In our study of Zechariah 14 last Sunday, I mentioned that my interpretation of at least one particular portion of the chapter might raise objections from those who prefer to read the chapter from a more literal, premillennial perspective. That section was 14:16-19:
16 Then everyone who survives of all the nations that have come against Jerusalem shall go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the Feast of Booths. 17 And if any of the families of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, there will be no rain on them. 18 And if the family of Egypt does not go up and present themselves, then on them there shall be no rain; there shall be the plague with which the LORD afflicts the nations that do not go up to keep the Feast of Booths. 19 This shall be the punishment to Egypt and the punishment to all the nations that do not go up to keep the Feast of Booths.
A premillennial reading would understand these verses to depict a literal millennial reign of Christ, during which time there will be ungodly people still on the earth (those who “do no go up to Jerusalem to worship the King.”) Many proponents—particularly those of the dispensational persuasion—would say that all people, godly and ungodly, will literally come to Jerusalem and worship God in the Feast of Booths. Many would also take vv20-21 to indicate that during this period literal animal sacrifices will also be offered. In their view, the final judgment only comes after that.
On Sunday, I didn’t have time to give any explanation for why I reject this view. Now, I’d like to give a brief case. (I’ll not reproduce here how I do interpret these verses. For that, you can listen to the message on our website.)
First, earlier parts of the chapter establish the New Jerusalem as the context for the events depicted. This is a problem because Rev 20:15 depicts all evildoers being cast into the lake of fire prior to the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven. Rev 21:27 explicitly teaches that nothing unclean will ever enter the New Jerusalem, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life. The New Jerusalem will only contain the true worshipers of God.
Second, references to the Feast of Booths and to sacrifices cannot be taken literally because all components of the Old Covenant have been fulfilled in Christ (2 Cor 1:20; Gal 3:10-5:4; Col 2:16-17; Heb 8:6-13, 10:9). To understand these things literally is to revert to Old Covenant worship, which the NT authors would find inconceivable. In the New Jerusalem, Jesus Himself will be with us; how strange that our attention would be diverted from Him back to types and shadows, back to keeping the law of Moses.
Third, to read these verses literally is to expect God—in the New Covenant era—to demand outward worship from those whose hearts are far from Him, and that in literal Jerusalem. Taken literally, those who keep the feast will have rain. That is, those who outwardly worship God will satisfy Him, or at least, avoid His wrath. This kind of rote, meaningless worship is what the prophets condemned (Isa 1:11-17; Jer 6:20).
In His conversation with the woman at the well in John 4, Jesus predicted a new era of worship. “The time is coming, when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship…” That is, the time of merely outward forms of worship which people did in their pilgrimages to Jerusalem—those things are going to be a thing of the past. He went on to say to her, “But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him.” Those old forms of outward worship from people whose hearts are far from Him have no place in the New Covenant. He is not seeking those kinds of worshipers. He creates worshipers in the ew covenant by giving them new hearts capable of worshiping in spirit and truth.
The fourth problem with a literal reading is that Egypt is singled out. That is a problem because withholding literal rain would not be bothersome to Egypt. They don’t and never have needed rain. They irrigate using water from the Nile. Deut 11:10-11 makes this very point. It only makes sense to read this figuratively as a description of judgment against those hardened against God.
I could be wrong about these things. As I mentioned on Sunday, it is important not to miss the forest for the trees. We can disagree about how best to understand the trees. However, our view of the forest is paramount—Christ is coming again and we must persevere until He does.
Comments