When Would Covenant theology persons See Zechariah 14 fulfilled?

[HankD]

I don't agree with throwing anything 2000 years into the future just because you can't explain it fully. This chapter is fulfilled in my opinion.

Not a problem prophecy70, Baptist are like Heinz 57 when it comes to prophetic things.

I hold my prophetic views lightly.

HankD

 

[prophecy70]

Not a problem prophecy70, Baptist are like Heinz 57 when it comes to prophetic things.

I hold my prophetic views lightly.

HankD

I realize it doesn't matter that much. But being 27 and a hammered in futurist my whole life from everyone I know. And then finding out everything you learned has more than one side is quite interesting. It's like a bird leaving the nest. It's a whole new world.

 

[HankD]

I realize it doesn't matter that much. But being 27 and a hammered in futurist my whole life from everyone I know. And then finding out everything you learned has more than one side is quite interesting. It's like a bird leaving the nest. It's a whole new world.

Yes its fascinating.

HankD

 

[Covenanter]

When a verse in the prophets is fulfilled, it is not automatic that the whole prophecy is fulfilled. Rather, as exampled by the Lord stopping reading in the middle of a prophecy, and declaring that portion He read was now fulfilled in Him.

He left the rest unread, for it is yet to be fulfilled.

Should Jesus have read the whole chapter, or the whole of Isaiah to claim Scripture was being fulfilled?

Read on in Isaiah 61 - the rest of v. 3 applies, & the whole chapter is applied by the Gospel.

Other reason for not reading the whole prophecy could include -
he'd said enough for his hearers to identify the passage & look it up;
he want to stress what he had read about his healing ministry;
he wanted them to think about the very next phrase after they had rejected him;
the beatitudes in the sermon on the mount do include aspects of Isaiah 61, and judgment in hell fire.

When Jesus said, "It is written .... " he obviously expected his hearers to refer to & remember the passage.

 

[Covenanter]

They could also be moved to ask, "Is the day of vengeance also in view, but delayed by God's longsuffering?"

Actually delayed 40 years, but suffered by this generation.

 

[agedman]

Should Jesus have read the whole chapter, or the whole of Isaiah to claim Scripture was being fulfilled?

Read on in Isaiah 61 - the rest of v. 3 applies, & the whole chapter is applied by the Gospel.

Other reason for not reading the whole prophecy could include -
he'd said enough for his hearers to identify the passage & look it up;
he want to stress what he had read about his healing ministry;
he wanted them to think about the very next phrase after they had rejected him;
the beatitudes in the sermon on the mount do include aspects of Isaiah 61, and judgment in hell fire.

When Jesus said, "It is written .... " he obviously expected his hearers to refer to & remember the passage.

It matters very little which scheme one adopts, but what cannot be relinquished is the exactness and reliance upon what has been prophesied about the future based on what has been fulfilled in the past.

Experience indicates that there are those who would see a fulfillment in a portion and then, because the next part doesn't fit some scheme or historical unfolding, suggest that the prophecy must in that portion be taken as differently, or is in some manner to be held less than exact.

Perhaps Augustine struggled over this very issue when trying to come up with answers to what he was seeing both in the Scriptures and in history. Because he was schooled in philosophy and rhetoric, he looked for answers that required him to abandon the facts of Scripture and embrace that of allegorical. It would have been far better for him to not have made such a shift in his thinking.

However, when one removes such thinking, and acknowledges that if for certain (as it was) the Scriptures were fulfilled exactly as stated in the first coming of Christ, then it must be that the promised return will unfold with that same authority.

 

[Covenanter]

However, when one removes such thinking, and acknowledges that if for certain (as it was) the Scriptures were fulfilled exactly as stated in the first coming of Christ, then it must be that the promised return will unfold with that same authority.

The Scriptures prophesying 30 pieces of silver were fulfilled, but not exactly see my post - page 2 #38

And Rachel of Ramah was prophesied, yet was fulfilled in Bethlehem.

It seems that patterns & similarities are valid, rathe rthan literal fulfilment.

 

[tyndale1946]

The Scriptures prophesying 30 pieces of silver were fulfilled, but not exactly see my post - page 2 #38

And Rachel of Ramah was prophesied, yet was fulfilled in Bethlehem.

It seems that patterns & similarities are valid, rathe rthan literal fulfilment.

Covenanter, I been into another study and have not really looked into this one... Allow me a little time to look into it and establish my thoughts and I will get back to you... Brother Glen

 

[agedman]

The Scriptures prophesying 30 pieces of silver were fulfilled, but not exactly see my post - page 2 #38

And Rachel of Ramah was prophesied, yet was fulfilled in Bethlehem.

It seems that patterns & similarities are valid, rathe rthan literal fulfilment.

Just because I don’t respond to a post does that make the post correct.

You are incorrect about the silver. It was paid for the wages of Judas pointing out Jesus. That the money was latter used for a different purpose does not negate the literalness of the prophecy.

Also, you miss the mark about Ramah.

Briefly, Ramah means “high place” it refers to the grave marker of Rachel from whom Israel descended. The cry reaching to Ramah is basically saying the whole of all Israel heard of the massacre in Bethlehem and mourned .

Again, the prophecy was fulfilled exactly as stated.

Why is it that folks look for the exception to the rule rather than finding that the rule has no exception?