM
I personally relate it to the intra-Advent period. I think that Zechariah was simply trying to impress the great truth of the Gentiles coming to salvation. He gave his prophecy in spiritual terms that he was familiar with and which his audience could identify with. I don't think it is any more or less than that. We are blessed with a full picture of the new arrangement now. Zechariah wasn't. He was looking through a glass darkly toward a glorious new day. With all the limitations he gave things as he saw them, and put them in terms he was familiar with. We have had near 2,000 yrs of the Gentiles being brought into true Israel. Zechariah was simply telling us that the Gentile would one day come to Jehovah on an equal footing and on the same terms as the Jew. That was a totally alien concept to the Old Testament Jew and even with the early disciples after Jesus hands on ministry with them in the New Testament.

Remember this was written around 500 yrs before Christ. This prophecy was made within the confines of the old covenant set-up. Natural Jerusalem was still the centre of global worship to the King of Glory. Israel still represented the totality of God’s relationship with mankind, Judah being the choice tribe. It must have been hard for the Old Testament prophet to comprehend the great New Testament revelation of the Gentiles being brought into salvation with God under a completely new arrangement. The abolition of the Judaic sacrificial system would have been inconceivable at that juncture. It would have been like denying the faith or heretical.

Zachariah was looking forward into the future and articulating the promise of salvation to the nations (something that never before happened). The Gentile nations still hadn't begun to embrace the truth. This would not happen in any significant way until Cornelius’ house. At the time of writing, the idea of the New Testament Church would have been totally inconceivable to the Jewish mind. The different revelations of this future period were therefore done in Old Testament language and with an old covenant understanding.

I thank you for your concise and articulate explanation of your thoughts on Zech. 14, but I have much to say concerning your thoughts. I'll begin by asking two questions:

1. What covenant(s) do you consider to be the Old Covenant (please reference the Scripture)?

2. In what way do you believe the New Covenant (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2031:31-34;&version=50;) affects the Abrahamic (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2015&version=50), Deuteronomic (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2029-30;&version=50;), and Davidic (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%207;&version=50;) Covenants (specifically concerning Jerusalem)?

Thanks so much! - Astro

wpm
Dec 30th 2008, 11:28 PM
I thank you for your concise and articulate explanation of your thoughts on Zech. 14, but I have much to say concerning your thoughts. I'll begin by asking two questions:

1. What covenant(s) do you consider to be the Old Covenant (please reference the Scripture)?

2. In what way do you believe the New Covenant (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2031:31-34;&version=50;) affects the Abrahamic (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2015&version=50), Deuteronomic (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2029-30;&version=50;), and Davidic (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%207;&version=50;) Covenants (specifically concerning Jerusalem)?

Thanks so much! - Astro

I believe that all the covenants, types and shadows in the OT that came before the cross were fufilled in Christ (the substance). The NT shows this. 2 Corinthians 3:14 tells us: "the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ."

The whole Old Testament Judaic system was an imperfect shadow that could in no way fulfil the redemptive plan of God for mankind, but simply pointed forward to the Saviour. It was unsatisfactory and unpleasing as an administration; that is why it was replaced.

Hebrews 8:6 tells us that Jesus “is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.”

Nihil Obstat
Dec 30th 2008, 11:41 PM
I believe that all the covenants, types and shadows in the OT that came before the cross were fufilled in Christ (the substance).

Um... the New Covenant is in the old testament and was promised before the cross... Could you elaborate, please?

wpm
Dec 30th 2008, 11:58 PM
It can't be 70 ad as it says ALL nations.


The Roman empire enveloped the nations and was viewed as representing the known world.

wpm
Dec 31st 2008, 12:02 AM
Um... the New Covenant is in the old testament and was promised before the cross... Could you elaborate, please?

It was predicted in the OT but was fufilled through the life, death and resurrection of Christ.

third hero
Dec 31st 2008, 04:30 AM
There's a big difference between Egypt being made a desolation (no survivors) as Joel 3 talks about and not receiving any rain as Zech 14 talks about. I have yet to see a premil give a convincing case for how Zech 14:18-19 correlates with Joel 3:19.

It's all about the environment. If there is no rain in Egypt, the people can not survive there. If the people can not survive there, then the place becomes a desolation. Besides, let's see what Joel 3:19 says concerning Egypt.

Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence [against] the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land. Joel 3:19

In this verse, we see the prophecy of Egypt becoming a desolation. Well, let's seek clarity and define what the term "desolation" means.

des⋅o⋅la⋅tion   /ˌdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˈleɪhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngʃən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) [des-uh-ley-shuhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngn] Show IPA Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html)

–noun 1.an act or instance of desolating.2.the state of being desolated.3.devastation; ruin.4.depopulation. 5.dreariness; barrenness.6.deprivation of companionship; loneliness.7.sorrow; grief; woe.8.a desolate place.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/desolation

Here, for more clarity, let's look up the word desolate.

des⋅o⋅late   /adj. ˈdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnglɪt; v. ˈdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˌleɪt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) [adj. des-uh-lit; v. des-uh-leyt] Show IPA Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html)
adjective, verb, -lat⋅ed, -lat⋅ing. –adjective 1.barren or laid waste; devastated: a treeless, desolate landscape. 2.deprived or destitute of inhabitants; deserted; uninhabited.3.solitary; lonely: a desolate place. 4.having the feeling of being abandoned by friends or by hope; forlorn.5.dreary; dismal; gloomy: desolate prospects. –verb (used with object) 6.to lay waste; devastate.7.to deprive of inhabitants; depopulate.8.to make disconsolate.9.to forsake or abandon.- http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/desolate

Now, according to the definitons of both desolate and desolation, Egypt is to be a depopulated place of ruin.

Now, let's look at Zechariah 14's prophecy concerning Egypt.

And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that [have] no [rain]; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. Zechariah 14:18-19

Why is Egypt mentioned? Because they do not have much rain to begin with. their crop-growing season ties together with their rain and flood season, which happens at their winter season. The trees, the crops, and all of the greenery that Egypt has depends on the rain season and the flooding of the Nile. If the rains do not come, and the Nile does not flood, then Egypt will have no means of growing produce, ad as a result, it would become a desolate place.

Therefore, if the Lord withholds the rains from Egypt, that whole nation will become a desolate place, uninhabitable and in ruin. This is why I say that Zechariah 14:18-19 shows exactly how Joel 3:19 is fulfilled.

See what I mean by checking out some websites dealing with Egyptian climate, like this one:
http://www.ask-aladdin.com/weather.htm.

IF thyis does not answer your question, John146, then I can not provide the answer you seek. The Egyptian rain season is vital to the survival of that nation. If the rain seasons do not come, then the whole land will become desolate, and uninhabitable.

NOw I want you to be aware that I am not trying to 1up you or downplay what you believe. I am only answering your question the best way I can.

wpm
Dec 31st 2008, 04:48 AM
It's all about the environment. If there is no rain in Egypt, the people can not survive there. If the people can not survive there, then the place becomes a desolation. Besides, let's see what Joel 3:19 says concerning Egypt.

Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence [against] the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land. Joel 3:19

In this verse, we see the prophecy of Egypt becoming a desolation. Well, let's seek clarity and define what the term "desolation" means.

des⋅o⋅la⋅tion   /ˌdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˈleɪhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngʃən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) [des-uh-ley-shuhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngn] Show IPA Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html)

–noun 1.an act or instance of desolating.2.the state of being desolated.3.devastation; ruin.4.depopulation. 5.dreariness; barrenness.6.deprivation of companionship; loneliness.7.sorrow; grief; woe.8.a desolate place.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/desolation

Here, for more clarity, let's look up the word desolate.

des⋅o⋅late   /adj. ˈdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnglɪt; v. ˈdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˌleɪt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) [adj. des-uh-lit; v. des-uh-leyt] Show IPA Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html)
adjective, verb, -lat⋅ed, -lat⋅ing. –adjective 1.barren or laid waste; devastated: a treeless, desolate landscape. 2.deprived or destitute of inhabitants; deserted; uninhabited.3.solitary; lonely: a desolate place. 4.having the feeling of being abandoned by friends or by hope; forlorn.5.dreary; dismal; gloomy: desolate prospects. –verb (used with object) 6.to lay waste; devastate.7.to deprive of inhabitants; depopulate.8.to make disconsolate.9.to forsake or abandon.- http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/desolate

Now, according to the definitons of both desolate and desolation, Egypt is to be a depopulated place of ruin.

Now, let's look at Zechariah 14's prophecy concerning Egypt.

And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that [have] no [rain]; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. Zechariah 14:18-19

Why is Egypt mentioned? Because they do not have much rain to begin with. their crop-growing season ties together with their rain and flood season, which happens at their winter season. The trees, the crops, and all of the greenery that Egypt has depends on the rain season and the flooding of the Nile. If the rains do not come, and the Nile does not flood, then Egypt will have no means of growing produce, ad as a result, it would become a desolate place.

Therefore, if the Lord withholds the rains from Egypt, that whole nation will become a desolate place, uninhabitable and in ruin. This is why I say that Zechariah 14:18-19 shows exactly how Joel 3:19 is fulfilled.

See what I mean by checking out some websites dealing with Egyptian climate, like this one:
http://www.ask-aladdin.com/weather.htm.

IF thyis does not answer your question, John146, then I can not provide the answer you seek. The Egyptian rain season is vital to the survival of that nation. If the rain seasons do not come, then the whole land will become desolate, and uninhabitable.

NOw I want you to be aware that I am not trying to 1up you or downplay what you believe. I am only answering your question the best way I can.

You are building your argument on an online dictionary definition (of your own choosing) instead of addressing the actual original Hebrew word.The word you should be considering is shemamah meaning laid waste, devastation or desolation. If you check the scriptural use of this word you will see that it comes up 58 times. It is overwhelmingly used to describe land that is laid waste. This is in keeping with much Second Coming Scripture that show that this current world will be burned up when Jesus comes and the wicked will be likewise immediately and completely destroyed.

Peter says “the day of the Lord will arrive (heko) as a thief in the night; in the which (en heé)”:

1. The heavens shall pass away / perish with a great noise.
2. The elements shall be ‘loosed by being set on fire’,
3. The earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly.
4. The works that are within the earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly.

And continues, “seeing then that all these things (that is 1-4) shall be luomenoon dissolved / burned up utterly / consumed wholly."

Joel 3:19 similarly tells us that "Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness" when Jesus comes. This shows that Zechariah must indeed be referring to the first Advent. There is no avoiding the fact that there will be no Egypt left to populate a future millennium at Christ's Coming. This is a constant point in Scripture.

third hero
Dec 31st 2008, 04:53 AM
There is a option your not seeing...... Scripture is pretty clear that no heathen survives the second coming. So the only other option is that the 144,000 have offspring which will have free will to decide to choose to worship or not to worship the king. This would satify both views and their difference though I speak of events in eternity not millenial reign.


Mark
I understand what you believe, Ross3421. However, can you consider why Eternity is not an option for discerning Zechariah 14? You say that there are no survivors of the Lord's coming, and yet, we have the Lord's coming shown in this chapter, Zechariah 14:5-15, and verse 16 showing us what the Lord will require from the survivors of that incident. Eternity can not be an option because there are heathen present in this chapter, a component that will be missing when the New Earth is brought into existence, for all of the wicked, unbelieving men will have already been judged and sentenced to the Lake, a component missing in Zechariah 14.

Eternity can not be considered, because it is not a viable option in this chapter. There is punishment for disobedience in this chapter, Egypt is still in existence until the punishment for the nations hits them in verse 18-19, a key component that is absent in the Revelation 21 version of the New Earth. Sin can not be a part of the Revelation 21 New Earth, for the old order, which Sin and death are included, will be destroyed, burning forever in the Lake of Fire. And yet, according to this chapter, the Lord is ruing the world from Jerusalem, a component only found in the premil interpretation of the Millennium.

The 144,000 can not have offspring that are not believers, for in Revelation chapters 7 and 14, we find them to be redeemed from the earth. That leads me to beleive that they are the first to receive the promise of eternal life, without the side effect of having to die first. I know that this confounds many POV's includeing most premils, but this is a truth that makes them distinct.

It is entirely possible for there to be survivors of the Return of the Lord, simply because the "wicked" are all gathered to the Valley of Megiddo, the winepress of the Lord's wrath. All of the armies of the world, their kings, presidents, soldiers, tank militias, and all will be destroyed by Christ at the Valley of Megiddo, which is chronicles in Ezekiel 39 and Revelation 14:17-20; 16:13-14,16; and 19:15-21. They are all gathered to one place, and are squelched there. There are plenty of people around the world that will not be a part of that massacre. These will either die due to the hailstones or die when their city collapses due to the massive earthquake, (Revelation 16:17-21).

But even after that happens, according to Revelation 19:15, the Lord will rule over the nations, even as he completely cuts off their militias. Moreover, Daniel 7:12 shows us that the "rest of the beast" will have their lives spared, but their authority stripped from them. And lastly, Zechariah 14:16-20 shows us what the Lord will require the heathen to do, and even throws in the punishment that Egypt will undoubtedly suffer. Egypt can not become desolate after the Lord's return if the Lord simply destroys all of the inhabitants of the world when He comes.

Therefore, eternity can not be an option for interpreting Zecariah 14, because all of the things that will not be present in eternity are present in this chapter, especially Egypt.

wpm
Dec 31st 2008, 05:07 AM
I understand what you believe, Ross3421. However, can you consider why Eternity is not an option for discerning Zechariah 14? You say that there are no survivors of the Lord's coming, and yet, we have the Lord's coming shown in this chapter, Zechariah 14:5-15, and verse 16 showing us what the Lord will require from the survivors of that incident. Eternity can not be an option because there are heathen present in this chapter, a component that will be missing when the New Earth is brought into existence, for all of the wicked, unbelieving men will have already been judged and sentenced to the Lake, a component missing in Zechariah 14.

Eternity can not be considered, because it is not a viable option in this chapter. There is punishment for disobedience in this chapter, Egypt is still in existence until the punishment for the nations hits them in verse 18-19, a key component that is absent in the Revelation 21 version of the New Earth. Sin can not be a part of the Revelation 21 New Earth, for the old order, which Sin and death are included, will be destroyed, burning forever in the Lake of Fire. And yet, according to this chapter, the Lord is ruing the world from Jerusalem, a component only found in the premil interpretation of the Millennium.

The 144,000 can not have offspring that are not believers, for in Revelation chapters 7 and 14, we find them to be redeemed from the earth. That leads me to beleive that they are the first to receive the promise of eternal life, without the side effect of having to die first. I know that this confounds many POV's includeing most premils, but this is a truth that makes them distinct.

It is entirely possible for there to be survivors of the Return of the Lord, simply because the "wicked" are all gathered to the Valley of Megiddo, the winepress of the Lord's wrath. All of the armies of the world, their kings, presidents, soldiers, tank militias, and all will be destroyed by Christ at the Valley of Megiddo, which is chronicles in Ezekiel 39 and Revelation 14:17-20; 16:13-14,16; and 19:15-21. They are all gathered to one place, and are squelched there. There are plenty of people around the world that will not be a part of that massacre. These will either die due to the hailstones or die when their city collapses due to the massive earthquake, (Revelation 16:17-21).

But even after that happens, according to Revelation 19:15, the Lord will rule over the nations, even as he completely cuts off their militias. Moreover, Daniel 7:12 shows us that the "rest of the beast" will have their lives spared, but their authority stripped from them. And lastly, Zechariah 14:16-20 shows us what the Lord will require the heathen to do, and even throws in the punishment that Egypt will undoubtedly suffer. Egypt can not become desolate after the Lord's return if the Lord simply destroys all of the inhabitants of the world when He comes.


I am glad you brought this up because I personally believe it highlights another problem with the Premil understanding of Zechariah 14 and its location of Zechariah 14 at the Second Coming. First, Premils argue that the total destruction depicted in Revelation 19 does not refer to the entire wicked (as Amils believe) even though the passage clearly shows all those left behind at the Coming of Christ as being consumed. Premil says it only relates to the physical armies that come against Israel. They seem to overlook the fact that the birds of heaven fill themselves with “the flesh of all men.” Significantly, the suffix “both free and bond, both small and great” is added in order to fully impress the enormity and all-inclusive nature of this feast. However, when we look at the Premil millennium as found in Zechariah 14 we see these same armies that came against Israel are actually the ones that are ushered into the millennium and inherit the kingdom of God.

A Premil understanding of Zechariah 14:16 has the heathen nations coming to the feast of tabernacles after the Second Coming: "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."

This just doesn't add up to me. It has to be one or the other. Of course we know that no unsaved populate the new earth that arrives with the Coming of Christ.

II Thessalonians 1:7-10 is helpful to us here:“the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.”

You can see, this passage recognises only two types of person at Christ's appearing (as all Scripture). Saved or lost, caught up or caught on. In fact, it carefully situates men in one of only two distinct groupings, and conclusively proves that it is only "them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" that will survive the Second Coming. The rest are expressly destroyed.

third hero
Dec 31st 2008, 05:53 AM
I am glad you brought this up because I personally believe it highlights another problem with the Premil understanding of Zechariah 14 and its location of Zechariah 14 at the Second Coming. First, Premils argue that the total destruction depicted in Revelation 19 does not refer to the entire wicked (as Amils believe) even though the passage clearly shows all those left behind at the Coming of Christ as being consumed. Premil says it only relates to the physical armies that come against Israel. They seem to overlook the fact that the birds of heaven fill themselves with “the flesh of all men.” Significantly, the suffix “both free and bond, both small and great” is added in order to fully impress the enormity and all-inclusive nature of this feast. However, when we look at the Premil millennium as found in Zechariah 14 we see these same armies that came against Israel are actually the ones that are ushered into the millennium and inherit the kingdom of God.

The fun thing about scriptures and the end times is that I do not have to take heed to your personal beliefs.

That said, Revelation 19 is not a stand-alone chapter, but a chapter that tells a story that is inter-related to the other chapters of the book. This is why reading all of Revelation is required in order to understand it. Chapter 19 shows that the Lord kills all who are at the winepress of God's wrath. (Revelation 19:15). The winepress of God's wrath is described as a place where an angel gathers the grapes to be squashed. (Revelation 14:17-20). The angel that gathers the grapes is identified as Satan. (Revelation 16:13-14, the Dragon being identified in Chapter 20:1-3 as Satan). The place of the gathering is identified as what it was called in the Hebrew, Armageddon. (Revelation 16:16) Armageddon is the place that is now known as the Valley of Megiddo. (http://www.biblestudy.org/biblepic/megiddo.html, also known as the Valley of Jezreel and the Valley of Jehosephat, Joel 3). Without this knowledge, it is easy to say that the entire world is slain by the Lord. This is why the details of verses are so important. They bring out the entire story.


A Premil understanding of Zechariah 14:16 has the heathen nations coming to the feast of tabernacles after the Second Coming: "
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."


This just doesn't add up to me. It has to be one or the other. Of course we know that no unsaved populate the new earth that arrives with the Coming of Christ.

This is not premil understanding. This is scripture reading. Zechariah 14 tells us that there is a time, after Jerusalem is attacked, when the "Lord my God will come, and all of His Saints with thee" (verse 5). The sign is visible in the next few sentences, and the war happens at verse 12. What happens after that? The Lord's requirements for the "Heathen" (verses 16 & 18) people. MIsnomer is not here on the premil side. Scripture, however, is.


II Thessalonians 1:7-10 is helpful to us here:
“the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.”


You can see, this passage recognises only two types of person at Christ's appearing (as all Scripture). Saved or lost, caught up or caught on. In fact, it carefully situates men in one of only two distinct groupings, and conclusively proves that it is only "them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" that will survive the Second Coming. The rest are expressly destroyed.

I disagree. This passage only shows that the Lord will take vengeance on those who did not believe our message of His return, and as a result, when He does come, the enemies of God will be destroyed. Premils do not disagree that the wicked shall be destroyed. We disagree with the idea that the entire world will be destroyed.

Again, notice what is absent from these verses? The destruction of the World. We see the Lord coming, destroying the wicked ones, and being glorified in the saints that He brought with Him. This does not happen in heaven, but on earth. If the earth is destroyed at His return, then this verse can not happen, because He is admired by all who believe, while he is on Earth.

Again, notice the actual wording in these verses. "In flaming fire taking vengeance". Notice that the "in flaming fire" part is actually a metaphor? It is not an action. The action, or verb, of the passage, is "taking vengeance", something that Revealtion 19 shows us clearly is not the scorching the earth with fire.

And again, there is one detail that is again missed by this passage. How many of the wicked is vengeance being taken upon? Is it all of them? Don't know, this passage doesn't tell us anything.

However, Zechariah 14 gives us a much clearer view of what will happen when the Lord return, with the wicked being destroyed, and the rest being forced to honor the Feast of Tabernacles, and the punishment to those who refuse to do so, which Egypt will feel the brunt of. This is not saying something and trying to find scripture to back the statement up, but rather reporting what is written in scripture, and taking it for what it's worth, believing it at face value.

John146
Dec 31st 2008, 04:45 PM
It's all about the environment. If there is no rain in Egypt, the people can not survive there. If the people can not survive there, then the place becomes a desolation. Besides, let's see what Joel 3:19 says concerning Egypt.

Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence [against] the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land. Joel 3:19

In this verse, we see the prophecy of Egypt becoming a desolation. Well, let's seek clarity and define what the term "desolation" means.

des⋅o⋅la⋅tion   /ˌdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˈleɪhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngʃən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) [des-uh-ley-shuhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngn] Show IPA Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html)

–noun 1.an act or instance of desolating.2.the state of being desolated.3.devastation; ruin.4.depopulation. 5.dreariness; barrenness.6.deprivation of companionship; loneliness.7.sorrow; grief; woe.8.a desolate place.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/desolation

Here, for more clarity, let's look up the word desolate.

des⋅o⋅late   /adj. ˈdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnglɪt; v. ˈdɛshttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˌleɪt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) [adj. des-uh-lit; v. des-uh-leyt] Show IPA Pronunciation http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html)
adjective, verb, -lat⋅ed, -lat⋅ing. –adjective 1.barren or laid waste; devastated: a treeless, desolate landscape. 2.deprived or destitute of inhabitants; deserted; uninhabited.3.solitary; lonely: a desolate place. 4.having the feeling of being abandoned by friends or by hope; forlorn.5.dreary; dismal; gloomy: desolate prospects. –verb (used with object) 6.to lay waste; devastate.7.to deprive of inhabitants; depopulate.8.to make disconsolate.9.to forsake or abandon.- http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/desolate

Now, according to the definitons of both desolate and desolation, Egypt is to be a depopulated place of ruin.

Now, let's look at Zechariah 14's prophecy concerning Egypt.

And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that [have] no [rain]; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. Zechariah 14:18-19

Why is Egypt mentioned? Because they do not have much rain to begin with. their crop-growing season ties together with their rain and flood season, which happens at their winter season. The trees, the crops, and all of the greenery that Egypt has depends on the rain season and the flooding of the Nile. If the rains do not come, and the Nile does not flood, then Egypt will have no means of growing produce, ad as a result, it would become a desolate place.

Therefore, if the Lord withholds the rains from Egypt, that whole nation will become a desolate place, uninhabitable and in ruin. This is why I say that Zechariah 14:18-19 shows exactly how Joel 3:19 is fulfilled.

See what I mean by checking out some websites dealing with Egyptian climate, like this one:
http://www.ask-aladdin.com/weather.htm.

IF thyis does not answer your question, John146, then I can not provide the answer you seek. The Egyptian rain season is vital to the survival of that nation. If the rain seasons do not come, then the whole land will become desolate, and uninhabitable.

NOw I want you to be aware that I am not trying to 1up you or downplay what you believe. I am only answering your question the best way I can.I appreciate your effort and I don't say this to offend, but I find your explanation to be far less than convincing. To me, you're basically saying that the people of Egypt need rain in order to survive and I simply disagree with that. I also disagree that the rain would cause the kind of desolation that Joel 3:19 talks about and as Paul (wpm) already addressed. I believe the implication in Joel 3:19 is that Egypt would be entirely desolate and I don't see the withholding of rain as causing that kind of desolation.

John146
Dec 31st 2008, 04:56 PM
I disagree. This passage only shows that the Lord will take vengeance on those who did not believe our message of His return, and as a result, when He does come, the enemies of God will be destroyed. Premils do not disagree that the wicked shall be destroyed. We disagree with the idea that the entire world will be destroyed.

Again, notice what is absent from these verses? The destruction of the World. We see the Lord coming, destroying the wicked ones, and being glorified in the saints that He brought with Him. This does not happen in heaven, but on earth. If the earth is destroyed at His return, then this verse can not happen, because He is admired by all who believe, while he is on Earth.

Again, notice the actual wording in these verses. "In flaming fire taking vengeance". Notice that the "in flaming fire" part is actually a metaphor? It is not an action. The action, or verb, of the passage, is "taking vengeance", something that Revealtion 19 shows us clearly is not the scorching the earth with fire.

And again, there is one detail that is again missed by this passage. How many of the wicked is vengeance being taken upon? Is it all of them? Don't know, this passage doesn't tell us anything.

However, Zechariah 14 gives us a much clearer view of what will happen when the Lord return, with the wicked being destroyed, and the rest being forced to honor the Feast of Tabernacles, and the punishment to those who refuse to do so, which Egypt will feel the brunt of. This is not saying something and trying to find scripture to back the statement up, but rather reporting what is written in scripture, and taking it for what it's worth, believing it at face value.What is it about those who don't know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ and are allowed to survive compared to those who are not allowed to survive? Are they just lucky?

You have Jesus only taking vengeance on some who don't know God or obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ instead of all. Why? Does 2 Thess 1 at all suggest that any unbelievers are not included among those who don't know God or obey the gospel of Christ? It seems to clearly differentiate between what happens to believers and unbelievers when Christ returns. Believers are gathered to Him and He is glorified in them and admired by them. Unbelievers will suffer Christ's vengeance. Where does this third group of survivors come from and why wouldn't Paul have mentioned them?

You talk about taking the passages at face value. I don't see that you're doing that with 2 Thess 1:7-8. If taken at face value then we'd have to assume that it's referring to all unbelievers rather than some because all unbelievers are included among those who do not know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ.

third hero
Dec 31st 2008, 09:11 PM
What is it about those who don't know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ and are allowed to survive compared to those who are not allowed to survive? Are they just lucky?

You have Jesus only taking vengeance on some who don't know God or obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ instead of all. Why? Does 2 Thess 1 at all suggest that any unbelievers are not included among those who don't know God or obey the gospel of Christ? It seems to clearly differentiate between what happens to believers and unbelievers when Christ returns. Believers are gathered to Him and He is glorified in them and admired by them. Unbelievers will suffer Christ's vengeance. Where does this third group of survivors come from and why wouldn't Paul have mentioned them?

You talk about taking the passages at face value. I don't see that you're doing that with 2 Thess 1:7-8. If taken at face value then we'd have to assume that it's referring to all unbelievers rather than some because all unbelievers are included among those who do not know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ.

Eric,
I do not know all of the answers.

The fact of the matter, to me, is this:

1. Zechariah 14 shows that there are survivors who will have to go to Jerusalem to worship the King of Kings during the feast of Tabernacles.

2. Other scriptures tell us that there are people in whom the Lord will rule over once He establishes His throne here on earth.

3. Zechariah 14:16 & 18 describe these survivors as "heathen".

I can not connect the dots. I can only go with what I believe what is written says. You can choose not to disagree, but that dos not mean that I have to agree with it. I believe that is what the Bible teaches, and that is all there is to it.

To directly answer your question, I would say this:

"Someone is in error". Either it is my misunderstanding of the Bible, or your misunderstanding of the Bible. Only Lord Jesus can show us who is right or wrong, and in the interest of fair play, it seems wise for us to allow Him to do it. I will continue to believe as I have, and I will continue to show scriptures proving my point. You will continue to believe as you will and you will show your evidence. We are not going to be in agreement, barring an intervention of the Holy Spirit. With that, I say to let's just agree to disagree.

third hero
Dec 31st 2008, 09:17 PM
I appreciate your effort and I don't say this to offend, but I find your explanation to be far less than convincing. To me, you're basically saying that the people of Egypt need rain in order to survive and I simply disagree with that. I also disagree that the rain would cause the kind of desolation that Joel 3:19 talks about and as Paul (wpm) already addressed. I believe the implication in Joel 3:19 is that Egypt would be entirely desolate and I don't see the withholding of rain as causing that kind of desolation.

Since my explanation is not 'specific" enough for you, I can only say that I can not answer your question, because the evidence that I have shown you is more than enough to convince me that Zechariah 14:18 shows how Joel 3:19 is fulfilled.

But there is one question that I have to ask you. In Joel 3:19, Egypt was not the only nation set for desolation. Edom was also set for desolation. Edom no longer exist, and it hasn't for a long time. Does this mean that the Lord will resurrect Edom to destroy them again atthe Valley of Decision?

And one more question. How is Joel 3:19 telling us that God will destroy both Edom and Egypt, when it only says that both nations will become places of ruin?

John146
Dec 31st 2008, 09:25 PM
Since my explanation is not 'specific" enough for you, I can only say that I can not answer your question, because the evidence that I have shown you is more than enough to convince me that Zechariah 14:18 shows how Joel 3:19 is fulfilled.

But there is one question that I have to ask you. In Joel 3:19, Egypt was not the only nation set for desolation. Edom was also set for desolation. Edom no longer exist, and it hasn't for a long time. Does this mean that the Lord will resurrect Edom to destroy them again atthe Valley of Decision? I don't believe the point of the verse is to suggest that Edom would still be in existence at that time. The land is certainly still in existence. I'm not sure exactly where that would be today. I think it's speaking in terms that people back then would understand and is really referring to the same thing that 2 Peter 3:10-12 alludes to. Not only would Egypt and Edom be desolate, but the entire world because the earth will be burned up when Christ returns on the day of the Lord.


And one more question. How is Joel 3:19 telling us that God will destroy both Edom and Egypt, when it only says that both nations will become places of ruin?Sorry, I don't understand your question. I don't know exactly why it singles those nations out, but based on my understanding of the day of the Lord from 1 Thess 5:1-6 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 there won't be any nations that survive that day.

John146
Dec 31st 2008, 09:26 PM
Eric,
I do not know all of the answers.

The fact of the matter, to me, is this:

1. Zechariah 14 shows that there are survivors who will have to go to Jerusalem to worship the King of Kings during the feast of Tabernacles.

2. Other scriptures tell us that there are people in whom the Lord will rule over once He establishes His throne here on earth.

3. Zechariah 14:16 & 18 describe these survivors as "heathen".

I can not connect the dots. I can only go with what I believe what is written says. You can choose not to disagree, but that dos not mean that I have to agree with it. I believe that is what the Bible teaches, and that is all there is to it.

To directly answer your question, I would say this:

"Someone is in error". Either it is my misunderstanding of the Bible, or your misunderstanding of the Bible. Only Lord Jesus can show us who is right or wrong, and in the interest of fair play, it seems wise for us to allow Him to do it. I will continue to believe as I have, and I will continue to show scriptures proving my point. You will continue to believe as you will and you will show your evidence. We are not going to be in agreement, barring an intervention of the Holy Spirit. With that, I say to let's just agree to disagree.That's fine with me. We can just agree to disagree instead of repeating ourselves on that issue.

third hero
Dec 31st 2008, 09:48 PM
I don't believe the point of the verse is to suggest that Edom would still be in existence at that time. The land is certainly still in existence. I'm not sure exactly where that would be today. I think it's speaking in terms that people back then would understand and is really referring to the same thing that 2 Peter 3:10-12 alludes to. Not only would Egypt and Edom be desolate, but the entire world because the earth will be burned up when Christ returns on the day of the Lord.

Edom does not exist. It is a wilderness that is uninhabited today. I do not believe that the term, desolation, can be equated to destruction, which is what 1 Peter 3 alludes to. The elements being melted means that there will be no ruins, but rather ash. Of course this is a technical difference, but I figure I might as well show it.


Sorry, I don't understand your question. I don't know exactly why it singles those nations out, but based on my understanding of the day of the Lord from 1 Thess 5:1-6 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 there won't be any nations that survive that day.

Of course my understanding is different, and I have scriptures supporting my thesis, including Zechariah 14:16-20, Psalm 2, and Revelation 19:15. It is my understanding that when the Lord coms back, the world will only suffer a massive earthquake, which will level the cities of the world, as well as the mountains and islands. But again, we'll just have to agree to disagree.