Amillennialism: A Hostile Attitude to the Throne of David?

Dr. Bob

I think an important qualifier there is "The modern nation of" Israel. We all agree Israel was in covenant with God until the first century--after that it's a matter of interpretation. Let's not get into this "making God a liar thing." I've heard that too many times and it consistently generates more heat than light.

In Christ,

Tim

 

Hi Tim. I'm back, finally! This has not been a month that I've had time to spend on the computer!
OK, where were we? Oh yes; the suspension of the kingdom based in Jerusalem by virtue of Judah being taken captive by Babylon.

Remember, 2 Sam, 7:16. The throne of David would be established forever. David's "house" (dynasty) would be established forever. Now, perhaps there are conditions placed on the eternal nature of this Davidic kingdom in scripture, but if there is, I'm unaware of it. It seems to me to be an unconditional promise by God.
But God most assuredly put conditions on the Israelites enjoying the physical kingdom based in Jerusalem. 1 Kings 9: 4-9 makes that abundantly clear, as does 1Kings 11. And as Ezekiel 21:9-13; 26,27 makes plain, those conditions were not met.
OK, so now what? God has this unconditional promise to David that He must fulfill to keep His word, but at the same time, Solomon (and those after him) has not followed God. God promised that if they did not, He would remove them from the land and that the Temple would be a by-word to the nations.

(5) Then I will establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever, as I promised to David thy father, saying, There shall not fail thee a man upon the throne of Israel. (6) But if ye shall at all turn from following me, ye or your children, and will not keep my commandments and my statutes which I have set before you, but go and serve other gods, and worship them: (7) Then will I cut off Israel out of the land which I have given them; and this house, which I have hallowed for my name, will I cast out of my sight; and Israel shall be a proverb and a byword among all people:

There's the warning,...

(12) Cry and howl, son of man: for it shall be upon my people, it shall be upon all the princes of Israel: terrors by reason of the sword shall be upon my people: smite therefore upon thy thigh. (13) Because it is a trial, and what if the sword contemn even the rod? it shall be no more, saith the Lord GOD.
Eze 21:26-27 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. (27) I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.

...And there's the sad result.

Now what? Amos has a promise for Israel. Chapter 9 starts as a warning of destruction, but ends with encouragement.

Amo 9:11-12 In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: (12) That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.

One day David's dynasty was to be restored.
Both Jesus and John the Baptist started their ministries with one message. "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand". (Matt.3:2; Matt. 4:17) Jesus presented Himself to the people of Israel as the promised Messiah. He claimed to be sent by God the Father. Yet the religious rulers of His day rejected Him. At the Triumphal Entry, He wept because of this...

Luk 19:41-44 And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, (42) Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. (43) For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, (44) And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

Because of their rejection, David's dynasty could not at that time be built "as in the days of old", (Amos 9:11).
However, the dynasty was reestablished at Christ's coming.

Act 15:13-17 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: (14) Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. (15) And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, (16) After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: (17) That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.


But, remember Gen. 49? The promise of a scepter to Judah, until "Shiloh" came? Remember 2Sam.7 ? The promise of a never ending dynasty to David's line? Remember Eze. 21 ? the suspension of the dynasty until the One came to whom it belonged?

Tim, you wrote...

My second step:
2. Remember that Scripture is written for us but not to us.
Basically what we've discussed in the posts above emphasize this point. Consider the historical context. The text must have some relevance to the original audience. A spiritual kingdom in their time is more relevant than a way-distant physical kingdom.

I'm not sure where you're coming from here. I don't think a spiritual kingdom was more relevant to the people of Christ's day than a physical kingdom. But they didn't realize that the physical kingdom was off in the distant future. Look...

Act 1:6-7 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? (7) And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

I don't think that the disciples were looking for a spiritual kingdom. Jesus told them that it wasn't for them to know. Also...

Luk 23:50-51 And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just: (51) (The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them he was of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.

I don't think Joseph was waiting for a spiritual kingdom. And why did the disciples ask Him when the kingdom would be restored after they had heard Him say...

Luk 17:20-21 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: (21) Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Why did He say that the time wasn't for them to know, why not just say; "I've already told you, it's within you", or something like that?
But in that passage cited above, Jesus does an interesting thing. After answering the Pharisees, He turns to His disciples and says,...

Luk 17:22-30 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. (23) And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them. (24) For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. (25) But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation. (26) And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. (27) They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. (28) Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; (29) But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. (30) Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Some people want to make this part of the passage to be referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. I don't think so. The destruction of Jerusalem couldn't be said to resemble " For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.
So, what are we to make of Jesus reply to the question in Luke 17? It looks to me like He spoke of two separate phase's of the kingdom. One phase that is inside of men, (the Holy Spirit), and another, future kingdom that will be glorious in it's appearing.

This can be shown by careful study of the passages with the word "kingdom" in them.

Mat 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

There was obviously a kingdom that the Pharisees could have entered. They wouldn't go in, and they wouldn't permit others to go in.

Col 1:12-13 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: (13) Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Paul told those at Colosse that they had already been translated into the kingdom of Christ. Past tense. But he also said, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light. They had already been placed in the kingdom, (past tense), but would inherit it (future tense).

Mat 25:32-34 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: (33) And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. (34) Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

This is clearly speaking of the 2nd coming and of a future kingdom.

Mat 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

Same here.

Luk 11:2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.

Why teach them to pray that the Father's kingdom come if He had been teaching them that it was already here?

Luk 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

When would they see Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom?

Luk 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.

I thought He had already told them that the kingdom was inside them? I thought He had rebuked the Pharisees for not entering, and not allowing others to enter the kingdom? He had. Christ and the apostles spoke of the kingdom in two different phases. A current spiritual kingdom and a future, coming physical kingdom.

This is what I was talking about when I said that you seemed to have an "either/or" approach to the kingdom. You seem to think the scriptures either have to be referring to a spiritual kingdom or a literal, physical one, but couldn't be teaching that there is both. I think that the context has to be applied to discover which phase of the kingdom is being referred to.

I'm going to stop here, but maybe I can come back and finish up the next time. What I think I have established so far is that the "kingdom" in the New Testament is spoken of in two different phases. A spiritual phase and a future physical phase.
Next time, I'll address some of the specific passages that you mentioned, cover the "vast time gaps" in Old Testament prophecy and show why I believe there has to be a future, literal, physical kingdom.

'Til then,
Jim

 

Jim,
You gave me a lot to digest--but let me take a small bite for now: I do believe that there will be a greater manifestation of the kingdom in the future--physically. But I believe that will be for eternity--the ultimate "new heavens and new earth", rather than being the so-called "millenium".

Christ did initiate His spiritual kingdom during His ministry, but it was not yet established. It was fully established when the rival kingdom was put down, i.e. the apostate nation of Israel. That kingdom had come under Satan's control and was decidedly anti-Christ. When Christ destroyed that physical kingdom, the saints inherited the true kingdom, i.e. they were the sole claimants to being the kingdom of God.

To me, this explains the "now, but more-so later" nature of Christ's references to the kingdom. This kind of earlier initiation (beginning), and later establishment (making sure and strong) of a kingdom is reflected in the O.T. theocracy of David and Solomon. David initiated the reign of his line, but Solomon reigned in the established kingdom. This seems to be the reason that David was prohibited from building the Temple, leaving it for Solomon. Ultimately I think this typology all points to the Messainic kingdom of the N.T.--Christ won the crucial victory to initiate the kingdom, then later established His kingdom by destroying His enemies (primarily in Jerusalem). Thus the church inherits the victorious kingdom of Christ.

Restated, Christ ascended to the throne of David at the Father's right hand, like David, He fought against the enemies of his kingdom until they were defeated and then allowed his children to inherit the kingdom. Yet greater victories lie ahead (like victory over death), but the kingdom is now established with Christ as King all ready.

Does that address some of your questions about my view?

In Christ,

Tim