But before we get into the specific examples, let’s consider what he has to say leading up to it:

The Bible does use descriptions that some believe prophecy a future paradise on earth. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if all warfare ceased? And wouldn’t it be perfect if famines and calamities never occurred again? Best of all, wouldn’t it be bliss if Jesus were here on earth reigning over that perfect kingdom of peace?
Believing that God planned something because we want it is not a reliable basis for our interpretation. It isn’t difficult to read a Bible passage and think it makes sense for it to be fulfilled the way we want it fulfilled. We must beware of the “it makes sense” approach to Bible study. Ultimately, God’s word will make sense, but not because it agrees with the way we would do things.
It is easy to draw a conclusion hastily by the “it makes sense” method. We all would love for the world to embrace peace under the rule of Jesus. What we would love to happen is not a valid criteria [sic; it should be “criterion”, but that’s just nitpicking] for Bible interpretation, however. It is important that we come to an understanding of what God really had in mind when He spoke of peace.

{“In the Days of Those Kings: A 24 Lesson Adult Bible Class Study on the Error of Dispensationalism”. Pulliam, Bob. 2015. Houston, TX: Book Pillar Publishing. 155. Italics and boldface in original.}

I agree, but Pulliam doesn’t seem to realize that this also goes for his own view: as I explained at the end of Part 1, the primary (if not only) reason for thinking passages about “A Literal Earthly Utopia” weren’t really referring to such is the presumption that believers will spend eternity in Heaven, not on Earth. As I’ve already explained, not only is that never actually taught in Scripture, but the reason the Alexandrian school under Clement and Origen went out of its way to incorporate it into Christianity was because the Greek intellectuals they were trying to reason with and convert didn’t want an earthly eternity; this was because they believed matter was inherently evil, so to them, spending eternity in a physical universe sounded like an eternal Hell–to them, it didn’t matter if the Curse was removed; the matter would still be evil! The correct response to this line of reasoning is to recognize that the premise that matter is inherently evil is simply false: it didn’t come from Scripture, but was imposed on it.

What is being described when Old Testament passages refer to peace in the Messiah’s kingdom? Is it the world at peace, or is it the Messiah’s kingdom at peace in the world? The world at peace would necessitate the Millennium expected by the Dispensationalist. All world governments (as the political entities that they are) would have to throw away their weapons and live in harmony. Kingdom peace, on the other hand, requires peace simply limited to the boundaries of the kingdom. Whether or not the nations of the world wage war, only the citizens of Christ’s kingdom need to be at peace. The chart at the top of the next page illustrates this point. While people out of all nations become citizens of the kingdom (the circle in the center), that kingdom does not make war with the kingdoms of the world.
Unlike ancient Israel, the Messiah’s present kingdom does not go to war (physically cf. II Cor 10:3-5). The boundaries of the kingdom are not expanded by warfare, and yet kingdom boundaries are expanded. It is accomplished by the conquest of hearts for the king through God’s word (Mt 13:18-23). The kingdom is not defended by physical weapons, or fleshly strength. If it were, the King Himself would have been defended from the purpose of the Jews (Jn 18:36). Since His kingdom is not of this world, we can expect His citizens to be fighting a different kind of warfare (Eph 6:10-18). And when the world does fight against the kingdom, its citizens remain at peace with the world, their King, and each other (e.g. Acts 7:54-8:4). This is the nature of the kingdom established by the Messiah.
Is it supposed to be the first thing we think of when we think of a kingdom? Probably no more than the death of Jesus on the cross was supposed to be the first thing expected by Jews in the first century. We are accustomed to political governments established in the context of wars and treaties. Because we are accustomed to that, the language of prophecy will use familiar concepts to foretell the Messiah’s kingdom, but will not necessarily be fulfilled with our expectations of those descriptions. Does that mean it is not literally fulfilled? Not in the least! Something literal fulfills these prophecies, it just isn’t the physical kingdom that some people expect.

{Ibid. 155-156. Italics and boldface in original.}

Of course, right at the end, Pulliam exploited the weasel-words tactic on the word “literal” that I called out two Parts ago. But more to the point, he’s conflating the present kingdom of Jesus, which is limited in scope to the Heavenly Dominions (which also limits the domains in which the “different kind of warfare” is divinely-authorized to occur, adding nuance to his claim about Ephesians 6:10-18), with the kingdom in its fullness, despite the implication of Hebrews 10:12-13 that Jesus’ authority will someday expand to include everything presently outside it! As I discussed earlier in this critique series, verses 14 & 27 of Daniel 7 shut down the idea that the present kingdom is the kingdom in its fullness with a couple of details that Pulliam says absolutely nothing about in his book. Daniel 7:27 alone is particularly devastating for his position, which may explain why he never once quotes it in his book, despite quoting the verse just before it {p. 181}: “Then the kingdom and dominion, And the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And all dominions shall serve and obey Him.” (1995 NASB, boldface added) In one fell swoop, this verse demonstrates that (a) the Saints will receive the sovereignty and dominion of kingdoms (plural), (b) these kingdoms will be on Earth, per the phrase “under the whole heaven”, and (c) that all dominions (without qualification; i.e., politics, economics, art, science, etc. are included here) will serve and obey Christ from then into eternity future.¹

Also notice the analogy Pulliam gave of Christ’s kingdom including a subset of every political nation. Here’s his “chart at the top of the next page”:

This analogy may work for the present kingdom, but the Aramaic phrasing of Daniel 7:14 implies that the circle in the middle of the diagram will one day expand all the way to the outer edge of the pie!

And to him was forcibly given [the Peil stem indicates a more intensive form of giving; i.e., what had belonged to the world is being repossessed by the Father and given to His Son] dominion and honor and a kingdom. And all the peoples, the nations, and the tongues: to him they will pay reverence. His dominion is a dominion age-enduring, that which never will pass away, and his kingdom that which never will be destroyed. [End major train of thought] (Daniel 7:14, my right-to-left translation, boldface and underlining added)

Sure, Pulliam’s preferred translation, the 1995 NASB, includes the phrase “men of every” before “tongue” (which would be somewhat consistent with his chart); but it also puts those words in italics because they’re not in the Aramaic text (as my translation here demonstrates). I suspect Pulliam would agree that a nation is a distinct entity from the individuals comprising it; he arguably even makes this distinction in the caption to his chart when saying “Unlike ancient Israel, this kingdom does not go to war, nor do individual saints within each nation go to war with each other.” {Boldface and underlining added.} He doesn’t rule out the possibility of individual saints within a nation being sent to war against another nation on behalf of their own nation, which would be consistent with this distinction. Remember, Jesus said “blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9a ASV), not “blessed are the pacifists”; there are times where war is necessary in this sin-Cursed world (Ecclesiastes 3:1,8), if only to keep fellow sinful humans in check! Likewise, 2 Corinthians 10:3-5 is discussing spiritual warfare specifically, and verse 5 even more specifically refers to the work of a Christian apologist; the passage doesn’t prohibit Christians from getting involved in worldly wars when the situation requires it (e.g., if they wind up getting drafted and having to kill people to survive; Christians are obligated to obey government orders as long as they don’t involve disobeying God (Acts 5:29), and killing in self-defense doesn’t qualify as murder (Exodus 22:2), so neither of these would be sinful). Hence, Daniel 7:14 prophesies national-level worship of Christ by all nations, not individual-level worship of Christ by individuals within every nation. How has this been fulfilled at any point up to the present day?

To argue their case for a literal, earthly Millennium, Dispensationalists will try to argue a need from Scripture. They tell us that a Millennium must arise to accomplish certain necessary things in God’s program. Mark Hitchcock offers a list of three reasons a Millennium is necessary. Let’s study these, and see if his list has any validity.
REASON ONE: The Millennium is where God rewards the faithful. A mixture of passages dealing with the current kingdom (Dan 7:18, 22, 27; Lk 19:11-26; Rev 2:26-28; 20:4-6) and the final judgment (I Cor 6:2-3) are used to defend this point. This position argues that the eventual authority of the faithful in the Millennial kingdom is being determined by the lives they live now. When I read this approach taken by Millenarians to encourage people to be faithful now, it begins to sound like heaven becomes a consolation prize. People are urged, “You need to live your life valiantly for the Lord, so you eventually receive authority in the Millennium.” I thought we were living this life for the heavenly “prize.” I can’t find anything about a Millennial prize in the passages they use. And here we should ask, “Is heaven the lesser of two rewards?” Although not intended, this reward concept of the Millennium is a back-handed slap at the true glory that awaits the redeemed. Carnal reward should never be the primary incentive for faithful service.

{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 156-158. Italics, boldface, and all-caps in original.}

Notice that Pulliam claims Daniel 7:18, 22, & 27 deal with “the current kingdom”, without even attempting to explain how those verses cohere with his position. He doesn’t address these verses in his discussion of Daniel 7 in Lesson 17, either. In fact, despite all his allegorizing in Lesson 24 to explain away the two resurrections of Revelation 20 (which I’ll address in the next post of this series), he never once, anywhere in his book, even SUGGESTS what “reigning with Christ” means. It’s as if he deliberately avoided dealing with this issue! And little wonder, since it’s difficult to imagine how they (especially verse 27) can be true in our day, even metaphorically:

“But the saints [literally, “But saints”; plural, no definite article] of the Highest One will receive [plural] the kingdom and possess [plural] the kingdom forever, for all ages to come [literally, “the kingdom unto the age, and/even unto an age of the ages”]… until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was passed in favor of the [literally, “and the judgment (definite article present) was given for”] saints of the Highest One, and the time arrived when the [literally, “time was reached, and”] saints [plural] took possession of [plural] the kingdom…Then the sovereignty, the dominion and the greatness [literally, “And the sovereignty, and the dominion, and the majesty”] of all the kingdoms [literally, “of kingdoms”; no definite article] under the whole heaven will be given to the people [literally, “to a people”; singular, no definite article] of the saints [literally, “of saints”; plural, no definite article] of the Highest One; His kingdom will be an everlasting [or “age-enduring”] kingdom, and all the dominions (plural) will serve and obey [literally, “will pay reverence (plural) and show themselves obedient (plural) to”] Him. (Daniel 7:18,22,27 1995 NASB, boldface and underlining added)

Also notice that in the Aramaic, every verb with “saints” as its subject is plural, as is “saints” itself–this demonstrates that these statements were meant on the individual level, not the collective level (thus ruling out the idea that Christians already have these things because they are in Christ, who presently rules the Heavenly Dominions). This also rules out the idea that “saints of the Highest One” have already “possessed the kingdom unto the age, even unto an age of the ages” ever since Pentecost of A.D. 30, since that would imply the false teaching of “Once Saved Always Saved”–hence, this must be referring to a time when each believer’s salvation is finalized, which won’t be the case until they’re judged upon being resurrected (Daniel 12:2, Matthew 19:28-30, Mark 10:30, Romans 2:5-10, Titus 1:2, 3:7).

I find it interesting that Pulliam is implying that Revelation 2:26-28 is referring to the present kingdom, and not the future one. Consider how those verses and the one immediately following them go (I’m sure Pulliam is familiar with how they go in the 1995 NASB, so I’ll quote them from the LGV here for comparison):

And the one being victorious, and keeping My works until the end, I will give him authority over the nations — ‘He shall shepherd them with a rod of iron; As the vessels of pottery are crushed’ — as I also have received from My Father. And I will give him the morning star. The one having an ear, listen to what the Breath is saying to the assemblies. (Revelation 2:26-29 LGV, italics and red text in original.)

I ask again: how has Christ given Christians “authority over the nations” at present? That italicized portion in the middle is a quotation of Psalm 2:9 LXX, which prophesied Jesus ruling the nations; the quotation is immediately followed by a promise that just as Jesus is given this authority by his Father, he’ll in turn give such authority to his followers who remain steadfast till the end (after all, is that not what Jesus means by “being victorious, and keeping My works until the end”?). Likewise, “the morning star”, typically used in the ancient world for the planet Venus (remember, the word “star” was used in the ancient world for any luminous, point-like object in the sky, which would’ve also included planets, meteors, comets, etc.–pretty much anything except the sun & moon, which don’t appear point-like), is also a title for Christ in Scripture (2 Peter 1:19, Revelation 22:16), intended to invoke certain properties Venus has in the sky (to the naked eye, Venus is the brightest object in the sky other than the sun and moon, and it’s only visible within 43 degrees of the sun–its orbit is closer to the sun than Earth’s, so it appears to be “tethered” to the sun in the sky when observed from Earth over time–so when it appears above the eastern horizon at night, you know daylight is coming shortly afterward!). Finally, notice that the LGV puts all this text in red, because Jesus himself was the one telling John what to write; this tells us that “what the Breath [i.e., the Holy Spirit] is saying” was in fact the words of Jesus himself! Also bear in mind that each of the other 6 letters Jesus dictated to the assemblies of Asia Minor in John’s day has a similar section near the end:

The one having an ear, listen to what the Breath is saying to the assemblies: ‘To the one being victorious, I will give to him to eat from the Tree of Life, which is in the midst of the Garden of God.’…

The one having an ear, listen to what the Breath says to the assemblies: ‘The one being victorious shall not be injured by the second death.’…

The one having an ear, listen to what the Breath is saying to the assemblies: ‘To the one being victorious, I will give some of the manna to eat that has been hidden. And I will give him a white pebble, and on the pebble a new name inscribed which no one has perceived except the one receiving it’.…

The one being victorious shall be dressed in white clothing. And I will not erase his name from the Book of Life, but I will acknowledge his name before My Father and before His messengers. The one having an ear, listen to what the Breath is saying to the assemblies.…

The one being victorious I will make him a column in the Temple of My God, which he should not leave thereafter. And I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, (the New Jerusalem, the one descending out of the sky from My God), and My new name. The one having an ear, listen to what the Breath is saying to the assemblies.…

The one being victorious, I will permit him to sit with Me on My throne as I also was victorious and sat down with My Father on His throne. The one having an ear, listen to what the Breath is saying to the assemblies

(Revelation 2:7,11,17; 3:5-6,12-13,21-22 LGV, red text in original. See also notes therein.)

Last I checked, the prohibition against humans accessing the Tree of Life (instituted in Genesis 3:22-24) has yet to be overturned! Whatever you think of my discussion on life and death in the previous post, isn’t the second death supposed to be something nobody can come back from? How can Revelation 2:11 be a promise pertaining to the present, rather than the future? I, for one, don’t recall receiving a new name that only I have perceived, much less receiving it inscribed on a white pebble. “In the ancient courts, the accused was condemned by judges giving him black pebbles, and acquitted by receiving white pebbles. Here, the sense seems to be not only acquittal, but a new beginning (new name).” {See Note 65 on p. 7 in the PDF} Geography professor Gary Fuller observed that “Place names change, and when they do, it usually means that a major upheaval has occurred” {“The Trivia Lover’s Guide to the World: Geography for the Lost and Found”. Fuller, Gary. 2012. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. 236.}; why should we expect anything different when a person’s name changes? If the bodies of the living faithful are presently temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19), then how can each of us presently be “a column in the Temple of [Jesus’] God”? Don’t these statements clash with each other if they’re both to be true in the present?² In what sense have the faithful had the name of God, the name of His city, and Jesus’ new name (that new name being what, exactly?) “written on them”? And since we all agree that Jesus is physically present beside his Father, then shouldn’t the same go for Jesus permitting the faithful who remain steadfast “to sit with Me on My throne as I also was victorious and sat down with My Father on His throne”?

In short, these statements are promises about the still-future, not the now-present (and due to the sheer parallelism of these 7 letters, that goes for all 7 of the statements in red text quoted above!). If Pulliam thinks they’re all fulfilled at present, then let him give his explanation of how they’re fulfilled. Include the specifics, Pulliam!

As for 1 Corinthians 6:2-3, this is another reference to Christians “reigning with Christ” in the future: “Or do you not know that the saints will judge [future active indicative 3^rd-person plural] the world [kosmos; the world order]? If the world [kosmos] is judged [present passive indicative 3^rd-person singular; futuristic present in light of the previous sentence, here emphasizing certainty] by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge [future active indicative 1^st-person plural] angels? How much more matters of this life?” (1995 NASB, boldface added) Where does Pulliam get the idea that this refers to the final judgment? Won’t the judgments dished out then be solely the Father’s call, except in cases where the Son intervenes (after all, only the Father³ has full knowledge of everything each of them did throughout their entire lives!)? How will “the saints” be doing that judgment (the two instances of “will judge” are in the active voice, implying “we”, “the saints” will be executing the judgment referred to here)? The only reasonable conclusion is that this is instead referring to the saints acting as judges and rulers in the Kingdom once it’s fully arrived, in the same vein as what we saw with 2 Timothy 4:1 in the previous post.

Finally, Pulliam’s favorite false premise has reared its ugly head again: “This position argues that the eventual authority of the faithful in the Millennial kingdom is being determined by the lives they live now.” I should think that’s a natural conclusion to draw from Biblical premises. Does Pulliam think that heaven is a place where all of the faithful will receive the exact same prizes, despite all the NT passages that teach otherwise (e.g., Matthew 25:14-30, especially verses 20-25 & 28; Luke 19:11-27, especially verses 16-21 & 24)? “When I read this approach taken by Millenarians to encourage people to be faithful now, it begins to sound like heaven becomes a consolation prize.” Once again, Pulliam is merely assuming that Heaven itself is the prize. Let me be clear: Heaven isn’t a consolation prize, because heaven itself isn’t the prize at all! Rather, a restored universe entirely under the Heavenly Dominions is the prize. “People are urged, ‘You need to live your life valiantly for the Lord, so you eventually receive authority in the Millennium.’” Granted, authority over the still-mortal people among the nations in the New Heavens and New Earth is hardly the only thing the faithful will inherit, but aside from a belief that there will be no nations after Jesus returns (a belief contradicted by the numerous prophecies of the Kingdom that mention nations by name), what reason is there for Christians to ignore it altogether? “I thought we were living this life for the heavenly ‘prize.’” Well, you thought wrong, Pulliam. Such a prize is never promised in Scripture, plain and simple. Well, unless by “heavenly prize”, Pulliam meant “a prize under heaven’s authority and influence” (i.e., following the actual definition of the Greek word epouranios, often rendered “heavenly places” when it should be rendered “heavenly dominions”). “I can’t find anything about a Millennial prize in the passages they use.” Maybe not a Millennial prize, but certainly an earthly prize (e.g., Daniel 7:27; Hebrews 2:5)! And that’s actually quite appropriate, because the authority of the redeemed will continue beyond the Millennium into eternity future: “they have no need of a lamp and light of a sun, because the Lord God doth give them light, and they shall reign — to the ages of the ages.” (Revelation 22:5c YLT, boldface and underlining added)

“And here we should ask, ‘Is heaven the lesser of two rewards?’” Again, heaven itself isn’t the reward at all. However, Pulliam’s question here does raise an important point about the dispensationalist dichotomy between Israel and “the Church”: dispensationalists hold that Israelites will receive the earthly destiny promised throughout the Scriptures, while Christians will receive the heavenly reward that Pulliam seems to be looking forward to. As Tim Warner pointed out in his debate with traditional dispensationalist Mal Couch:

Darby’s system [Darby is regarded as “the father of modern dispensationalism and futurism”] was a hybrid formed from the “heavenly destiny” ideas of amillennialism (which he continued to apply to the Church), and the literal earthly Kingdom – chilaism of the early Church Fathers – for Israel. Yes, Darbyism gives Israel back her ancient hope. That is certainly progress in the right direction. But, it is hardly fair, in my opinion, to portray Darbyism as being wholly loving to the Jews, when in fact his system made them second-class citizens, an “earthly people,” while the Church is supposed to be a “heavenly people.” Why is this not “apartheid of the elect?” Why would segregating the people of God into “earthly” and “heavenly” races be any less repulsive to Jews than segregation in the south was to blacks in the 1950s? {Boldface and content in brackets mine. Scroll to p. 2 in the PDF.}

“Although not intended, this reward concept of the Millennium is a back-handed slap at the true glory that awaits the redeemed.” But again, Pulliam has incorrectly assumed that nothing physical is involved in “the true glory that awaits the redeemed”! “Carnal reward should never be the primary incentive for faithful service.” I could be mistaken (and Pulliam is free to correct me if so), but it seems to me that Pulliam is using the word “carnal” as a synonym for “physical”; i.e., any reward involving something physical is a “carnal” reward. But the definition of the Greek word for “carnal” or “fleshly”, σαρκικός (sarkikos G4559; an adjective derived from the noun σάρξ–sarx–meaning “flesh”), is considerably more specific than that: “having the nature of flesh, i.e. under the control of the animal appetites… governed by mere human nature not by the Spirit of God… having its seat in the animal nature or aroused by the animal nature… human: with the included idea of depravity” {Scroll to “Outline of Biblical Usage”. Boldface and underlining mine.}. Just as the adjective pneumatikos (the Greek word typically rendered “spiritual”) refers to being driven by the spirit, sarkikos refers to being driven by the flesh. Hence, rewards sought under motivation of the Holy Spirit, whether physical or non-physical, are not carnal, by definition.

Of course, if Pulliam continues to insist that Christians shouldn’t want authority in Christ’s Kingdom (not even for spiritually-sound reasons; e.g., a desire for a political system that can’t be sinfully manipulated), then God will give Pulliam what he wants once the Kingdom arrives… That’s not a threat (after all, I’m not the one in a position to carry it out; only God is)–it’s a statement of fact.

REASON TWO: The curse on creation must be lifted so it can fulfill God’s original purpose. We all agree that God placed a curse upon the earth (Gen 3:17-19). Subjective arguments are offered (like everything in creation being out of harmony) to prove that the Millennium will bring everything into harmony. But when have we been told that the physical creation was God’s highest prize, and that He has been trying to get it back ever since Genesis 3? Illustrating the subjective nature of this, Hitchcock quotes James Boice: “To my mind, however, the best and ultimate reason why there must be a literal millennium is that only in a literal millennium do we have a meaningful culmination of world history.” That is a telling statement. It is subjective from the standpoint of what Mr. Boice believes “world history” in the Bible to be about. We have already shown that the Dispensationalist has that wrong. World history is the result of sin committed by man and solved by the death of a Savior. This quote is also an admission of subjective opinion, because in his own words the best argument is “to my mind.”

{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 158. All-caps, italics, and boldface in original.}

If Pulliam’s willing to dish out the question, then he must be willing to take the opposite question in return: “When have we been told that heaven was God’s highest prize, and that God has no intention to restore the physical creation?” I challenge Pulliam to give me a single Biblical passage–book, chapter, and verse–that incontrovertibly indicates the redeemed are to spend eternity in heaven. Remember, I demonstrated in the previous post that his proof-texts for the idea that the physical creation will be annihilated when Jesus returns say nothing of the sort. On the other hand, I can answer his question conclusively by simply pointing to a passage he seems to have overlooked:

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until [achri, emphasizing the period between the starting and ending points] now. 23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24 For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance. (Romans 8:18-25 NKJV, boldface and underlining added)

As for the notion that “the physical creation was God’s highest prize”: maybe some (or even most) dispensationalists sincerely believe that, but it’s a straw-man as far as my position is concerned. I believe that God’s highest prize will be realized in the physical creation, but the prize certainly includes much more than just the physical! Indeed, Daniel 12:12 implies that Tribulation survivors will receive something even better 45 days after Jesus returns than they’ll already receive when Jesus returns (cf. verse 11)! But as far as I can tell, the Bible never tells us what that even better thing is; so strictly speaking, the Bible leaves open the possibility that the “highest prize” will be something immaterial after all!

The only real argument of substance is Mr. Hitchcock’s third argument:
REASON THREE: The Biblical covenants of the Old Testament must be fulfilled. These are the covenants to Abraham and David, and the new covenant in Jeremiah 31. [Dispensationalists split off the land covenant to Israel in Deuteronomy to offer an additional covenant. That covenant really offers no additional substance to what was already offered to Abraham’s “descendants” (Gen 12:7). It simply focuses the fulfillment on the nation of Israel.] This has been adequately answered in Chapters 5-13 of this book. We have found abundant evidence that those covenants have been fulfilled in Israel’s past, and in Jesus Christ.

{Ibid. 158. Italics, all-caps, and boldface in original. Content in brackets comes from Pulliam’s footnote indicated at that point in the text.}

I intend to delve more deeply into Pulliam’s attempted exegesis of the Abrahamic Covenant in a future post. But it’ll suffice for now to point out that he has not “adequately answered” the point I’ve repeatedly made about two divinely-inspired men plainly stating that the promise God made to Abraham in Genesis 17:8 hadn’t been fulfilled by the Apostolic Period, and in fact, won’t be fulfilled until all the faithful from throughout history are collected together (Hebrews 11:8-10,13,39-40) at the rapture and the resurrection of the righteous when Jesus returns (1 Corinthians 15:51-52; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2)!

So now, finally, we arrive at the section of Lesson 15 that he titled “Important Millennial Passages” {Ibid. p. 158.}, which contains his attempts to force-fit OT promises to the “Heavenly Destiny” concept (and all the other false conclusions he’s drawn from accepting said concept).

Here’s Pulliam’s explanation for how this passage was supposedly fulfilled:

As this chapter is surveyed in its entirety, we find three sections. Verses 1-5 deal with the character of the Messiah, verses 6-10 deal with the nature of His rule, and verses 11-16 depicts the return of God’s people to the land for the accomplishment of the Messiah’s work.
The section focused upon by the Dispensationalist (and Premillennialists in general) is verses 6-10. Here we find the animal kingdom in perfect harmony, and no one hurting or destroying. When we interpret this section, seeing a peace between specific animals (where wolves actually dwell with lambs) makes as much sense as seeing an actual rod come out of the Messiah’s mouth (v4). The question we should be asking is, “Does this passage comprehend the condition of the future world, or the Messiah’s present kingdom?”
This passage was fulfilled in Paul’s day. In Romans 15:12, he quotes from this passage to show how prophecy had been fulfilled in Jesus drawing the Gentiles into God’s purpose. If this passage is fulfilled now, then the description of verses 6-9 are fulfilled now. The New Testament becomes a commentary on what God intended in these symbols. Isaiah is seeing peace in the coming kingdom, not the “animal kingdom.”

{Ibid. 158-159. Italics and boldface in original.}

First of all, the word “rod” occurs in the Masoretic Text of verse 4, but not in the Septuagint. And I’ve already established here that the Septuagint version of Isaiah 11 preserves the original, divinely-inspired reading. So Pulliam’s point about “rod” being used metaphorically for Jesus’ words (in order to claim everything in verses 6-9 is metaphorical) is moot. How do I know that “the rod of his mouth” (verse 4 1995 NASB) refers to Jesus’ words? Because the Septuagint for this phrase explicitly refers to “the word of his mouth” (verse 4 BLXX, boldface added), instead. So now I’m going to do what Pulliam failed to do for any of the passages he’s trying to explain away in this Lesson: actually quote the passage in full.

1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a blossom shall come up from his root:
2 and the Spirit of God shall rest upon him, the spirit [literally, “and a breath of God will repose upon him, a breath”] of wisdom and understanding, the spirit [literally, “and of understanding, a breath”] of counsel and strength, the spirit [or “and of force/might, a breath”] of knowledge and godliness shall fill him [literally, “and of piety”; the verb for “shall fill him” opens verse 3];
3 the spirit of the fear of God [literally, “A breath of fear of God will fill him up”]. He shall not [or “neither”] judge according to appearance [or “opinion”], nor reprove [or “convict”] according to report [or “dialect”, or “mode of speech”]:
4 but he shall judge the cause of the lowly [literally “judge judgment for the lowly”], and shall reprove [or “convict”] the lowly of the earth: and he shall smite the earth [literally, “he will smite earth”; no definite article] with the word of his mouth [literally, “with word of the mouth of his”], and with the breath of his lips shall he destroy the ungodly one [literally, “and with breath through lips he will do away with irreverent ones”].
5 And he shall have his loins girt with righteousness [literally, “And he will be with righteousness bound about the loins of his”], and his sides clothed with truth [literally, “and with truth of shutting in (genitive singular neuter present middle participle) the sides”].
6 And the wolf shall feed with the [literally, “And wolf will be fed {scroll to “βοσκηθήσεται”} together with (συμ- is prefixed to the verb)”] lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the young calf [literally, “and leopard (or “panther”) will rest together with kid (young goat) and calf (“calf” is accusative, not nominative; hence, it’s an object of “will rest together with”, not a subject of “will be fed”);”] and bull and lion shall feed [literally, “will be fed”; the verb is passive, not active] together [or “at the same time”]; and a little child shall lead them.
7 And the ox [literally, “And ox”; no definite article] and bear shall feed [literally, “will be fed”; passive, not active] together; and their young shall be together [literally, “and together the children of theirs will be”; thought-for-thought, “and their children will coexist”]: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox [literally, “and lion and ox at the same time will eat chaff”].
8 And an infant [literally, “And a non-speaking child,”; i.e., a baby too young to talk] shall put his hand on the holes of asps, and on the nest of young asps [literally, “upon a den of asps, and upon a couch of offsprings (i.e., bedchamber) of asps, will cast the hand”].
9 And they shall not hurt [literally, “And they may absolutely not do harm”; subjunctive-mood verb with a double negative], nor shall they at all be able [literally, “nor at all (double negative) are potentially having power in themselves (present middle subjunctive 3^rd-person plural)] to destroy any one on my holy mountain [literally, “upon the mountain, the holy one of mine”]: for [or “because”] the whole [literally, “the all-together”] world is filled [literally, “was filled”; aorist passive indicative] with the knowledge [or “with the knowing”; genitive singular neuter definite article before an aorist active infinitive verb] of the Lord, as much water covers the seas [literally, “water to cover seas”; aorist active infinitive verb, no definite article].

10 And in that day there shall be a [literally, “And there will be in the day, that very one, the”] root of Jesse, and he that shall arise to rule over the Gentiles [literally, “and the one standing up (nominative singular masculine present middle participle) to rule (present active infinitive) nations”]; in him shall the Gentiles trust [literally, “on the basis of him (epi with a dative-case object) nations will hope”], and his rest shall be glorious [literally, “and the recreation (i.e., ceasing from work) of his will be for preciousness (BLB’s text parsing says this last noun is nominative singular feminine, which wouldn’t make sense in light of all the other nominative-case words in the phrase; however, before accent marks were added to the Greek text, the dative singular feminine form would’ve been spelled identically; therefore, I’ve rendered it as a dative by adding the preposition “for”)”].

11 And it shall be in that day [literally, “it will be in the day, that very one], that the Lord shall again shew his hand [literally, “the Lord will add with the disclosing (genitive singular neuter definite article before an aorist active infinitive verb) of the hand of His”], to be zealous for [literally, “with burning zeal (genitive singular neuter definite article before an aorist active infinitive verb) for”] the remnant that is left [literally, “the remainder being left (present active participle)”] of the people [literally, “the ethnic group”], which shall [literally, “whosoever may”] be left [aorist passive subjunctive 3^rd-person singular; hence my rendering of the nominative singular masculine form of ὅς as “whosoever” (decidedly singular) instead of “which” (which can be plural)] by [literally, “from”] the Assyrians [plural with a definite article; I would identify this with modern-day Syria, but I’m hesitant to do so because the Masoretic Text of this verse mentions Assyria distinctly from “Hamath”, which specifically referred to Syria], and that from Egypt [singular], and from the country of Babylon [literally, “and from Babylonia”, singular; i.e., modern-day Iraq], and from Ethiopia [singular], and from the Elamites [literally, “and from Elamites”–plural, but no definite article; i.e. Persia, modern-day Iran], and from the rising of the sun [literally, “from risings (plural) of a sun”; no definite article–i.e., multiple nations east of Israel], and out of [literally, “out from among”] Arabia [singular].
12 And he shall lift up a standard [literally, “a sign”] for [or “unto”] the nations, and he shall gather [literally, “he will lead together”] the lost ones [literally, “the perished ones”; accusative plural masculine aorist middle participle] of Israel, and he shall gather the dispersed [the Greek word is the root of the English word “diaspora”] of Juda [literally, “and the ones having sown themselves abroad (accusative plural masculine perfect middle participle) of Judah he will lead together] from [literally, “out from among”] the four corners [literally, “wings”] of the earth.
13 And the envy [or “zeal”, or “jealousy”] of Ephraim shall be taken away, and the enemies of Juda shall perish: Ephraim shall not envy Juda, and Juda shall not afflict [or “will not trouble”] Ephraim.
14 And they shall fly [literally, “they will be flown”; future passive indicative 3^rd-person plural] in the ships of the Philistines [literally, “in foreign vessels”]: they shall at the same time spoil the sea [literally, “a sea at the same time they will plunder”], and them that come from the east [literally, “and the ones away from sun risings”], and Idumea: and they shall lay their hands on Moab first [literally, “and upon Moab the hands will be laid first”]; but the children [literally, “sons”] of Ammon shall first obey [or “hearken”; the verb literally means “hear under”, implying subordination] them.
15 And the Lord shall make desolate [literally, “And the Lord will lay waste”] the sea of Egypt; and he shall lay [literally, “he will lay upon/over”] his hand [literally, “the hand of his”] on the river [or “the running stream”] with a strong wind [or “with a forcible breath”], and he shall smite [or “he will knock” this verb could be used for anything from a gentle knock to a fatal strike] the seven channels [literally, “seven ravines”; no definite article], so that men shall pass through it dry-shod [literally, “so too, to travel through (present middle infinitive) it (accusative singular neuter demonstrative pronoun) in sandals”].
16 And there shall be a passage [literally, “there will be a way through”] for my people that is left [literally, “for the left-behind ethnic group of mine”] in Egypt: and it shall be to Israel as the day when he came forth [literally, “when he emanated”] out of the [literally, “out from among the”] land of Egypt.

(Isaiah 11:1-16 BLXX, boldface added; paragraphs divided according to distinct major trains of thought in the MT; Brenton divides them as verses 1-5, 6-14, & 15-16; Great Isaiah Scroll divides them as verses 1-9 & 10-16)

Pulliam might be right that dispensationalists focus on verses 6-10, but the real clues pointing to a straightforward fulfillment (not wooden literal; note verse 5) are in verses 11-16. How does Pulliam think verses 11-16 were fulfilled? He never says in his book, despite a robust interpretation requiring one’s understanding of the details to be specified! Would he suggest Pentecost of A.D. 30? Well, this map of all the nations from which Jews had come to be present in Jerusalem for Pentecost in A.D. 30 (as named in Acts 2:9-11) poses a couple of problems for that idea. First of all, even granting that the term “Ethiopia” was sometimes used more generically in Biblical times for sub-Saharan Africa, not a single one of the nations on that map extended into sub-Saharan Africa–ruling out the idea that Isaiah 11:11 was fulfilled at Pentecost of A.D. 30! Even if we’re more generous and count the Ethiopian eunuch of Acts 8 as fulfilling that, and take “the four wings of the earth” as referring exclusively to the known world, even more evidence against the idea that Isaiah 11 was fulfilled by the time Paul wrote Romans 15:12 is found in that very same chapter of Paul’s epistle!

20 And thus I aspired to preach the gospel, not where Christ was already named, so that I would not build on another man’s foundation; 21 but as it is written,

“THEY WHO HAD NO NEWS OF HIM SHALL SEE,
AND THEY WHO HAVE NOT HEARD SHALL UNDERSTAND.” [Quoting Isaiah 52:15 LXX]

22 For this reason I have often been prevented from coming to you; 23 but now, with no further place for me in these regions, and since I have had for many years a longing to come to you 24 whenever I go to Spain—for I hope to see you in passing, and to be helped on my way there by you, when I have first enjoyed your company for a while— 25 but now, I am going to Jerusalem serving the saints. 26 For Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make a contribution for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem [compare 1 Corinthians 16:1-6]. 27 Yes, they were pleased to do so, and they are indebted to them. For if the Gentiles have shared in their spiritual things, they are indebted to minister to them also in material [literally, “fleshly”] things. 28 Therefore, when I have finished this, and have put my seal on [literally, “and sealing to them”] this fruit of theirs, I will go on by way of you to Spain. 29 I know that when I come to you, I will come in the fullness of the blessing of Christ. (Romans 15:20-29 1995 NASB, boldface added)

This passage also gives us some important timing details on when Romans was written, which Warner spells out when explaining the order in which the LGV arranges the NT books:

Romans was written after Paul had collected the donations from the Macedonian assemblies and from Corinth in Achaia.[Rom. 15:22-28; Acts 20:3-4] After leaving Corinth, Paul backtracked through Macedonia (Berea, Thessalonica) and then spent Passover with the Philippian assembly[Acts 20:5-11] and picked up Luke from there.[Acts 20:6] When writing Romans, Paul was still intending to visit Rome as a free man right after he delivered the donation to the Jerusalem assembly on Pentecost.[Rom. 15:28-29] He was not yet aware that he would be arrested at Jerusalem and detained in Caesarea. However, when he spoke to the Ephesian elders shortly after leaving Philippi, he had become aware of his impending arrest at Jerusalem, saying: “now I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things that will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit testifies in every city, saying that chains and tribulations await me.”[Acts 20:22-23] Therefore, “in every city” where he was warned concerning what he would face at Jerusalem had to be those cities of Macedonia through which Paul backtracked (Berea, Thessalonica, Philippi). Consequently, Romans was written either just before or after Paul left Corinth, before hearing these warnings in the Macedonian assemblies. He desired to continue pushing west from Corinth all the way to Rome, but hand-delivering the donations from the Gentile assemblies to the Jerusalem assembly prevented him from doing so at that time.

{Scroll to p. 9-10 in this PDF. Boldface and italics in original. Underlining mine. Content in brackets are Warner’s footnotes indicated at that point in the text.}

Remember, this was near the tail end of Paul’s third missionary journey–the last one recorded in the book of Acts. However, just as early church tradition tells us that the Apostle Thomas (yes, the same “Doubting Thomas” from John 20) brought the Gospel to India in A.D. 52, early church tradition also tells us that Paul went on a fourth missionary journey after his house arrest in Rome ended, during which he wrote Titus and 1 Timothy; he was arrested and sentenced to death when getting back from this journey, since Nero’s persecution of Christians was in full swing by then (and Paul wrote 2 Timothy while in prison awaiting his execution). And where had that missionary journey taken him? Spain. Indeed, according to Clement of Rome, who knew Paul personally (Philippians 4:3), Paul “reached the farthest bounds of the West” {1 Clement 5:5-6}–which, as far as anyone in the Roman empire was concerned, was Spain. And, get this, Spain isn’t mentioned in Acts 2:9-11, either. Hence, by the time Paul wrote Pulliam’s proof-text, neither Jews nor the Gospel were anywhere to be found in Spain! Since “the four corners of the earth” would have included Spain in 1^st-century reckoning, this rules out a fulfillment of Isaiah 11:12 by the time Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans!

But by the time of Ferdinand and Isabella (the monarchs who funded Christopher Columbus’ first expedition), there were indeed Jews in Spain–after all, Ferdinand and Isabella banished Jews who wouldn’t convert to Catholicism from Spain with the Edict of Expulsion, which went into effect on July 31, 1492. In fact, a friend of mine whose family immigrated to the U.S. from Mexico has told me that this edict was one of the things that led some of his ancestors to wind up in Mexico! Some Sephardic Jews (so called from the Hebrew name for the Iberian Peninsula–on which modern-day Spain and Portugal are located–Sepharad) were allowed to reclaim Spanish citizenship in 1924, and the edict was formally revoked in 1968, so there are Jews there today.

In fact, this same point goes for the mention of “Ethiopia” in Isaiah 11:11, whether the term was meant in its specific or generic sense. Israelites are present among the Beta Israel of Ethiopia and the Lemba of southern Africa. Hence, it’s completely feasible for Isaiah 11:11 to be fulfilled at a time shortly in the future from our own.

Furthermore, not only are “Assyrians” and “Elamites” the only nations in verse 11 whose names are in a plural form (implying the general populace of these nations, rather than just their land holdings), but “Assyrians” is the only one with a definite article attached to it. This suggests that at the time of this verse’s fulfillment, the Assyrian empire (or countries that were formerly part of it) will somehow have been playing the most prominent role in keeping Israelites from returning to the land. This is intriguing, considering that Isaiah refers to the Antichrist as the “Assyrian” (using singular masculine terms for him) only 3 chapters later (Isaiah 14:25 Masoretic Text; the Septuagint uses plural terms at all the relevant points, but the Great Isaiah Scroll {click on “Click to examine the scroll.”, then scroll leftward along the bottom to Column 12 (labelled below the scan as “Col XII – Is.14:1-29”), then hover over the text starting two complete lines above the large gash at the bottom of the column} sides with the Masoretic Text on this one).

Verse 12 is also intriguing, due to the categories of Israelites that would be covered by it: “the perished ones of Israel and the ones having sown themselves abroad of Judah”. The root verb for “perished ones” is the verb for “destroy” or “perish”, yet the participle is aorist-tense–allowing the results to not continue to the time of the prophecy’s fulfillment; hence, “the perished ones of Israel” must be referring to freshly-resurrected Israelites! Also notice that “the ones having sown themselves abroad” is in the middle voice, implying that these people or their ancestors (again, the underlying verb is a compound word meaning “to sow seed across”) played a part in their own migration, rather than being totally passive in it. This is consistent with how Jewish migrations have generally occurred over the last 19.5 centuries, and perhaps even with modern Jewish individuals who’ve chosen to stay where they’ve settled, rather than return to Israel. The statement that these types of Israelites “will [be led] together out from among the four wings of the earth” is perfectly consistent with the rapture on the Day of the Lord!

However, that last point seems at first glance to clash with verses 15-16, which prophesy that “the Lord will lay waste the sea of Egypt; and he will lay over the hand of his on the running stream with a forcible breath/wind, and he will smite/knock seven ravines, so too, to travel through it in sandals. And there will be a way through for the left-behind ethnic group of mine in Egypt: and it shall be to Israel as the day when he emanated out from among the land of Egypt.” However, this drying up of the Red Sea is alluded to just before John describes the New Jerusalem: “and the sea is no more.” (Revelation 21:1c ASV) The comparison to Israel’s Red Sea crossing simply refers to how the seabed became dry ground during that event (Exodus 14:16,21-22,29). This is intended to enable Israelites and Egyptians to go back and forth between each other’s land, facilitating the tight relationship Isaiah prophesied them to have once the Kingdom is underway:

1 The burden of Egypt.

Behold, Jehovah rideth upon a swift cloud [compare Matthew 24:30 & Revelation 14:14-16], and cometh unto Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall tremble at his presence; and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it. 2 And I will stir up the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother, and every one against his neighbor; city against city, and kingdom against kingdom. 3 And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst of it; and I will destroy the counsel thereof: and they shall seek unto the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizards. 4 And I will give over the Egyptians into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, Jehovah of hosts.

5 And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and become dry. 6 And the rivers shall become foul; the streams of Egypt shall be diminished and dried up; the reeds and flags shall wither away. 7 The meadows by the Nile, by the brink of the Nile, and all the sown fields of the Nile, shall become dry, be driven away, and be no more. 8 And the fishers shall lament, and all they that cast angle into the Nile shall mourn, and they that spread nets upon the waters shall languish. 9 Moreover they that work in combed flax, and they that weave white cloth, shall be confounded. 10 And the pillars of Egypt shall be broken in pieces; all they that work for hire shall be grieved in soul.

11 The princes of Zoan are utterly foolish; the counsel of the wisest counsellors of Pharaoh is become brutish: how say ye unto Pharaoh, I am the son of the wise, the son of ancient kings? 12 Where then are thy wise men? and let them tell thee now; and let them know what Jehovah of hosts hath purposed concerning Egypt. 13 The princes of Zoan are become fools, the princes of Memphis are deceived; they have caused Egypt to go astray, that are the corner-stone of her tribes. 14 Jehovah hath mingled a spirit of perverseness in the midst of her; and they have caused Egypt to go astray in every work thereof, as a drunken man staggereth in his vomit. 15 Neither shall there be for Egypt any work, which head or tail, palm-branch or rush, may do. 16 In that day shall the Egyptians be like unto women; and they shall tremble and fear because of the shaking of the hand of Jehovah of hosts, which he shaketh over them. 17 And the land of Judah shall become a terror unto Egypt; every one to whom mention is made thereof shall be afraid, because of the purpose of Jehovah of hosts, which he purposeth against it. 18 In that day there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan, and swear to Jehovah of hosts; one shall be called The city of destruction.

19 In that day shall there be an altar to Jehovah in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to Jehovah. 20 And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto Jehovah of hosts in the land of Egypt; for they shall cry unto Jehovah because of oppressors, and he will send them a saviour, and a defender, and he will deliver them. 21 And Jehovah shall be known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know Jehovah in that day; yea, they shall worship with sacrifice and oblation, and shall vow a vow unto Jehovah, and shall perform it. 22 And Jehovah will smite Egypt, smiting and healing; and they shall return unto Jehovah, and he will be entreated of them, and will heal them.

23 In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian shall come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria; and the Egyptians shall worship with the Assyrians.

24 In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth; 25 for that Jehovah of hosts hath blessed them, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.

(Isaiah 19:1-25 ASV, boldface and underlining added)

Isaiah 11:13 not only mentions that the northern and southern tribes will be reunited and reconciled with each other at the time of the prophecy’s fulfillment, but also that all of Judah’s enemies will have perished at the time! The sheer number of people and groups who still demonize or harass Jews in our day should make it clear that this hasn’t happened yet.

Verse 14 likewise mentions the perks that Israel will receive from other nations and lands at the time of this prophecy’s fulfillment. I say “and lands” because, as far as we know, Idumea, Moab, & Ammon are all extinct nations; their lands still exist (modern-day western Jordan), but they’re inhabited by people who aren’t descended from Edom, Moab, or Ammon. Of particular interest is the claim that Israelites “will be flown in foreign vessels”. The verb for “flown” is indeed the ancient Greek verb for “to fly” (e.g., the same verb occurs in Genesis 1:20 LXX, which contains the first Biblical mention of “flying”); hence, this passage could be referring to Israelites getting to fly around on foreigners’ aircraft–a type of “vessel” that didn’t even exist until the early 20^th century (well, A.D. 1783 if you count manned hot air balloons)!

So, if the context of Isaiah 11:10 rules out a fulfillment in Paul’s time, then Pulliam must have misunderstood how Paul was using this passage in Romans 15:12. I already explained this two posts ago, but the short answer is that Paul was quoting Isaiah 11:10 as an example of a prophecy that said Gentiles were to participate in the Kingdom. Nothing in the context of Romans 15 indicates that Paul was saying the prophecies he was quoting had been fulfilled by his time; this is the point that Pulliam consistently overlooks when making these sorts of claims, as, again, I demonstrated two posts ago.

My discussion of Isaiah 11:1-16 was considerably longer that you might’ve liked–and be warned that the discussions on Zechariah 14 and (especially) Ezekiel 37 will be even longer! So after all that, it’s rather fortunate that Pulliam’s attempt to explain away Isaiah 32 is extremely flimsy!

As with many other Messianic prophecies, if you look for a fulfillment in the physical world around us, you are looking in the wrong place. Instead of a future time when God’s people return from captivity, Isaiah speaks of the captivity those people would experience. When they came back from this captivity, the blessings would flourish in the coming Messiah. A kingdom that could once be carried off into captivity will no longer entertain that danger, not because it would be in an earthly Millennium of peace, but because it would be a spiritual kingdom of peace. This is the present spiritual kingdom of Christ.

{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 159. Boldface and italics in original.}

I’ve already dealt with this passage in my upcoming analysis of the “Day of the Lord” passages, so I’ll just copy-and-paste some relevant points from that work-in-progress here:

The final mention of the Day of the Lord in Isaiah occurs most of the way through a major train of thought spanning almost 4 chapters of the book–the solitary letter פ occurs at the end of Isaiah 32:8 {in the Masoretic Text}, and doesn’t occur again until the end of Isaiah 35:10 (the last verse of Isaiah 35)! The minor trains of thought in between (demarcated by the solitary letter ס at the end of the closing verse of each {in the Masoretic Text}) are 32:9-20, 33:1, 2-6, 7-12, 33:13-34:17 (the one mentioning the Day of the Lord), 35:1-2, & 3-10. Don’t worry, I won’t drag you through the slog of a fresh translation of all of these minor trains of thought! I’ll just do so for the one mentioning the Day of the Lord and highlight some details of the others.

Isaiah 32:9-20 is directed to the complacent people of Judah, especially women of Jerusalem (verse 9), telling them that their complacency will get them in trouble for a little more than a year from when Isaiah spoke this (the Hebrew text of verse 10a literally says “Days over a year you will be perturbed”). This was fulfilled in a poor harvest — Isaiah 32:10-12 (note especially that the penultimate verb in verse 10 is the only simple perfect verb in these verses: “for the grape crop has been exhausted”–my right-to-left translation”); contrast with the sign given to Hezekiah in 2 Kings 19:29-31 that they will nonetheless have food to eat in Hezekiah’s 14^th & 15^th year (which were a Sabbatical year and a Jubilee year, respectively), the declaration that the remnant of “Judah will again take root downard and bear fruit upward” (verse 30c 1995 NASB), and reassurance that “The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this” (NKJV), a phrase that only occurs elsewhere in the parallel passage of Isaiah 37:30-32 and in Isaiah 9:7c (a fascinating discussion of these passages is available here) — leading up to Sennacherib’s invasion of the fortified cities of Judah (2 Kings 18:13, Isaiah 36:1), which occurred in Hezekiah’s 14^th year, only 8 years (compare 2 Kings 17:6, 18:1, 9-10) after Ephraim was exiled to Assyria by Shalmaneser (two kings of Assyria before Sennacherib, with Sennacherib’s father Sargon II ruling in between). Verse 14 mentions that “Hill and watch-tower have become caves forever” (1995 NASB), but the word for “Hill” is the proper name “Ophel”, the word for “watch-tower” (H975) occurs only here in the Bible (although Nehemiah 3:26-27 seems to refer to this tower at Ophel), and the term “forever” was translated from the phrase עַד־עוֹלָם (“till an age”). That last point coheres with the opening of verse 15: “Till is poured out upon us a Breath from a height” (my right-to-left translation). Could this be referring to what we saw back in Joel 2:28? “And so it will be after this [i.e., after God “restore[s] the years” that the locust[s] ate, cf. verses 25-27] That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh”. Well, there are no waw-consecutives in this entire passage until verse 15b (“And then a wilderness becomes a planted garden”), and while the only verb in verse 13 is imperfect-tense, all the verbs of verse 14 are perfect tense, suggesting that while all the events of verse 14 occur before the events of verse 13, the timing of verse 14 relative to verses 10-12 is ambiguous. So while verses 10-12 are clearly tied to Sennacherib’s invasion, the timing of the events of verses 13-14 need not be–that is, they could occur sometime between Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah and the Day of the Lord. On the other hand, note all the waw-consecutive perfect verbs in verses 15-19, the last of which is “And so it will hail”. But since this statement is immediately preceded by a description of God’s people living in peace and safety, the “forest” must refer to one that isn’t being cultivated (i.e., a wilderness; this is reinforced by the Hebrew word coming “from an unused root probably meaning to thicken with verdure” {scroll to “Strong’s Definitions”}), and the “city” referred to in the second half of verse 19 can’t be Jerusalem, but must be a city that deserves to be destroyed. This shouldn’t surprise us, since passages like Joshua 10:11 and Revelation 16:21 (although the context of the latter places the events at the same time as the earthquake associated with the Day of the Lord) show that God sometimes uses hail (or, in the case of Revelation 16:21, more likely shrapnel from comets–it’s still falling ice!) to judge the wicked. Verse 20 concludes the train of thought by returning to those who will get to enjoy the blessings of verses 15-18.

I find it telling that Bob Pulliam’s attempt at explaining how this passage was fulfilled by the first century (he wrongly insists that all OT prophecy was fulfilled by A.D. 70, so only NT prophecies have any possibility of being fulfilled in the future; hence, he’s obligated to explain how every blatantly-unfulfilled OT prophecy actually was fulfilled–although he doesn’t seem willing to try his hand at Isaiah 65-66 or Ezekiel 40-48!) merely asserts an interpretation without even attempting to exegete it from the text:

{Quotation of the above snippet from Pulliam’s book omitted for brevity}

Set aside the fact that Pulliam is using an incorrect, dualistic definition for the word “spiritual” here (i.e., that the “physical” and the “spiritual” are mutually-exclusive). In addition to the points above about verses 1-8 closing out a separate train of thought from the one verses 9-20 start; the details of verses 10-12 indeed being fulfilled literally in the 13^th & 14^th years of Hezekiah; and the timing details brought out by comparing the simple imperfects, simple perfects, and waw-consecutive perfects; it’ll suffice to respond to this with a quip I’ll never forget Jeff Hamilton of the La Vista Church of Christ teaching me in an email: “an assertion is not a fact.”

{Italics, boldface, capitalization, hyperlinks, and content in brackets in original. Content in curly brackets added.}

In case it’s not obvious from the snippets of my analysis I’ve quoted here, I conclude that Isaiah 32:15-20 is describing how things will be once Jesus has returned. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: if Pulliam wants to claim this whole passage is an allegory, then he’s obligated to explain the allegorical significance of every last detail, just as Warner did with the details in the story of the Rich Man & Lazarus. Unless and until he does so, he hasn’t exegeted this passage at all, but has merely asserted a conclusion without giving any arguments to support it.

What does Pulliam have to say about this passage?

Again, we have a poetic description of abundant blessings. Are the first two verses about a barren land blossoming, or about a barren people blossoming? These verses introduce the profusion of blessing described in verses 3-6. It is about a nation (Israel) that has become a desert and a wilderness. These people will be visited by their God, bringing about a spiritual awakening (vv5-6a). The chapter returns to metaphor in the last half of verse six, with the chapter ending in the clear vision of a ransomed people who find “gladness and joy.” The magnificent poetry of this chapter is destroyed in the Dispensationalist’s effort to turn these poetic descriptions into God’s concern for the environment.

{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 159. Italics added.}

At least Pulliam tried to offer some allegorical significance for this passage. He claimed that “a barren land blossoming” is a metaphor for “a barren people blossoming”. However, as long as I’ve recently finished translating this chapter, let’s consider the whole thing, starting off with the context that verses 1-2 are linked to in our oldest surviving copy of the book of Isaiah (the paragraph divisions below are as seen in the Great Isaiah Scroll {click on “Click to examine the scroll.”, then scroll leftward along the bottom to Column 28 (labelled below the scan as “Col XXVIII – Is.34:1-36:2”), then hover over the text about halfway down the scan}):

16 You [plural] should enquire [imperative] from the words upon a scroll of YHWH, and cry out [2^nd-person plural imperative]. Each of these [the animals listed in Isaiah 34:11-15 as inhabiting the greater land of Edom during the Millennium] will not have been lacking [perfect], female [‘ishshah] or her companion; none will have sought in vain [perfect], because my [the Son’s] mouth, it has commanded [perfect], and His [the Father’s] breath, it will have gathered together [perfect tense with a Paragogic Nun, emphasizing the action’s intensity] [the Septuagint ends this verse with: “because the Lord gave command to them, and the breath of His brought them together”, both verbs being aorist indicative; notice that the Hebrew phrasing suggests the Son’s mouth and the Father’s breath (people can hear the Son’s voice directly, but not the Father’s; hence, the first-person must be referring to the Son–who was speaking this prophecy to Isaiah as the Father’s representative–and the third-person to the Father), while the Greek phrasing is compatible with either of them (but more likely the Father, in light of His breath being able to gather things together) being meant in both places]. 17 And He [waw-disjunctive] has cast [i.e., appointed; perfect] a lot for them, and His hand has assigned [perfect] her [feminine; “the land of Edom” from Isaiah 34:6] to them with the cord [same word from verse 11]; till [or “during”] an age [ʿowlam] they will inherit [imperfect] her, for generation and generation they will abide [imperfect] in her. 1 Wilderness and desert will be bright [i.e., cheerful; imperfect], and Arabah [a desert valley that included at least some of greater Edom] will rejoice [waw-conjunctive imperfect] and she will sprout [or “blossom”; waw-conjunctive imperfect 3^rd-person feminine singular] like a crocus [or “a meadow saffron”]. 2 Blossoming it will blossom [absolute infinitive followed by an imperfect of the same verb], and will rejoice [same word from verse 1, including the vowel points]; yea, with rejoicing [noun form of the verb for “rejoice”] and ringing crying [infinitive construct], glory of the Lebanon [a mountain range on Israel’s northern border, renowned for its forests] will have been given [perfect] to it, splendor of the Carmel [a promontory on the Mediterranean with fertile slopes] and the Sharon [a fertile maritime plain on the Mediterranean]. They [3^rd-person masculine plural pronoun, included for emphasis {scroll to “Strong’s Definitions”}; referring to both the animals of Isaiah 34:11-15 and the additional wildlife and foliage to inhabit greater Edom after the Millennium as indicated in Isaiah 35:1-2] will see [imperfect] glory of YHWH, splendor of our God.

3 Slack hands you must make strong [imperative 2^nd-person plural], and tottering [active participle] knees you must make firm [imperative 2^nd-person plural]. 4 You must say [imperative 2^nd-person plural] to ones with a hastening [plural active participle] heart [singular]: “You must be strong [imperative 2^nd-person plural]; fear [jussive 2^nd-person plural] not. Behold! Your God with vengeance will come [imperfect]; recompense of God Himself will come [imperfect], and He will deliver [waw-conjunctive imperfect] you [2^nd-person masculine plural]. 5 At that time, eyes of blind ones will be opened [imperfect], and ears of deaf ones will be let loose [imperfect; these are two different verbs, but both have “open” in their range of meanings]. 6 At that time a lame one will spring [imperfect] like the deer, and a tongue of a mute one will give a ringing cry [waw-conjunctive imperfect]. For in the wilderness will have been cleft [plural perfect] waters, and wadis {same word from Joel 3:18 & Isaiah 34:9} in the Arabah. 7 And then [waw-consecutive perfect, picking up from “will give a ringing cry”] the mirage-inducing ground will become [literally, “will be to”] a marsh, and a thirsty place will be to fountains of waters; in an abode of dragons, her resting place, a grass will give way to a reed and a bulrush. 8 And then there will be [waw-consecutive perfect] there a way embanked {scroll to “Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon”}, and a road [or “way”]. And the Road [or “Way”] of the Holiness [or “the Holy One”], it will be called [imperfect]. An unclean one [the same adjective rendered “unclean” in the Levitical Laws] will never pass over it [imperfect]; and it [included for emphasis] will be for him walking [active participle] that way [same word for “road” earlier in the verse], and foolish ones never will go astray [imperfect; the Hebrew verb was used for the concepts of “wandering”, “erring”, “misleading”, or even “staggering drunkenly”] on it. 9 Never will be [imperfect] there a lion, and violence [singular construct] of beasts [plural absolute] will climb it [imperfect] not at all. Never will it be found [imperfect] there, and so will walk [waw-consecutive perfect] there ones having been redeemed [plural passive participle]. 10 And ransomed [plural passive participle; construct form] of YHWH will turn back with vigor [imperfect; the usual verb for “turn back” with a Paragogic Nun, indicating emphasis] and so will come [waw-consecutive perfect] to Zion, with a shrill sound and joy of an age [or “and an age-enduring joy”; the Hebrew word is ʿowlam] upon their heads. Cheerfulness and joy will reach them [imperfect], and so sorrow and sighing will flee [waw-consecutive perfect].

(Isaiah 34:16-35:10 my right-to-left translation of the Masoretic Text, hyperlinks in original, boldface adjusted for the present discussion, underlining added)

So, to answer Pulliam’s question, Isaiah 35:1-2 is about the land of Edom blossoming! Did you notice that Pulliam claimed that the chapter “returns to metaphor” partway through verse 6? It’s probably because Jesus himself quoted the events of verses 5-6a as literally occurring during his ministry, but verses 6b-10 obviously weren’t fulfilled at that time; hence, Pulliam feels he has no choice but to claim that the way Jesus fulfilled this prophecy switched from literal to metaphorical partway through the train of thought! In contrast, my understanding of Jesus’ application of verses 5-6 to himself (Luke 7:20-23) requires no such hermeneutical gymnastics: Jesus literally performed the actions described in verses 5-6a to provide a taste of what things would be like in his Kingdom; once the Kingdom arrives, verses 5-10 will all be fulfilled literally! (And notice that the term “At that time” at the beginning of verses 5 & 6 points back to the second half of verse 4, which is clearly alluding to the judgment by fire at Jesus’ return.) This is reinforced by how the author of Hebrews quoted verse 3 when encouraging his Jewish Christian readers to endure God’s chastening in the present. Here’s my discussion on that passage in my “Day of the Lord” analysis:

and all chastening for the present, indeed, doth not seem to be of joy, but of sorrow, yet afterward the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those exercised through it — it doth yield. Wherefore, the hanging-down hands and the loosened knees set ye up; and straight paths make for your feet, that that which is lame may not be turned aside, but rather be healed; peace pursue with all, and the separation, apart from which no one shall see the Lord, looking diligently over lest any one be failing of the grace of God, lest any root of bitterness springing up may give trouble, and through this many may be defiled; lest any one be a fornicator, or a profane person, as Esau, who in exchange for one morsel of food did sell his birthright, for ye know that also afterwards, wishing to inherit the blessing, he was disapproved of, for a place of reformation he found not, though with tears having sought it [see Genesis 27:34,38]. (Hebrews 12:11-17 YLT, boldface added)

The implication is that the context Isaiah 35:3 was taken from is talking about “the blessing” (which Isaac gave to Jacob, which blatantly included the Abrahamic Land promise—after all, Isaac himself defined “the blessing of Abraham” this way in Genesis 28:4, when encouraging Jacob to flee Esau’s wrath by going to Laban) in which “that which is lame [or “maimed”, or “deprived of a foot”] may not be turned aside, but rather be healed”—implying the author of Hebrews expected a literal fulfillment of Isaiah 35:6a at a time still future from when he was writing! Also note well that the author of Hebrews compares the faithful who fall away to Esau, who initially had the birthright (being the firstborn among Isaac’s twins), but sold it for food (Genesis 25:29-34; the Hebrew verb does in fact mean “to sell”). This warning will be especially pertinent for believers living in the Antichrist’s future dominion who don’t flee at the start of the Tribulation, and thus may be tempted to forfeit their salvation by getting the mark of the beast to buy food (Revelation 13:16-17; 14:9-12; 20:4).

As an aside, the mention of a “root of bitterness springing up… through [which] many may be defiled” harks back to a warning against apostasy in the suzerainty treaty of Deuteronomy:

And I do not appoint to you alone this covenant and this oath; but to those also who are here with you to-day before the Lord your God, and to those who are not here with you to-day. For ye know how we dwelt in the land of Egypt, how we came through the midst of the nations through whom ye came. And ye beheld their abominations, and their idols, wood and stone, silver and gold, which are among them. Lest there be among you man, or woman, or family, or tribe, whose heart has turned aside from the Lord your God, having gone to serve the gods of these nations; lest there be in you a root springing up with gall and bitterness. And it shall be if one shall hear the words of this curse, and shall flatter himself in his heart, saying, Let good happen to me, for I will walk in the error of my heart, lest the sinner destroy the guiltless with him: God shall by no means be willing to pardon him, but then the wrath of the Lord and his jealousy shall flame out against that man; and all the curses of this covenant shall attach themselves to him, which are written in this book, and the Lord shall blot out his name from under heaven. And the Lord shall separate that man for evil of all the children of Israel, according to all the curses of the covenant that are written in the book of this law.

(Deuteronomy 29:14-21 BLXX, boldface added)

Compare this with the promise of the very next chapter that, if the nation of Israel (not individual Israelites) returns to YHWH with all its heart and soul and faithfully obeys the Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 30:10), “Jehovah thy God will put all these curses upon thine enemies, and on them that hate thee, that persecuted thee.” (verse 7 ASV) Again, this lines up with not only wicked Israelites, but also every nation that ever persecuted Israel being judged on the Day of the Lord!

{Indentation, boldface, italics, hyperlinks, and content in brackets in original. Underlining added.}

Moreover, the Hebrew text of this prophecy keeps switching between imperfects, perfects, and waw-consecutive perfects. These verb tenses give us an order in which the events are prophesied to occur; and the order these verb tenses yield seems counterintuitive for a mere allegory. For example, the portions Jesus quoted in Luke 7:20-23 (Isaiah 35:5-6a) use simple imperfect verbs, but then the verb in the second half of verse 6 (the part of the verse mentioning events that didn’t literally happen during Jesus’ ministry) is simple perfect—hence, the waters being cleft in the wilderness is here prophesied to happen before the blind receive sight, the deaf hear, etc. That doesn’t line up with Jesus’ ministry at all, reinforcing the notion that Jesus was using the healings of his then-present ministry to point forward to the fulfillment of this passage! Likewise, verse 7 (describing deserts becoming marshes and well-watered environments) opens with a waw-consecutive perfect verb, meaning it picks up sequentially from or is a consequence of the last imperfect or waw-consecutive perfect verb prior; in this case, that would be the “tongue of a mute one [giving] a ringing cry”, closing out the first half of verse 6. Hence, the healings Jesus pointed to as a characteristic of the Kingdom are to begin before deserts become well-watered, which in turn is to start no later than the Highway of the Holy One is established (per the waw-consecutive perfect verb at the start of verse 8)! This lines up well with people having access to the Tree of Life as soon as the judgment on the Day of the Lord has ended, but with the blessings of the Kingdom taking some time afterward to manifest in the environment and in human society. This is reinforced by Ezekiel 47:8, which mentions the waters of the River of Life “issuing forth [active participle] toward the territory, the eastern, and then they descend [waw-consecutive perfect] over the Arabah [compare Isaiah 35:7] and then they enter [waw-consecutive perfect] the sea, toward the sea being made to go forth [Hophal passive participle], and then the waters are healed [waw-consecutive perfect]”–my right-to-left translation).

In short, the Hebrew text of Isaiah 32:9-35:10 (remember, that entire stretch of Scripture is one major train of thought!) presents a back-and-forth on the timing of the events that would be totally unnecessary for a mere allegory; these must have been included because the events are to literally occur in that order! (Again, I go into much more detail in my upcoming analysis of the “Day of the Lord” passages.)

For that matter, what do each of the animals in Isaiah 34:11-15 represent? What do the specific plants mentioned in 35:1-2 represent? Why do the former get to inhabit Edom during the Millennium while the latter don’t show up until the Millennium is over? Shall I go on? A robust allegorical understanding must offer an explanation for these details!

Can Pulliam (or any other amillennialist for that matter) come up with an allegorical explanation for each of these verses (let alone every verse from Isaiah 32:9-35:10!), including the specifics of each and the timing of each verb relative to the others? Unless and until they try (much less succeed), they are being intellectually lazy at best and deceptively cherry-picking Scripture at worst.

This time, Pulliam actually tries to interpret the passage in light of its context, but still neglects to explain why chapter 60 is to be understood metaphorically if chapters 57-59 make sense when interpreted in a straightforward manner (i.e., the figures of speech in these 3 chapters are obvious when they occur, so why treat chapter 60 any differently?):

God has just brought accusations against Israel for her sins in chapters 57-59. The last verse of chapter 59 is spoken to the coming Servant (the Messiah), and chapter 60 presents the great blessings God will pour out upon His people. A great deal of metaphor is presented in the poetry of this chapter. Through these powerful pictures, Israel could see a brighter day on the horizon. These are fulfilled.

{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 159-160.}

Unfortunately, the major train of thought extends much further in either direction than Pulliam let on. And I mean much further. The solitary Hebrew letter פ last occurred at the end of Isaiah 50:11, and doesn’t occur again until the end of Isaiah 65:12! So, the full context of Isaiah 60 is Isaiah 51:1-65:12! In fact, Revelation 21-22 draws heavily on several sections of this major train of thought, and then some (Isaiah 54, 60, 62, & 65-66, and Ezekiel 43, 47, & 48; that article presents the text of the OT passages side-by-side with the verses in Revelation that reference particular sections of them!), making it crystal-clear that all these OT chapters are talking about the New Jerusalem–and by virtue of the contexts of these chapters unambiguously referring to the Jerusalem that’s been on earth (albeit destroyed twice since the chapters in Isaiah were written and once since the ones in Ezekiel were written) since Biblical times, it’s crystal-clear that the New Jerusalem is Restored Jerusalem!

Sure, Pulliam could object that the solitary letter ס occurs plenty of times in between to mark off minor trains of thought, but that argument would also apply to the portion he focused on: in the vicinity of Isaiah 57-60, this letter occurs at the end of 56:9, 57:14, 57:21, 58:14, 59:21, 60:22, & 61:9. That first minor train of thought just after the portion Pulliam focuses on is especially significant, since we just saw above that Jesus applied Isaiah 61:1-3 to his own ministry in Luke 7:21-22. Indeed, Jesus quotes Isaiah 61:1-2a in Luke 4:18-19, then makes it clear that he was fulfilling those verses just by him teaching in the synagogue at Nazareth!

And he came to Nazareth, where he hath been brought up, and he went in, according to his custom, on the sabbath-day, to the synagogue, and stood up to read; and there was given over to him a roll of Isaiah the prophet, and having unfolded the roll, he found the place where it hath been written: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, Because He did anoint me; To proclaim good news to the poor, Sent me to heal the broken of heart, To proclaim to captives deliverance, And to blind receiving of sight, To send away the bruised with deliverance, To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.’ And having folded the roll, having given it back to the officer, he sat down, and the eyes of all in the synagogue were gazing on him. And he began to say unto them — ‘To-day hath this writing been fulfilled in your ears;’ (Luke 4:16-21 YLT, boldface added)

While amillennialists seem to think this is a slam-dunk that Isaiah 61 (and by implication, its greater context, including Isaiah 60) was entirely fulfilled in the first century, they overlook how Isaiah 61:4 (which occurs after the portion Jesus quoted, but that his Jewish listeners would’ve recalled in their heads while he was teaching from it–as they did when rabbis in general were teaching) begins: “And then they will build [waw-consecutive perfect] the age-enduring desolations…” (my right-to-left translation, boldface added). The events of verses 4-9 were to take place after the events Jesus said were fulfilled in the synagogue that day, cohering perfectly with the miracles of Jesus’ ministry giving people tastes of a Kingdom that was yet to fully manifest! This reinforces a point I’ve been making over and over again: amillennialists can only claim that OT prophecies about the kingdom are already fulfilled by ignoring their original contexts!

Indeed, it’s as if God saw fit to show them up in this regard after all these centuries by reinforcing that Isaiah 61:1-9 is contextually connected with Isaiah 60 through the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls: the Great Isaiah Scroll has Isaiah 60:1-61:9 all in a single paragraph {click on “Click to examine the scroll.”, then scroll leftward along the bottom to Column 50 (labelled below the scan as “Col L – Is.61:4-63:4”), then hover over the text between the paragraph breaks near the top of columns 49 & 50}!

Finally, while Pulliam claims that the last verse of Isaiah 59 is spoken to the Messiah, it’s actually spoken to Israelites who survive the Day of the Lord, as I’ve already demonstrated from Paul’s use of this passage in Romans 11:26-27.

This time, Pulliam actually manages to bring up some substantial points:

The bulk of this chapter deals with Israel’s return after 70 years of captivity (cf. Jer 25:11f). The portion of this chapter most relied upon is at the end (vv19-26), where God promises not to break His covenant with Israel. This concept is discussed along with the New Covenant on pages 73-75, and the unchangeable nature of the covenant on pages 130-131. Without an understanding of the duration of the Abrahamic covenant and its fulfillment, one cannot accurately interpret this prophecy. The New Covenant is fulfilled in the New Testament

{Ibid. 160. Italics in original.}

“Without an understanding of the duration of the Abrahamic covenant and its fulfillment, one cannot accurately interpret this prophecy”? Okay, I’ll bite. We know the Abrahamic covenant is not yet fulfilled, because God told Abraham that “I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting [Hebrew ʿowlam] possession” (Genesis 17:8 ASV, boldface added); yet two divinely-inspired men said, after the New Covenant had already been ushered in with Christ’s atonement (see Romans 7:1-4, which likens the transition from the Mosaic Covenant to the New Covenant to a woman being released from her marriage contract with her dead husband and entering into another marriage contract with a new husband), that Abraham never received the land that was promised to him (Acts 7:5, Hebrews 11:8-10,13-16), not even enough of it to set his foot on (Acts 7:5)! While Pulliam rightly observes that the meaning of the Hebrew word ʿowlam depends on its context {Ibid. 52-56.}, these NT statements make it clear that the instance in Genesis 17:8 is meant in the sense of “age-enduring”: that is, the promise is to endure past the age in which Abraham lived, through the ages that have occurred since, and into the age when Abraham will be resurrected to receive it, and will then get to enjoy it in his glorified body for all ages throughout the rest of eternity.

I’ll have more to say about pages 73-75 in a future post, and I already addressed his remarks on pages 130-131 in sections of two other posts. However, Pulliam has somewhat misrepresented (or more likely, simply misunderstood) how much of the passage is about what (and it doesn’t help that an especially critical aspect of it is getting lost in translation, as you’re about to see!). In the Masoretic Text, the solitary Hebrew letter פ occurs at the end of Jeremiah 32, and then doesn’t occur again until the end of Jeremiah 34:7, implying that Jeremiah 33:1-34:7 is a complete major train of thought, and the solitary letter ס occurs at the end of Jeremiah 33:3,9,11,13,16,18,22,24,26, & 34:5. So now I’ll present the whole passage from the 1995 NASB, while breaking up the paragraphs according to the minor trains of thought:

1 Then the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the second time, while he was still confined in the court of the guard, saying, 2 “Thus says the LORD who made the earth [literally, “it”], the LORD who formed it to establish it, the LORD is His name, 3 ‘Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know.’

4 For thus says the LORD God of Israel concerning the houses of this city, and concerning the houses of the kings of Judah which are broken down to make a defense against the siege ramps and against the sword, 5 ‘While they are coming to fight with the Chaldeans and to fill them with the corpses of men whom I have slain in My anger and in My wrath, and I have hidden My face from this city because of all their wickedness: 6 Behold, I will bring to it health and healing, and I will heal them; and I will reveal to them an abundance of peace and truth. 7 I will restore the fortunes [literally, “captivity”] of Judah and the fortunes [literally, “captivity”] of Israel and will rebuild them as they were at first. 8 I will cleanse them from all their iniquity by which they have sinned against Me, and I will pardon all their iniquities by which they have sinned against Me and by which they have transgressed against Me. 9 It will be to Me a name of joy, praise and glory before all the nations of the earth which will hear of all the good that I do for them, and they will fear and tremble because of all the good and all the peace that I make for it.’

10 “Thus says the LORD, ‘Yet again there will be heard in this place, of which you say, “It is a waste, without man and without beast,” that is, in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem that are desolate, without man and without inhabitant and without beast, 11 the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the voice of those who say,
“Give thanks to the LORD of hosts,
For the LORD is good,
For His lovingkindness is everlasting”;
and of those who bring a thank offering into the house of the LORD. For I will restore the fortunes [literally, “captivity”] of the land as they were at first,’ says the LORD.

12 “Thus says the LORD of hosts, ‘There will again be in this place which is waste, without man or beast, and in all its cities, a habitation of shepherds who rest their flocks. 13 In the cities of the hill country, in the cities of the lowland, in the cities of the Negev, in the land of Benjamin, in the environs of Jerusalem and in the cities of Judah, the flocks will again pass under the hands of the one who numbers them,’ says the LORD.

14 ‘Behold, days are coming,’ declares the LORD, ‘when I will fulfill the good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 15 In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth. 16 In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will dwell in safety; and this is the name by which she will be called: the LORD is our righteousness.’

17 For thus says the LORD, ‘David shall never lack [literally, “Never will be cut off for David”] a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel; 18 and the Levitical priests shall never lack [literally, “And never will be cut off for priests, those of Levi”] a man before Me to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to prepare sacrifices continually [literally, “all the days”].’”

19 The word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, saying, 20 “Thus says the LORD, ‘If you can break My covenant for the day and My covenant for the night, so that day and night will not be at their appointed time, 21 then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant so that he will not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levitical priests, My ministers. 22 As the host of heaven cannot be counted and the sand of the sea cannot be measured, so I will multiply the descendants [literally, “seed” singular] of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.’”

23 And the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, saying, 24 “Have you not observed what this people have spoken, saying, ‘The two families which the LORD chose, He has rejected them’? Thus they despise My people, no longer are they as a nation in their sight [literally, “to their faces”; i.e., “before them”].

25 Thus says the LORD, ‘If My covenant for day and night stand not, and the fixed patterns [literally, “and statutes”, KJV “the ordinances”] of heaven and earth I have not established, 26 then I would reject [or “refuse”] the descendants [literally, “a seed” singular] of Jacob and David My servant, not [literally, “from”] taking from his descendants [literally, “seed” singular] rulers [plural active participle] over [better, “in addition to”] the descendants [literally, “a seed” singular] of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But [or “Because”] I will restore their fortunes [literally, “their captivity”] and [literally, “and so”; waw-consecutive perfect] will have mercy on them.’”

1 The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD, when Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and all his army, with all the kingdoms of the earth that were under his dominion and all the peoples, were fighting against Jerusalem and against all its cities, saying, 2 “Thus says the LORD God of Israel, ‘Go and speak to Zedekiah king of Judah and say to him: “Thus says the LORD, ‘Behold, I am giving this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he will burn it with fire. 3 You will not escape from his hand, for you will surely be captured and delivered into his hand; and you will see the king of Babylon eye to eye, and he will speak with you face to face [literally, “mouth to mouth”], and you will go to Babylon.’”’ 4 Yet hear the word of the LORD, O Zedekiah king of Judah! Thus says the LORD concerning you, ‘You will not die by the sword. 5 You will die in peace; and as spices were burned for your fathers, the former kings who were before you, so they will burn spices for you; and they will lament for you, “Alas, lord!”’ For I have spoken the word,” declares the LORD.

6 Then Jeremiah the prophet spoke all these words to Zedekiah king of Judah in Jerusalem 7 when the army of the king of Babylon was fighting against Jerusalem and against all the remaining cities of Judah, that is, Lachish and Azekah, for they alone remained as fortified cities among the cities of Judah.

(Boldface and hyperlinks mine.)

I’ll grant that Jeremiah 34:1-7 is referring to the immediate historical situation, the upcoming first destruction of Jerusalem, and Zedekiah’s ensuing fate–not the distant future. But even if we take 33:6-13 as being fulfilled in the Second Temple Period, it wasn’t fulfilled at the end of the Babylonian Exile. People from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, & Levi who’d been living in Babylon were allowed to return to Jerusalem in the 1^st year of Cyrus (Ezra 1:1-4), but Israelites from the other ten tribes throughout the rest of the Persian empire weren’t given permission to return to Judea until the 7^th year of Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:8; the full decree is given in verses 11-26–note especially verses 11 & 13). Even by my chronology (laid out in Appendix D of my upcoming book), which identifies this “Artaxerxes” as Darius the Great (per Ezra 6:14-15), these decrees would’ve been given about 23 years apart–meaning that Ephraim wasn’t restored to the land for the first 23 years following the Babylonian exile.

But despite Pulliam’s remark that dispensationalists mostly rely on verses 19-26, I already see some goodies in verses 14-18. We all (presuming you’re a Christian, dear reader) agree that the “Branch of David” mentioned in verse 15 is Jesus, but the claim that “He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth” has yet to be fulfilled, since Jesus has yet to be in a position (namely, King of Kings) to execute both justice and righteousness; the fact that Christians are still being martyred (which is inherently unjust) all over the world should be Exhibit A. Likewise, the claim that “Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will dwell in safety” is also yet to be fulfilled; just look at all the political tension in the Middle East, and the fact that Judah has yet to return to YHWH on the national level (a prerequisite for the nation to “be saved”, per Deuteronomy 30)! We all know that the promise in verse 17 has been all but assured through Jesus’ resurrection, but note which throne is referred to here: “the throne of the house of Israel”! Again, “the house of Israel” refers to the nation of Israel, implying that Jesus is to rule politically over the nation of Israel! As for verse 18’s implication that Levites will offer sacrifices for the rest of eternity once Jesus returns, despite the implication of certain passages that there will come a time when no sins will be occurring ever again (e.g., Jeremiah 31:40, which implies that the Lake of Fire, with all the dead bodies of the wicked, will one day become “holy unto the LORD; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever.”–KJV; this implies that people will no longer need it as a deterrent to sinning, because nobody left will be sinning anymore): “burnt offerings” were typically used to show appreciation and gratitude to God (e.g., the first use of the Hebrew word is in Genesis 8:20, with reference to the sacrifice Noah offered once the Flood was over), the word for “grain offerings” referred to a sacrificial offering that was “usually bloodless and voluntary” {scroll to “Strong’s Definitions”}, while the word for “sacrifice” properly refers to “a slaying”. Only the first and third of these required the killing of animals, but the purpose of the first has nothing to do with any sins of the one offering it, and the purpose of the third is left unstated (and thus, will be determined on a case-by-case basis). Hence, it’s perfectly feasible for these three types of offerings to be offered in a world where nobody is sinning anymore–which seems to answer the final question I posed regarding animal death in a Curse-free world: some animals will still be sacrificed after the Great White Throne Judgment has ended and the Lake of Fire has been phased out, so such offerings will play a role in curbing the potential for those animals’ populations to reach detrimental levels (as for animals that are never sacrificed, the “divine constraints on the reproductive process” possibility would be more feasible).

As for verses 19-26, the fact that every instance of “descendants” is singular has some profound implications that are easy to overlook in the many English translations that render them in the plural. Since “seed” is singular in the phrases “seed of David”, “a seed of Jacob and David My servant”, “his seed”, and “a seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob”, they are all referring to Jesus specifically (Galatians 3:16), not descendants of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or David in general. The meaning of verse 22 in light of this is straightforward enough: “As the host of heaven cannot be counted and the sand of the sea cannot be measured, so I will multiply the [seed] of David My servant [i.e., “I will multiply Jesus”] and the Levites who minister to Me.’” Since the Hebrew verb for “multiply” properly means “to increase (in whatever respect)” {scroll to “Strong’s Definitions”}, and the instance in Jeremiah 33:22 is in the Hiphil form, its range of meanings includes “to make much, make many, have many… to multiply, increase… to make much to do, do much in respect of, transgress greatly… to increase greatly or exceedingly… to make great, enlarge, do much” {scroll to “Outline of Biblical Usage”}. Of these possibilities, “make great” seems to fit best when referring to a single person, especially if the plural term “the Levites who minister to Me” includes resurrected people who can’t reproduce (Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25). Nonetheless, the usual sense of “multiply” (which would seem to be demanded by the qualifier “As the host of heaven cannot be counted and the sand of the sea cannot be measured”) could work not just for the Levites in still-mortal bodies, but even for Jesus, as we’ll see below.

The phrasing of verses 25-26 seems more enigmatic: “25 Thus says the LORD, ‘If My covenant for day and night stand not, and statutes of heaven and earth I have not established, 26 then I would refuse a seed of Jacob and David My servant [i.e., “I would refuse Jesus”], from taking from his seed rulers in addition to a seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob[i.e., “I would refuse… from taking from Jesus rulers in addition to Jesus”?!]. Because I will restore their captivity and so will have mercy on them.’” Set aside the fact that God is outright implying that the likelihood of the events of verse 26a failing to occur is the same as the likelihood that He hasn’t established any Laws of Nature. That is, if Pulliam wants to argue that verse 26 won’t be fulfilled as worded, then he’ll also have to argue that verse 25 wasn’t meant as worded, either–in which case, we might as well abandon all of science, because science presupposes that there are Laws of Nature (a presupposition that has yet to be justified in isolation from Jeremiah 33:25 and any of the earlier verses it harks back to, like Genesis 1:5 or 8:22!) The underlined portions of verse 26 imply that God was here promising to “take from Jesus rulers in addition to Jesus”. What in the world is that supposed to mean?! Granted, the Hebrew preposition, H413, has a range of meanings, “toward” being the most common; however, the only thing in the word’s range of meanings that makes even a modicum of sense in this context (even if we take “seed” to be plural) is “together with” or “in addition to” {scroll to entry 5. Under “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon” and entry (6) under “Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon”}. As such, this statement was probably confusing to Jeremiah’s original audience, too, whether they understood “seed” to be plural or singular; but the Apostle John gives us the key to understanding it:

We have known that every one who hath been begotten of God [literally, “the whole entity having been begotten (perfect tense) out from God”] doth not sin, but he who was begotten of God [literally, “but the one who was begotten (aorist tense) out from God”] doth keep himself [following the Textus Receptus & majority of manuscripts; the oldest manuscripts and Critical Text have “guards it”], and the evil one doth not touch him; we have known that of God we are, and the whole world in the evil doth lie; and we have known that the Son of God is come [or “is present”], and hath given us a mind, that we may know Him who is true, and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ; this one is the true God and the life age-[en]during! (1 John 5:18-20 YLT, boldface and underlining added)

The perfect-tense phrase “the whole entity having been begotten out from God” refers to the collective of all the faithful, since their “having been begotten” continues to the present (note that the phrasing “the whole entity” means this statement applies to believers on the collective level, not the individual level; this is consistent with each individual believer having to remain steadfast in order to stay in the collective). On the other hand, the aorist-tense phrase “the one who was begotten out from God” refers to Jesus, the aorist tense lacking the implication that the results continued to the present. This distinction in terminology is appropriate because the Son was begotten by the Father (the Greek text of John 8:42b literally has Jesus saying “for I, out of God, issued forth”), and therefore (by the very definition of “begotten”–in Greek, “begetting” referred to producing something of the same kind as the producer, while “creating” referred to producing something of a different kind than the producer; this is why the earliest Christians were able to hold this view, while denying that Jesus is a created being) “was in the form of God… but emptied himself… being born in the likeness of men.” (Philippians 2:6-7 ESV) Indeed, John uses this perfect-versus-aorist distinction with respect to “being begotten of God” throughout his First Epistle and in his Gospel account.

Basically, the collective of believers is reckoned as “having been begotten out of God” because they are reckoned as “the Body of Christ”–the person who literally “was begotten out of God” as “the Beginning” (Proverbs 8:22,25 LXX), but was subsequently born of Mary (which is reinforced by the fact that Gabriel refers to the Son in Luke 1:35 as “the holy thing which is begotten” (ASV, boldface added)–present passive participle, referring to a begetting that had already happened before Mary became pregnant, as indicated by the future-tense verbs elsewhere in the sentence) and became human in both kind and body.

This, then, is what Jeremiah 33:26 meant by “taking from his seed rulers in addition to a seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob”: members of “the whole collective having been begotten out of God” would be rulers alongside “the one who was begotten out of God”. This coheres perfectly with other Biblical passages that refer to the righteous ruling the New Heavens and New Earth alongside Christ, such as Daniel 7:27, 2 Timothy 2:12, Revelation 5:9-10, & 20:4,6. But in what sense are Christians ruling over the earth at present? Again, the fact that there are still Christians being martyred in our day should make it clear that we haven’t yet received this authority that’s been promised to the faithful!

As a last resort, Pulliam could point out that Jeremiah 33:14-26 is missing from the Septuagint (Jeremiah has some of the most significant differences between the Masoretic Text & the Septuagint for any OT book); if these verses were a later addition to the Hebrew, then this whole discussion would be moot. But verses 16-20 have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, in a fragmentary manuscript dating to the period when the Septuagint was being translated! Moreover, the article at the first hyperlink in this paragraph explains that these verses contain material similar to other sections of Jeremiah (compare 33:14-16 with 23:4-6 and 33:25-26 with 31:35-36), so the LXX translators probably omitted this section because they perceived it as an erroneous duplication. Hence, it’s far more likely that the second half of Jeremiah 33 was incompetently omitted from the Greek text, rather than fraudulently added to the Hebrew text.

I’ve already brought this passage up a couple of times in this series, so let’s start with a quick refresher. On the first of these occasions, I pointed out that the literal Greek phrasing of Hebrews 4:12 places the fulfillment of Ezekiel 37:1-14 in the future from when Hebrews was written. On the second occasion {scroll to the fourth paragraph before “A Quick Exercise” }, I pointed out that Pulliam contradicts himself by claiming that God’s explanation in verses 11-14 uses a metaphor to explain a metaphor (i.e., that God explains the vision of verses 1-10 by saying it’s a metaphor for Him causing “the whole house of Israel” to “come up out of [their] graves”, which in turn is a metaphor for restoration to the land following the Babylonian exile)–only to admit closer to the end of his book that “An explanation of symbolism always requires a use of the non-symbolic. To use more symbolism would explain nothing at all. When we make mysteries out of explanations, we deny that an explanation has been given.” {“In the Days of Those Kings”. 235.} (Also, God explains in verse 12 that “I will open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves, My people; and I will bring you into the land of Israel”–1995 NASB, underlining added–as if they’re two distinct actions!) And since I’ve only ever summarized his argument without actually quoting it, I’ll prove I’m not misrepresenting him by giving you a reprint of the discussion on this passage from the outline he handed out on that fateful Wednesday night Bible study I attended (yes, I’ve kept the outline for the last 2.5 years just to call him out on this!):

• I. A Classic Vision of the Future…
  • A. Ezk 37:1-14…
    • 1. Ezekiel is shown a valley full of dry bones.
    • 2. This vision is sometimes understood to be the final resurrection, but its own description denies that
      • a. God gives the interpretation in vv11-14.
      • b. He told Ezekiel that the bones were “the whole house of Israel,” and that they said to themselves, “Our bones are dry, our hope is lost, and we ourselves are cut off.” (v11)
  • B. The obvious interpretation of the vision looks to the situation of Israel when Ezekiel saw this vision.
    • 1. We must ask, “Why do they say this about themselves?”
    • 2. When this vision was seen, Israel was in captivity. God is telling them “you shall live, and I will place you in your own land.” (v14)
  • C. In this case, a current circumstance has explained why the vision was seen as it was. We look for clues to it’s [sic] understanding in knowing what was going on when the prophecy was given, and relating the stated interpretation in the vision to those circumstances.

{Boldface, italics, and content in parentheses in original. Content in brackets added. (I initially tried to add this into WordPress without the bullets, but until someone can show me how to get “I”, “A”, “1”, & “a” layers instead of JUST “1”, this is the best I can do.)}

But again, the literal Greek phrasing of Hebrews 4:12, “For living is the Word of God [i.e., Jesus], and active, and sharper beyond any double-edged knife [used to expose every part of an animal when processing it for food], and penetrating until the distribution of life and of breath and of joints and of sinews, and is a judge of thoughts and sentiments of the heart” (my word-for-word translation, underlining added), proves that the fulfillment of Ezekiel 37:1-14 was a future event from when Hebrews was written–which itself wasn’t until centuries after the return from the Babylonian Exile! However, I have yet to engage with the fact that Pulliam’s attempt at explaining away this passage also tries to invoke the fuller train of thought (for once).

This chapter was fulfilled in the return of Israel from exile, as can be seen by looking more closely at the context, reaching back into chapter 36. The union of the divided kingdom took place as Israel reentered the land, and Jesus rules an undivided kingdom. {Ibid. 159-160.}

Really? Because, while the cetuma-petuha test does indeed indicate that the major trains of thought extend from Ezekiel 36:1 to 37:14 and from 37:15 to 39:29, I can see some details even in Ezekiel 36 that demonstrate otherwise. Pay careful attention to both the verb tenses and my additional formatting.

1 “And you, son of man, prophesy [imperative] to [H413, the same word from Jeremiah 33:26 discussed above] the mountains of Israel and [then] say [waw-consecutive perfect], ‘O mountains of Israel, hear [imperative] the word of the LORD. 2 Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “Because the enemy has spoken [perfect] against you, ‘Aha!’ and, ‘The everlasting heights [or “and ‘Heights of an age”] have become [perfect] our possession,’ 3 therefore prophesy [imperative] and [then] say [waw-consecutive perfect], ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “For good reason they have made you desolate [infinitive] and crushed [infinitive] [literally, “Because, by intention to astonish and to crush”] you from every side, that you would become [literally, “for you (plural) to be”; infinitive] a possession of the rest [literally, “for the remainder”] of the nations [plural] and [then] you [will?] have been taken up [or “taken away” waw-consecutive imperfect, picking up from “has said”] in the talk [literally, “upon (or “on the ground of”) a lip of tongue”] and the whispering of [or “and defamation of”; construct form] the people [literally, “a people;” singular].”’” 4 Therefore, O mountains of Israel, hear [imperative] the word of the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih]. Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih] to the mountains and to the hills, to the ravines and to the valleys, to the desolate wastes [literally, “and to the ruins, the deserted ones”] and to the forsaken cities [literally, “and to the cities, the ones that have been forsaken”] which [will?] have become [perfect] a prey and a derision to the rest [or “to a remainder”] of the nations [plural] which are round about,[better, “:” That is, the sentence should end here, with verse 5 kicking off a new sentence.]

5 [T]herefore thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “Surely [a conditional or interrogative particle followed by a negative adverb; i.e., “Without question,”] in the fire of My jealousy I have spoken [perfect] against the rest [literally, “against a/the remainder”] of the nations [plural], and against all Edom, who [will have?] appropriated [literally, “gave/will have given”] My land [‘eretz] for themselves as a possession with wholehearted joy [literally, “with joy of all a heart”] and with scorn of soul, to drive it out for a prey [literally, “to the intent that its (“all Edom”; the words for “all” and “open space” both have a 3^rd-person feminine singular pronominal suffix) open space is for plunder”].” 6 Therefore prophesy [imperative] concerning [literally, “over”] the land [literally, “soil”; ‘adamah, the root of the name “Adam”, as seen in the Hebrew text of Genesis 2:7] of Israel and [then] say [waw-consecutive perfect] to the mountains and to the hills, to the ravines and to the valleys, “Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], ‘Behold, I have spoken [perfect] in My jealousy and in My wrath because you [the soil of Israel] [will?] have endured [perfect] the insults [literally, “reproach” singular] of the nations [literally, “of nations”; plural, no definite article].’ 7 Therefore thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], ‘I have sworn [literally, “I have lifted up (perfect) my hand,”] that surely [properly, “without question,”; same phrase from verse 5] the nations which are around you [literally, “which to you (the soil of Israel) are from round about,”] will themselves endure their insults [literally, “they (emphatic) will bear (imperfect) their (plural) reproach (singular; same word from verse 6)”]. 8 But [literally, “And”, lining up with the waw-consecutive construction in verse 6; i.e., verse 6c-7 are directed toward Israel’s soil, and verses 8-12a toward its mountains] you, O mountains [plural; note that every instance of “you” from the start of this verse through verse 12a is plural] of Israel, you will put forth [literally, “you will give”; imperfect] your branches and [you will] bear [imperfect] your fruit for My people Israel; for they will soon come [literally, “because they (“My people Israel”) will have approached (perfect) to enter (infinitive)”]. 9 For, behold, I am for you [literally, “behold, I am toward (H413) you”], and [then/so] I will turn [waw-consecutive perfect, picking up sequentially from “and you will bear your fruit”] to [H413] you, and you will be cultivated and sown [literally, “and then/so you will be tilled (waw-consecutive perfect), and then you will be sown (waw-consecutive perfect)”]. 10 [And then] I will multiply [waw-consecutive perfect] men [literally, “humanity”; ‘adam] on you, all the house of Israel, all of it; and [then/so] the cities will be inhabited [waw-consecutive perfect] and the waste places [literally, “and the ruins”; same word from verse 4] will be rebuilt [imperfect]. 11 [And then/so] I will multiply [waw-consecutive perfect] on you man [‘adam] and beast [behemah; properly “quadruped”, but often used of animals in general]; and [then/so] they will increase [waw-consecutive perfect; the same verb as “multiply”, but in the Qal form rather than Hiphil form {scroll to “Outline of Biblical Usage”}] and [then will] be fruitful [waw-consecutive perfect]; and [so] I will cause you to be inhabited [waw-consecutive perfect] as you were formerly [literally, “as your former state”] and [then/so] will treat you better than at the first [literally, “will do good (waw-consecutive perfect), more than your beginning”]. Thus [literally, “and so”] you will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that I am the LORD. 12 Yes, I will cause men–My people Israel–to walk on you and possess you [literally, “And so I will cause humanity (‘adam) to walk (waw-consecutive perfect) on you (plural), and then My people Israel will take possession of [waw-consecutive perfect] you (singular)], so that you (singular) will become their [literally, “and so you will be (waw-consecutive perfect) to them for an”] inheritance and never again bereave them of children [literally, “and never will you add (imperfect 2^nd-person singular) to their (plural) miscarrying (infinitive construct; this verb is in the Piel form, so the range of meanings includes “make childless”, “cause barrenness”, “show barrenness or abortion”, and “miscarry”) again”].’

13 “Thus says [literally, “has said”, perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], ‘Because they say [literally, “On account of those saying”; plural active participle] to you, “You are a devourer of men [literally, “One eating (singular feminine active participle) humanity (‘adam), you are,”] and have bereaved your nation of children [literally, “and nations (masculine plural) of yours (feminine singular) have been (perfect feminine singular) showing barrenness (feminine singular active participle; same verb for “miscarrying” from verse 12)”],” 14 therefore [literally, “According to such conditions,” {scroll to entry II.3.d. under “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon”}] you will no longer devour men [literally, “humanity (‘adam) you (singular) will eat (imperfect) never again,”] and no longer bereave your nation of children [literally, “and your (singular) nations (plural) will lose children (imperfect; same word from verses 12 & 13) never again],’ declares [literally, “–an utterance/declaration of”; the Hebrew word is a noun, not a verb] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih]. 15 “I will not let you hear [literally, “And never will I cause to be heard [imperfect] concerning (H413) you (singular)”] insults [literally, “reproach”, singular] from [literally, “of”] the nations anymore [or “again”], nor will you bear disgrace from the peoples any longer [literally, “and scorn (singular) of peoples (plural) you (singular) will not bear (imperfect) again”], nor will you cause your nation to stumble any longer [literally, “and your (singular) nations (plural), never will you (singular) cause to stumble (imperfect) again”],” declares [literally, “–an utterance/declaration of”; same word from verse 14, H5002] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih].’”

16 Then the word of the LORD came to [literally, “And then was (waw-consecutive imperfect) a word of YHWH toward (H413)”] me saying [or “to say”; infinitive construct], 17 “Son of man [or “of Adam”], when the house of Israel was living [active participle] in [literally, “upon”] their own land [literally, “soil”; ‘adamah], [and then] they defiled [waw-consecutive imperfect] it by their ways [literally, “in their way”, singular] and their deeds [literally, “and by their wanton deeds”, plural]; their way before Me was [perfect] like the uncleanness of a woman in her impurity [literally, “like uncleanness of the impurity”]. 18 Therefore [literally, “And so”] I poured out [waw-consecutive imperfect] My wrath [or “My rage”] on them for [literally, “on them, on account of”] the blood which they had shed [or “they had poured out” perfect; same verb from the start of the verse] on the land [‘eretz], because [literally, “and”] they had defiled [perfect] it with their [wooden] idols {scroll to “Strong’s Definitions”, “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon”, & “Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon”}. 19 Also [literally, “And so”] I scattered [waw-consecutive imperfect] them among the nations and [so] they were dispersed [waw-consecutive imperfect] throughout [literally, “in” or “among”] the lands. According to [literally, “As”] their ways [literally, “way”, singular] and their deeds [literally, “and as their wanton deeds”] I judged [perfect] them. 20 When they came to [literally, “And so they entered (waw-consecutive imperfect) into (H413)”] the nations where they went [perfect], they profaned [literally, “and then they profaned (waw-consecutive imperfect) there] My holy name, because it was said [or “while it was being said”, or “through it being said”; בֶּ with an infinitive construct acting as a gerund] of [literally, “about”] them, ‘These are the people of the LORD [the 1995 NASB forgot to italicize “are”, which isn’t in the Hebrew text]; yet they have come out of His land [literally, “and out from His land they have come forth (perfect)”].’ 21 But I had concern [literally, “And so I had compassion”, waw-consecutive imperfect] for [literally, “over”] My holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned [perfect] among the nations where they went [thence].

22 “Therefore [literally, “According to such conditions”] say [imperative] to the house of Israel, ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act [literally, “Not for your (plural) sake am I (included for emphasis) working (active participle of ʿāśâ, the word for “make” in Genesis 1), house of Israel”], but for [literally, “but rather because of”] My holy name, which you [plural] [will] have profaned [perfect] among the nations where you [plural] went [perfect] [thence]. 23 I will vindicate the holiness of [literally, “Therefore I will consecrate”; waw-consecutive perfect] My great name which has been profaned [literally, “My name, the great one, the one profaned (passive participle)”] among the nations, which you [plural] [will] have profaned [perfect] in their midst. Then [literally, “And then”] the nations will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that I am the LORD,” declares [literally, “–an utterance/declaration of”; H5002, same word from verses 14 & 15] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “when I prove Myself holy [literally, “when showing Myself holy”; infinitive construct] among you [plural] in their sight [literally, “to their eyes”]. 24 For [literally, “And so”] I will take [waw-consecutive perfect] you [plural] from the nations, gather [literally, “and then I will gather together”; waw-consecutive perfect] you [plural] from all the lands and bring [literally, “and then I will bring in”; waw-consecutive perfect] you [plural] into [literally, “unto”; H413] your own land [literally, “your (plural) soil (‘adamah)”]. 25 Then [literally, “And then”] I will sprinkle [waw-consecutive perfect] clean [or “pure”] water [literally, “waters”, a singular/plural word, like shamayim, meaning “heaven/s” or “sky/skies”, or the English word “sheep”] on you [plural], and you will be clean [literally, “and then you (plural) will shine”; waw-consecutive perfect]; I will cleanse [imperfect] you [plural] from all your [plural] filthiness [literally, “uncleannesses”; same word from verse 17, but plural instead of singular] and from all your [wooden] idols [same word from verse 18]. 26 Moreover, [literally, “And then/so”] I will give [waw-consecutive perfect] you [literally, “to you”, plural] a new heart and put a new spirit within you [literally, “and a new breath/spirit I will put (imperfect; same verb for “give” at the start of the verse) in the inward part (connoting the “seat of thought and emotion”, as the word for “heart” often does in the OT {scroll to “Outline of Biblical Usage” for each word}) of you (plural)”]; and [then/so] I will remove [waw-consecutive perfect] the heart of stone [literally, “a heart, the one of stone”] from your [plural] flesh [singular] and [so will] give [waw-consecutive perfect] [to] you [plural] a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you [literally, “And My breath/spirit I will put (imperfect) in the inward part of you (plural)”; same Hebrew terms from verse 26] and cause you to walk in My statutes [literally, “and then I will arrange (1^st-person singular waw-consecutive perfect; ʿāśâ, which properly means “fashion” in Genesis 1) those who (direct object marker followed by relative particle) are in my statutes, that you will walk (2^nd-person plural imperfect)”, or “and then I will arrange that you (plural) which walk in My statutes”; the Hebrew sentence structure is somewhat awkward on this phrase], and you will be careful to observe My ordinances [literally, “and My ordinances (waw-disjunctive) you will keep watch (imperfect) of, and so you will do (waw-consecutive perfect) them”]. 28 You will live [literally, “And so you (plural) will dwell”; waw-consecutive perfect] in the land that [or “which”] I gave [perfect] to your forefathers [literally, “to fathers of yours (plural)”]; [and] so you [plural] will be [waw-consecutive perfect] My people [literally, “unto Me, for a people”], and I [included for emphasis] will be [imperfect] your God [literally, “unto you (plural) for a God”]. 29 Moreover, I will save [literally, “And so I will liberate”; waw-consecutive perfect form of a verb properly meaning “to be/make open, spacious, or wide”] you [plural] from all your [plural] uncleanness [literally, “uncleannesses”, plural; same word from verse 25]; and [so] I will call [waw-consecutive perfect] for [literally, “toward”; H413] the grain and multiply [literally “and then I will multiply”; waw-consecutive perfect, the same conjugation of the same verb from verse 10] it, and I will not [better, “and never will I”; see verse 30] bring [literally, “bestow”, “put”, or “set”; imperfect] a famine on you [plural]. 30 [And so] I will multiply [waw-consecutive perfect, same conjugation from verse 29] the fruit [literally, “fruit”; no definite article] of the tree and the produce [literally, “and produce”; no definite article] of the field, so that [properly, “to the end that”; same word from verse 5 (לְמַעַן), followed by אֲשֶׁר, turning it into a conjunction] you [plural] will not [or “never”] receive [properly, “take”; imperfect] again the disgrace [literally, “a reproach”; no definite article] of famine among the nations. 31 Then you will remember [literally, “And then you (plural) will recall”; waw-consecutive perfect] your evil ways [literally, “your (plural) ways (plural), the evil ones (plural)”; i.e., “the evil ways of yours”] and your [plural] deeds that [or “which”] were [properly, “were”; not in the Hebrew text] not good [plural], and [then] you will loathe yourselves [waw-consecutive perfect] in your own sight [literally, “in your (plural) faces (plural)”] for [literally, “on account of”; ʿal] your [plural] iniquities [or “perversities”; plural] and [on account of; וְעַל] your abominations [properly, “disgusting things of yours (plural)”; H8441, the same word famously appearing several times in Leviticus 18]. 32 I [emphatic] am not doing [active participle of ʿāśâ] this for your sake [same word from verse 22, לְמַעַנְכֶם], [better, “.”; i.e., this word closes out a sentence]” declares [literally, “A declaration/utterance of”] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “let it be [literally, “–It will be” or “It is”] known [Niphal imperfect] to you [plural]. Be ashamed [literally, “You (plural) should be ashamed”; imperative] and confounded [literally, “and you must be humiliated”; imperative] for [literally, “from”] your (plural) ways, O house [literally, “House”; “O” was added by the translators] of Israel!”

33 ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “On the day that I cleanse [literally, “In the day of My cleansing”; infinitive construct with a 1^st-person singular pronominal suffix] you [plural] from all your [plural] iniquities [or “perversities”; same word from verse 31], [then] I will cause the cities to be inhabited [waw-consecutive perfect], and [so] the waste places [literally, “the ruins”; same word from verses 4 & 10] will be rebuilt [waw-consecutive perfect]. 34 The desolate land [literally, “And the land (waw-disjunctive), the desolated one (passive participle)”] will be cultivated [literally, “will be tilled”; imperfect] instead of [better (in light of the word immediately following this phrase), “in return for”; תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר] being [literally, “having been”; perfect] a desolation in the sight [literally, “to the eyes”] of everyone who passes by [literally, “everyone passing by”; active participle]. 35 They will say [literally, “Therefore they (plural) will say”; waw-consecutive perfect], ‘This desolate land [literally, “The land, this one, the desolated one (passive participle)”] has become [perfect] like the [literally, “like a”; no definite article] garden of Eden; and the waste, desolate and ruined cities [literally, “and the cities, the ruined ones (plural adjective), and the desolated ones (plural passive participle), and the torn-down ones (plural passive participle)”] are fortified and inhabited [literally, “have become abided in”; perfect].’ 36 Then [literally, “And then”] the nations that are left [literally, “which are left over”; imperfect] round about you [plural] will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that [or, “indeed, that”] I [emphatic], the LORD, have rebuilt [perfect] the ruined places [literally, “the torn-down things”; same passive participle from verse 35, but without a waw at the start] and planted [literally, “and I planted”; perfect] that which was desolate [literally, “the desolate thing”; same passive participle from verse 35, but singular instead of plural and without a waw at the start]; I [emphatic], the LORD, have spoken [literally, “I, YHWH, I have promised”; perfect] and will do it [literally, “and so I will act”; waw-consecutive perfect form of ʿāśâ].”

37 ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “This also [better, “again”, “still”, or “more”] I will let the house of Israel ask Me [literally, “I will be consulted/sought (Niphal imperfect) for the house of Israel”] to do [infinitive construct form of ʿāśâ] for them [plural]: I will increase [imperfect] their men like a flock [literally, “increase them (plural) like the (definite article present in the Hebrew) flock (i.e., multitude) of humanity (singular form of ‘āḏām)”]. 38 Like the flock for sacrifices [literally, “Like a flock (no definite article) of holy things (plural form of the word for “holiness”)”], like the [literally, “like a”; no definite article] flock at Jerusalem [or “of Jerusalem”; no preposition] during [properly, “in”] her appointed feasts [or “her appointed times” or “her appointed meetings”; properly, “her appointments”], so will the waste cities be [literally, “so the cities, the ruined ones (same adjective from verse 35), will be (imperfect)”] filled [properly, “full”; this Hebrew word is an adjective, not a verb] with flocks of men [literally, “humanity”; singular form of ‘āḏām]. Then [literally, “And then”] they will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that I am the LORD [or “know indeed Me, YHWH”].”’”

1 The hand of the LORD was upon me [literally, “Upon me was (perfect) a hand of YHWH”], and [then] He brought me out [waw-consecutive imperfect] by the Spirit of the LORD [literally, “in the Breath of YHWH”] and [then He] set me down [waw-consecutive imperfect] in the middle of the valley; and it was full of bones. 2 [And] He caused me to pass [waw-conjunctive perfect] among [literally, “over”] them round about [in a circuit; the Hebrew phrase is “סָבִיב סָבִיב”, the word for “round about”/“circuit” being used twice in a row for emphasis], and behold, there were very [better, “exceedingly”; H3966] many on the surface [literally, “the face”] of the valley; and lo, they were very [better, “exceedingly”; H3966] dry. 3 He said [waw-consecutive imperfect] to[ward; H413] me, “Son of man [‘āḏām], can [interrogative particle] these bones [literally, “the bones, these ones”] live [imperfect]?” And [then] I answered [or “said”; waw-consecutive imperfect], “O Lord GOD [literally, ““My Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], You [singular; included for emphasis] know [literally, “have perceived”; perfect].” 4 Again [literally, “And then”] He said [waw-consecutive imperfect] to [H413] me, “Prophesy [imperative] over these bones [literally, “the bones, these ones”] and [then/so] say [waw-consecutive perfect, picking up sequentially from the imperative “prophesy”] to[ward; H413] them, ‘O dry bones [literally, “The bones, the dry ones”], hear [imperative] the word of the LORD [literally, “hear a word of YHWH”; no definite article].’ 5 Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih] to these bones [literally, “to the bones, these ones”], ‘Behold, I [included for emphasis] will cause breath to enter you [literally, “Behold My leading (active participle) into you (plural) breath,”] that you may come to life [literally, “and so you (plural) will live”; waw-consecutive perfect]. 6 I will put [literally, “And then/Therefore I will bestow” waw-consecutive perfect] sinews [or “tendons”] on you [plural], make flesh grow back on you [literally, “and then I will bring up (waw-consecutive perfect) flesh on you (plural)”], cover you [plural] with skin [literally, “and then I will spread (waw-consecutive perfect) over you skin”] and [then I will] put [waw-consecutive perfect] breath in you [plural] that you may come alive [literally, “you, and so you (plural) will live” (waw-consecutive perfect)]; and [then] you will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that I am the LORD [or “know indeed Me, YHWH”].’”

7 So [literally, “And”] I prophesied [perfect] as [literally, “according to that which”] I was commanded [perfect]; and as I prophesied, there was a noise [literally, “and then there was (waw-consecutive imperfect) a sound (or “voice” or “thunder”) about (i.e., “at the time of”) my prophesying (infinitive construct)”], and behold, a rattling [properly, “a quaking/shaking”]; and the bones came together [literally, “and then bones drew near (waw-consecutive imperfect)”], bone to[ward; H413] its bone. 8 And I looked [waw-conjunctive perfect], and behold, sinews [or “tendons”] were [“were” was added by the translators] on them, and flesh grew [literally, “came up”; perfect] and skin covered them [literally, “and then spread [waw-consecutive imperfect] over them skin from above”]; but there was no breath [literally, “and breath having not”] in them. 9 Then [literally, “And then”] He said [waw-consecutive imperfect] to[ward; H413] me, “Prophesy [imperative] to[ward; H413] the breath, prophesy [imperative], son of man [‘āḏām], and [so] say [waw-consecutive perfect, picking up sequentially from the imperative “prophesy”] to[ward; H413] the breath, ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “Come from the four winds, O breath [literally, “from four winds come (2^nd-person imperative), the breath”], and breathe [or “blow”; 2^nd-person imperative] on [literally, “into”] these slain [literally, “these, the slain ones”; passive participle], that they come to life [literally, “and they will live”; waw-conjunctive imperfect].”’” 10 So [literally, “And”] I prophesied [waw-conjunctive perfect] as [literally, “according to that which”] He commanded me [literally, “He gave me charge”; perfect], and the breath came into them [literally, “and then went (waw-consecutive imperfect) into them the breath”], and they came to life [literally, “and then they lived”; waw-consecutive imperfect] and [then they] stood [waw-consecutive imperfect] on their feet, an exceedingly great army [literally, “an army great in exceeding abundance”, or “an army of exceedingly great abundance”; H3966 used twice in a row for emphasis].

11 Then [literally, “And then”] He said [waw-consecutive imperfect] to[ward; H413] me, “Son of man [‘āḏām], these bones [literally, “the bones (feminine plural), these ones,”] are the whole house of Israel [literally, “the whole (masculine singular) House (masculine singular) of Israel are they (masculine plural)”]; behold, they say [literally, “behold their saying (active participle)”], ‘Our bones are dried up [literally, “have dried up”; perfect] and our hope [literally, “line”; this word derives its figurative meaning of “hope” from its first⁴ Biblical occurrences (Joshua 2:18,21), the only ones where it was used in its literal sense] has perished [waw-conjunctive perfect]. We are completely cut off [literally, “We have been cut off (perfect) to ourselves”].’ 12 Therefore [literally, “According to such conditions,”] prophesy [literally, “you (singular) must prophesy”; imperative] and [then you (singular) must] say [waw-consecutive perfect acting as an imperative]to[ward; H413] them, ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “Behold, I [emphatic] will open [literally, “Behold My opening”; active participle] your [plural] graves [or “sepulchers”] and cause you to come up [literally, “and then I will bring up (waw-consecutive perfect) you (plural)”] out of [or “from”] your [plural] graves [or “sepulchers”], My people [properly, “My congregated unit”; H5971]; and [then] I will bring [or “lead”; waw-consecutive perfect] you [plural] into [or “toward”; H413] the land [literally, “toward soil”; ‘ăḏāmâ] of Israel.

13 Then [literally, “And then”] you will know [or “perceive”; waw-consecutive perfect] that I am the LORD [or “indeed I, YHWH], when I have opened [literally, “in my opening”; infinitive construct] your [plural] graves [or “sepulchers”] and caused you to come up [literally, “and in my bringing up (infinitive construct) you (plural)”] out of [or “from”] your [plural] graves [or “sepulchers”], My people [H5971]. 14 [And then/so] I will put [or “set”; waw-consecutive perfect] My Spirit [or “Breath”] within [or “in”] you [plural] and [then] you [plural] will come to life [literally, “will live”; waw-consecutive perfect], and I will place [literally, “and then/so I will set down”; waw consecutive perfect] you [plural] on your [plural] own land [literally, “your soil”; ‘ăḏāmâ]. Then [literally, “And then”] you [plural] will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that I, the LORD [or “know indeed, I, YHWH”], have spoken [or “promised”; perfect] and done it [literally, “and wrought”; waw-conjunctive perfect form of ʿāśâ],” declares the LORD [literally, “a declaration of YHWH”].’”

(Ezekiel 36:1-37:14 1995 NASB, but with the paragraph divisions following the cetuma markers in the Masoretic Text; boldface and underlining added)

First of all, while Edom is specifically mentioned in verse 5, note that the verse contains only perfect-tense verbs, with no waw-consecutives; this means that the “fire of [God’s] jealousy” won’t necessarily be poured out on “a remnant of nations” and “Edom” in that order. This means a futurist understanding of the phrase “a remainder of the nations” (i.e., that these are all the nations Jews will have been scattered to throughout the Diaspora, from the second destruction of Jerusalem even through the present day) wouldn’t contradict the fact that the nation of Edom went extinct by the end of the Second Temple Period.

The rest of that minor train of thought includes quite a few details pertaining to timing, consistent with this passage being written as a “historical narrative” about the future; and historical narratives are meant to be understood in a straightforward manner. What’s more, this minor train of thought ends with a detail that has never been fulfilled to this day: “never will you add to their miscarrying again”. The inclusion of both an adverb for “again” and a verb meaning “cause to add”, “increase”, “do more”, or “do again” {scroll to the entry for “(Hiphil)” under “Outline of Biblical Usage”} are present here tells us God was emphatic here that it will never happen again. Not to be morbid (remember, I’m a rainbow baby myself), but if you look at this chart of miscarriage rates per 100,000 people in each country’s population, you’ll see that neither Israel nor Palestine has “0” in all three columns. (Remember, “you” here refers to the mountains of Israel, not the Israelites themselves; so even if you wrongly assume that none of the people living in the Promised Land today are true Israelites, this point still demonstrates that Ezekiel 36:12c is not yet fulfilled–“never again” with no additional qualifiers means never again for all time after the fulfillment begins! There are still miscarriages happening in the Promised Land today–indeed, this article estimated only 3 years ago that about 1,500 occur annually in Israel, which averages to a little more than 4 per day–so the fulfillment must not have started yet.) If Pulliam thinks this whole passage is meant metaphorically, then let him explain what this detail is “really” supposed to mean; and if he can come up with something, let’s see him do the same for every detail in this train of thought–after all, a robust interpretation of the alleged metaphor would require that.

It’s significant that verse 13 speaks of accusations of “eating humanity” and “causing barrenness” among multiple “nations”. Aside from the notion that these people will regard Israelites as leeches on society, conspiracy theories that Jews engage in cannibalism have been around at least since the 2^nd century B.C., as recorded and promoted by the 1^st-century Alexandrian writer Apion {scroll to “Type of an Anti-Semitic.” & “Tales About Jewish Worship.”} While the Bible does record instances of Israelites engaging in cannibalism (2 Kings 6:28-29, Lamentations 4:10), it was always in the context of sieges by enemies, during which all other food sources had run dry or been cut off; these were acts of desperation, not regular practices (as ugly as warfare can be in modern times, it was even uglier in ancient times). Also notice what the Jewish Encyclopedia, originally published in 1906, said about Apion’s work, which scholarship over the century-plus since has continued to agree with:

The few excerpts preserved by Josephus exhibit systematic defamation of the Jew, and are all the more remarkable as they have been repeated almost in the same form, mutatis mutandis, throughout the anti-Semitic writings of the centuries, from Tacitus, who reechoed these charges in his “History,” v. 2-5, down to these days. They comprise, first, aspersions cast upon the Jewish race; secondly, derogatory statements concerning their patriotism and loyalty as citizens; and, thirdly, malicious misrepresentations of their faith, their religious beliefs and rites—accusations originating in old pagan legends and made by a prejudiced multitude ever anew against the Jews, and for some time also against Christians {Italics in original.}

As for “and nations of yours have been showing barrenness”, it’s noteworthy that conspiracy theories about Jews trying to take over the world by subtly and methodically causing and/or promoting depopulation among the nations have only existed since the early 20^th century (fueled by “the advent of scientific racism and volkisch [sic; it’s correctly spelled elsewhere in the response as “völkisch”] thought [specifically referring to the idea that “races as the main historical actors were seen as acting through the nation. Nations were their tool or outlet to take part in Social Darwinist competition between the races.”]”⁵ in the 19^th century {scroll to the response by “EdHistory101”} and the idea that “Jews cause war, Revolution s [sic] etc.” {scroll to the response by “SonRaetsel”}). And between World Economic Forum members who’ve been calling for the world’s population to be reduced to 1 billion and all the conspiracy theories floating around during the COVID-19 era (several of which turned out to be true, giving conspiracy theorists inordinate confidence regarding other theories), some conspiracy theorists have been adapting this antisemitic trope with the times, especially in light of the fact that some WEF board members happen to be Jewish {I haven’t looked through all the sources cited therein, so use your own discernment; I cite this article only to give confirmed examples of WEF members with Jewish roots or connections, without endorsing any of the other claims or conclusions presented in the article}.

In short, Ezekiel 36:13c prophesies of Gentiles making claims about Jews that have only been made about Jews for a little over 100 years before our own time! Hence, verses 14 (speaking of Israelites never again being perceived as a leech on society and never again showing and/or causing loss of children, the latter probably referring at least in part to the WEF board members named at that last hyperlink being dealt with by the Day of the Lord) and 15 (speaking of Israelites never again having to put up with reproach or scorn, and nations never again stumbling because of them) obviously haven’t been fulfilled yet.

At first, I was considering rendering Ezekiel 36:20-21 with future perfects (e.g., “and then they will have profaned”; in which case these verses would be referring to the Diaspora), because Ezekiel 33:21-22 indicates that everything God said from there through 39:29 (contrast the date in Ezekiel 40:1) was received by Ezekiel just before an escapee from Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem announced to him that Jerusalem had fallen. This would’ve been too early for Judah to be sufficiently scattered among the nations under Babylonian control to use perfect-tense verbs for people profaning YHWH’s name over their capture & exile (because that would imply the profaning was already completely over and done, when in fact it was just beginning). But then I noticed that verses 17 & 21 explicitly refer to the “house of Israel”, not Judah! Hence, verses 17-21 are speaking, not of what was just starting to happen with Judah under the Babylonian empire, but of what had already happened with Ephraim under the Assyrian empire! This implies (again, due to the perfect-tense verbs) that by the time God told Ezekiel this, those in the nations formerly ruled by the Assyrians (now ruled by the Babylonians) were no longer profaning YHWH over Ephraim’s capture & exile. This would be consistent with my interpretation of Ezekiel 4:1-8 {HIDMF, p. 744-750}, where I take “the house of Israel” as referring to Ephraim and Judah (starting with the united kingdom of Israel after Solomon dedicated the Temple; remember, “the house of Israel” could refer to all 12 tribes or the 10 northern tribes, depending on the context), and “the house of Judah” as referring to Judah alone; this would imply that the northern tribes began repenting toward YHWH 40 years before the first destruction of Jerusalem, so only the southern tribes were still rebelling against Him by the time of Ezekiel’s ministry. Also notice that verse 20 uses the phrasing “the nations where they went”, implying the Israelites under consideration here only reached a subset of the nations, as seen following the Assyrian conquest (in contrast to the Diaspora, during which Israelites have been scattered pretty much all over the world).

Verses 22-24 mention God bringing the northern tribes (again, this is what “the House of Israel” means in the context) back from the nations where God’s name had been profaned because of them, that “the nations (unqualified, implying all nations) will know that I am the LORD”, and that God will bring them back to their own soil (implying the physical land is involved).

…Actually, I’m getting ahead of myself here: it’s important to pay attention to how this prophecy switches between waw-consecutive perfects, simple imperfects, and simple perfects–while official English translations generally fail to bring out these nuances, they give us details on when these events were to occur relative to each other. To illustrate how this works, let’s consider all the verbs of these types throughout verses 24-31, bearing in mind that the timing of verse 24 begins “when showing Myself holy among you to their eyes” (per the end of verse 23), and verses 21-22 tell us every instance of “you” and “your” in this minor train of thought refers to the Ephraimites (i.e., the 10 northern tribes of Israel):

Every line in this table that isn’t boldfaced or italicized sequentially follows (or at earliest, coincides with) the previous line that isn’t boldfaced or italicized, except for the one immediately after the italicized line, which sequentially follows (or at earliest, coincides with) the italicized line. The boldfaced lines here don’t need to occur between the line above and the line below them (note that the only instance where this is obvious in official English translations is with the simple perfect verb in verse 28). With verses 25-27a, the swaps from waw-consecutive perfects to simple imperfects indicate backtracking along the timeline, covering the same point in time thrice for emphasis: this would make sense here, since all the statements about “a (new) heart” are obviously referring to the same point in time, as are both statements where “God puts [a] Breath/Spirit in your inward part”. Hence: God cleanses you and puts His new Breath/Spirit in you before You shine and God gives you a new heart (swapping a heart of stone for a heart of flesh) and arranges you who are in His statutes. Likewise, the simple imperfect verb at the end of verse 28 coheres with the simple fact that God was a God for the redeemed Ephraimites (during their lifetimes) before the redeemed Ephraimites were to become a people to God (for the rest of eternity). Similarly, the sentence structure in verse 27b suggests that “You who walk in God’s statutes” will already be doing so (per the imperfect tense of the verb, implying an incomplete action–in this case, an in-progress one) by the time “God arranges” them. At the same time, the sequential nature of the waw-consecutive perfect verbs imply that these refer to one-time punctiliar actions; even if some of these events occur multiple times going forward (e.g., God multiplying the grain, fruit of the tree, and produce of the field), this prophecy refers only to the initial occurrences of such events. In light of this, it makes sense that the negative statements at the end of verses 29 & 30 use simple imperfects, rather than waw-consecutive imperfects (because, again, “never” or “never again” with no additional qualifiers implies “for all time into eternity future”, which is decidedly not punctiliar).

So now that we’ve got the order of the events worked out, let’s delve into some more specifics on the events. Verses 25-27a mention God sprinkling water on them, giving them a heart of flesh in place of a heart of stone, and putting His breath in them. Pulliam might appeal to New Testament uses of this terminology (e.g., John 3:5, 2 Corinthians 3:3) to explain this away as merely referring to the salvation offered “to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16c 1995 NASB). But then we get to the rest of verse 27: “and then I will arrange you which walk in My statutes, and My ordinances you will keep watch of, and so you will do them”. When have God’s people ever managed to do this en masse? We have at least two recorded examples of individuals who managed to do this in spite of their sins (Luke 1:6), but at no point in history has every single living Israelite (whether among all 12 tribes, or just the 10 northern tribes) done so (every single instance of “you” in these verses is plural, so all these sweeping promises were meant directly for each individual, not the collective containing them)! Hence, this must be referring to a time after the resurrection of the righteous, at which point God will have finished refining all the faithful throughout history “to be conformed to the image of his Son” (Romans 8:29 NIV); note the literal Hebrew phrasing “I will arrange you which walk in my statutes”, implying not only that there will be some Israelites at that time “which [don’t] walk in [God’s] statutes” (namely, Israelites who wind up among the “sheep” of the Sheep & Goats Judgment on the Day of the Lord — Matthew 25:31-46 — and thus aren’t refined and so are still susceptible to sin going into the Kingdom), but also that God (the speaker) will be directly setting up every situation for those “which walk in [His] statutes” so that these people will never sin again. (I must admit that this would be a clever way for God to enable these humans to not sin, while still having the free will to do whatever benevolent or benign things they want!)

Verse 28 likewise contains a detail placing the fulfillment long after the end of the Babylonian Exile: “And so you will dwell in the land which I gave to fathers of yours; and so you will be unto Me, for a people, and I will be unto you for a God”. Yes, the phrasing “the land which I gave to fathers of yours” implies the same physical land is being talked about here. But more importantly, while English translations tend to render it “and you will be My people”, the Hebrew phrasing is actually “and so you will be unto Me, for a people”. The literal phrasing implies that the northern tribes of Israel will be just one of many groups who are God’s People; this is consistent with not only some people being redeemed from the southern tribes, as well, but also with all the redeemed from throughout history getting to rule the nations with Jesus in his Kingdom, presumably over the very nations they hailed from on this side of eternity. This may even explain why the 144,000 of Revelation 14:1-5 “are they who are following the Lamb whithersoever he may go” (verse 4b YLT) as Jesus’ entourage of singers in the Kingdom: the identifying markers of these people line up with the Antediluvian Sons of God (Genesis 4:26 LXX) before Noah’s generation was corrupted through marrying the Daughters of Adam (Genesis 6:2,4; contrast the first part of Revelation 14:4, which identifies these 144,000 as “they which were not defiled with women”–KJV, boldface added); hence, they served God faithfully before nations existed (the first Biblical instance of both the Hebrew and Greek words for “nation” is in Genesis 10:5), and so have no “home nation” to rule!

Finally, the point above about the waw-consecutive verbs indicating punctiliar actions would imply that the regret and remorse mentioned in verse 31 would be one-time occurrences for the redeemed that will rather quickly be settled to the satisfaction of their consciences. This is consistent with the statements in Revelation 7:17 & 21:4 that God “shall wipe away every tear from their eyes” (ASV); note especially that the former verse occurs shortly after the discussion of the 144,000 Israelites to be sealed during the apocalypse, 12,000 from each tribe (7:4-8)–meaning 120,000 of these men (ancient reckoning of the sizes of multitudes typically counted adult men only, so these numbers would be higher if women and children are included) will be from the northern tribes. Indeed, both these verses are harking back to Isaiah 25:8, which brings this all together and is cited by Paul as not being fulfilled until the resurrection of the righteous: “He will swallow up death in victory. [Compare 1 Corinthians 15:54] And the Lord Jehovah will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the reproach of his people will he take away from off all the earth: for Jehovah hath spoken.” (DBY, boldface and underlining added)

The proclamation of onlookers in verse 35 that “The land, this one, the desolated one, has become like a garden of Eden; and the cities, the ruined ones and the desolated ones, and the torn-down ones are fortified and have become abided in” is also telling. This comparison to Eden heavily implies that this is referring to the Kingdom, in light of the “Paradise Lost” & “Paradise Regained” narratives of Genesis 1-3 & Revelation 21-22, respectively. Indeed, the English word “paradise” comes from the Greek word παράδεισος (paradeisos, G3857), which is used in the Septuagint for the Garden of Eden, and has that same connotation in all 3 of its NT occurrences (Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:4, Revelation 2:7). To be fair, though, the Hebrew phrase for “like a garden of Eden” (כְּגַן־עֵדֶן) was rendered in the LXX as ὡς κῆπος τρυφῆς (“as a garden of softness/delicacy/luxurious living”), using kēpos for “garden” instead of paradeisos and translating the Hebrew word ʿēḏen as a common noun (“pleasure”, “delight”, “luxury”) instead of a proper noun (“Eden”). Also notice the mention in verse 36 of “the nations which are left over round about you”; again, the plural “you” throughout this passage refers to the 10 northern tribes of Israel, so at the time of this prophecy’s fulfillment, some of the nations surrounding the Ephraimites will have been done away with. Does this refer to “round about you” at the time the prophecy was given (i.e., the nations surrounding what used to be the Assyrian empire), or “round about you” at the time the prophecy is fulfilled (i.e., the nations surrounding restored Israel)? I’m presently undecided on this, but either way, it would be consistent with the Biblical teaching that some nations will be allowed to continue into Christ’s Kingdom and others won’t (Jeremiah 12:14-17). It’s worth adding in this regard that Isaiah 14:25 refers to the Antichrist as “the Assyrian”, implying he will be from what used to be the Assyrian empire — and Daniel 7:11-12 implies that the Antichrist’s kingdom won’t be permitted to continue into the Kingdom. And before you suggest that this contradicts Isaiah 19:23-25, which makes it clear that Assyria will be allowed to continue into the Kingdom — the prophecies as worded don’t require that the Antichrist’s kingdom will include all of the former Assyrian empire (indeed, Daniel 11:41 implies that the lands of “Edom, Moab and the foremost of the sons of Ammon” — 1995 NASB — will not be part of the Antichrist’s empire, despite being part of the Assyrian empire at its peak {Ammon’s land was just north of Moab’s, so Ammon is included in the territory on this map, despite not being labeled} and being “round about” Israel), only that the Antichrist himself will hail from the former Assyrian empire.

As for verses 37-38 of chapter 36, consider the statements that God “will increase them [the Ephraimites] like the flock [i.e., multitude] of humanity. Like a flock of holy things, like a flock of Jerusalem in her appointments, so the cities, the ruined ones, will be full with flocks of humanity.” This suggests (a) that the northern tribes of Israel will have their numbers increased like crazy (consistent with some members of those tribes being among the “sheep” of the Sheep & Goats Judgment), (b), that the rest of the nations on Earth will experience the same degree of population growth (consistent with all nations being ruled by the faithful from throughout history, and thus able to flourish equally), and (c), that Jerusalem will have large influxes of people during appointed feasts throughout the year (consistent with Ezekiel 45:18-25 telling us that some of the feasts instituted under Moses {scroll to “The Feasts”} will still be celebrated in the Kingdom).

Then, of course, we finally have the section Pulliam is actually trying to explain away. I amply demonstrated at the start of this section that Pulliam has misunderstood this passage, but I think it’s important to bring out a couple details to ensure that we don’t misunderstand it, too.

At first glance, verses 5-6 seem problematic, since the waw-consecutive perfect verb for “and so you (plural) will live” occurs in both verses, with every verb in between also being waw-consecutive perfect! We might say all these actions occurred at the same time, since there’s Biblical precedent for understanding a chain of waw-consecutives this way: “And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.” (Genesis 7:17 KJV, underlining added) I’ve underlined the verbs in that sentence, and every single one of them is waw-consecutive imperfect. Yet, while the actions “was” and “increased” obviously began before the actions “bare up” and “was lift up” (because water can rise a little bit before objects in it are raised up by the force of buoyancy), “bare up” and “was lift up” clearly coincide with each other in time, since “bearing up” the Ark necessarily “lifts it up” “from upon the land” (my right-to-left translation of the last two Hebrew words of the verse) at the very same time. However, Ezekiel 37:8c, “and then spread over them skin from above; and breath having not in them” makes it clear that all the other actions between these verbs occur before God breathes life into the bones. However, it’s important to remember that the precise tense of a Hebrew verb is determined by its context (which is why native Hebrew speakers see no contradiction between Genesis 1:24,27 & 2:19—the clear indication in Genesis 1 that the animals were created before both Adam and Eve tells them that the waw-consecutive imperfect verb for “formed” in 2:19a should be understood as “had formed [before this point in the narrative]”, as the DBY, ESV, & NIV render it). The context of Ezekiel 37:5-8 therefore demands that the waw-consecutive construction at the start of verse 6 should be understood as “Therefore”, rather than “And then/so” (the sense is that the instance of “and so you will live” immediately prior sequentially follows “My leading into you breath”, but the verbs in verse 6 before “and so you will live” are God’s step-by-step description of how He’ll get the bones to that point).

In the same vein, when we pay attention to the order of events implied by the waw-consecutive verbs in verses 12-14, we find something insightful: God raises “the whole house of Israel” (verse 11) out from their graves, then brings them onto Israel’s soil (again, implying physical land is involved) (verse 12). But the infinitive constructs in verse 13 corresponding to God opening their graves and raising them out of them are then followed by (per the waw-consecutive perfect verb at the start of verse 14) God putting His Breath into them, then setting them down on their soil. Comparing this with 36:24-27, where God bringing the Ephraimites to their soil is represented by a waw-consecutive perfect verb, but God putting His new Breath in them by a simple imperfect verb, reveals that the boldfaced actions of verses 25b-27a in the above table occur sequentially before or at the same time as the final action of verse 24.

Now seriously, think about it: why would God go to the trouble of switching up the Hebrew verb forms in a way that enables us to discern the order of events like this unless the order of events is important?! And if the order of the events within the passage makes for important details that should be paid attention to for a proper, in-depth interpretation, how much more would this go for the events themselves?!

As for 37:15-39:29, the petuha-cetuma test reveals that the minor trains of thought within it are as follows: 37:15-28; 38:1-9,10-13,14-16,17,18-23; 39:1-10,11-16,17-24, & 25-29. Let’s briefly consider the minor train of thought from chapter 37:

15 The word of the LORD came again [literally, “And then was (waw-consecutive imperfect) a declaration/utterance of YHWH] to[ward; H413] me saying [literally, “me, to say”; infinitive construct], 16 “And you [singular], son of man [‘āḏām], [you (singular) should] take [imperative] for [or “to”] yourself one stick [properly, “piece of wood” or “timber”] and [you (singular) should] write [waw-conjunctive imperative] on it, ‘For Judah and for the sons [literally, “for sons”; no definite article] of Israel, his companions [or “associates”]’; then [literally, “and”; waw-conjunctive] [you (singular) should] take [imperative] another [same word for “one” earlier in the verse, H259] stick [same word from earlier in the verse, H6086] and [you (singular) should] write [waw-conjunctive imperative] on it, ‘For Joseph, the [literally, “a”; no definite article] stick [H6086] of Ephraim and all the house [literally, “the house”; no definite article] of Israel, his companions [or “associates”; same word from earlier in the verse, H2270].’ 17 Then join them [literally, “And you should bring them near”; waw-conjunctive imperative] for yourself one to another [literally, “one (H259) toward (H413) another (H259) for yourself”] into [properly, “for” or “unto”] one [H259] stick [H6086], that they may become [literally, “and so they will become”; waw-consecutive perfect] one [better, “united”; H259 is plural here] in your [singular] hand. 18 When [literally, “And when”] the sons of your people speak to you [literally, “toward (H413) you (singular) sons of your (singular) people (H5971) speak (imperfect)”] saying [literally, “to say”; infinitive construct], ‘Will you not declare [literally, “Won’t you announce/publish”; interrogative particle prefixed to a negative particle, before an imperfect verb properly meaning “to be conspicuous”] to us what you mean by these [literally, “what these are to (or “for”) you (singular)”]?’ 19 say [literally, “you (singular) must promise”; imperative] to[ward; H413] them, ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “Behold, I will take [literally, “Behold My taking”; active participle] the [literally, “a”; no definite article] stick [H6086] of Joseph, which is in the hand [literally, “in hand”; no definite article] of Ephraim, and the tribes [literally, “and staffs”, H7626; each of the 12 tribes of Israel had their own tribal staff–Ephraim inherited the lion’s share from Joseph, despite Manasseh being the older brother, cf. Genesis 48] of Israel, his companions [or “associates”; H2270]; and I will put [literally, “and then I will set”; waw-consecutive perfect] them with [literally, “upon”] it, with the [literally, “a”; no definite article] stick [H6086] of Judah, and [then I will] make [waw-consecutive perfect form of ʿāśâ] them [unto; the preposition לְ is present here] one stick, and [so] they will be [waw-consecutive perfect] one in My hand.”’ 20 The sticks [H6086] on which you write will be [literally, “sticks, those which you (singular) write (imperfect) upon them”] in your hand before their eyes. 21 Say [literally, “And you must promise”; waw-conjunctive imperative] to[ward; H413] them, ‘Thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “Behold, I will take the [literally, “Behold My taking (active participle)”] sons of Israel from among [properly, “from the midst of”] the nations where they have gone [perfect] [thither; this word is present in the Hebrew], and [so] I will gather them [together; waw-consecutive perfect] from every side [or “from round about”] and [so I will] bring [or “lead”; waw-consecutive perfect] them into [or “toward”; H413] their own land [literally, “their soil”; ‘ăḏāmâ]; 22 and [so] I will make [waw-consecutive perfect form of ʿāśâ] them [unto] one [or “a united”; H259] nation in the land, on the [literally, “in”] mountains of Israel; and one [H259] king will be [imperfect] king for all of them [literally, “for all of them for a king”]; and they will no longer be [literally, “and never again (H5750) will they become”; imperfect] two nations and no longer [literally, “and never again (H5750)”] [will they] be divided [imperfect] into [or “unto”; לִ] two kingdoms [again; H5750 present at the end of the sentence]. 23 They will no longer defile themselves [literally, “And never again (H5750) will they defile themselves (imperfect)”] with their idols, or [properly, “and”] with their detestable things, or [properly, “and”] with any of their transgressions; but [literally, “and so”] I will deliver [waw-consecutive perfect] them from all their dwelling places [or “their backslidings”, depending on the Hebrew manuscript; unfortunately, the entire sentence up to and including this word is missing {scroll to “Ezekiel 37”, then “23”; the italicized words of the traditional Hebrew text are missing from or illegible in the manuscript} from our only ancient Hebrew fragments containing this verse, found in the ruins of a synagogue at Masada (a Jewish city destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 73, implying this manuscript predates that event) {Scroll to “The Synagogue and Its Scrolls” to read the story of its discovery}; however, the LXX has ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἀνομιῶν αὐτῶν, meaning “from all of the lawlessnesses of theirs”, agreeing with the variant reading “backslidings”] in which they have sinned [literally, “in which they erred by them”], and [so I] will cleanse [waw-consecutive perfect] them. And [so] they will be [waw-consecutive perfect] My people [literally, “to Me for a people (H5971)”], and I [emphatic] will be [imperfect] their [literally, “to them for a”] God. 24 “My servant [literally, “And My servant”; waw-disjunctive] David will be king [literally, “will be a king”; no verb] over them, and they will all have one shepherd [literally, “and one shepherd (waw-conjunctive active participle) there will be (imperfect) for all of them”]; and they will walk in My ordinances [literally, “and in My judgments they will walk (imperfect)”] and keep My statutes [literally, “and My statutes they will keep (imperfect)”] and [so they will] observe [or “work” or “do”; waw-consecutive perfect form of ʿāśâ] them. 25 They will live [literally, “And so they will dwell”; waw-consecutive perfect] on the land that [or “which”] I gave [perfect] to Jacob My servant [literally, “to My servant, to Jacob”], in which your fathers lived [literally, “that your (plural) fathers dwelt (perfect) in it]; and [so] they will live [or “dwell”; waw-consecutive perfect] on it, they, and their sons and their sons’ sons [literally, “and sons of their sons”], forever [literally, “till (or “during”; ʿad) an age (ʿowlam)”]; and David My servant will be their prince [or “will be a ruler (H5387, whose range of meanings that would fit in this context also includes “chief”, “captain”, “governor”, etc.) for them”] forever [literally, “for/unto an age”; lᵊʿowlam]. 26 I will make [literally, “And so I will cut”, waw-consecutive perfect; this terminology is drawn from Genesis 15, where God had Abram cut certain animals in half for God to pass between the pieces, and the verb usually rendered “made” in verse 18 of that chapter is the same verb used here, H3772] a covenant of peace with them; it will be [imperfect] an everlasting [literally, “age-enduring”; ʿowlam] covenant with them. And [so] I will place [or “set”; waw-consecutive perfect] them and [so I will] multiply [waw-consecutive perfect] them, and [so I] will set [waw-consecutive perfect; same verb for “place” earlier in the sentence] My sanctuary [or “holy place”, singular; LXX “the holy things (plural) of mine”] in their midst [literally, “in the middle of them”] forever [literally, “for/unto an age”; lᵊʿowlam]. 27 My dwelling place also [literally, “And so My dwelling place”] will be [waw-consecutive perfect] with [literally, “over” or “upon”] them; and [so] I will be [waw-consecutive perfect] their God [literally, “to them for a God”], and they will be [imperfect] My people [literally, “to Me for a people (H5971)”]. 28 And [then] the nations will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that I am the LORD who sanctifies [literally, “know indeed I, YHWH, the one sanctifying (active participle)”] Israel, when My sanctuary is [literally, “Israel by My sanctuary (or “holy place”, LXX “holy things”; same root words from verse 26) being (infinitive construct)”] in their midst [literally, “in the middle of them”] forever [literally, “for/unto an age”; lᵊʿowlam].”’” (Ezekiel 37:15-28 1995 NASB, boldface and underlining added)

Now, Church of Christ minister and amillennialist Norm Fields claimed that this was fulfilled in the return of Israel from the Babylonian Exile, explicitly saying what Pulliam merely implied: “Immediately following the vision of the dry bones is the prophecy of the two sticks. Before the captivity they were a divided kingdom but when they were restored to the land they were brought back together in a united kingdom.” {Scroll to p. 8 in the PDF}⁶ Actually, Pulliam orally offered that same point on that fateful Wednesday night where he made the mistake of saying to my face that “you’re not qualified to teach… about this”. But what they’re both overlooking with this point is that it’s possible for some elements of a prophecy to come to pass in the course of history playing out normally–but if the rest of the details of that same prophecy don’t come to pass with the timing indicated in the prophecy, then that instance of the former elements coming to pass wasn’t the prophecy’s fulfillment. What we’re really looking for is the set of events that fulfills all the details as stated in the prophecy. An excellent example for illustrating this is the opening to the Olivet Discourse:

4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man lead you astray. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am the Christ [that last comma isn’t demanded by the Greek text, so this should be rendered “many shall come in my name, saying I am the Christ”; i.e., these are people who claim to accept Jesus as the Christ, not people who make themselves out to be the Christ]; and shall lead many astray. 6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that ye be not troubled: for these things must needs come to pass; but the end is not yet. 7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be famines and earthquakes in divers places. 8 But ALL THESE THINGS are the beginning of travail. 9 Then shall they deliver you up unto tribulation, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all the nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then shall many stumble, and shall deliver up one another, and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray. 12 And because iniquity shall be multiplied, the love of the many shall wax cold. 13 But he that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world [literally, “the whole inhabited earth”; ruling out the idea that the gospel just reaching the entire Roman Empire was enough to fulfill this prophecy, as preterists must interpret this verse] for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the end come. (Matthew 24:4-14 ASV, underlining, boldface, and all-caps added)

How many of the underlined events have been happening on-and-off ever since Jesus spoke this? Pretty much all of them except what we see in verse 14 (and possibly 12), the occurrence of which has only seemed feasible for the last couple decades or so! Obviously, not every false teacher, war, famine, earthquake, Christian persecution, mass betrayal of neighbors (think of those who turned Jews over to the Nazi regime) or false prophet has been an indicator that Jesus was going to return in the foreseeable future (i.e., a fulfillment of this prophecy)! But Jesus gave us the key to understanding which ones aren’t “false alarms” in verses 7c-8: we’ll know it’s the real deal when “all these things” are happening all over the world simultaneously!

In this case, Pulliam and Fields are claiming that because people from all tribes eventually returned to Judea within decades of the Babylonian Exile ending, the two sticks prophecy was fulfilled then–while totally ignoring all the details that didn’t come to pass at the time. These would include the Israelites never again defiling themselves with idols, detestable things, or transgressions (verse 23; the fact that post-Temple Judaism often places the Talmud in authority over the OT should be Exhibit A that they’ve found new idols since the return from the Babylonian Exile; also, using the rest of the verse to try explaining this away as referring to Christ clearing the way for salvation won’t work, since the instances of “never again” would then imply the false doctrine of “Once Saved Always Saved”), David himself (not “seed of David”–just “David”) becoming a ruler for them (verse 25; this detail alone implies that this passage can only be fulfilled once David has been resurrected; this would imply that David will be one of the Kings that Jesus will in turn be King of–remember, the title “King of Kings” simply refers to the King that all the other Kings have to answer to!), and the nations (note the absence of qualifiers like “round about”) seeing that YHWH sanctifies them by the presence of His holy place/things (verse 28, depending on whether you go by the Hebrew or the Greek). It’s worth emphasizing that the 12 tribes were eventually scattered again centuries later–opening up the possibility that all 12 tribes will return to Judea again in the future, but this time with all the other details of Ezekiel 37:15-28 coming to pass as well. And of course, multiple other Biblical prophecies demand another return of Israelites to the land after the second destruction of Jerusalem.

And just to drive the point home, following Pulliam and Fields’ logic consistently would require us to conclude that the first person who matched a single one of the Messianic prophecies was the Messiah, even if they showed up centuries before Jesus! And many individual prophetic details did come to pass in other individuals before Jesus, as even the Bible itself records! How many other Israelites were born of the seed of Abraham (Genesis 22:18), Isaac (21:12), or Jacob (Numbers 24:17) (spoiler: all of them!); or were from the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10), the family line of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1,10), or the House of David (Jeremiah 23:5); or were born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2); or were brought gifts by kings of Tarshish, Seba, Sheba, and the isles (like Solomon; Psalm 72:10-15); or was a prophet (Deuteronomy 18:18); or had zeal for God’s house to be kept holy (Psalm 69:9); or started their ministry in Galilee (like Jonah; Isaiah 9:1 cf. 2 Kings 14:25; Gath-hepher was in Galilee); or entered the temple in Jerusalem (Malachi 3:1); or experienced anything mentioned (remember, Pulliam and Fields’ logic says not all the details have to line up!) among the 29 prophetic details Josh McDowell lists–from “Betrayed by a Friend” (Psalm 41:9) to “Buried in a Rich Man’s Tomb” (Isaiah 53:9) {“The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict”. McDowell, Josh. 1999. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. 183-192.}–that were fulfilled in JUST the 24-hour period from sunset to sunset on Nisan 14, A.D. 30?! (And my ongoing analysis of the “Day of the Lord” passages suggests that Jesus might be gearing up to break his own record for “most Biblical prophecies fulfilled in 24 hours”! In fact, most if not all of them will be just during the daylight portion of that day, so he may only need 12 hours this time around!) Replacing all those “and”s with “or”s makes a huge difference, doesn’t it? As McDowell put it:

“Why, you could find some of these prophecies fulfilled in the deaths of Kennedy, King, Nasser, and other great figures,” replies the critic.
Answer: Yes, one could possibly find one or two prophecies fulfilled in the lives of other men, but not all sixty-one major prophecies!
{“The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict”. 193.}

The same goes for Biblical prophecy in general: an alleged fulfillment of a Biblical prophecy isn’t the real deal unless all the details match the Biblical text!

It’s also important to bear in mind that the major train of thought continues into a prophecy about Gog & Magog in 38:1-39:16. The only other time the names “Gog” and “Magog” appear together in the Bible is in Revelation 20:8; hence, these are parallel passages, and are talking prophetically about the same time period and the same set of events. The Revelation verse’s context (20:7-15) solidly links the fulfillment of Ezekiel 38:1-39:16 to the end of the Millennium; note also Ezekiel 38:11, where the rebels are said to see Israel (cf. verse 16) as a nation of sitting ducks due to the level of peace they’ve gotten used to in “the land of unwalled villages [or “open regions”]… those who are at rest, that live securely, all of them living without walls and having no bars or gates” (1995 NASB). How many neighborhoods do you know of that are so safe that nobody bothers having any security measures to keep people out?! This is blatantly referring to Christ’s Kingdom in full swing! Yet Ezekiel 39:12 mentions that Israel would be burying the corpses of these rebels Satan deceived “For seven months” (1995 NASB), implying that the “fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them” (Revelation 20:9c KJV; compare Ezekiel 38:22 & 39:6, the fuller contexts of which reveal that the fire won’t be the only thing stopping Gog & Magog from accomplishing their goal!) at least 7 months before the Great White Throne judgment (verses 11-15; contrast Ezekiel 39:14-15, speaking of burying the remains of the rebels from Gog & Magog, with Revelation 20:13, which mentions “death and hell deliver[ing] up the dead which were in them”–KJV). This detail is insightful because Jesus will return on Tishri 10 (1 Corinthians 15:52 cf. Leviticus 25:8-10; i.e., the 10^th day of the entire Hebrew Year) of the 6,000^th year after Adam’s first sin (Hebrews 4:1-10, 2 Peter 3:5-8 cf. Genesis 6:3 & Leviticus 25:10) and Satan will presumably be bound (Revelation 20:2) by the end of that day; Satan being released 1,000 years later would then be near the start (not end!) of A.M. 7,000. If the Lake of Fire is to be cleansed (Jeremiah 31:40) at the very end of the Millennial Week (Hebrews 4:3-4,9-10) this “seven months” figure in Ezekiel 39:12 would imply that the “little season” for which Satan “must be loosed” “to deceive the nations” (Revelation 20:3,8 KJV) will last not even 5 or 6 months (depending on whether A.M. 7,000 happens to have a leap month on the Hebrew Calendar). I intend to go over this passage in more detail in a future post, since I’ve recently been exposed to a school of thought that claims we’re currently living in that “little season”, and I can already tell the details of this passage will help set the record straight!

The remaining two minor trains of thought (39:17-24,25-29) mention God’s glory being set “among the nations; and all the nations will see My judgment which I have executed and My hand which I have laid on them [the rebels of Gog, Magog, Rosh, Meshech, & Tubal (cf. verses 1 & 6)]. And the house of Israel will know that I am the LORD their God from that day onward.” (verses 21-22 1995 NASB). The Hebrew for that last emphasized phrase is מִן־הַיּוֹם הַהוּא וָהָלְאָה–“from the day, that one, and onwards/beyond”; in the absence of additional qualifiers, this phrase conveys the sense of “for all time, starting that day”–thus ruling out “that day” from being the end of the Babylonian Exile, since “from that day onward” would’ve been interrupted by the Diaspora, during which Israel at large is calloused. God then says all the nations will know about Israel’s judgment for iniquity against Him (verses 23-24), but concludes with a promise of restoration that’s blatantly never been fulfilled. Note all the underlined phrases:

25 Therefore [literally, “For this reason”] thus says [literally, “has said”; perfect] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih], “Now [or “Straightaway”] I will restore [literally, “bring back”; imperfect] the fortunes [literally, “the captivity”] of Jacob and [so will] have mercy [or “compassion”; waw-consecutive perfect] on the whole [or “toward the whole”; no definite article or preposition] house of Israel; and [so] I will be jealous [or “zealous”; waw-consecutive perfect] for My holy name. 26 “They will forget [literally, “And so they will bear/take off”; waw-consecutive perfect] their disgrace and all their treachery which they perpetrated [literally, “did covertly”; perfect] against [literally, “among”; בִ] Me, when they live [or “dwell”; infinitive construct] securely on their own land [literally, “upon their soil (‘ăḏāmâ) at safety,”] with no one to make them afraid.[literally, “and nothing causing to tremble (active participle);”; the sentence continues into the next verse] 27 “When I bring them back [literally, “in my bringing them back (infinitive construct)”] from the peoples [H5971] and [so I] gather [waw-consecutive perfect] them from the lands [literally, “from lands”; no definite article] of their enemies [literally, “of those hostile to (active participle) them”], then I shall be sanctified [literally, “and so I will be honored/treated as sacred”; waw-consecutive perfect] through [literally, “in” or “by”] them in the sight [literally, “to the eyes”] of the many nations. 28 “Then [literally, “And then/so”] they will know [waw-consecutive perfect] that I am the LORD their God [or “know indeed I, YHWH, their God,”] because I made them go [literally, “by My carrying them away”] into exile [infinitive construct] among [literally, “toward”; H413] the nations, and then gathered [literally, “and then I gather”; waw-consecutive perfect] them again to [literally, “upon”] their own land [literally, “their soil (‘ăḏāmâ)”]; and I will leave none of them there any longer [literally, “and never again will I leave over a remnant (imperfect) from them there”]. 29 “I will not hide My face from them any longer [literally, “And never again will I conceal (imperfect) My face from them”], for [properly, “since”; H834 used as a conjunction] I will have poured out [perfect] My Spirit [or “Breath”] on the [literally, “the”; no definite article in the Hebrew] house of Israel,” declares [literally, “a declaration/utterance of”] the Lord GOD [literally, “my Lord YHWH” ‘ăḏōnāy yᵊhvih]. (Ezekiel 39:25-29 1995 NASB, boldface and underlining added)

I don’t even want to try listing all the stuff happening on Israelite soil in our day that’s causing people to tremble in fear! And how many Jews in our day are living in nations that are hostile to the nation of Israel? And as tempting as it might be to explain away verse 29 as being fulfilled on Pentecost of A.D. 30, the simple fact is that on that occasion, God only poured out the Holy Spirit on the 120 disciples present in that upper room before Peter gave his sermon (Acts 2:1-4, cf. 1:15), and the 3,000 Israelites who repented and got baptized after hearing it (Acts 2:38,41)–not the collective “house of Israel” (whether taken to mean all 12 tribes or just the 10 northern tribes).

Oh, and one last thing that I’ve seen pointed out in the course of all my research for this section (I’ll show in my analysis of the Day of the Lord passages that he’s mistaken regarding at least Ezekiel 30:1-5, but the point still stands that everything in Ezekiel that has been fulfilled, was fulfilled literally):

From history we know that all of the prophecies in Ezekiel 1-32 have been literally fulfilled. But the prophecies in Ezekiel 33-48 are future. Ezekiel 36-48 describes the return of Israel to the land that had they [sic] occupied, God’s judgment on the nations, and then the future 1,000 year kingdom or millennium.
…Some Christians believe this passage is symbolic of the Christian church, and others would say it predicts the rebuilding of Solomon’s temple after the Jewish captivity in Babylon ended. Both views are wrong. The first view should be rejected because Ezekiel never tells us that these descriptions of the temple are symbols, and it is not obvious that these are symbolic of the church. Why would the prophet be so indirect when Ezekiel 1-32 have been fulfilled so literally?

{Scroll to “What is Ezekiel 40-48 about?”. Boldface added.}

All in all, Pulliam has, as usual, completely ignored the fuller OT context of Ezekiel 37 and interpreted NT references to it superficially. No wait, he managed to do even worse this time–he outright ignored the NT references (but to be fair, the reference in Hebrews 4:12 nearly always gets lost in translation–at least in official English translations–as I pointed out in the Introduction to this series)!

Next, we have what is arguably Pulliam’s best attempt at explaining away any of these passages:

This text refers to the restoration accomplished by Jesus. He is the source of “living waters” (v8 – see Jn 4:10f; 7:38; cf. Isa 44:3). The Dispensationalist sees geologic changes (v10), but Zechariah offers a poetic description of Jerusalem’s exaltation to visibility. Jerusalem truly rose to send light into all the world (Acts). It is a picture of God’s people victorious in their holy fight, for we do engage a warfare that cannot be lost (II Cor 10:3-6; Eph 6:10-17).

{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 160. Italics in original.}

Now, as I explained here, Zechariah 14 closes out the major train of thought that began all the way back in Zechariah 12:7. There are no solitary ס’s in Zechariah 14, and the last one was at the end of chapter 13; hence, the entirety of Zechariah 14 is a complete minor train of thought (i.e., Pulliam omitted the first 5 verses of the discussion–I suspect due to the paragraph divisions in the 1995 NASB). I’ll go through the entire major train of thought in my analysis of the “Day of the Lord” passages, but since the “Day of the Lord” itself is mentioned in Zechariah 14:1, it’ll suffice for now to focus on just the minor train of thought. I’ve decided to make my more literal renderings easier for you to follow by just giving you my right-to-left translation in brackets at the end of each verse (please let me know if you’d prefer it this way going forward!):

1 Behold, a day is coming for the LORD when the spoil taken from you will be divided among you. [literally, “Behold a Day coming (active participle) for YHWH, and then her (3^rd-person feminine singular) plunder will be divided (waw-consecutive perfect) in the midst of you (2^nd-person feminine singular).”] 2 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. [literally, “Therefore I will gather (waw-consecutive perfect) all the nations toward (H413) Jerusalem for battle, and then the city will be captured (waw-consecutive perfect), and then the houses will be plundered (waw-consecutive perfect) and the women will be lain with (imperfect); and then half of the city will go out (waw-consecutive perfect) among the nation (singular), and the remainder of the people (H5971) will never be cut off (imperfect) from the city.”] 3 Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. [literally, “And then YHWH will go forth (waw-consecutive perfect) and then will wage war (waw-consecutive perfect) with the nations, those ones, as a day of him waging war (infinitive construct), in a day of battle (H7128, a poetic term for “war” or “battle”).”] 4 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. [literally, “And then His feet will stand (waw-consecutive perfect) in the day, that one, upon a Mount, the one of Olives, which is against (ʿal) the face of Jerusalem from the east; and then the Mount, the one of Olives, will be split open (waw-consecutive perfect) from its middle eastward (the word for “east” with a Directional He) and westward (the word for “west” with a Directional He), an exceedingly great valley, and so half of the mountain will depart (waw-consecutive perfect) northward (the word for “north” with a Directional He), and its other half southward (the word for “south” with a Directional He).”] 5 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! [literally, “And then you (masculine plural) will take flight (waw-consecutive perfect) in the valley of My mountains, indeed, the valley of mountains will extend (imperfect) toward (H413) Atsal (a name meaning “reserved”), and so you (masculine plural) will take flight (waw-consecutive perfect), just as you took flight (perfect) from before (or “from the face of”) the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah; and then YHWH my God will come (waw-consecutive perfect), and all holy ones with you (2^nd-person feminine singular, presumably referring to the same “you” at the end of verse 1; however, the 2^nd-century-B.C. Septuagint, the 1^st-century Targum Jonathan–whose translator, Jonathan ben Uzziel, was a pupil of Hillel the Elder, a Jewish sage who died around the time Jesus became a teenager!—the 1^st-to-2^nd-century Peshitta OT, and the early-5^th-century Latin Vulgate all have the 3^rd-person masculine singular “Him” instead).”]

6 In that day there will be no light; the luminaries will dwindle. [literally, “And so it will come to pass (waw-consecutive perfect) in the day, that one, there will be (imperfect) no light, and glorious (or “influential”) ones will curdle like milk (LXX, “there will not be light and cold and ice”; Peshitta, “there will be no light, but frost and ice”; Vulgate, “there will not be light, but cold and frost”).”] 7 For it will be a unique day which is known to the LORD, neither day nor night, but it will come about that at evening time there will be light. [literally, “And so it will be (waw-consecutive perfect) a unique day, it is known (imperfect) to YHWH, not day and not night, and then it will come to pass (waw-consecutive perfect) that at evening time there will be (imperfect) light.”]

8 And in that day living waters will flow out of Jerusalem, half of them toward the eastern sea and the other half toward the western sea; it will be in summer as well as in winter. [literally, “And then it will come to pass (waw-consecutive perfect) in the day, that one, that living waters will go forth (imperfect) from Jerusalem, half (same word from verse 4) of them toward (H413) the sea, the eastern (or “former”) one, and half of them toward (H413) the sea, the western (or “latter”) one, in the summer and in the harvest (i.e., autumn/winter), it will exist (imperfect).”]

9 And the LORD will be king over all the earth; in that day the LORD will be the only one, and His name the only one. [literally, “And so YHWH will be (waw-consecutive perfect) for a (or “YHWH will become”) king over all the land; in the day, that one, YHWH will be (imperfect) first, and his name first.”]

10 All the land will be changed into a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem; but Jerusalem will rise and remain on its site from Benjamin’s Gate as far as the place of the First Gate to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the king’s wine presses. [literally, “All the land will be turned (imperfect) like the desert plain (or “Arabah”; they’re the same Hebrew word) from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem; and then she will rise (waw-consecutive perfect) and then/so will abide (waw-consecutive perfect) in her place {scroll to entry 4.A. under “Outline of Biblical Usage”} starting from {scroll to entry 9.b.(1) under “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon”} Benjamin Gate, till (ʿaḏ) the standing place of the First Gate, till (ʿaḏ) the Corner Gate and Chanane’el Tower, till the king’s winepresses.”] 11 People will live in it, and there will no longer be a curse, for Jerusalem will dwell in security. [literally, “And then/so they will dwell (waw-consecutive perfect) in her, and utter destruction there will never be (imperfect) again, and so Jerusalem will dwell (waw-consecutive perfect) unto safety.”]

12 Now this will be the plague with which the LORD will strike all the peoples who have gone to war against Jerusalem; their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongue will rot in their mouth. [literally, “And this will be (imperfect) the pestilence with which YHWH will strike (imperfect) all the peoples (plural form of H5971) which will have waged war (perfect) against Jerusalem: his (singular) flesh (singular) rotting (absolute infinitive) and himself (singular) standing (active participle) on his feet, and his (singular) eyes will rot away in their sockets (properly, “holes”), and his tongue will rot away in their (plural) mouth.”] 13 It will come about in that day that a great panic from the LORD will fall on them; and they will seize one another’s hand, and the hand of one will be lifted against the hand of another. [literally, “And so it will come to pass (waw-consecutive perfect) in the day, that one: a great tumult of YHWH there will be (imperfect) among them, and so a man will strengthen (waw-consecutive perfect) a hand of his companion’s, and then/so his hand will go up against (or “over”; ʿal) a hand of his companion.”] 14 Judah also will fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the surrounding nations will be gathered, gold and silver and garments in great abundance. [literally, “And moreover, Judah will wage war (imperfect) in Jerusalem, and so wealth (singular) of all the nations (plural) round about (singular) will be gathered (waw-consecutive perfect), gold and silver and garments unto exceeding abundance.”] 15 So also like this plague will be the plague on the horse, the mule, the camel, the donkey and all the cattle that will be in those camps. [literally, “And thus a pestilence will be (imperfect) upon the horse, the mule, the camel, and the donkey, and each among the quadruped (singular) which will be (imperfect) in the same encampments as the pestilence, this same one (i.e., “as the same pestilence”).”]

16 Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Booths. [literally, “And then/so there will be (waw-consecutive perfect) the whole collective being left behind (the word for “all” (H3605) followed by a singular active participle with a definite article) from all the nations, the ones going (plural active participle with a definite article) down against (ʿal) Jerusalem, and then they will go up (waw-consecutive perfect) as often as {scroll to entry 2.c. under “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon”} year by year to bow down (infinitive construct) to king YHWH of Hosts, and to keep a pilgrim-feast (infinitive construct), Feast of the Booths/Tabernacles.”] 17 And it will be that whichever of the families of the earth does not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, there will be no rain on them. [literally, “And so it will come to pass (waw-consecutive perfect): the one which doesn’t go up (singular imperfect) from with {the compound preposition used here denotes a particularly close relationship; see Note. at the bottom of “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon”} families (i.e., as a representative of their own family) of the land/Earth toward (H413) Jerusalem to bow down (infinitive construct; same word from verse 16) to king YHWH of Hosts, neither (properly, “also not”) will the rain be (imperfect) upon them.”] 18 If the family of Egypt does not go up or enter, then no rain will fall on them; it will be the plague with which the LORD smites the nations who do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Booths. [literally, “And if a family of Egypt doesn’t go up (imperfect) and is not coming (singular active participle) and not having rain upon them, there will be (imperfect) the pestilence with which YHWH will strike (imperfect) the nations which don’t go up (imperfect) to keep a pilgrim-feast (infinitive construct; same verb from verse 16), Feast of the Booths/Tabernacles.”] 19 This will be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all the nations who do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Booths. [literally, “This will be (imperfect) a sin-offering (or “a penalty for sin”) of Egypt, and a sin-offering (or “a penalty for sin”) of all the nations which don’t go up (imperfect) to keep a pilgrim-feast (infinitive construct), Feast of the Booths/Tabernacles.”]

20 In that day there will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, “HOLY TO THE LORD.” And the cooking pots in the LORD’S house will be like the bowls before the altar. [literally, “In the day, that one, there will be (imperfect) upon bells of the horses, “Holiness (or “A Holy Thing”) Unto (or “For”) YHWH”, and then/so there will be (waw-consecutive perfect) the pots in YHWH’s House, like the basins before (properly, “to[ward] the face of”) the altar.”] 21 Every cooking pot in Jerusalem and in Judah will be holy to the LORD of hosts; and all who sacrifice will come and take of them and boil in them. And there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts in that day. [literally, “And so every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah will be (waw-consecutive perfect) a holy thing to YHWH of Hosts, and so all the ones slaughtering for sacrifice (plural active participle) will go (waw-consecutive perfect) and then will take (waw-consecutive perfect) from them and then will boil (waw-consecutive perfect) among them, and never again will there be (imperfect) a merchant (or “Canaanite”) in the house of YHWH of Hosts in the day, that one.”]

(Zechariah 14:1-21 1995 NASB, boldface and underlining mine)

First off, we should determine what the feminine singular suffixes I rendered “her” and “you” in verse 1 refer to. Looking back to the minor trains of thought in the previous chapter (Zechariah 13:1-6 & 7-9), we find the following feminine singular terms (as the 1995 NASB renders them): “sin”, “impurity” (verse 1); “the unclean spirit” (verse 2); “mother [i.e., of anyone who prophesies falsely]” (verse 3); “robe [with the masculine qualifier “of hair”]” (verse 4); “ground [‘ăḏāmâ]” (verse 5); “sword” (verse 7); “it [all the land]”, “the third part [of the land]”, “it [all the land, in which the “third part” will be left]” (verse 8); & “the third part” again (verse 9). In light of 13:9 saying that “I will bring the third part through the fire, Refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, ‘They are My people,’ And they will say, ‘The LORD is my God.’” (1995 NASB), it doesn’t make sense for their spoil to be taken from them! Hence, “her” must be referring to the next-most-recent singular feminine term, “it”–which has “all the land” as its antecedent. Does this refer to “all the land” of Israel specifically, or the entire face of the planet, or just the world island (Europe, Asia, & Africa), etc.? Well, since 13:1 speaks of “a fountain” being “opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (1995 NASB), verse 2 has God promising to “remove the prophets and the unclean spirit from the land” (1995 NASB), and then God says in verse 8 that “It will come about in all the land… That two parts in it will be cut off and perish; But the third will be left in it” (1995 NASB), there doesn’t seem to be any contextual reason to assume “her” in 14:1 refers to anything other than the two thirds of the land of Israel that “will be cut off and perish”. Likewise, the feminine 2^nd-person singular suffix at the end of verse 1 refers to “the third [that] will be left in it”–i.e., those people will receive the spoils from their wicked neighbors who die on the Day of the Lord. This is consistent with other Day of the Lord passages that speak of Israel (e.g., Amos 5:18-27) and Jerusalem (e.g., Joel 2:1-14) being judged along with all other nations (e.g., Obadiah 15-16, the first use, chronologically–and hence, the defining use–of the phrase “Day of the Lord”; every Biblical use of this phrase is referring to that same day, unless the context of a particular instance demands otherwise).

Consider also that Revelation has Jerusalem (note that “Babylon the great”, an early Christian codename for the city of Rome, is distinguished from “the great city” here, and indeed, had already been destroyed about 3.5 years earlier–the LGV puts the part of the verse pertaining to Babylon in parentheses; see Note 374 on p. 35 of this PDF for an explanation) being split into thirds just after the earthquake without equal (which may even explain how two of those thirds are “cut off and perish”), which itself occurs shortly before Jesus returns:

And the seventh messenger did pour out his vial to the air, and there came forth a great voice from the sanctuary of the heaven, from the throne, saying, ‘It hath come!’ and there came voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and a great earthquake came, such as came not since men came upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake — so great! And it [be]came — the great city — into three parts, and the cities of the nations did fall, and Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give to her the cup of the wine of the wrath of His anger, (Revelation 16:17-19 YLT, boldface and underlining added)

Verse 2 mentions that on the Day of the Lord, God will bring all the nations to battle Jerusalem, they’d capture the city, houses would be plundered, and women would be violated. This seems antithetical to the Day of the Lord, until you recall that Jerusalem will also be judged that day: “Blow a trumpet in Zion, And sound an alarm on [literally, “in”] My holy mountain! Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble, For [or “Because”] the day of the Lord is coming; Indeed, it is [or “Because it is”; same conjunction as previous line, H3588] near [or “at hand”]” (Joel 2:1 2020 NASB, boldface added). Half the city (perhaps all of them will be dwelling in the two thirds of the land that “perish”, perhaps some will be from all three thirds; note that the lack of a waw-consecutive at the start of Zechariah 14:1 means the land splitting and perishing in 13:7-9 don’t necessarily happen before all the events of Zechariah 14) would go out among the nation (i.e., surrendering to the Antichrist’s empire that’s leading the charge–that would explain why “nation” is singular this once in the entire chapter), but the other half would be the ultimate victors who’ll never be cut off from the city. Verse 3 tells us the tables turn because Yahweh will wage war with those same nations. Remember, the OT uses the Tetragrammaton (יהוה, transliterated “YHWH” in my right-to-left translations) for the Father and the Son, so context is needed to determine who was intended. Verse 4 makes it clear that the Son is meant here by mentioning His feet standing on the Mount of Olives. Now, recall from two posts ago what Pulliam claimed in Lesson 11 of his book:

Zechariah 14:4… was actually fulfilled in a literal way by Christ’s first coming when He provided a way of escape through His blood. Whether you need to relate the prophecy to His riven flesh, or just see the actual escape through His sacrifice, something literally did occur to fulfill this. By this escape from the domain of darkness, the hearts of men were made the kingdom of the Messiah (cf. Col 1:13).
{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 119. Italics in original.}

However, the text specifies which direction Mount Olivet would be split (i.e., the crack will run east-to-west down the middle), and that the two halves of the mountain will shift north and south. We can tell that Mount Olivet itself “merely” shifts, rather than it and the earth’s crust underneath it splitting open to create a fissure, because the split creates a means for the second half mentioned in verse 2 to escape the battle through the resulting valley. If Pulliam’s right that all of this was just a metaphor for Christ “provid[ing] a way of escape through His blood”, why bother mentioning the directions at all? After all, Zechariah’s contemporary audience would’ve known Mount Olivet was to the east, so a path through the mountain to safety would’ve had to run west-to-east. The answer is that God included these details to let Zechariah and his original audience know how the path through the mountain would be carved–which requires these statements to be meant literally!

At the same time, notice that the fleeing occurs just after Jesus’ feet touch down on Mount Olivet–which in turn occurs after the rapture of all the faithful from throughout history (in addition to verse 5c mentioning that “YHWH my God will come, and all holy ones with Him”, see 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2; again, the Greek phrasing behind “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto him”–2 Thessalonians 2:1 ASV, underlining and boldface added–is a “TSKS construction” (Granville Sharp’s First Rule), implying that the “coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” and the “gathering together of us to him” are a unit: two simultaneous components of one bigger event). Hence, the half of Jerusalem’s population fleeing here must not be Christians, or they would’ve been raptured instead. Are these (a) the 144,000 Israelites who are sealed according to Revelation 7, (b) Israelites who were ignorant of the Gospel through no fault of their own (in contrast to their wicked counterparts who actively rejected it), or (c) Muslims (and/or whatever other non-Jews and non-Christians are inhabiting Jerusalem during the Antichrist’s reign there) who never got a chance to hear the Gospel? I’ll have to do some additional research on Revelation 7 and the other passages it alludes to before I can decide on my “official position”, but between the fact that God has set apart the 144,000 out of the general Israelite population (the Hebrew verb for “be holy” literally means “be set apart” or “be separate” {scroll to “Outline of Biblical Usage”}) and the fact that Jerusalem’s current population is just over 1 million, I’m presently inclined toward a combination of (b) & (c).

Now, between the points brought to bear in the previous paragraph, Revelation 16:17-19, the waw-consecutives of Zechariah 14:1-5, its earlier context of Zechariah 13:8-9, the mention in Acts 1:11-12 that Jesus will return in the same way his 11 remaining disciples saw him leave (i.e., bodily, from the sky, touching down on the Mount of Olives), and the sudden switch from imperfect-tense verbs in Joel 2:4-9 (describing an angelic army taking Jerusalem during the judgment by fire) to perfect-tense verbs in Joel 2:10 (mentioning the earthquake, shockwaves in the air, and the sun, moon, & stars darkening), we have enough information to lay out the following well-defined sequence of events:

1. Most intense earthquake of all time
2. Jerusalem’s land divided into thirds, two of which “will be cut off and perish” due to the armies that gathered at Armageddon, with half the survivors among all three thirds (which may or may not include anyone from the third that receives the spoils in Zechariah 14:1) surrendering to the Antichrist
3. Jesus returns and the faithful (dead and still-living) are raptured
4. Jesus’ feet touch Mount Olivet and it splits
5. The inhabitants of the remaining third of Jerusalem start fleeing through the valley carved through Mount Olivet
6. Jesus takes off to slaughter the wicked all over the world during the judgment by fire (which includes the angelic assault on Jerusalem), with the raptured saints following around in the air
7. Jesus returns to the ground at Jerusalem (with the raptured saints also touching down this time) once the judgment by fire has finished

See what kinds of sequential details Pulliam deprives his readers of by allegorizing away all these prophecies, rather than going through the effort of harmonizing them?

All the most ancient textual witnesses agree that “there will be no light” for at least a portion of the Day of the Lord; this will be the case for the period of time between sunrise and when Jesus shows up (2 Peter 1:19 LGV {scroll to p. 3 in the PDF; see also the Notes indicated on the words “Day”, “star”, and “hearts:”}, Revelation 22:16; consider the earlier discussion about the term “morning star”), in light of the Bible’s consistent teaching about the sun & moon having already gone dark by the time the Day of the Lord begins, let alone by the time Jesus returns on that day (Isaiah 13:9-10; Joel 2:10,31, 3:14-15; Matthew 24:29-31). But while the Septuagint, Peshitta, and Vulgate all mention cold, frost, and/or ice in relation to the Day of the Lord, the Masoretic Text instead says that “glorious/influential ones will congeal/curdle like milk”. Which wording should be taken as the original? On the one hand, the NLT & ESV have margin notes saying that the “meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain”; indeed, even the 1611 KJV rendered the phrase as “the light shall not be cleare, nor darke”, with marginal readings of “precious” & “thicknesse” for “clear” & “dark”, respectively. So it’s tempting to blindly follow the textual criticism rule that “The more difficult reading is to be preferred, because scribes were more apt to smooth out difficult readings.” {Quoted in: “The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict”. 89.} However, it’s difficult to do that without being hypocritical, since we followed the other early versions when they all agreed against the Masoretic Text on the ending to the previous verse! Quite simply, with this verse being unattested among the Dead Sea Scrolls, all these other readings very well could be older than the Masoretic reading (indeed, the only portion of Zechariah 14 that survives among the Dead Sea Scrolls is a fragmentary reading of verse 18). On the other hand, it’s tempting to scoff at the idea that cold, ice, or frost occur on the same day as the worldwide judgment by fire–until you recall that the first half of the verse is talking about what happens before that judgment begins. With the sun not shining as brightly going into the Day of the Lord, it very well could get quite cold leading up to Jesus’ return! Historically, nightly lows in Jerusalem hover in the 60s Fahrenheit in the month of Tishri (September/October), so a frosty morning on Tishri 10 (1 Corinthians 15:52, cf. Leviticus 25:8-10) would be ominous indeed! Hence, it makes the most sense to trust the Septuagint, Peshitta, & Vulgate over the Masoretic Text on this one; in fact, the Christian Standard Bible mentions in its margin note on this verse {scroll to “CSB Footnotes”} that Aramaic Targums and Symmachus’ late-first-century translation of the OT into Greek also use the ice, cold, and/or frost terminology. Then again, the phrasing in the LXX & Targum Jonathan {click here to see how Google Translate handles the latter} imply that there will be no ice or frost, just as there’s no light. But again, in light of the sun having been darkened leading up to that day, it’s more feasible that the Peshitta and Vulgate more accurately captured the sense (lack of light, but presence of cold, ice, and frost) of the archaic Hebrew manuscripts we wish we possessed.

Verse 7 then rounds out this remark about the darkening by describing the Day of the Lord as “a unique day” because “at evening time there will be light”. The reason for this is given quite plainly in John’s description of the New Jerusalem: “And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof… And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there… And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light” (Revelation 21:23,25; 22:5a KJV). In short, the Day of the Lord will feature darkness after sunrise and daylight after sunset–a complete reversal compared to all other days in history! No wonder Zechariah called it “a unique day”! But if Pulliam is correct that this is just “a poetic description of Jerusalem’s exaltation to visibility”, then what aspect of that is such a “unique day” supposed to represent?!

As for Pulliam’s attempt to link Jesus directly with the “living waters” of verse 8, Warner gives us a fascinating bit of background information for understanding John 7:38:

See Isaiah 44:3 & Isaiah 58:11. That Jesus’ statement was made “in the last day, the great day of the Feast” [John 7:37] (the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles) is significant, since on that day the libation of water pouring took place. Water was drawn from the pool of Siloam yearly on this day and carried in a procession to the Temple. There the water was poured out as a symbolic representation of the spring-fed river of life prophesied to issue forth from the Temple in Messiah’s Kingdom. This was called “living water” (Zech. 14:8), which will flow down to the Dead Sea and heal everything it touches (Ezek. 47:1-12; Joel 3:18). That spring-fed river is also called “a pure river of water of life” (Rev. 22:1). {Scroll to Note 170 on p. 24 of the PDF. Boldface and content in brackets mine.}

Also bear in mind that while Pulliam explicitly links John 7:38 with Isaiah 44:3, just like Warner does, the other verse it alludes to, Isaiah 58:11, is talking about the Kingdom, as we saw when discussing Isaiah 60 earlier. Aside from that, verse 8 mentions that these “living waters” would go from Jerusalem in two directions: the eastern (Dead) sea and the western (Mediterranean) sea. I ask Pulliam again: what’s the significance of the “living waters” flowing toward these particular bodies of water?

Verse 9 tells us that YHWH will become king over all the land in that day. This can’t be referring to the Father, since, as Pulliam explains when trying to pass off the 1,000 years of Revelation 20 as symbolic:

“For every beast of the forest is Mine, the cattle on a thousand hills.” (Ps 50:10) Now, we all know that there are more than 1,000 hills on this planet. So, should we wonder who the cattle on the 1,001^st hill belongs to? That would be absurd. The number 1,000 is being used to represent a great sum without being specifically accurate. The number 1,000 is being used the same way here in Revelation 20:4.
{“In the Days of Those Kings”. 262.}

What Pulliam’s overlooking is that metaphoric uses of a term are typically only used once or twice in a given context, but repetition is a way for the author to be emphatically literal. The precedent for this comes from Genesis 1, where God qualified the Hebrew word for “day” (יוֹם) with a number and the words “evening” and “morning” for all six days, to make it unequivocally clear that they were literal days. Revelation 20:2-7 deliberately parallels this, using the Greek phrase for “thousand years” (χίλια ἔτη) six times, to make it unequivocally clear that it’s a literal millennium. (Remember, the opening chapters of Genesis and the closing chapters of Revelation dovetail each other!)

Anyway, the idea that YHWH will become king (implying he wasn’t already) clearly must be referring to the Son. Yet Jesus obviously isn’t king over all the land now; even if you restrict this to the land where Israel and Palestine now sit, neither of those places are putting Jesus first in how they currently run things! Hence, this must be referring to Jesus officially taking his place (on Earth–in contrast to Daniel 7:13-14, where he’s being given the authority to take that place on Earth) as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, rather than merely the King and Lord of the Heavenly Dominions that he is now.

In verse 10, I rendered “starting from” from the compound preposition לְמִ, which Brown, Driver, & Briggs explain is pleonastic. The Cambridge Dictionary defines the word “pleonastic” most straightforwardly as “using more words than are needed to express a meaning, either unintentionally or for emphasis” {boldface in original, underlining mine}. Zechariah was emphasizing that the Benjamin Gate was the terminus a quo for the area being defined here as “ris[ing]” and “abid[ing] in her place”. Why bother doing this if this rising is just “a poetic description of Jerusalem’s exaltation to visibility”, as Pulliam claims? Verse 11 goes on to claim that “utter destruction there will never be again, and so Jerusalem will dwell unto safety”. In light of the current political situation in the Middle East, how can the city of Jerusalem possibly be regarded as “dwell[ing] unto safety” in our day?!

Moving on to verses 12-15: when Israel and Iran were fighting just a few months ago, did all the Iranian soldiers’ flesh rot while they were still standing, their eyes rot in their sockets, and their tongues rot away in their mouths? When did any (let alone all) animals in the Iranians’ camps experience these things? Even recent events give us a reality check that this passage hasn’t been fulfilled yet! Moreover, if Pulliam is correct that this is just poetry, why did God choose to include this pestilence in the poem, as opposed to any other? And when since Zechariah’s time did Judah wage war in Jerusalem such that wealth from all the surrounding nations were gathered “unto exceeding abundance”?

Verse 16 mentions “the whole collective being left behind from all the nations, the ones going down against Jerusalem”, and promises that “they will go up as often as year by year to bow down to king YHWH of Hosts, and to keep” the Jewish holiday of Sukkot. At what point in history has this ever happened, much less annually?! And when has God ever followed through on His threats in verses 17-19 that any family from the land/Earth that fails to send a representative to bow down to YHWH or observe Sukkot on their behalf will be punished with lack of rain and a pestilence? If all of this is just poetry, as Pulliam insists, then why mention Egypt by name (a nation that was no longer independent during Zechariah’s ministry, having been conquered by Persia just a few years earlier), but no other foreign nations? Why specify the Feast of Booths/Tabernacles, as opposed to any other holiday?

Finally, consider verse 21: should the Hebrew word H3669 be understood as the proper noun “Canaanite” or the common noun “merchant”? Well, we can get some clues by considering other mentions of Canaan in “Day of the Lord” prophecies. We saw above that Isaiah 19:18 mentions that “there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan, and swear to Jehovah of hosts” (ASV, boldface added), something that wouldn’t make sense if the Canaanites are to go extinct by that point. There are also a couple passages from Zephaniah that are pertinent here. I haven’t yet produced a more literal translation of these passages, so let’s go with the 1995 NASB here, to concede as much to Pulliam as possible:

“On that day,” declares the LORD,
“There will be the sound of a cry from the Fish Gate,
A wail from the Second Quarter,
And a loud crash from the hills.
“Wail, O inhabitants of the Mortar,
For all the people of Canaan [or “all the merchant people”] will be silenced [literally, “will have been destroyed”; the verb is perfect-tense, not imperfect];
All who weigh out silver will be cut off.
“It will come about at that time
That I will search Jerusalem with lamps,
And I will punish the men
Who are stagnant in spirit,
Who say in their hearts,
‘The LORD will not do good or evil!’
“Moreover, their wealth will become plunder
And their houses desolate;
Yes, they will build houses but not inhabit them,
And plant vineyards but not drink their wine.”
Near is the great day of the LORD,
Near and coming very quickly;
Listen, the day of the LORD!
In it the warrior cries out bitterly. [literally, “Bitterly roaring there will be a warrior.”; or, as I argue {HIDMF, p. 509-511.} the Hebrew text originally read, “From Nazareth–there will be a champion.”– מנצרת שׁם גּבּור instead of the grammatically-awkward מר צרח שׁם גּבּור; compare Matthew 2:23.]

(Zephaniah 1:10-14 1995 NASB, boldface and underlining added)

The claim that “all the people of Canaan will have been destroyed” would contradict the statement in Isaiah 19:18, and “all the merchant people” would fit better in the parallelism with “All who weigh out [literally, “All laden with”] silver”. Also consider what Zephaniah said just after establishing that the Day of the Lord is a literal day:

Seek ye Jehovah, all ye meek of the earth, that have kept his ordinances; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye will be hid in the day of Jehovah’s anger. For Gaza shall be forsaken, and Ashkelon a desolation; they shall drive out Ashdod at noonday, and Ekron shall be rooted up. Woe unto the inhabitants of the sea-coast, the nation of the Cherethites [Philistines with roots in Crete, according to the NASB margin notes]! The word of Jehovah is against you, O Canaan, the land of the Philistines; I will destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant. (Zephaniah 2:3-5 ASV, boldface and underlining added)

Notice that this passage clarifies that “Canaan” is being used with reference to “the land of the Philistines”, which includes the modern-day Gaza Strip and an additional area further up the Mediterranean coast {the pink area on the map is ancient Philistia; note the overlap between the Gaza strip and Philistia’s westernmost quadrant}. And let’s not forget this snippet from the earliest Day of the Lord passage of them all:

And the captives of this host [literally, “fortress”] of the children of Israel, that are among the Canaanites, shall possess even unto Zarephath [a city on the Mediterranean coast, north of Tyre–which itself is north of Philistia]; and the captives of Jerusalem, that are in Sepharad, shall possess the cities of the South. (Obadiah 20 ASV, boldface and underlining added)

These passages would all cohere with each other if: any still-living Christians caught up in the rapture at Jesus’ return (or people who’ve never heard the Gospel, yet became Israel’s prisoners-of-war following the Day of the Lord) who are of Canaanite descent will be relocated along the Mediterranean coast and in 5 Egyptian cities and permitted in the Temple described in the closing chapters of Ezekiel; wicked people of Canaanite descent (or among merchants in general) will be killed by Jesus at his return and their homeland would be left uninhabited (at least for a significant period of time, since Zephaniah 2:7 implies that some of it will be reinhabited by Judeans at some point!); Canaan would never again be the mercantile bastion it was in the ancient world; and merchants will never again be allowed to set up shop in the Temple at Jerusalem–and the Gospels make it clear that the last of these details wasn’t true of the Second Temple (Matthew 21:12, Mark 11:15, Luke 19:45, John 2:14; also bear in mind that these accounts describe two different occasions where Jesus drove money-changers out of the Temple, one near the beginning of his ministry, and the other during his Passion Week–this tells us that after the occasion recorded in John, the money-changers still got to set up shop again by the time the Synoptics tell us about; hence, it’s very likely the Jewish authorities also allowed them to set up shop again sometime after Jesus’ crucifixion)!

Are you starting to see all the intricate details that Pulliam’s interpretation of Zechariah 14 forces you to throw out the window? I fail to see how you can possibly get the understanding from the text itself that it’s all just a poetic word-picture. Which reinforces the overarching difference between how Pulliam and I handle all the passages covered in this Lesson: Where I explain these passages using exegesis (extracting ideas from the passage), Pulliam opts for eisegesis (imposing ideas on the passage).

Pulliam’s final attempt to allegorize away a passage in this Lesson is as follows:

This text is of value to the Dispensationalist as it seems to provide a vision of national victory (vv4-5), and a “government” in keeping with the old economy of Israel (v7). This entire passage applies to the Messiah’s kingdom established in the first century (cf. Mt 4:15f), and as we have already proven, He presently sits upon the throne of David.

{Ibid. 160. Italics in original.}

His appeal to Matthew 4:15 is admittedly important. Here’s the fuller context of that verse:

12 Now when Jesus heard that John had been taken into custody, He withdrew into Galilee; 13 and leaving Nazareth, He came and settled in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali. 14 This was to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet:

15 “THE LAND OF ZEBULUN AND THE LAND OF NAPHTALI,
BY THE WAY OF THE SEA, BEYOND THE JORDAN, GALILEE OF THE GENTILES—
16 “THE PEOPLE WHO WERE SITTING IN DARKNESS SAW A GREAT LIGHT,
AND THOSE WHO WERE SITTING IN THE LAND AND SHADOW OF DEATH,
UPON THEM A LIGHT DAWNED.” [Loosely quoting Isaiah 9:1-2–as for which version, I’ll explain below]

17 From that time Jesus began to preach and say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand [literally, “has neared”, perfect-tense verb; this refers to Jesus himself embodying the Kingdom of Heaven while he was on earth, as I’ve explained elsewhere {read the paragraph just above “Daniel 10 & 11”}].”

(Matthew 4:12-17 1995 NASB, all-caps in original)

This passage from Isaiah is a prime example of the chapter divisions in modern Bibles not being divinely-inspired. In the Masoretic Text, the solitary letter ס occurs at the end of Isaiah 9:7, but had last appeared beforehand at the end of 8:18. Hence, the full minor train of thought is Isaiah 8:19-9:7. Indeed, the Great Isaiah Scroll starts the paragraph with 8:19, and the next space at the start of a new line is at the beginning of 9:8. Moreover, the MT of the overall passage lines up closely with the Great Isaiah Scroll except for some variations in spelling and a handful of other trivial points that I’ll mention below. So, in light of Matthew’s divinely-inspired quotation lining up with the Masoretic Text, Septuagint, & Great Isaiah Scroll darn near equally (the first instance of “SITTING” agrees with the LXX, where the MT & Great Isaiah Scroll have “walking”; however, the verb for “DAWNED” in Matthew’s quotation is aorist indicative, agreeing with the perfect-tense verb in the MT & Great Isaiah Scroll, and against the future indicative verb in the LXX–this is probably why the late Richard Longenecker, NT scholar, listed Matthew 4:15-16 among the “Four of Matthew’s quotations [of OT prophecies that Matthew doesn’t place on the lips of Jesus that] would have made no sense at all had the LXX text been used”, alongside 2:15, 8:17, & 27:9 {“Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period: 2nd Edition”. Longenecker, Richard N. 1999. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 121. Content in brackets mine.}) let’s use Peter Flint’s translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll {Click on the image, scroll leftward to Column 8 (labeled “Col VIII – Is 8:8-9:11”), and click on each verse to see Flint’s rendering of it} as our base English text, and I’ll indicate textual variants and my own notes in brackets as we go along:

19 When [MT “And when”; LXX “And in the case that”] they say [Hebrew imperfect; LXX aorist subjunctive] to you [plural]: ‘Consult [imperative 2^nd-person plural in Hebrew & Greek] the ghosts and familiar spirits which chirp and mutter [Hebrew “toward the necromancers and toward the familiar spirits, the ones tweeting (plural active participle of an onomatopoeia for a bird chirping {scroll to “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon” & “Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon”}) and the ones muttering (plural active participle)”; LXX “the ones sounding (present active participle) from the land, and the ventriloquists (adjective), the ones talking emptily (present active participle), which out from the belly emit a sound (present active indicative)”]; should not a people consult [Hebrew Qal imperfect 3^rd-person masculine singular; LXX “seek out”, present active indicative 3^rd-person plural] their [Hebrew & Greek “its”; singular, not plural] god, or the dead for the sake of the living [Hebrew “god concerning the living ones toward the dead ones”; Greek, “god concerning the living ones and the dead ones?”, ending the question here], 20 for instruction [Hebrew & Greek “law”; the Hebrew word is where the term “Torah” comes from] and testimony? [MT agrees, ending the question here; LXX opens this verse as a new sentence: “For He gave [aorist active indicative] a law unto (or “for”; εἰς, G1519) a help,”]’-surely there will be no dawn for one who speaks like this [Hebrew “But rather they will speak (plural imperfect) not according to the word, this one, those who are without dawn for it (masculine singular, presumably referring back to “word”)”; LXX “so that they may speak (aorist active subjunctive 3^rd-person plural) not (absolute negation) according to the utterance, this one, concerning which there is (present active indicative 3^rd-person singular, presumably referring back to “this utterance”) not (absolute negation) gifts (plural) to give (aorist active infinitive) about (this Greek preposition could mean “about”, “concerning”, “on account of”, “because of”, “around”, or “near”; “with the genitive case (the instance of “this” immediately following is in the genitive case) denoting the subject or occasion or superlative point” {scroll to “Strong’s Definitions”; content in parentheses mine}) this”]. 21 They will go [Hebrew “And so he will pass (singular masculine waw-consecutive perfect)”] through it, while severely distressed [Hebrew “it, the one ill-treated (masculine singular active participle)”] and hungry [masculine singular adjective in the Hebrew]. When he is hungry [literally, “And so it will come to pass (waw-consecutive perfect), because he is hungry (masculine singular imperfect)”], he will become angry [Hebrew “therefore he will put himself in a rage (singular masculine waw-consecutive perfect; the Hithpael stem indicates this action is reflexive)”] and curse [Hebrew “and then he will curse”; waw-consecutive perfect] by his king and by his god, and look up [Hebrew, “and then he will turn (waw-consecutive perfect) to above”; Directional He present in MT & Great Isaiah Scroll] [LXX “And upon you (plural) will arrive (future active indicative 3^rd-person singular) harsh (nominative plural masculine) famine (nominative singular masculine), and it will be (future middle indicative 3^rd-person singular) as soon as {scroll to entry II.2.b. under “Thayer’s Greek Lexicon”} you (plural) might hunger (aorist active subjunctive), you (plural) will be sorrowful (future passive indicative) and you (plural) will speak (future active indicative) badly of the ruler and the idols (following the reading in Rahlfs’ Septuagint, παταχρα; other manuscripts have πατριά, meaning “family” {scroll to “21”}), and they will look up (future middle indicative 3^rd-person plural) unto the sky/heaven above”]. 22 Then he will look to the [MT “a”, lacking the definite article] land [Hebrew “And toward the (including the definite article, following Great Isaiah Scroll) land, he will look intently (Hiphil imperfect 3^rd-person masculine singular)”; LXX “And unto the land they will turn their eyes (future middle indicative 3^rd-person plural) downward”], and there will be [Hebrew & Greek literally read “and behold!”] distress and darkness, the gloom [the Hebrew word has connotations of covering with shade {scroll to “Strong’s Definitions”}] of anguish. Then they will be driven into darkness [Hebrew “And to duskiness (or misfortune; feminine singular) he will be thrusted (masculine singular Pual passive participle)]. [LXX “behold! Distress (literally, “pressure”) and dire calamity (literally, “a narrow space”) and darkness. Narrow (or “A strait of”) perplexity and darkness so that they are seeing (present active infinitive) not (conditional negation).”]

1 For one who was in anguish there will be no [literally, “they will cease from” {scroll to “Isaiah 9”}] gloom [apparently a variant spelling of the same word for “gloom” in 8:22–מוּעָף instead of מְעוּף]. [MT “For there won’t be gloom for her which had distress,”; LXX “And he will not (absolute negation) be at a loss (future passive indicative), the one being (present active participle) in distress (literally, “a narrow place”),”] In the former time [Hebrew “like the time, the former/first one”; LXX “till an appointed time, this first one”] he treated [better, “He will have treated”; note that the major trains of thought leading up to this verse (Isaiah 7:1-17, 7:18-25, & 8:1-10:19), which are presented in chronological order (per the waw-consecutive constructions at the start of 7:18 & 8:1), indicate that this prophecy was given “in the days of Ahaz… king of Judah” (Isaiah 7:1b ASV), before Ephraim was exiled!] the [definite article present in Great Isaiah Scroll, absent from MT] land [Directional He present in the MT, absent from Great Isaiah Scroll] of Zebulun and the land [the letter ה is a prefix on “land” in the Great Isaiah Scroll, acting as a definite article; but it’s a suffix on “land” in the MT, acting as a Directional He] of Naphtali with contempt (“he will have treated… with contempt” is perfect-tense), but in the latter time [MT “and the latter/last one”] he will make it glorious, by the [Hebrew “He will have made heavy (i.e., burdened; perfect) the] Way of the Sea, beyond [Hebrew “across”] the Jordan, Galilee of the nations. [LXX “first one. Act (present active imperative) swift, make (present active imperative) a territory (nominative) of Zebulun and the land (nominative) of Naphtali into a way (accusative) of the sea, and the remaining ones (nominative plural masculine), the ones dwelling (nominative plural masculine present active participle) by the (accusative singular feminine) sea, and on the other side of the Jordan, Galilee of the nations, the portions (accusative plural neuter) of Judea.”]

2 The people [singular in Hebrew & Greek] who walked [Hebrew “people, the ones walking (plural active participle)”] [Greek “The ethnic group, the one traversing (singular present middle participle)”] in darkness [Hebrew has a definite article here: “in the darkness”] have seen [plural perfect in Hebrew, Greek has the plural aorist imperative “Look!”] a great light. On those who lived in the land of deep shadows, light has shined [Hebrew “The ones dwelling (plural active participle) in a land of shade of death, a light will have shined (singular perfect) on them (plural)”; LXX “The ones dwelling (plural present active participle) in a region and a shadow of death, a light will shine (future active indicative) upon you (plural)”]. [Great Isaiah Scroll has a larger gap between sentences here and a marker under this row of text on the far right, implying a new minor train of thought is about to begin within the paragraph.] 3 You have expanded the nation, you have increased its joy. [Hebrew “You will have made great (perfect) the nation, for it You will have magnified (perfect) the joy.”; Greek “The majority (superlative form of πολύς, the adjective for “many”; i.e., “greatest part”) of the ethnic group which You (singular) led down (aorist active indicative) in joyfulness of Yours (singular).”]

They rejoice in your presence, as with the joy at harvest, as people cheer when they divide spoil. [Hebrew “They will have rejoiced (perfect) to your face, like joy in the harvest, as they spin around in excitement (imperfect) in their apportioning (infinitive construct) a spoil.”; LXX “And they will be made joyful (future passive indicative 3^rd-person plural) in the face of Yours (singular), as the ones being merry (plural masculine present middle participle of the verb for “will be made joyful”) in a reaping and that (accusative singular masculine relative pronoun) with a turning (singular accusative noun), the ones dividing among themselves (nominative plural masculine present middle participle) spoils.”] 4 For the [or “Because of a”; “yoke” is preceded by a direct object marker, not a definite article] yoke of their [Hebrew “his”; the pronominal suffix is singular, not plural] burden and the [Hebrew “a”; direct object marker, not definite article] pole [or “staff”; literally, “branch”] on their [Hebrew “his”; singular, not plural] shoulder, the [Hebrew “a”; no definite article or direct object marker] rod [or “scion”; literally, “stick”] of their oppressors [Hebrew, “of the slave driver (singular masculine active participle)”], and you have broken [Hebrew, “driver, you will have broken (or “shattered”) before him”], as in the day [Hebrew, “as a day”; no definite article or preposition for “in”] of Midiam [as spelled in the Great Isaiah Scroll, מדים; MT has מִדְיָן, which means “Midian” as a proper noun, but “strife” as a common noun] [Greek “On the very account that (i.e., “Inasmuch as”) the yoke has removed itself (perfect middle indicative 3^rd-person singular), the one lying (nominative singular masculine present middle participle) upon them (plural), and the stick (the Greek word could cover anything from a wand, cudgel, or cane to a royal baton, scepter, rod, or staff {scroll to “Outline of Biblical Usage” & “Strong’s Definitions”}), the one upon the neck (singular) of theirs (plural). For the stick (same word from earlier in the verse) of the ones asking for something back (genitive plural masculine present active participle of a verb used of “exacting something due” or “asking again”), the Lord dispersed (aorist active indicative 3^rd-person singular), as in the day, the one over Madiam”]. 5 For [or “Because”] every boot tramping [Hebrew “every sandal shod (singular active participle)”] in the tumult [Hebrew “in a shaking”; no definite article] and the garments rolled [Hebrew “and every mantle (singular) being rolled (Poal singular passive participle)”] in blood [better, “in drops of blood” or “in bloodshed”; the word for “blood” is plural] will be [Hebrew “therefore will be”; waw-consecutive perfect] burned as fuel for [Hebrew “be unto a burning (singular noun, not a verb), fuel of a”] fire [Greek “Because every equipment (singular; the Greek word refers more specifically to “a loose outer garment for men which extended to the feet” {scroll to entry 2 under “Thayer’s Greek Lexicon”; boldface omitted}) having gathered themselves together (perfect middle participle) in deceit, and every mantle with monetary reconciliation {scroll to “Outline of Biblical Usage” & “Thayer’s Greek Lexicon”} will repay (future active indicative 3^rd-person plural), and they will determine (or “they will desire”; future active indicative 3^rd-person plural) if they became (aorist passive indicative 3^rd-person plural) burnt in fire (plural adjective)”]. 6 For a child is born [Hebrew “Because a youth was begotten”; perfect] to us, a son is given [Hebrew “was given”; perfect] to us. The government will be on his shoulders [Hebrew “And so the empire (this word occurs only in these two verses, while the usual Hebrew words for “government” or “dominion” occur far more often) will be (waw-consecutive perfect) upon his shoulder (singular)”]. He is called [MT “And then his name (singular) was called (Qal waw-consecutive imperfect, picking up from “was given”)”; Great Isaiah Scroll “And so/Therefore his name (singular) will be called (Pual waw-consecutive perfect, picking up from “the empire will be”)”–the letter Yodh after the Waw is present in the MT, but absent in the Great Isaiah Scroll {scroll to “Pu.” Under “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon” for the latter spelling, וְקֹרָא”}] Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, the [MT omits this definite article] Prince of Peace [Hebrew “Wonderful Counselor to the Mighty God who is Father of Perpetuity and of the Prince of Peace”; the Hebrew word for “name” being singular implies that this whole phrase is one big compound name, rather than four shorter ones] [Greek “Because a youth was begotten (aorist passive indicative) to us, a son also was given (aorist passive indicative) to us, of whom the Beginning {scroll to entry 5 under “Thayer’s Greek Lexicon”} originated (aorist passive indicative) upon the shoulder of his, and the name (singular) of his is called (present middle indicative 3^rd-person singular) Messenger of Great Counsel (Codex Alexandrinus adds “, Wonderful Counselor, Mighty, Powerful, Prince of Peace, Father of the Age About to Be”, apparently from a revision to align the Greek closer with the Hebrew text), for I will lead (future active indicative) peace upon the rulers (plural), peace and health in him”]. 7 His government will expand, and peace will be endless [Hebrew “Unto abundance of the empire (same unique word as in the previous verse) and unto peace, without end,”] for the [Hebrew “upon the”; no definite article] throne of David and [Hebrew “and upon”] his kingdom, to establish [or “to arrange”; Hiphil infinitive construct] it [Hebrew “her”, referring back to “empire”, which is also feminine singular] and [“and” missing from the Great Isaiah Scroll, but present in the MT] to sustain [Qal infinitive construct] it [Hebrew “her”] with justice [or “judgment”; noun derived from {scroll to “Root Word (Etymology)”} the verb for “judge”] and [Hebrew “and with”] righteousness from now on and forevermore [literally, “from now and during an age;”]. The zeal [Hebrew “zeal”; no definite article] of the LORD of hosts will do [imperfect] this [or “will fashion this empire”; the demonstrative pronoun for “this” is feminine, referring again to the “empire”] [Greek “Great is the Beginning (these first 3 Greek words are all in the nominative case, so they’re the subject of the sentence) of His and of the peace of his there is [present active indicative 3^rd-person singular] no bound; upon the throne of David and the Kingdom of his (The Great Beginning), to set her (feminine, referring back to “Kingdom”) upright (aorist active infinitive) and to support (literally, “to take hold of in turn”; aorist middle infinitive) her in righteousness and in judgment, from the present and for the age of time (εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον). The zeal (nominative case, implying the subject is no longer “The Great Beginning”) of the Lord Sabaōth (σαβαωθ, the Greek transliteration of צְבָאוֹת, the Hebrew word for “of Hosts”) will do (future active indicative) these things (accusative plural neuter)”].

For starters, it should be obvious that the LXX translators decided to paraphrase this passage {see here for a more detailed discussion of the last two verses in particular, which explains the verbs for “begotten” & “given” being past-tense and the significance of “the Beginning” in the LXX of verse 6}, rather than giving a formal translation of it; hence, the Hebrew versions should be given priority throughout this discussion, as the original reading is preserved between them. Still, I felt it was worthwhile to translate the whole LXX version of this passage as accurately as I could, for the sake of completeness.

The passage opens with a remark to a plural “you”, which seems to refer to Isaiah himself as representative of faithful Israel, in light of the preceding context (note that Isaiah 8:11 opens with “For thus the LORD spoke to me [singular]”–1995 NASB–yet all the 2^nd-person terms in what God said to him in verses 12-13 are plural); that all 12 tribes of Israel are included here, rather than just Benjamin & Judah (Isaiah’s ministry spanned the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, & Hezekiah, kings of Judah–Isaiah 1:1– and ancient Jewish tradition holds that he was martyred in the reign of Hezekiah’s son Manasseh–2 Kings 20:21–yet the northern tribes were exiled in Hezekiah’s reign, so this is important to clarify!) is clear from verses 17-18.

The sentence structure indicates that verses 19 & 20 function together as a complete sentence, with the bulk of it being a conditional statement: “When they (unfaithful Israelites) say to you (faithful Israelites): ‘Consult toward the necromancers and toward the familiar spirits, the ones tweeting and the ones muttering; should not a people consult its god concerning the living ones toward the dead ones, for law and testimony?’–but rather they will speak not according to the word, this one, those who are without dawn for it (the word).” Isaiah is warning faithful Israelites to not treat necromancers and mediums as their gods. Isaiah then explains in verses 21-22 what will happen to an unfaithful Israelite (note all the singular verbs) who follows the hypothetical advice God is warning against: “And so he will pass through it, the one ill-treated and hungry. And so it will come to pass, because he is hungry, therefore he will put himself in a rage, and then he will curse by his king and by his god, and then he will turn to above. And toward the land, he will look intently, and behold! Distress and darkness, the gloom of anguish. And to duskiness he will be thrusted.” Certainly a dire situation to wind up in.

But then Isaiah goes on in the first verse of chapter 9 (or, if you go by the Jewish verse numbering, the last verse of chapter 8) to introduce a contrast, explaining what will happen to faithful Israelites who were distressed in his own time: “For there won’t be gloom for her which had distress, like the time, the first one, He will have treated with contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and the last one (i.e., the last time), He made heavy the way of the sea, across the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.” Compare this with the quotation of this verse in Matthew 4:15–“Land of Zaboulon and Land of Nephthalim, way of sea, on the other side of the Jordan, Galilaia of the nations” (my word-for-word translation of γῆ Ζαβουλὼν καὶ γῆ Νεφθαλίμ ὁδὸν θαλάσσης πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου Γαλιλαία τῶν ἐθνῶν–NA28). Pay careful attention to the key phrases Matthew omitted from his quotation of this verse that his original Jewish readers would’ve reinserted in their heads while reading it. Interpreting this quotation properly (i.e., in light of both contexts at once), we see that Isaiah was foretelling, in the days of Judah’s king Ahaz, that God would place gloom and distress on the lands of Zebulun & Naphtali (which gives us the additional detail that Isaiah gave this particular prophecy before these tribes were exiled under the Assyrians; this would explain why the LXX translators understood the Hebrew word רִאשׁוֹן as meaning “foremost” rather than “former” in this context–and hence, why we should do the same), and that afterward (as implied by the Hebrew word וְהָאַחֲרוֹן, which could also be rendered “and the subsequent”), He’d burden “the Way of the Sea (a major trade route along the Mediterranean, connecting Egypt with Syria by passing through Israel), across the Jordan (the land of Gilead), Galilee of the nations (which roughly coincided with the tribal land of Issachar, Zebulun, & Naphtali, as can be seen by viewing this map and this map side-by-side)”. According to BibleRef, those latter three areas wound up corresponding to three districts of the Assyrian empire following the conquest of the northern tribes:

Assyrian records from that time show that this conquered, occupied region was divided into three Assyrian districts. Isaiah mentions those same three districts in this passage. “Galilee of the Gentiles” was also known as the Megiddo province: from the Litani River in the north to the Valley of Jezreel. “The way of the sea” is the Dor province: along the Mediterranean from Joppa to Haifa. And “along the Jordan” or “beyond the Jordan” is Gilead: territories east of the Jordan River from the Dead Sea to the Sea of Galilee. {Hyperlink added. Scroll to “What does Isaiah 9:1 mean?”, and click the first instance of “Expand”.}

Yet, Matthew was saying that after being tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1-11), by beginning his ministry in Zebulun and Naphtali, dwelling in Capernaum on the coast of the Sea of Galilee, Jesus was fulfilling the promise at the start of the verse: “For there won’t be gloom for her which had distress, like [when the Assyrians conquered the lands identified above]”. Likewise, apart from a substitution of singular Greek terms for plural Hebrew terms in the first half, Isaiah 9:2 and Matthew 4:16 are substantially identical:

The people, the ones walking [plural] in the darkness have seen [plural] a great light. The ones dwelling in a land of shade of death, a light will have shined on them. (Isaiah 9:2, my right-to-left translation)

The ethnic group, the one abiding [singular] in darkness, a great light he stared at [singular], and for those abiding in a region and shadow of death, a light rose unto them. (Matthew 4:16, my word-for-word translation)

In essence, Jesus’ ministry starting in the regions identified above and shining a light on the people living in these regions (note that the regions themselves aren’t included as subjects in those clauses!) effectively undid the “treating with contempt” and the “burdening” that had begun centuries before! This shows that Isaiah 9:1-2 was indeed prophesying of the time when the Messiah would begin his ministry in Galilee. But does this mean that the entire passage was fulfilled at that time? Obviously not, since we just saw that the bulk of verse 1 was fulfilled in the days of the Assyrian empire! Moreover, consider the verse immediately following the portion Matthew quoted: “You will have made great the nation, for it You will have magnified the joy. They will have rejoiced to your face, like joy in the harvest, as they spin around in excitement in their apportioning a spoil.” How does Pulliam harmonize this verse with his view that the nation of Israel, having no further purpose in God’s plan, would be discarded, never to be restored again, just over 4 decades after Isaiah 9:1-2 was fulfilled?

And now we’ve reached the portion of the passage that Pulliam tried to explain away: “Because of a yoke of his burden and a branch on his shoulder, a stick of the slave driver, you will have shattered before him, as a day of Midiam.” It’s tempting to simply interpret the end of verse 4 as saying “as a day of strife”, but the LXX has Μαδιαμ (“Madiam”), demonstrating not only that the Great Isaiah Scroll’s reading is simply a variant spelling of the same name, but also that the LXX translators understood the Hebrew word as a proper noun instead of a common noun here. In this case, the “day of Midiam” harks back to Judges 7:22-25.

And they sounded with the three hundred horns; and the Lord set every man’s sword in all the host against his neighbour.
And the host fled as far as Bethseed Tagaragatha Abel-meula to Tabath; and the men of Israel from Nephthali, and from Aser, and from all Manasse, came to help, and followed after Madiam.
And Gedeon sent messengers into [literally, “in”] all mount Ephraim, saying, Come down to meet Madiam, and take to yourselves the water as far as Bæthera and Jordan: and every man of Ephraim cried out, and they took the water before hand unto Bæthera and Jordan. And they took the princes of Madiam, even Oreb and Zeb; and they slew Oreb in Sur Oreb, and they slew Zeb in Jakephzeph; and they pursued Madiam, and brought the heads [literally, “head”; singular in Hebrew & Greek] of Oreb and Zeb to Gedeon from beyond Jordan. (BLXX, boldface added)

This military pursuit was part of a chain of other exploits led by the judge Gideon, which God had enabled as a response to the Israelites crying out because of Midianite oppression (and note that the entire paragraph below is a complete major train of thought in the Masoretic Text):

Then the sons of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD gave them into the hands of Midian seven years. The power of Midian prevailed against Israel. Because of Midian the sons of Israel made for themselves the dens which were in the mountains and the caves and the strongholds. For it was when Israel had sown, that the Midianites would come up with the Amalekites and the sons of the east and go against them. So they would camp against them and destroy the produce of the earth as far as Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel as well as no sheep, ox, or donkey. For they would come up with their livestock and their tents, they would come in like locusts for number, both they and their camels were innumerable; and they came into the land to devastate it. So Israel was brought very low because of Midian, and the sons of Israel cried to the LORD. (Judges 6:1-6 1995 NASB)

But since Isaiah 9:4 says that “a stick of the slave driver, you will have shattered before him, as a day of Midiam”, this is clearly just a comparison to the overthrowing of the Midianite oppressors in Gideon’s day; hence, Midian (assuming the Midianites still have living descendants–as far as scholarship can tell, they married & assimilated into other cultures in what is now Saudi Arabia sometime after the Period of the Judges, and so lost their national identity) need not be the culprit behind the “burden” on the Israelites’ shoulders in the days leading up to this prophecy’s fulfillment. As for who the 3^rd-person masculine terms “his” and “him” refer to in Isaiah 9:4, this could easily be referring to the Antichrist, in light of another connection with Isaiah’s reference to him a few chapters later:

The LORD of hosts has sworn:
“As I have planned,
so shall it be,
and as I have purposed,
so shall it stand,

that I will break the Assyrian in my land,
and on my mountains trample him underfoot;
and his yoke shall depart from them (plural),
and his burden from their (singular) shoulder.”

This is the purpose that is purposed
concerning the whole earth,
and this is the hand that is stretched out
over all the nations.

For the LORD of hosts has purposed,
and who will annul it?
His hand is stretched out,
and who will turn it back?

(Isaiah 14:24-27 ESV, boldface and underlining added)

As I’ve explained elsewhere, the use of the plural “them” and the singular “their” in parallel statements in verse 25 implies that “the Assyrian” will head a single government tyrannically ruling multiple nations; together with the facts that the king of Assyria who harassed Judah in Isaiah’s day, Sennacherib, didn’t die on Israel’s mountains (2 Kings 19:36-37, 2 Chronicles 32:21, Isaiah 37:37-38), and that the events prophesied here concern “the whole earth” and “all the nations”, it’s difficult to understand “the Assyrian” in this major train of thought (Isaiah 14:24-27 has a solitary פ immediately before and immediately after it in the Masoretic Text) as being anyone other than the Antichrist.

Verse 5 goes on to reassure the Israelites at the time of the prophecy’s fulfillment that “every sandal shod in a shaking and mantle being rolled in bloodshed therefore will be unto a burning, fuel of a fire.” Even the war equipment of their oppressors would be incinerated! What does this represent, Pulliam? After all, Christians are still being persecuted and even martyred to this day (e.g., see this story published less than three days before I published this post)! Clearly, verses 4 & 5 (and the other OT passages connected with them) are speaking of oppression being overthrown in a political realm–exactly the implication Pulliam is trying to deny!

And then comes the most famous portion of the whole passage, the first portion of which is unfortunately mistranslated in most English Bibles to make it sound like it was prophesying the Son’s virgin birth, rather than being a statement of fact about his begetting by the Father as “the Beginning” (Proverbs 8:22-25 LXX; in addition to the earlier discussion about John’s distinction between “the one who was begotten” and “the whole collective having been begotten”, consider again Gabriel’s implication to Mary that the Son had already been begotten before his conversation with her: “And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come [future middle indicative] upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow [future active indicative] thee: wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten [nominative singular neuter present passive participle] shall be called [future passive indicative] the Son of God.”–Luke 1:35 ASV, boldface and underlining added). I’ve here adjusted my hyper-wooden rendering above to account for the fact that most of verse 7 is a dependent clause, with the independent clause being all the way at the end of the verse:

For a youth was begotten for us, a son was given for us. And so the empire will be upon his shoulder. Therefore his name will be called “Wonderful Counselor to the Mighty God who is Father of Perpetuity and of the Prince of Peace”. Unto abundance of the empire and unto peace, without end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to arrange her, to sustain her, with judgment and with righteousness, from this time and as far as an age, zeal of YHWH of hosts will fashion this empire. (Isaiah 9:6-7, my right-to-left translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll)

Again, both instances of “her” and the final “this” (which is feminine) refer to the Messiah’s Empire, the only feminine antecedent from verse 6. In light of the imperfect verb “will fashion” in the independent clause of verse 7, the phrase “this time” near the end of the dependent clause must refer back in the context to the time when “the empire will be upon his shoulder”. All in all, there’s no reason to think the events associated with future-tense verbs have already come to pass, especially in light of the repeated quotations of Psalm 110:1 in the NT: “An utterance of YHWH to my Lord: ‘You, sit (imperative) at My right side until I am in the process of making (the proper sense of the imperfect) your enemies (active participle) a footstool for your feet.’” (Psalm 110:1 my right-to-left translation, underlining added) The numerous NT quotations of this verse as a present reality from Pentecost onward imply that in the first century, “the process of making your enemies a footstool for your feet” hadn’t even begun yet!