An Amillennial Interpretation of Zechariah 14: The Lord’s Coming to Jerusalem | Ben Habegger

by | Aug 12, 2025 | Eschatology, Old Testament

*Editor’s Note: This blog is the first of six installments in a series by Ben Habegger titled “An Amillenial Interpretation of Zechariah 14.” As more installments of the series are released, they will be linked together here.

 

Zechariah 14:1–5: The Lord’s Coming to Jerusalem

The opening verses of chapter 14 portray the final conflict between the nations and the holy city. This conflict culminates in the sudden arrival of the Lord God and his heavenly hosts.

1 Behold, a day is coming for the Lord when the spoil taken from you will be divided among you. For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city will be captured, the houses plundered, the women ravished and half of the city exiled, but the rest of the people will not be cut off from the city. Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward the south. You will flee by the valley of My mountains, for the valley of the mountains will reach to Azel; yes, you will flee just as you fled before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord, my God, will come, and all the holy ones with Him![1]

Verse 2 puts this final conflict into proper perspective: the Lord himself “will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle.” This time when God gathers his enemies against his people “for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty” (Rev. 16:14) is prophesied in several places throughout scripture (cf. Ezek. 38:1–23; 39:1–6; Joel 3:2; Rev. 16:12–16; 19:19; 20:8–9). Here we must focus on the unique picture which Zechariah paints of this event.

The nations gather and battle against Jerusalem, and they are initially successful. They capture the city, loot the houses, rape the women, and even succeed in carrying away captive half the inhabitants. Still, the other half of the city’s people will not be killed or exiled. Why? The Lord himself will appear on the scene and catch the nations in their heinous act of desecration; and when God arrives, he will descend in full battle array. When he touches down on the earth right outside the walls of Jerusalem, the Mount of Olives will split to form a valley, a way of escape for the beleaguered inhabitants of the city. John MacKay explains verse 2 this way: “The message is that the future of the church will involve a time when it will be surrounded by its enemies and seemingly overwhelmed by them…. Under the metaphor of the pillaging of an ancient city, the church is presented as suffering grievously at the hands of her enemies, and yet there has been a remnant left.”[2]

The reference to the Mount of Olives should remind us of Ezekiel’s words, written a generation before Zechariah’s time. MacKay makes the connection when discussing verse 4:

‘His feet’ indicates a theophany, perhaps one where the presence of God causes the earth to shake (Ps. 68:8; 97:4; Micah 1:3–4; Nahum 1:3, 5). The addition ‘east of Jerusalem’ – which was scarcely needed to locate this well-known hill – links this vision with that granted to Ezekiel when the Lord’s glory left Jerusalem and ‘stopped above the mountain east of it’ (Ezek. 11:23). The Lord whose visible presence with his people had then ceased now returns in power, as was similarly forecast in Ezekiel 43:2. It is not of course to some reconstructed city that he comes, but to the New Jerusalem which is the reality symbolised in these visions. It is the city that bears the name ‘the Lord is there’ (Ezek. 48:35).[3]

Dean Davis further opines, “Verse 4 pictures the LORD creating an unexpected way of escape for his people; verse 5 pictures them using it…. Quite intentionally, the imagery used here reminds us of Israel’s miraculous deliverance at the Red Sea (Exodus 14:1ff).”[4]

But what about the details of the earthquake and Azel, and should we expect the Lord Jesus to descend upon the literal hill called the Mount of Olives? If the prophecy uses the land of Judah and the city of Jerusalem as veiled references to the New Testament church, why are certain geographical markers emphasized?

For instance, why does Zechariah stress that the valley of escape created by the divided Mount of Olives will reach all the way to Azel? Davis sees in these details a great deal of symbolism involving the escape of God’s people to a city of refuge.[5] More likely, much of the description of the earthquake, including the mention of Azel, simply refers to details of the historical earthquake during the reign of Uzziah.[6] It is as if the prophet rehearses the details of that past event to say, “It will be like that again when the Lord comes to defend his city. His people will have a way of escape.” That is certainly the comparison in verse 5: “Yes, you will flee just as you fled before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah.” There is also conflicting manuscript evidence here which should be factored into the interpretation.

Either this valley will become an escape route for the Hebrews fleeing Jerusalem in the face of the assault against the city by the nations (so niv, nlt, nrsv; following the mt), or the valley will be filled and blocked like it was during the earthquake at the time of King Uzziah (so nab, neb, njb; following the lxx; Targ.). A different vowel pointing of the same Hebrew root word renders the two separate meanings, and ‘either is equally possible’. Baldwin’s (1972: 218) mediation of the difficulty is helpful, noting: ‘It is impossible to be sure how the text read originally, but the general meaning is clear. The earth movements which open a valley eastwards will also block up the Kidron valley, so providing a level escape route from Jerusalem.’[7]

The earthquake of Uzziah’s time is barely mentioned in scripture. Amos prophesied two years before what was apparently the same earthquake (Amos 1:1). Such an earthquake must have been severe if it was still remembered over two centuries later in post-exilic Judah. It was an unforgettable national disaster which doubtless gripped the imaginations of Zechariah’s original audience.[8] That historical event is likened to the Lord’s coming, which will shake the entire earth (cf. Hag. 2:6–7; Heb. 12:26–27) and bring terror to those caught desecrating his holy dwelling.[9]

While appreciating the complex imagery of the text, we should perhaps not forget that the literal Mount of Olives may have a prominent role at the Second Advent of Christ. Matthew and Mark pointedly state that Jesus sat on the Mount of Olives as he taught his disciples about his Second Advent (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:3). Luke also says that Jesus ascended to heaven from the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:12). At the time of Christ’s ascension, two men in white announced to his disciples that he would come back in just the same way which they had seen him leave (Acts 1:10–11). Jesus ascended to heaven bodily, and he will return bodily; he may also return to the same place, the Mount of Olives.[10] This would be in keeping with how the prophecies of his First Advent were fulfilled. The Christ came out of Bethlehem in Judah symbolically, since he was David’s seed and Bethlehem was David’s ancestral town; but Jesus was also born in the literal city of Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2; Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4–7, 11).

 

 

[1] All scripture quotations are taken from the nasb Updated Edition of 1995.

[2] Ibid., 303–304.

[3] Ibid., 305. Cf. also Andrew E. Hill, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, ed. David G. Firth, vol. 28 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2012), 261.

[4] Dean Davis, The High King of Heaven: Discovering the Master Keys to the Great End Time Debate (Enumclaw, WA: Redemption Press, 2014), 397. Cf. also Barry G. Webb, The Message of Zechariah, The Bible Speaks Today, ed. J. A. Motyer (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 179.

[5] Davis, High King of Heaven, 397–98.

[6] For a discussion of the word Azel, see Mark J. Boda, The Book of Zechariah, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016), 758.

[7] Hill, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, 262. See also Hill’s discussion of the name Azel on the same page.

[8] These online articles give summaries of fascinating archeological evidence for this major earthquake: https://patternsofevidence.com/2019/01/20/biblical-quake-confirmed/ https://www.icr.org/article/scientific-scriptural-impact-amos-earthquake.

[9] Josephus makes an intriguing connection between Uzziah’s attempted desecration of the Holy Place (2 Chron. 26:16–20) and the earthquake. Azariah the king (called this in 2 Kings 15 but Uzziah in 2 Chron. 26) attempted to usurp the role of Azariah the high priest; but the Lord struck the king with leprosy and drove him out of the temple. Josephus says that the earthquake also happened at the same time. He even records certain effects of the earthquake which seem to mirror Zechariah’s words: “And before the city, at a place called Eroge, half the mountain broke off from the rest on the west, and rolled itself four furlongs, and stood still at the east mountain, till the roads, as well as the king’s gardens, were spoiled by the obstruction.” See Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book 9, chapter 10, paragraph 4, verse 225, William Whiston. In any case, the parallels between King Uzziah and the “man of sin” who will attempt to usurp Christ’s prerogatives are worthy of note (see 2 Thess. 2:3–8).

[10] Hill, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, 261.

 

Follow Us In Social Media

Do We Still Believe in Sola Scriptura?—Three Years Later … | Sam Waldron

Do We Still Believe in Sola Scriptura?—Three Years Later … | Sam Waldron

Almost three and a half years ago I waded into an issue in a blog for which in some circles I was scorched with disagreement and (by some people) with ridicule. I warned that respect for what is called widely “the Great Tradition” was beginning seriously to cause the boat of sola scriptura to list. Events since then have shown that my concerns should not have been dismissed as foolish and ridiculous.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This