Preterism and Zechariah 12-14

Dr. Thomas Ice

InJanuary of this year I taught a course on Eschatology (Bible Prophecy) inOrange, California at Chafer Theological Seminary. Since preterist Ken Gentrylives only a few miles from Chafer Seminary, I invited him to come and speak toour class. Even though Chafer Seminary is dispensational, I thought it healthyto expose our students to the exact opposite of our views with Dr. Gentry'svisit. Dr. Gentry was gracious enough to come in and give a presentation ofhis preterist views on the Book of Revelation to our class. Even though I justcompleted a long series on Preterism in Pre-Trib Perspectives, I want to revisit the issue at least once more.

Duringa time of questions I ask Dr. Gentry about Zechariah 12-14 and preterism. Ifirst asked him if he believed, as a preterist, that Zechariah 12-14 was aparallel passage to the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13; Luke21:5-36). He answered, "Yes." I agree! I then noted that Zechariahspeaks of "all the peoples" (12:2), "all the nations of theearth will be gathered against it (Jerusalem)" (12:3), and "I willgather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle" (14:2). "Thisdoes not sound like the Romans in a.d.70," I said. Further, Zechariah goes on to say, "In that day the Lord will defend the inhabitants ofJerusalem" (12:8) and "Then the Lordwill go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day ofbattle" (14:3). I concluded that this does not fit with what happened toJerusalem in a.d. 70 when theRomans conquered Israel. Finally, it says that the Lord will rescue Israel, inthat day (14:3), whereas, in a.d.70 the Lord judged Israel as Luke 21:20-24 notes. "How does a preteristsay that Zechariah speaks of a.d.70 when the Lord is rescuing His people in that passage," I asked Dr.Gentry?

Nowkeep in mind that Dr. Gentry is one of foremost preterist spokesmen on theplanet. His answer, in essence, was to say that the Church had replacedIsrael. This is similar to what the late David Chilton had said in hispreterist commentary on Revelation:

Another passageparallel to this is Zechariah 12, which pictures Jerusalem as a cup ofdrunkenness to the nations (Zech. 12:2; cf. Rev. 14:8-9), a laver of fire thatwill consume the heathen (Zech. 12:6; Rev. 15:2). The irony of Revelation, aswe have seen repeatedly, is that first-century Israel herself has taken theplace of the heathen nations in the prophecies: She is consumed in the fierylaver-the Lake of Fire-while the Church, having passed through the holocaust,inherits salvation.[1]

Ithen told Dr. Gentry that his answer was nothing more than theologizing. Hehad merely stated his theological conclusion on the matter, but failed to givea textual interpretation. I asked his point blank, "Could you give atextual interpretation of this passage in Zechariah?" He responded,"No."

Apreterist cannot give a textual interpretation of Zechariah 12-14 because theybelieve it is to be equated with God's judgment at the hands of the Romans in a.d. 70 upon Israel-error number one. Greg Beale notes that, "Zechariah 12 does not prophecy Israel's judgmentbut Israel's redemption."[2] Zechariah 12-14 clearly speaks of atime when Israel is rescued by the Lord from an attack by "all the nationsof the earth," not just the Romans-error number two. In this context,Israel must refer to Israel. Since that it true, then the event of Zechariah12-14 has not yet happened in history. This means that it is a future event. Dr. Beale makes a comment about Daniel that applies to Zechariah as well:

the burden of proof rests on these preterists toprovide an exegetical rationale both for exchanging a pagan nation with Israelas the primary object of Daniel's final judgment and for limiting the lastjudgment mainly to Israel and not applying it universally.[3]

Preteristsand Futurist, like myself, both agree that Luke 21:20-24 prophesied the a.d. 70 Roman destruction of Jerusalem. Using Luke 21:20-24 as a baseline, notice the contrasts between it andZechariah 12-14, as observed by Randall Price.

ContrastsBetween Luke 21:20-24 and Zechariah 12-14

Becauseof the differences between the above contrasted passages, it is impossible toharmonize with events that have already taken place. Impossible as long as twoplus two continues to equal four. But some of the best minds that preterismhas to offer attempt to place round pegs into square holes.

PreteristGary DeMar recently attempted an interpretation of Zechariah 14.[5] Predictably, he says that Zechariah 14 "describes events leading up to andincluding the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d.70."[6] DeMar cannot show from the text ofZechariah the destruction of Jerusalem. DeMar approached the passage in what Iwould call a thematic approach. He hopped-skipped-and-jumped around thepassage, denuding it of its context. Worse, he repackaged it into a falsecontext. Dealing only with chapter 14, DeMar fails to produce any evidencethat God is judging Israel, as is clearly used in Luke 21:20-24. In fact, theLord is judging the nations for the text says, "I will set about todestroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem" (12:9), and "Iwill gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle . . . the Lord will go forth and fight againstthose nations" (14:2-3). Instead, the Lord is defending (12:8) andrescuing (14:3) Israel from those nations. Just as in Matthew 24, no wheredoes the text speak of the Lord coming in judgment against His people. BothZechariah and Matthew speak of Israel's rescue (cf. Matt. 24:31) and this iswhy the prophecy of both passages are yet future.

Conclusion

Theonly way that preterists can attempt to deal with Zechariah 12-14 is not bytaking the words and phrases of the passage in its literary context, but bysimply declaring-as done by Chilton and Gentry-that the church replaces Israel.The text of Scripture is supposed to be the basis upon which we develop sound theology.Instead, preterists have to impose their false theological beliefs upon God'sinerrant Word. Walt Kaiser is on the mark in commenting on this passage thefollowing:

In no otherchapter of the Bible is the interpretation of the name "Israel" moreimportant than in Zechariah 14. To say that "Israel" means the"Church," as many have done, would lead to a most confusing picturein this chapter and in the end of chapter 13. For example, 13:8-9 affirms thattwo-thirds of the land (Israel) will die, but few would be willing to saytwo-thirds of the Church will be slaughtered in the final day. Clearly"Israel" refers to that geo-political unit known today as the nationof Israel.[7]

God'sWord wants His Church to be forward looking to a secure and certain future ofvictory. Such a perspective enables a believer to live faithfully in thepresent because of the future. The past is equally important. However, afalse view of the past will rob a believer in the present of the hope needed tolive boldly for our Lord. Maranatha!

Endnotes

[1]David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: AnExposition of the Book of Revelation(Fort Worth: Dominion Press, 1987), pp. 385-86.

[2] G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: ACommentary on the Greek Text(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), p. 26.

[3] Beale, Revelation, p. 45.

[4]Randall Price, Charting the Future (San Marcos, Tex.: privately published charts,n.d.), n.p.

[5] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession ofthe Modern Church (Atlanta,American Vision: 4^th edition, 1999), pp. 437-43.

[6] DeMar, Madness, p. 437.

[7] Walter C. Kaiser, The Communicator'sCommentary: Micah-Malachi(Dallas: Word, 1992), p. 417.