Rapture: The End-Times Error That Leaves the Bible Behind (61 page)

When the inhabitants of Jerusalem were defeated, they realized that it was the punishment of God upon them for their treatment of Jesus. They had not been the “wise” who understood and fled. They were of the wicked, and so they mourned (Dan. 12). This understanding of Zechariah is substantiated in the Olivet Discourse.

The second oracle continues in Chapter 13 with more predictions concerning “that day.” Zechariah introduces a fountain, which he develops further in 14:8. This fountain of water flows with “living waters” which will “cleanse them from sin and uncleanness” (13:1). Jesus used this “living waters” symbol in the New Testament. Ezekiel describes a thousand cubits of water flowing from the Temple. The Apocalypse uses all of these to symbolize the Holy Spirit and the blessings He bestows on us. What better description of the baptismal font of the New Jerusalem could we expect?

Next, we learn that “on that day” God will definitively defeat the idols that some Jews were worshiping (13:2). The worship of these idols is evidenced by two actions described earlier in Zechariah, lying and stealing: “Everyone who steals shall be cut off henceforth according to it, and everyone who swears falsely shall be cut off henceforth according to it” (5:3). From this it is not too difficult to figure out that the idols were material wealth and comfort, gained through deceit and power. The antidote is to “love truth and peace” (8:19). We see in The Apocalypse that Truth is the primary weapon of the New Jerusalem against the dragon’s deceit and power.

Prophecy will also cease, which reminds us again of Daniel’s seventy-weeks vision. All Old Testament prophecy has been fulfilled in Christ and His Kingdom.

A beautiful passage that returns to the theme of the Good Shepherd is inserted at this point. Before Zechariah continues with the last chapter of his book, he re-emphasizes the lessons of the shepherd parable. We read, “Strike the shepherd, that the sheep may be scattered” (13:7). A gruesome fact is pointed out that The Apocalypse will enlarge upon: “Two-thirds shall be cut off and perish, and one-third shall be left alive” (13:8).

This should tip us off. This last chapter will perhaps concentrate on the part of Daniel’s seventieth week in which the New Covenant Messiah was vindicated over the Old Covenant leaders. Zechariah 14 is perhaps the most important chapter in this book. It foreshadows a theme we encounter in Galatians and in The Apocalypse. The Old will be cast out in favor of the New when the two staffs are broken during the seven decades of covenantal transition.

Rapturists misunderstand this entire chapter as being in the future, yet there is really no good reason to do this. We have already noted the mass confusion caused by this approach.

There are seven references to “that day,” in the last chapter. Every one of them fits the events of 70 A.D. “The spoil taken from you will be divided in the midst of you” (14:1). After Titus defeated Jerusalem, the army regrouped while the residents and goods of the city were sorted, distributed, and sold. “The city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile” (14:2). This certainly has already occurred. The Romans were very thorough in their pillaging.

There is a ray of hope in this black picture: “The Lord will go forth and fight” for His people at this time (14:3). But we must not forget the lessons of the shepherd parable. God will not be fighting for Old Jerusalem, but for the citizens of New Jerusalem.

Historians tell us that not a single Christian was killed in the overthrow of Jerusalem by the Romans and their allies. The focus of God’s protection is now on New Jerusalem, since the Old Covenant has been “annulled.” God did indeed fight for His People, as we clearly see in The Apocalypse.

There remains one phrase in Zechariah that rapturists are absolutely certain remains unfulfilled. We read that “His feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives which lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two” (14:4). Rapturists teach that this refers to the second coming. They understand the “split” very literally—the topography of Israel will be suddenly transformed. Mountains will literally be split in two and instantaneously flattened into plains.

But rapturists ignore the other uses of this kind of language in the Old Testament (GR5, 6). We have already encountered this even in Zechariah: “What are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain” (4:7).

Christ’s greatest battle was won during the Passion. Just before that awful weekend, Jesus was on the Mount of Olives with His disciples, sweating great drops of blood while He prayed. This night was the climax of Daniel’s last week, the halfway point during which the “strong covenant” would be made with New Israel. The splitting of the topography was understood by the early Church in much the same way as other apocalyptic literature is understood: the great dynasties of the Jewish people were destroyed by the sacrifice of Christ, whom they rejected. Previous categories and loyalties (Jew and Gentile) have been superseded by two new groups of people (Christian and non-Christian). The holy bloodline’s two staffs were broken.

Tertullian clearly applies this prophecy to the Agony in the Garden. “ ‘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’ ” (
AGM
, IV, 40).

Eusebius also understood Zechariah 14:1–5 as being fulfilled in the first century. In fact, no Church Father found it necessary to justify this exegesis of Zechariah, leading us to the conclusion that it was probably the common understanding of the entire early Church (
POG
, VIII, 4:144–6).

Zechariah continues by predicting that the people of God “shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah” (14:5). Perhaps we easily miss the significance of this. Zechariah is predicting that during “that day,” people will flee for safety
away from
Jerusalem. This was antithetical to everything the Jews had done throughout their history when invaded by a conquering army. After all, a fortified city is a relatively safe haven during war. Zechariah can come up with only one instance from the past to illustrate their flight during the “day of the Lord”: when an earthquake struck the area, and the residents fled out of the city into the open country for safety.

This is exactly what Jesus exhorted His followers to do in the Olivet Discourse. This should assure us that we are on the right track. “That day” is the same period during which the Church was founded and then fled from Jerusalem into the desert. When given the opportunity, the Christians of Judea obeyed and were delivered.

The New Kingdom established on “that day” will be a blessed time with continuous day (14:6). It is interesting to look up every mention of light in the Gospels. Starting with the beautiful passage in John’s Gospel, Chapter 1, we see that Christ and His Church are viewed as the source of light in the world. The light of the Church will pierce the darkness of the world. This theme is taken up in The Apocalypse, along with the theme of the living waters.

The theme of the split between the Old Covenant Israel and the New Covenant Church is so important in salvation history that Zechariah revisits it in 14:14: “Even Judah will fight against Jerusalem.” No longer will there be a believing and unbelieving portion of the holy bloodline of Israel. The new categories of non-Christians versus Christians is dealt with in depth by St. Paul and St. John in the New Testament.

As we have noted, rapturists believe that Zechariah 14 describes events that will occur in the future, during a corporeal millennial kingdom of Christ. This minor misunderstanding led to the mass confusion we charted at the beginning of this appendix. Because of their misunderstanding, they understand the last two occurrences of “that day” in the last paragraph of Zechariah 14 as still future. This part of Zechariah has a personal relevance to me because of how it fit into my own reconciliation with the Catholic Church.

When I was a Protestant seminary student at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, this paragraph became the topic of a discussion I will never forget. It describes the actions of all those “who sacrifice” in Jerusalem during the Millennial Kingdom (14:21). I was visiting with a teacher whose specialty was eschatology and who believed the Millennium was still future. A young man approached us and asked about the verse: “If Jesus’ sacrifice is final and complete, why will there be future animal sacrifices needed in Jerusalem during the Kingdom? After all, this is after the death and Resurrection of Jesus.” I will always remember what the teacher said: he reluctantly admitted that he knew of no plausible Protestant explanation for this verse!

The problem does not revolve around whether sacrifices will occur. Almost all rapturists believe that the animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant will be reinstituted in the Millennium after the second coming of Christ. That is not the problem for which this teacher had no answer. The question was, and remains, “Why?”

Protestants are emphatic that the Crucifixion of Christ was the last sacrifice ever needed. Why would God even
allow
those endless animal sacrifices to be performed—sacrifices that were only a shadow of our Lord’s Passion?

Why? This question and its answer bothered me for more than sixteen years. I found a satisfactory answer shortly before reconciling with the Catholic Church at the age of forty-one. Zechariah was referring, not to the animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant in a future Millennium, but to the
Eucharist
in God’s Kingdom here and now. The sacrifice of the Mass is being offered every day in Jerusalem. As Zechariah makes clear, the Eucharist is celebrated without interruption all over the world. I remember realizing with a jolt that the unbloody sacrifices of the Church were foretold in the Old Testament. The sacrifice of the Mass brings God’s grace gained at the Passion into our lives. It does this because it is actually the same sacrifice, brought into the present here on earth through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Since the Good Shepherd drama, Zechariah’s focus has changed from the earthly Jerusalem to the New Jerusalem, the Church. Given that, we can understand how Zechariah is able to close his book with the assertion that no Philistine, or “trader,” shall ever enter “the house of the Lord of hosts on that day” (14:21). On that day, a new House of the Lord will be built that will no longer depend on a physical Temple in Jerusalem: the worldwide, ecclesiastical Kingdom that Christ set up at His first advent, the Kingdom that we participate in through the sacraments. No one who is unworthy because of unbelief will be able to enter this spiritual Kingdom.

The insights of Zechariah are enough to take our breath away. Our brief treatment of this magnificent book has provided only a whiff of the feast that this prophet prepares for us. Remember, Zechariah lived in the sixth century B.C., yet the themes and predictions within his prophecies ring true throughout the New Testament and in the teachings of the early Church. Zechariah’s prophecies expand our knowledge concerning Daniel’s final week of covenantal transition. Our previous work in Daniel helped us develop the proper perspective. Zechariah views the seven decades surrounding Jesus’ Incarnation as a whole, just as Daniel did.

The Church has traditionally understood the human author of The Apocalypse to be none other than St. John the Apostle. The list of early Church Fathers who accepted St. John’s authorship is formidable: Melito, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Cyprian, Athanasius, Cyril of Alexandria, and Basil, to name the most prominent. However, among those who doubted Johanine authorship are Dionysius, Denis of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, and John Chrysostom.

Most of the doubters, however, had one thing in common: they strongly objected to what they perceived to be the book’s millenarian slant. They believed that an apostle would never have held the millenarian position that they thought was integral to The Apocalypse.

In that they were right. If The Apocalypse taught a future thousand-year corporeal reign of Christ after the second advent, the book could not have been apostolic in origin. This concept was Jewish in origin, but not a part of the deposit of Faith Christ gave to the Apostles. But since St. Augustine conclusively showed that the book does not have a millenarian slant (unless the reader brings it with him), I believe we can discount that objection.

Some modernists claim The Apocalypse was the work of several men: a “visions by committee.” That position does not take into account the beautiful unity of the book. Perhaps a reader who is just starting to study the book might find this theory plausible, but not a longtime student. In fact, “Most scholars judge that Apocalypse is the work of one author … that actually had a supernatural vision”
(NCE)
. Since there is broad support among scholars that the book was authored by one man, I see no convincing reason to abandon the traditional Church position: St. John is the author.

Modern opinions

Nonetheless, many modern scholars split the book into parts (usually three) and date each from a different period. They claim that one person then compiled these three parts and made them into a whole.