ECT The NT uses of Zech 14:5

Interplanner

Well-known member
First, for those of confused about the NT, that would be the accounts and letters of the apostles; ie, the collection. The arrival of the new covenant of forgiveness is within that collection, but the NT covers a few more things than does the topic of the new covenant.

2nd, it is extremely important that the NT have the final say on what the OT was saying. You will otherwise end up with two sets of train tracks or a wreck.

The places that use v5 'The Lord is coming with all his holy ones...'
Mt 25:31
I Th 3:13
2 Th 1:17
Jd 14

It is often just expression of the 'holy ones' that gets used by the NT passage. But since Jude is referring all the way back to the days and statements of Enoch, the coming in judgement has been a well known topic for all mankind for quite a while! No wonder the coming of Christ was called the end of time, the end of the ages, etc.

In the 2 Th 1 passage , the 'parousia' (coming) is also a time of relief from the current persecution. Obviously this is the 2nd time (2nd letter) mentioning it as coming quite soon to their relief. If Paul mentioned it soon in his 2nd letter again, is there any question that these things were expected quite soon in terms of the NT generation? Not at all. I doubt he would say so to people being hammered for their faith, if there wasn't a reason to expect it. Adjust your timeframes. They are not right without this view.

The event expected from Zech 14:5 was not just 'about Israel.' It was the final judgement of the world, though expressed in ways the most familiar to Israel. Uses of vs 7-11 are found sprinkled through the NHNE passage of Rev 21, 22, (there will be no night, twice), which is the location of the new Jerusalem; it never 'lands' on this one. This is why Heb 2:5 says that the subject of the great salvation (not just forgiveness but the NHNE) was 'the world to come about which we are speaking' in the early chapters of Hebrews, not a restored Israel as they knew it, that was about to be toast. Zech 14 is about the new.

D'ist-speak has all these points backward, and says this is all a mess. That is my every day experience with D'ism. They are always "right" and whenever the details of Scripture are presented, it's a mess. Guess who claims they are exclusively 'Bible-based'? "Just read the book" they say.

while the judgement on Israel was delivered in the DofJ, the worldwide final judgement did not take place. That's a God question; only the Father knows the time.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Zech 14
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

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



When did the LORD return & protect Jerusalem from it's enemies?
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Zech 14
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

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



When did the LORD return & protect Jerusalem from it's enemies?

Still curious about this, IP.
 

Danoh

New member
Zech 14
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

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



When did the LORD return & protect Jerusalem from it's enemies?

Sooner or later, and at one point or another, different schools of thought within Christianity will nevertheless be found having approached the studying out of one thing or another not only in a similar manner, but with a similar result...

Because they are all dealing with the same material.

And because each their approach will be found having ended up similar, at times.

STP, you know how that from within where you approach Ephesians 2, you end up with two sets of Ephesians as being the intended sense or meaning of Ephesians 2?

Whereas, in contrast, say, the approach that I have learned to apply, does not end up at said two sets of Ephesians?

Well, due to a similarity in approach on IP's part with yours, but in his case, as to Zechariah 14, the view that IP has ended up at as to the meaning of those passages in Zechariah 14 ends up, in his case, basically being the same as that of the Preterist...

His own approach differs from theirs, here and there, but his basic approach to Zech. 14 (and that of the Preterist) and its results, are very similar to your approach to Ephesians 2...

In the case of Zech 14, theirs is basically the view...

What is the Bible trying to teach us with this descriptive language of the Mount of Olives "split in its middle"? The earliest Christian writers applied Zechariah 14:4 to the work of Christ in His day. Tertullian (A.D. 145*220) wrote: "'But at night He went out to the Mount of Olives.' For thus had Zechariah pointed out: 'And His feet shall stand in that day on the Mount of Olives' [Zech. xiv. 4]."7 Tertullian was alluding to the fact that the Olivet prophecy set the stage for the judgment-coming of Christ that would once for all break down the Jewish/Gentile division. Matthew Henry explains the theology behind the prophecy:

The partition-wall between Jew and Gentiles shall be taken away. The mountains about Jerusalem, and particularly this, signified it to be an enclosure, and that it stood in the way of those who would approach to it. Between the Gentiles and Jerusalem this mountain of Bether, of division, stood, Cant. ii. 17. But by the destruction of Jerusalem this mountain shall be made to cleave in the midst, and so the Jewish pale shall be taken down, and the church laid in common with the Gentiles, who were made one with the Jews by the breaking down of this middle wall of partition, Eph. ii. 14.8

You will notice that there is no mention of a thousand year reign. Yet, we are told that "the LORD will be king over all the earth" (14:9). So what is new about this language? "For the LORD Most High is to be feared, a great King over all the earth. He subdues peoples under us, and nations under our feet" (Psalm 47:2, 3). This is exactly what happened with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Paul told the Roman Christians that "the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet" (Rom. 16:20). The church's adversary (Satan) were those Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah and persecuted His Bride, the church (see John 16:2). Jesus calls them a "synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 3:9).

https://www.preteristarchive.com/Modern/2001_demar_zechariah-14.html

In this, you and they share a similar approach, but applied to a different set of passages...

Again, at one point or another, different schools of thought, will nevertheless be observed applying a similar approach...

Its a fascinating thing, observing the approach of others...as revealed by their results...

It can always be educational, too.

It can leave one reflecting on one's own approach...
 

DAN P

Well-known member
First, for those of confused about the NT, that would be the accounts and letters of the apostles; ie, the collection. The arrival of the new covenant of forgiveness is within that collection, but the NT covers a few more things than does the topic of the new covenant.

2nd, it is extremely important that the NT have the final say on what the OT was saying. You will otherwise end up with two sets of train tracks or a wreck.

The places that use v5 'The Lord is coming with all his holy ones...'
Mt 25:31
I Th 3:13
2 Th 1:17
Jd 14

It is often just expression of the 'holy ones' that gets used by the NT passage. But since Jude is referring all the way back to the days and statements of Enoch, the coming in judgement has been a well known topic for all mankind for quite a while! No wonder the coming of Christ was called the end of time, the end of the ages, etc.

In the 2 Th 1 passage , the 'parousia' (coming) is also a time of relief from the current persecution. Obviously this is the 2nd time (2nd letter) mentioning it as coming quite soon to their relief. If Paul mentioned it soon in his 2nd letter again, is there any question that these things were expected quite soon in terms of the NT generation? Not at all. I doubt he would say so to people being hammered for their faith, if there wasn't a reason to expect it. Adjust your timeframes. They are not right without this view.

The event expected from Zech 14:5 was not just 'about Israel.' It was the final judgement of the world, though expressed in ways the most familiar to Israel. Uses of vs 7-11 are found sprinkled through the NHNE passage of Rev 21, 22, (there will be no night, twice), which is the location of the new Jerusalem; it never 'lands' on this one. This is why Heb 2:5 says that the subject of the great salvation (not just forgiveness but the NHNE) was 'the world to come about which we are speaking' in the early chapters of Hebrews, not a restored Israel as they knew it, that was about to be toast. Zech 14 is about the new.

D'ist-speak has all these points backward, and says this is all a mess. That is my every day experience with D'ism. They are always "right" and whenever the details of Scripture are presented, it's a mess. Guess who claims they are exclusively 'Bible-based'? "Just read the book" they say.

while the judgement on Israel was delivered in the DofJ, the worldwide final judgement did not take place. That's a God question; only the Father knows the time.


Hi and IP has not read Ezek 36:26 !!

#1 In verse 26 Israel is given a new heart !

#2 ,And God will put a new spirit with in them !!

#3, And verse 28 Israel will be back , and SHALL DWELL in the LAND that I gave to your fathers , are you reading IP ?

#4 The LAND is described in verses 33-38 !!

Read and WEEP !!

dan p
 

Danoh

New member
Hi and IP has not read Ezek 36:26 !!

#1 In verse 26 Israel is given a new heart !

#2 ,And God will put a new spirit with in them !!

#3, And verse 28 Israel will be back , and SHALL DWELL in the LAND that I gave to your fathers , are you reading IP ?

#4 The LAND is described in verses 33-38 !!

Read and WEEP !!

dan p

They read it...but their approach differs.

Thus, their different result.

The Literal in contrast to the Figurative.

In contrast, we might find that we at times actually apply their same approach...but to passages other than those they are applying their approach to...

And this witness, is true.

For it is the dynamic at work within the Apostle Paul's own approach, in the following...

Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. 1:15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 1:16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

And in the above, Paul's practice of their "prophets" approach there...had been pure.

Their approach to looking at a thing, and its resulting observation had been valid - but obviously - more incidental than intentional, and thus, only for that moment.

For they were largely, in the dark.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
They read it...but their approach differs.

Thus, their different result.

The Literal in contrast to the Figurative.

In contrast, we might find that we at times actually apply their same approach...but to passages other than those they are applying their approach to...

And this witness, is true.

For it is the dynamic at work within the Apostle Paul's own approach, in the following...

Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. 1:15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 1:16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

And in the above, Paul's practice of their "prophets" approach there...had been pure.

Their approach to looking at a thing, and its resulting observation had been valid - but obviously - more incidental than intentional, and thus, only for that moment.

For they were largely, in the dark.


Hi and what you and I believe is now us individually and be sorted out at the BEMA SEAT !!

And I am right on !!

DAN P
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Hi and IP has not read Ezek 36:26 !!

#1 In verse 26 Israel is given a new heart !

#2 ,And God will put a new spirit with in them !!

#3, And verse 28 Israel will be back , and SHALL DWELL in the LAND that I gave to your fathers , are you reading IP ?

#4 The LAND is described in verses 33-38 !!

Read and WEEP !!

dan p




I need NT interp and confirmation DanP
 

DAN P

Well-known member
I need NT interp and confirmation DanP


Hi and the NEW TESTAMENT / diatheke means ??

The new testament books are Matthew ----Acts and HEBREWS---Revekation !!

Romans --- Philemon are all dispensational !!

You need dispensational teaching by Paul !!

dan p
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
No, it is all the NT, and the new covenant is within it. We are in the new covenant now as the total of the verses on that subject bear out in normal reading.

But 2P2P has so much force and has been repeated so many times that people think they have to check with 2P2P first and then the passage, so that 2P2P is saved and preserved and kept intact.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
No, it is all the NT, and the new covenant is within it. We are in the new covenant now as the total of the verses on that subject bear out in normal reading.

But 2P2P has so much force and has been repeated so many times that people think they have to check with 2P2P first and then the passage, so that 2P2P is saved and preserved and kept intact.


Hi and I checked with you and you will not answer Rom 5:13 and 14 ?

Verse where the B O C is in the NEW COVENANT ??

dan p
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Hi and I checked with you and you will not answer Rom 5:13 and 14 ?

Verse where the B O C is in the NEW COVENANT ??

dan p





Stop using the damned acronym BOC like it was TM registered at Congress and has legal definition. it's just Christians for crying out loud. They are in the new covenant and ministers in it and of it. shush.
 

Danoh

New member
Stop using the damned acronym BOC like it was TM registered at Congress and has legal definition. it's just Christians for crying out loud. They are in the new covenant and ministers in it and of it. shush.

Your double-standard is showing :chuckle:

Nevertheless, Romans 5:8 towards ya.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Stop using the damned acronym BOC like it was TM registered at Congress and has legal definition. it's just Christians for crying out loud. They are in the new covenant and ministers in it and of it. shush.


Hi and will you stop using 2P2P or stop using NHNE ?

Jesus and Paul I know BUT who are you ??

Or are trying to persuade man or God ?? Gal 1:10 ??

Where does it say the B O C is in the New Covenant ?

dan p
 
Last edited:

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Zech 14
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

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



When did the LORD return & protect Jerusalem from it's enemies?
Good question.
Since the verses say the LORD will fight the nations that come against Jerusalem, not help them destroy it.
 

Danoh

New member
Good question.
Since the verses say the LORD will fight the nations that come against Jerusalem, not help them destroy it.

At the same time, what wick is asserting through and about one or two of isolated passages, just goes to show that the proper understanding of such passages often relies on much more than merely looking up the Hebrew and or the Greek, or one translation or another, but actually belongs to the realm of the particular, overall doctrine taught by Scripture as a whole, on one thing or another.

This had been the Prophet Isaiah's very point, in Isaiah 8:20.

So yeah "the volume of The Book" favors your conclusion there :thumb:
 
Top