sermonette: Symbolism, Types, and Prophecies
Analysis of Zion
John W. Ritenbaugh
Given 22-Feb-03; Sermon #598s; 17 minutes
Description: (show)
We must be careful about applying a biblical symbol to prophetic events too rigidly. The term 'Zion' may apply to the church, but there are contexts when it is improper to assign this term exclusively to this purpose. Having its origin as two different place names, the term may also generalize to the city of David, the nation of Israel, Mount Moriah, the mountains of Jerusalem, and finally the church. To ascribe all references to Zion as the church would be inappropriate. Consistency is needed in viewing the historical and prophetic contexts.
There is a proclivity among eager but misguided students of Bible prophecy to assign virtually every appearance of certain symbols and types in the Bible as always applying to both the end time and to the same spiritual entity. But the key word here is always because the Bible is not always that consistent. Well, if one is going to be accurate, one must be careful and honest. Now a clear example is the term Zion. Now many assume that this always refers to the church. I'm speaking in a prophecy here prophetically. It's quite easy to make that assumption, but to do so would be careless and it might lead to one making serious errors in understanding a prophecy. Now if you would take the time to look up the origin of this term, you would find that it is lost in the fog of ancient history. Honest researchers will tell you that they do not know its origin, but they can make a fairly accurate guess that it originally referred to a geographical feature of some kind. But it became a place name. Fort Mill, for example, is a place name. Now, the term is usually spelled Z I O N, but the first time that we run into it in the Bible is in Deuteronomy 448, where it is spelled S I O N. Now, according to my edition of Strong's, it refers to the peak of Mount Herman. But the term Zion. became prominent in II Samuel 5 and 7 and in I Chronicles 11 verses 4 through 9. Now we are going to look at the first Chronicles reference. Chapter 11 and verses 4 through 9. And David and all Israel went to Jerusalem, which is Jebus, where the Jebusites were, the inhabitants of the land, and the inhabitants of Jebus said to David, You shall not come hither. Nevertheless, David took the castle of Zion, which is the city of David. And David said, Whosoever smites the Jebusites first shall be chief and captain. And so Joab, the son of Zerewih, went up, went first up and was chief, and David dwelt in the castle. Therefore they called it the city of David. And he built the city around about, even from Milo round about, and Joab repaired the rest of the city. And so David waxed greater and greater and the Lord of hosts was with him. Zion was a small hill located in the southern sector of Jerusalem between the Kidron Valley on the east and the Tyroian Valley on the west. Now the Jebusites considered Zion and its castle to be impregnable. And so they taunted David, but he and his men captured it anyway, and it was renamed the city of David. Now it was to this place that David later brought the ark, which was the holiest piece of furniture from the tabernacle. Now because of the ark, Zion became to be identified then as the place of God's house. Now later, roughly about 50 years later, Solomon built the temple and the ark was then moved. To the location of the temple on Mount Moria, which was almost directly north of Mount Zion, and then that location came to be known as Zion. So now in the Bible we have two different locations within the city of Jerusalem, and they are both identified as Zion. The original Zion, the city of David, remained the headquarters for governing the nation, while the location on Mount Moria, also called Zion, became identified as the spiritual headquarters of Jerusalem, but both were called Zion. But as time moved on, The proliferation of Zion also moved on because the Bible's writers began to simply refer to the entire city of Jerusalem. The capital of Judah has Zion. Now we have 3 possible zays to choose from as you study prophecy. But it did not stop there either. In the Psalms, the poets sometimes apply Zion to the entire nation of Israel. The reasoning being the reasoning being that because the Israelites were the people of
God, and God dwelt with and in them. The word in is the key here, and God dwelt in Zion, the entire nation was now Zion. Now there are 4 za in the Bible. But it still did not end there. Because in
Hebrews 12:22, The place of God's throne in heaven is heavenly Zion. But there is still yet one more veiled reference in both Psalm 125 and 133 to all of the mountains of Jerusalem as being Zion. That makes 6 different places called Zion, the city of David, Mount Moria, the city of Jerusalem, the nation of Judah, all the mountains of Jerusalem, the heavenly place of God's throne. Now the Bible interpreters have added one more. The church Primarily on the basis of
Hebrews 12:22. Now when you find Zion in a prophecy, Which one is not? Which one is being referred to? Now here is where things are most likely to go awry. Now, the answer is to be very careful when trying to interpret the context in which it appears. Now we are going to go to Mica 4 and verse 2 as an example. Micah 4 and verse 2 and Micah is right after Jonah. Oh Micah is famous as a book. Uh, in a major way. Because of this context, Micah was a contemporary of Isaiah, and these some of these verses appear in both books, the one in Isaiah 2 and here in Isaiah 4. You'll recognize it immediately. And many nations shall come and say, come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob, and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in his paths, for the law shall go forth of Zion and the word of the Lord. From Jerusalem. Now is it the city of David? Is it the city of Jerusalem? Is it Mount Moriah? Is it the mountains of Jerusalem? Is at the church. Well, the verse tells you. We're looking at a Hebraeism. In which they will make a statement, then they will make another statement directly after that, that amplifies the preceding statement and explains it at the same time. Zion. Is the city of Jerusalem. And he shall judge among many people and rebuke strong nations afar off, and they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore, but they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree. And none shall make them afraid, for the mouth of the Lord of hosts hath spoken it, for all people will walk everyone in the name of his God, and we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever. And in that day, says the Lord, I will assemble her that halted, and I will gather her that is driven out. And her that I have
afflicted, and I will make her that halted a remnant and her that was cast off a strong nation. And the Lord shall reign over them in Mount Zion. Now the metaphor, the type has shifted to a more specific location. Even forever. And you, O Tower of of the flock, the stronghold of the daughter of Zion. Now here we, here we have another linkage with this word. Unto you shall it come even the first dominion, the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Zion. Now why do you cry out aloud? Is there no king in you? Is your counselor perished? For pangs have taken you as a woman in travail, be in pain and labor to bring forth, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in Travail, for now you shall go forth out of the city, and you shall dwell in the field, and you shall go even to Babylon, and there shall you be delivered. There the Lord shall redeem you from the hand of your enemies. OK, now he talks about Mount Zion in verse 7 and infers that it is strictly a mountain. But when we begin to go a little bit further, we can make a more specific connection. Through daughter of Jerusalem. Now daughter of Jerusalem. Means the offspring of Jerusalem. And if you look again in commentaries or in a book like the Dictionary of Biblical imagery, they will tell you that it means the citizens of the city, male and female, both identified as daughters. It's a bit more I want to say Romantic. That's not the right word though, gentle, gentler term. Uh, then one would infer to masculinity. It's showing a tender feeling as well. No. Overall, the entire context there. is actually talking about The city of Jerusalem. It gives the term Mount Zion in verse 7, only to show we will say the exact spot from which God Himself will be ruling. It's Mount Zion, meaning Mount Moriah, and the city he is talking about in verse 10 is going to go forth from it into captivity, into Babylon. Now, can you tell something here? In the beginning, we were talking about a time that was millennial. By the time we get to about verse 8, it has shifted, and now we are talking about something that is pre-millennial. You have to be very careful. Because sometimes the prophecy will go back and forth from one to the other with seemingly in a seamless way in which there is no paragraph break, you just have to be able to discern it. So right here in this context, We are presented with two places of Zion, two different circumstances for Zion. Now can this apply to the church? See, here is where some people can really go off. Well, one thing to understand is that this prophecy does not stand alone. It dovetails perfectly with Jeremiah's prophecy of the same thing. Micah lived 125 years or so before Jeremiah, but Jeremiah completed the prophecy to a much greater degree. And we find out in Jeremiah what God was talking about in Micah. Here in verse 10 was Jerusalem, the Jews going into captivity in Babylon, returning 70 years later, a free people. And in Jeremiah we find that Jeremiah counseled the people that when you go into captivity, settle down, buy homes, buy land, have babies because you're going to be there for a while. So the two prophecies go together, which makes it appear very strongly that to apply this. To the church in the future is vague and weak at the very least. There is only a spider's thread. Of a possibility that there will be a parallel for the church later on primarily because of what Jeremiah has to say as he completes the specifics of the prophecy. So this is a prophecy for the church to people to leave their homes, to go out in the field, that is to a distant rural area, and then on to Babylon. It's a question mark. Is it? I do not think so. Do you know why? Because spiritually, the church is already in Babylon. We do not have to go anywhere to be in it. We are already in it. We are to come out of it. Not go in it. We are to be delivered spiritually from it. So if a prophecy is going to be interpreted honestly and accurately, everything has to be interpreted in the same manner. The interpreter cannot jump back and forth between a physical application and a spiritual one without forcing the prophecy into saying something that was never intended. Consistency is the key. Well, there was one other word that I was going to go into, going to go into, but I will not. It's the word woman. This is another one that ties people up because people want to apply that one to the church all the time. It doesn't work. Because sometimes woman means is as we shall see.
