Zechariah 14 is one of the key texts that support s premillennial eschatology. In this chapter the Second Coming of the Messiah is described. He returns and stands on the Mount of Olives (14:4; Acts 1:11-12), conquers his enemies (14:3, 12-15), and reigns as king over a restored earth (14:8-9, 16). And yet the chapter indicates that some of the nations will refuse to come to Jerusalem to worship. As a result they will be judged with drought (14:16-19). The presence of disobedience and judgment after the return of the Messiah supports the conception of a Millennial period that precedes the New Heaven and New Earth.
Greg Beale proposes an amillennial reading of this chapter. He suggests that the event of this chapter are focused on the church age. In his first coming Christ defeated the nations (Ps. 2:8-9, which begins to be fulfilled at the resurrection). The judgment Zechariah speaks of is judgment on nations that “feigned” belief in Christ during the church age.
This interpretation is not compelling. It ignores the broader context of Zechariah 12-14, which focuses on Israel’s restoration in the last days. It neglects that Psalm 2, while beginning to be fulfilled with the resurrection, is not completely fulfilled until the return of the Messiah. Also correlation of this passage with other passages points towards locating this chapter at the Second Coming rather than at the church age (e.g., 14:4; Acts 1:11-12).
Beale also raises two objections against the premillennial reading. First, he notes that Zach. 14:11 (alluded to by Rev. 22:3) says there will be no more curse. This verse cannot be referred to the eternal state because “v. 11 is a continuation of a narrative of the period directly following God’s defeat of the unbelieving nations in vv. 1-3, which is narrated again in vv. 12-15, all of which directly precedes the purported millennial period.” Second, Beale says this passage is inconsistent with premillennialism because it involves judgment during the Millennium whereas premillennialists believe the judgment occurs at the end of the Millennium.
This second objection is easily dismissed. There is nothing inconsistent with national judgments taking place on disobedient nations during the Millennium and a final judgment of individuals at the end of the Millennium. The first objection is also easily answered by paying attention to the details of the text. Verse 11 does not say the entire earth will be free from the curse. The context of verse 11 is in the land of Israel and not the earth as a whole. Verse 10 specifies boundaries that identify the land under consideration. The focus of both verses 10 and 11 is clearly Jerusalem. So in context verse 11 speaks of the removal of the curse in the land of Israel (or perhaps more specifically, in Jerusalem). The allusion to this verse in Revelation 22:3 does not contradict this interpretation. Old Testament promises to Israel are often expanded beyond their original specifications by the NT (the New Covenant being a primary example). There is nothing inconsistent in the curse being removed from Israel or Jerusalem during the Millennium with that blessing being extended in the New Earth and New Jerusalem.
G. K. Beale, "The Millennium in Revelation 20:1-10: An Amillennial Perspective," Criswell Theological Review, NS 11, no. 1 (Fall 2013): 61-62.