Zecheriah 14 is it literal or figurative what proves it

Preterism can't explain 1290 days at the End of Time which Jesus said will be cut short.
There is no logical explanation until these days are recognized as literal days ending with the 7th Trumpet proclamation that "God's wrath has come" when armies are "gathered to Armageddon" and, as Zechariah reports, "Messiah will come with all the Saints" to destroy those who are destroying the earth and to judge and reward the Saints.
Mel Miller

 

This brings to mind a story about a Christmas tree and a pony

Um right revmwc. I stand amazed in the presence.

All I know is that Christ came in judgment of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That the Babylon of Revelation is Jerusalem and somewhere in that post there has got to be a pony.

 

I'm not sure where the idea of "reconciled" comes in in this discussion. There must be something I am missing.

Yes, they were the "fathers" of the Gentiles because of the adoption of those Gentiles into the family and commonwealth of Israel.

I think they are, the "dispersion".

The "one of a city", "two of a family" (unusual proportion there!) I take as the remnant of the New Covenant. There are several verses like this, especially in that middle section of Jeremiah.

The Zion of these passages (as opposed to some of the earlier historical Zion references) already points to the spiritual Zion, New Covenant believers. I am in the process of studying out the "Zion" and spiritual Jerusalem passages in Isaiah. So far I have 14 articles. If interested, you can find them here:
http://asterisktom.xanga.com/730209743/index-on-isaiah-articles-with-comments/

I believe it is still ongoing. As history progresses, and as physical countries and empires come and go, the spiritual Zion just keeps growing.

This is still the same topic, only under a different description.

There is more I wanted to add here, but something else just came up.

 

And Preterists can't explain why unicorns, ten times out of nine, have blue eyes.

The reason for both is the same.

 

Thanks Tom as you know we disagree on some things but I will read your blog. As a matter of fact I think I have questioned you with something in it in the pass.

Have a great day in the Lord.

 

If Zech 14 is supposed to have reference to AD70 there is a pretty major problem.

This was not the fate either of Jerusalem or the Church after AD70. Jerusalem was again the scene of rebellion in AD132-6, the 'Bar Cochba' rebellion, during which there was plenty of 'utter destruction' and after which no Jew or Christian was allowed to come within 50 miles of Jerusalem. If Jerusalem was 'safely inhabited,' it was by pagans.

If it is thought that the prophecy refers to the Church, the years after AD70 were by no means a time of safety. Persecution, which under Nero appears to have been restricted to Rome, would soon go Empire-wide.

Steve

 

To apply Zechariah 14 to the church you would have to overlook all the Jewish related aspects of the chapter (Jerusalem, festivals, etc).

Don Preston makes a comparison between Zechariah 14 and the Olivet discourse and also to Revelation. It's hard to see these unmistakeable similarities and not realize they are describing the same event. Obviously you would have to think the Olivet Discourse and Revelation are about the Church to think Zechariah 14 is about the Church.

Of course since these all relate to the same event and Old Covenant Jerusalem fades into history in 70AD as all things are fulfilled this helps the reader to be sure that the destruction of Jerusalem is the topic at hand not some future battle of Christianity.

Particularly uniting is "E" since these are the only times an event is described as known only to the Lord (that I've been able to ever find reference to) in the bible.

Here is a summary of Preston's comparisons.

Match the letters up in each category:

Zechariah 14
A. Siege of Jerusalem 1-2
B. Day of the Lord 1, 5
C. Coming with his holy ones 5
D. Jews led away captive into the nations 2
E. Day known only to the Lord 7

Olivet Discourse
A. Siege of Jerusalem Mt. 24:2f
B. Coming of the Son of Man 24:30-31
C. Coming with his angels 24:31
D. Jews led away captive into the nations, Luke 21:24
E. Day known only to the Lord 24-36

Don also does a great job comparing Zechariah 14 to Revelation

Zechariah
A. Coming of the Lord with His Saints, 14:5
B. Earthquake at the Day of the Lord, 14:4-5
C. Earthquake and Coming of the Lord at siege of Jerusalem, 14:1-5
D. Time of light, 14:7
E. River of living waters, 14:8
F. The Lord shall be King over the earth, 14:9
G. Exaltation of Zion, 14:10
H. No more curse, curse removed, 14:11
I. Nations coming to New Jerusalem with their wealth, 14:14
J. Nations observing Feast of Tabernacles, 14:16-20

Revelation
A. Coming of the Lord with His Saints 14:14f; 19:11f
B. Earthquake at the Day of the Lord, 6:12-17; 11:13; 16
C. Earthquake and Coming of the Lord at judgment of city "where the Lord was crucified" 11:8-13
D. Time of light, 21:23
E. River of life, 22:1
F. The Lord is King of the earth, 11:15; 19:16; 22:3
G. Exaltation of Zion, 14, 21
H. No more curse, curse removed, 22:3
I. Nations coming to New Jerusalem with their wealth, 21:24
J. Nations observing Feast of Tabernacles, 7:9-17* (vs. 17 also has the fountain of living waters)

 

Hello Logos1,
In my post, which you quoted rather selectively, I cited one particular verse from Zech 14, , namely v11

Could you explain to me how that verse fits in with Zech 14 referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, please?

Thanks.

Steve

 

The safely inhabited Jerusalem is to be taken in the same sense as Christ's words to His disciples, (BTW also in a Jerusalem eschatological context) Luke 21:18:

"But not a hair of your head shall be lost."

The extended passage gives us the proper spiritual meaning, 16-19:

"16 You will be betrayed even by parents and brothers, relatives and friends; and they will put some of you to death. 17 And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. 18 But not a hair of your head shall be lost. 19 By your patience possess your souls."

This is the same with the Jerusalem of this Zechariah passage. Spiritual Jerusalem, the Zion of God, will secure. Not a hair of their head will be lost.

Probably 90% of the objections futurists have to Preterism (and to a lesser degree Amill) stems from the misreading of a spiritual passage into a concrete literal sense.

 

Are you sure? Take a look at some of the other events of this Day:

Zech 13:

1 “In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.

This happened at Calvary. In fact there are several cross-references elsewhere from Zech. that tie directly with the Cross, most notably the spear that pierced Christ's side.

2 “It shall be in that day,” says the LORD of hosts, “that I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, and they shall no longer be remembered. I will also cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to depart from the land.

Do the Jews "remember" their idols today? No, they don't. This clearly cannot be future.

7“ Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,
Against the Man who is My Companion,”
Says the LORD of hosts.


“ Strike the Shepherd,
And the sheep will be scattered;"

Specifically quoted in the Gospels on the night of Gethsemane.

"Then I will turn My hand against the little ones."

Fulfilled in the Book of Acts, when the general persecution of Christians started.

These are just a few of the references from Zech. 13. More could easily be found that show that this Day is not some future event, but has its roots in God's dealing with the 1st-century Jews, and with His inaugurating the "Nation born in a day", the Zion of God, the Church, which includes Jews and Gentiles.

There were actually two fountains opened in this Day: the one mentioned here in Zechariah, the blood of Christ for our cleansing. There is also the imagery of the Living Water, the Holy Spirit, springing forth from the very place where God was satisfied, the Temple. This is the water that comes up from the Temple in the last chapters of Ezekiel. Christ told His disciples that those who believe in Him will have this ling water springing from their innermost being.

There we have it, the Holy Spirit's, life-giving power, both corporately and personally prefigured.

Both these fountains come from Christ, His death on the Cross. This is the purpose of the water and blood flowing from His pierced side.

Futurists have a choice: They can either wait and fixate on hoped for literal fulfillments - that will never come - or they can draw strength and encouragement from the spiritual truth from these all-too-often neglected passages of blessings and empowerment which we have right now to live as citizens in a very present Kingdom.

 

I'm sorry, but I see no mention of Jerusalem in Luke 21:16-19. I want to know how Jerusalem, which was destroyed in AD 70, is inhabited again after that date in safety.
Preterists insist that all Biblical prophecy refers to the destruction of Jerusalem which was a literal, historical event, but when it is pointed out that the facts don't fit, they say it has a spiritual meaning. We can all play at that game and make the Bible into a wax nose that we press into any shape we want. Is the Jerusalem that was destroyed in AD 70 a literal one a spiritual one?

Well Amen! But I thought that all prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70. Is Zechariah an exception to this? If it is AD 70, then Jerusalem is the literal one; if it refers to a future date, the preterist system breaks down.

The problem Preterists have is that they try to have it both ways. It is literal when they want it to be and 'spiritual' when they need it to be. I am no Dispensationalist, but at least they try to be consistent.

Steve

 

The point was not whether Jerusalem is in this passage or not (It is, but we'll get to that in a minute). The point was that the protection of Jerusalem you were speaking of was the same as God's protecting the hair of His saints. Either way, to be slavishly literal is to miss the point.

And, yes, Jerusalem is very much the topic. Just look at the verses just before and just after the ones I quoted.

:tonofbricks:See my earlier point in the previous post.

That is not what we do, but I am not going to go try to convince you otherwise.

Martin, I have tried to be respectful with you. But it is a two-way street. I went to some trouble getting that previous post together, but from now on I am not going bother - at least on your account - if all you see is a wax job.

You are not even making sense.

Consistent? And this is a good thing? Consistency of interpretation (spiritual or literal) would be wrong, seeing that there are both kinds of passages. I assume you agree.

And, no, Preterists do not "try to have it both ways". We do not try anything. I was a futurist for thirty-three years. I did not have an emotional investment in Preterists that tempted me to twist verses in order to safeguard an interpretation. However, when presented with first Amill and then Preterism, I did at first have to battle against my prior futurism. So your impugning motives is totally off the mark.

 

We never did get to it, did we?

 

Yes, we did. I had written:

And, yes, Jerusalem is very much the topic. Just look at the verses just before and just after the ones I quoted.

I see I merited the Caesarean thumbs down.

 

Thanks for this chart here, Logos. I came across it earlier but lost it. Also, in my earlier studies in Isaiah I had a partial chart that tied verses from that book with Revelation. For that matter, one could also be made with Zechariah and Isaiah as well.

The bottom line is that the more one studies these passages with the foundational OT passages in mind the more able we are to get a better fix on those same terms in the NT. A case in point is the New Heavens and New Earth. Having read this term in its original setting, and then accounting for descriptive and identifying cross-references, we are able to see the term as the NT writers intended it, - an inauguration of New Life in Christ, where Christ makes all things new. Specifically, it means a permanent turning away from obsolete and deprecated Judaism.