• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Old Testament Kingdom Prophecies. Literally or spiritually understood?

Status
Not open for further replies.

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Violence to the truth is what you do when disseminating falsehoods like this.

Use you Bible Yesh like you claim to do. Where does Christ ever say it's an earthly throne?

Revelation 20!

Where in Rev 20 does it state that its an earthly throne?

You people 'imagine' a lot of things and pass it along as scriptural fact when it is not.

Where in Rev 20 does it state that its an earthly throne?
 

George Antonios

Well-Known Member
Those two kingdoms – the spiritual and the physical – are not the same kingdom, yet in in a way they are because together they form a whole realm under God. Your spirit and your body are not the same thing, yet both of them are you, a single person [hopefully]. To confuse the two would be a mistake, and to completely separate the two would be a mistake. So it is with the following two Biblical expressions:
1) the kingdom of God and 2) the kingdom of heaven.
The expression the kingdom of God is basically a reference to the spiritual aspect of the kingdom as God is a spirit (Jn.4:24).
The expression the kingdom of heaven is basically a reference to the physical aspect of the kingdom, as heaven is a place (Rev.12:8, 20:11).
But since God is in heaven, it is normal to think of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven as referring to the same thing, especially when you read equivalent statements:

Kingdoms Harmonizing.gif

So it appears these two expressions refer to the same kingdom. The confounding element is that the expression kingdom of God – though mostly a reference to the spiritual aspect of the kingdom – is a general expression which sometimes refers to the holistic aspect of the kingdom – both spiritual and physical. It’s as with the term “America” which sometimes refers to the nation and sometimes to the continent – which also includes the nation – and the main way to tell the difference is the context. Likewise, the term “kingdom of God” sometimes refers to the narrower physical/political kingdom of God and sometimes to the wider and fundamentally spiritual kingdom of God – which also includes the physical/political kingdom of heaven:


Kingdom of God like saying America.gif
The spiritual kingdom and the physical kingdom are part of the same overall kingdom, but they are not the same and that will begin to explain what the Lord called the mystery of the kingdom of God (Mark 4:11). The lower two are never identical. The expression the kingdom of God can refer to the kingdom of heaven when the context is physical/political/Israelitish, but when the context is spiritual it cannot; and vice-versa the expression the kingdom of heaven can never refer to the spiritual aspect of the kingdom of God.

Any study that fails to note the following differences between the two aspects of the kingdom is non-scriptural study:

Kingdoms Differing 1.gif

Kingdoms Differing 2.gif Kingdoms Differing 3.gif Kingdoms Differing 4.gif
 

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
If this passage is talking about both the throne of David and the throne of the Kingdom of God in the teachings of Jesus, then we have God as a descendant of David--"thy seed."
Peter preached an Amillennial gospel of the Kingdom at Pentecost, including the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ that placed Jesus on David's throne in Heaven. This also would define the gospel of the Kingdom from that point on that Paul and the others preached.
 

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
Is it correct to interpret this as meaning one must be of your eschatalogical position to be saved?
It's not future eschatology. It's fulfilled eschatology.
“But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.” Luke 11:20 (KJV 1900)
 

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
Reference please? God's throne as in possession or God's throne in that God sat on it?

According to Hebrews 12:2, Jesus is currently not on the throne of God, but seated to the right of it. "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God."

Is Jesus God? Then consider the implications of Hebrews


“Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was established greatly.” 1 Kings 2:12 (KJV 1900)

“Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him.” 1 Chronicles 29:23 (KJV 1900)

“To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.” Revelation 3:21 (KJV 1900)

“And of all my sons, (for the LORD hath given me many sons,) he hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the LORD over Israel.” 1 Chronicles 28:5 (KJV 1900)

“Blessed be the LORD thy God, which delighted in thee to set thee on his throne, to be king for the LORD thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do judgment and justice.” 2 Chronicles 9:8 (KJV 1900)

“And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:” Revelation 22:1–3 (KJV 1900)
 

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
Messiah yet to set upon it!
Acts 15:16–18

16 ‘After this I will return, and I will rebuild the fallen tent of David; I will rebuild its ruins and restore it,

17 so that the rest of humanity may seek the Lord, namely, all the Gentiles I have called to be my own,’ says the Lord, who makes these things

18 known from long ago.

“Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.” Acts 2:30–33 (KJV 1900)
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Peter preached an Amillennial gospel of the Kingdom at Pentecost, including the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ that placed Jesus on David's throne in Heaven. This also would define the gospel of the Kingdom from that point on that Paul and the others preached.
Sorry, nope. Peter used the same terminology that Paul did, "revelation" (Greek apokalupsis). there is no way in the world for you to prove an amil position from Peter. All you have is an argument from silence, which is no argument at all. Peter had several general statements about the Second Coming, but they were certainly not amil statements. Just to be sure, I just read 1 & 2 Peter once again, and I'm right.
 

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
Sorry, nope. Peter used the same terminology that Paul did, "revelation" (Greek apokalupsis). there is no way in the world for you to prove an amil position from Peter. All you have is an argument from silence, which is no argument at all. Peter had several general statements about the Second Coming, but they were certainly not amil statements. Just to be sure, I just read 1 & 2 Peter once again, and I'm right.
Peter preached the same Amillennialism Jesus preached. A present spiritual Kingdom with Jesus resurrected into heaven where he as God rules all. Paul furthers this saying he will rule until he destroys the last enemy- death. And this happens on the last day. He rules now unless you reject his deity.
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Is Jesus God?
You completely missed my point. Look at the verse again. It says that Jesus "is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." Now if Jesus has a kingdom (and He does) and a throne (and He does) it is not the throne of the kingdom of God, because God the Father sits on that. Jesus sits on His right, so Jesus is not on the throne of the Kingdom of God.
Then consider the implications of Hebrews

“Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was established greatly.” 1 Kings 2:12 (KJV 1900)

“Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him.” 1 Chronicles 29:23 (KJV 1900)
Okay, I looked. What's your point? I have no trouble whatsoever with these passages. In fact they prove the point that there was a literal, physical throne of David which Jesus will sit on some day.

“To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.” Revelation 3:21 (KJV 1900)
What's your point? Are overcomers going to sit on the lap of Jesus?

Actually, this again proves the premil position. Jesus says specifically here that there are two thrones, "my throne" (the millennial throne) and "My Father in his throne" (the throne of the kingdom of God).

“And of all my sons, (for the LORD hath given me many sons,) he hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the LORD over Israel.” 1 Chronicles 28:5 (KJV 1900)

“Blessed be the LORD thy God, which delighted in thee to set thee on his throne, to be king for the LORD thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do judgment and justice.” 2 Chronicles 9:8 (KJV 1900)
Exactly. The literal, physical throne of David, which Jesus will sit upon in the millennial kingdom.

“And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:” Revelation 22:1–3 (KJV 1900)
So again, two thrones: that of the Lamb and that of God the Father.
 
Last edited:

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
Do you believe that people are lost if they do not hold to the amil position? Does a premil position mean that one is not saved?
We are saved by grace. Not according to knowledge. But the truth sets us free and those who hunger and thirst after it have great rewards in seeking it.
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Peter preached the same Amillennialism Jesus preached. A present spiritual Kingdom with Jesus resurrected into heaven where he as God rules all. Paul furthers this saying he will rule until he destroys the last enemy- death. And this happens on the last day. He rules now unless you reject his deity.
Prove the amil preaching of Jesus. I say that the Olivet Discourse completely disproves the amil position.
 

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
You completely missed my point. Look at the verse again. It says that Jesus "is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." Now if Jesus has a kingdom (and He does) and a throne (and He does) it is not the throne of the kingdom of God, because God the Father sits on that. Jesus sits on His right, so Jesus is not on the throne of the Kingdom of God.


Then consider the implications of Hebrews


Okay, I looked. What's your point? I have no trouble whatsoever with these passages. In fact they prove the point that there was a literal, physical throne of David which Jesus will sit on some day.

What's your point? Are overcomers going to sit on the lap of Jesus?

Actually, this again proves the premil position. Jesus says specifically here that there are two thrones, "my throne" (the millennial throne) and "My Father in his throne" (the throne of the kingdom of God).


Exactly. The literal, physical throne of David, which Jesus will sit upon in the millennial kingdom.

So again, two thrones: that of the Lamb and that of God the Father.
Peter says he now rules in heaven in the context of David's throne.

What does Jesus (God) sitting at the right hand of God represent?

Consider too, Jesus receives a throne of his own in the New Heaven and earth.

How can you make physical millennialism out of any of this?
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Peter says he now rules in heaven in the context of David's throne.

What does Jesus (God) sitting at the right hand of God represent?

Consider too, Jesus receives a throne of his own in the New Heaven and earth.

How can you make physical millennialism out of any of this?
Please give references. Simply you saying these things proves nothing.

And again, please define the Gospel of the Kingdom.
 

George Antonios

Well-Known Member
It's not future eschatology. It's fulfilled eschatology.
“But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.” Luke 11:20 (KJV 1900)
The spiritual aspect thereof only, for, what about other verses that clearly place the kingdom in the future? See post #22.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It's not future eschatology. It's fulfilled eschatology.
“But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.” Luke 11:20 (KJV 1900)
Nit fully though, as its the Kingdom is here. but not yet in its fullness!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top