- Oct 12, 2020
- 7,394
- 2,496
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes. What is your answer to that question?Look at how you are arguing, though, one sided. You argue that if my interpretation of Zechariah 14 is correct, then why doesn't the NT support it?
You are the one who thinks that Zechariah 14 doesn't support my interpretation of the NT, not me. Did you not read everything I said? I'm saying that the NT shines light on the OT prophecies. You're acting as if it's the other way around.Why aren't you also asking, if your interpretation of the NT is correct, why isn't Zechariah 14 supporting it?
Yes, but the NT takes precedence because the NT was written to shine light on the OT and reveal things that were a mystery and hidden in the OT. Just read Ephesians 3 for a good example of what I'm talking about.Isn't the idea to not pit the OT against the NT, but instead, have these two testaments squaring?
I'm doing what I talked about which is allowing the NT to interpret the OT for me. I spelled this out to you and you're still not getting it. You want the OT to interpret the NT for you instead.You don't seem to want to try and do that in this case.
I don't know exactly what you mean by the NT trumping the OT, but I made it quite clear that I believe the NT shines light on and clarifies what the purposely obscure OT prophecies are about and I gave examples of this.No matter how you choose to interpret the NT, none of that is making any of Zechariah 14 go away. None of that is solving anything recorded in Zechariah 14. None of that is squaring both testaments. You apparently think the NT trumps the OT, and that all that matters, all that counts, is what the NT says,and not what the OT says as well.
Did you read the examples I gave? Do you think that the fact that there will be no more death, sorrow, crying or pain when the new heavens and new earth are ushered in is made clear in the OT? No, but it is made clear in the NT. So, we should base our interpretation of Isaiah 65:17-25 on what is clearly taught in the NT about the new heavens and new earth.
Another example I gave was how the OT prophecies regarding the promises made to Abraham and his seed did not make it clear that the promises were made to Christ and those who belong to Christ, but the NT makes that clear (Galatians 3:16,29).
Similarly, we should interpret a passage like Zechariah 14 based on a doctrinal foundation that we form from the NT.
You act as if we can just interpret OT prophecies in isolation without any need of the aid of the NT. In that case, why was the NT even written if everything is already clearly explained in the OT?
If you want to keep using your flawed method of interpreting OT prophecies, that's your choice. But, I will continue to interpret OT prophecies in light of the NT.When I think what matters is, what do both testaments combined say.
LOL. When did I say that there's no chronology in the passage? What I'm saying is that I form the foundation of my doctrine from the NT, and OT prophecies need to not contradict what I see clearly taught in the NT. That's my approach and I believe it's a wise one. If you think otherwise, so be it.How can prophecies, regardless what sense they might be meaning, not involve chronology? How can Zechariah 14 be void of chronology? For example. How can verses 16-19 be meaning before verse 2 is fulfilled first? How can verse 12 be meaning before verse 2 is fulfilled first? So on and so on. This alone already undeniably proves that chronology is relevant in Zechariah 14, or at least it undeniably proves it to someone trying to agree with the text rather than trying to fight with it instead.
Last edited:
Upvote
0