Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so a 1000 yr reign on this earth is false

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

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

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
5,740
2,491
113
74
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
When Jesus said, “I have told you before” (Matthew 24:25), He was warning His disciples in person, but His words were not limited to their generation. He was speaking to them as the first hearers, but also through them to all who would follow Him until the end. Jesus often spoke this way—He told the disciples, “And you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake” (Matthew 24:9), yet this clearly continues for all believers across time.

Exactly, telling the first century disciples of Christ that they too shall have "great tribulation" like none other! Great tribulation is not limited to any single generation of saints but is a warning of what the church on earth should expect as the gospel is proclaimed unto all the earth. When the gospel sent unto all nations has completed building the spiritual Kingdom of God in heaven then comes the END! Not another one thousand years of time for this earth!

The “great tribulation” He described is a unique future time that will be worse than anything before or after (Matthew 24:21–22; Mark 13:19). He gave His disciples the signs so that both they and all believers afterward would be ready, just as He said, “What I say to you, I say to all: Watch!” (Mark 13:37).

NOT "the" great tribulation, rather "great tribulation" shall be the lot in life during this gospel age, as the message is sent unto every nation of the earth. If this were to be some future great tribulation, Christ would not have said "I have told YOU before." Christ includes those first century disciples with all disciples to come after them proclaiming the gospel of the Kingdom of God. As you quote: "Mark 13:37 (KJV) And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch."

Acts 14:22 (KJV) Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
5,740
2,491
113
74
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Do not presume to know what I think or believe, you do not. Your problem is a lack of discernment and relying too much on Paul and not enough on the words on Christ. What I have written is ALL based on scripture and nothing else and always is.

Does the truth offend you? Lack of discernment comes when professing believers become fixated on Christ bringing the Kingdom of God physically to THIS earth! Many people can quote much Scripture without understanding the Kingdom of God is not now, nor shall it ever be a physical Kingdom upon THIS earth! Being fixated on physical fulfillment we have not ability to see (understand) the Kingdom of God that is not of this world, but is within you is NOT physical, because it is the spiritual Kingdom of God in heaven, that mortal flesh and blood cannot inherit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
5,740
2,491
113
74
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I don't think most of them are dishonest. Same as any cult member though, most are not dishonest, they believe what their cult leader says.

And they can be dangerous to your welfare, money, health, safety, spiritual life.

Found this. Earlier was reading another, if I find again, will update post


Found it

Yes, many simply believe what they have been taught! I know this from experience! I too once believed what I was taught from well-meaning preachers and teachers. It wasn't until I became a faithful student of the Word of God myself, comparing Scripture with Scripture, and allowing the Bible to be its own interpreter that I realized I had allowed myself to believe those who use the Bible to prove what they too had been taught to believe to be truth without seeing the many inconsistencies and contradictions their beliefs forced into the Word of God. I've come to understand that if my doctrine forces inconsistencies or contradictions into the Word of God, I must be honest and let go of what I had been taught and study the Bible WITHOUT any preconceived doctrines. IOW we err if we use the Bible to prove what we think is true, rather than to allow the Bible to itself prove truth from error.
 

Scott Downey

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2021
11,470
6,988
113
66
St. Thomas
Faith
Christian
Country
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Gender
Male
Yes, many simply believe what they have been taught! I know this from experience! I too once believed what I was taught from well-meaning preachers and teachers. It wasn't until I became a faithful student of the Word of God myself, comparing Scripture with Scripture, and allowing the Bible to be its own interpreter that I realized I had allowed myself to believe those who use the Bible to prove what they too had been taught to believe to be truth without seeing the many inconsistencies and contradictions their beliefs forced into the Word of God. I've come to understand that if my doctrine forces inconsistencies or contradictions into the Word of God, I must be honest and let go of what I had been taught and study the Bible WITHOUT any preconceived doctrines. IOW we err if we use the Bible to prove what we think is true, rather than to allow the Bible to itself prove truth from error.
Me to, I was the same way, used to believe in all that 'left behind nonsense'
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee and rwb

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
5,740
2,491
113
74
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Do not presume to know what I think or believe, you do not. Your problem is a lack of discernment and relying too much on Paul and not enough on the words on Christ. What I have written is ALL based on scripture and nothing else and always is.

Btw, in case you don't realize this truth; the words of Paul are the words that come from the Spirit of Christ in him.
 

Scott Downey

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2021
11,470
6,988
113
66
St. Thomas
Faith
Christian
Country
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Gender
Male
Btw, in case you don't realize this truth; the words of Paul are the words that come from the Spirit of Christ in him.
Which makes them scripture. Paul was a chosen apostle of Christ, 'untimely born' he said.

1 Cor 15

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.


11 Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb

Scott Downey

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2021
11,470
6,988
113
66
St. Thomas
Faith
Christian
Country
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Gender
Male
Aren't you glad you are not a dispensationalist! As it is foolishness masquerading as truth.



 

Scott Downey

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2021
11,470
6,988
113
66
St. Thomas
Faith
Christian
Country
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Gender
Male


Discussion list 1-8 of an Amillenial view on Zechariah 14

Quoted,

"Given the factors we’ve discussed in the last post as well as this one, Zechariah’s prophecy fits better within the context of the new Jerusalem which “will dwell in security” in the new creation than it fits with a millennial Jerusalem which continues to experience day and night and the (lightened) effects of the Adamic curse and is eventually surrounded by a Satanic coalition of nations bent on her destruction (Rev. 20:9)."
 
Last edited:

shepherdsword

Encounter Team - Eagle
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 12, 2009
2,037
1,637
113
Millington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Breaking News! Jesus the Messiah has already come and roundly defeated His enemies and assumed the throne of David as Israel's true king.

The throne of David was a physical kingdom that is well documented. It was never at the right hand of the Father, which is where Christ sits.
No mention of the throne of David here:

Rv 3:21 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.

Jesus sits with the Father on his throne...not the throne of David. He will one day occupy that throne when he rules the earth from Jerusalem.


 

shepherdsword

Encounter Team - Eagle
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 12, 2009
2,037
1,637
113
Millington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Premillennialists are always denigrating the current authority and influence of the Lord Jesus Christ and His current reign over all creation from the right hand of majesty on high. They are also constantly elevating the authority and influence of Satan. They need both of these in order to justify their doctrine.

So, I will ask you to answer these important questions:
  1. Is Jesus “the express image of his (God’s) person,” who is “upholding all things by the word of his power” (Hebrews 1:2-3)?
Of course
  1. Do you believe that Christ has become "the ruler of God’s creation" (Revelation 3:14)?
Yes,,,but we do not yet see all things under his feet. This will happen in the Millennial kingdom.

Heb 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.


  1. Do you believe that Jesus has already "spoiled principalities and powers ... made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it (the cross)" (Colossians 2:15)?
This has nothing to do with the throne of David.
  1. Do you believe that Christ “is the head of all principality and power” (Colossians 2:10)?
This has nothing to do with the throne of David.

  1. Do you believe that “angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him” right now (1 Peter 3:22)?
" But now we see not yet all things put under him."
  1. Do you believe that Christ is currently "the archon (or ruler) of the kings of the earth" (Revelation 1:5)?
The kingdoms become his at the 7th trumpet. Not all things are yet under him.

Rv 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.


  1. Is Jesus “the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting” (1 Timothy 6:15–16)?
  2. Do you believe that “All things that the Father hath are” Christ’s (John 16:15)?
  3. Do you believe that the Father has indeed given Jesus “power over all flesh” (John 17:2)?
  4. Do you believe that “All things are delivered” unto Jesus of His “Father” (Matthew 11:27) and that He has “given all things into his (Christ’s) hand” (John 3:35 and John 13:3)?
  5. Do you believe that Jesus currently possesses “All power [Gr. exousia or authority] … in heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18)?
  6. Do you believe that the Father has given Jesus “authority to execute judgment … because he is the Son of man” (John 5:26-27)?
  7. Do you believe that Christ currently “openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth" (Revelation 3:7)?
  8. When does Christ reign? After His enemies are subdued or until His enemies are subdued (1 Corinthians 15:25-28)?
  9. 1 Corinthians 15:25-28 and Ephesians 1:20-23 tells us that Christ “hath put (aorist active indicative) all things under his feet” and Hebrews 1:8 tells us that “thou hast put all things in subjection’ (aorist active indicative) under his feet.” How could anyone therefore deny He is sovereignly reigning over His enemies now? How could anyone then relate this fulfilment to an alleged future age after the second coming?
I am not going to waste time by answering each of these individually. We can clearly see that all things are not yet under him. Not only from scripture but from our own experience. Satan is not bound but loose and seeking to devour who he can:

1 Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

If Jesus currently had all things under his feet this would not happen. The nations ARE being deceived to this very day.



  1. Do you agree that when it says in Hebrews 2:8 “For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him” that this plainly speaking about everyone who is living or has ever lived, albeit, there are enemies still being born right up until the second coming that will be placed under His feet?
Read the entire verse. It disputes your position:

Heb 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.


If you answer these honestly and rightly: what more power and authority does Jesus need over His enemies to prove to Premils that He is truly reigning over all them now? What type of spiritual reality do they live in?
He needs to hear the 7th Trumpet at which time the kingdoms of the earth, presently under satan's domain. He will then sit upon the physical throne of David which he will reestablish to rule the earth. That is what the bible teaches
 

shepherdsword

Encounter Team - Eagle
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 12, 2009
2,037
1,637
113
Millington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
I'll say it again: the old covenant setup in regard to the kings of Israel was an imperfect permissive rule that was pointing to the true heavenly fulfillment in Christ - Israel's real king. The old covenant pointed to the new covenant. The earthly pointed to the heavenly. The temporal pointed to the eternal. The visible pointed to the invisible. The imperfect pointed to the perfect. The type pointed to the anti-type.

It is not talking about a literal physical stone throne. It is long gone. It is talking about the kingship of David - Israel's true kingship. It is talking about Him assuming David's place of authority over true Israel.

That throne was destroyed more than two millennia ago, and there is not the slightest hint in any Scripture that it will be rebuilt.

David's throne (where Christ now sits) was never a literal chair, but a position of power, authority and preeminence over Israel.
You are denying concrete statements and spinning then into some metaphoric collage of confusion.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
11,091
5,914
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
The throne of David was a physical kingdom that is well documented. It was never at the right hand of the Father, which is where Christ sits.
No mention of the throne of David here:

Rv 3:21 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.

Jesus sits with the Father on his throne...not the throne of David. He will one day occupy that throne when he rules the earth from Jerusalem.

Some Premillennialists try to explain away this clear passage that confirms Christ assumed David’s throne at the resurrection by arguing that the throne referred to in Acts 2:30 is not David’s throne, but the Father’s throne. But are they right? The passage in question states: “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.”

What they seem to miss is that this is talking about Christ’s humanity and not His deity. This passage is demonstrating how “according to the flesh” (or as a man) He fulfilled the Davidic expectation and consequently took David’s Messianic throne.

Christ taking David’s throne does not refer to Him sitting on some long-preserved literal physical in the Middle East (as non-believing Jews and Premils apply this to in the future), but rather Him taking His rightful spiritual place and assuming His heavenly authority over the people of God and fulfilling the Messianic prophecies as Israel’s true king. As we see in the New Testament, the people of God or true Israel does not relate exclusively to a physical race but to spiritual grace on God’s elect. Peter is showing that Christ now reigns over His people in fulfilment of the Old Testament predictions.

Peter made it clear that Christ was currently sitting by the right hand of God exalted.” He immediately demonstrated that this was the fulfilment of the Messianic hope. He is reigning today. We see this in the fact he quotes Psalm 110 as part of his argument in Acts 2:34-35.

Peter ties up his whole argument in Acts 2:36 by saying: “let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

This statement recognizes the 2 aspects of His character - "Lord," His divinity, and "Christ" His Messianic earthly ministry as man. The title “Lord” here refers to His divine role as the “Son of God” whereas the title “Christ” relates to His Messianic office as “the son of man.” He carries a dual kingship as king of kings and Lord of lords.

The English word “Christ” is interpreted from the Greek word Christos. This word interestingly derives from the word chrio, meaning ‘to smear or rub with oil, i.e. (by implication) to consecrate / anoint to an office or religious service’. The Greek word Christos correlates with the Old Testament Hebrew word mashach meaning “anointed.”

I don’t believe this means that there are two literal physical thrones but rather two aspects to His kingship – human over His new creation, and divine over all creation. These are two aspects of the one kingship – He is both God and man. This does not in any way mean there are 2 kings, 2 kingdoms or 2 thrones. No. There are two aspects to Christ’s kingship - human and divine. As God Christ reigns over all creation; as Messiah He reigns over His new creation.

Jesus said in Revelation 22:16, “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”

This confession from Christ and this appellation describes both His humanity and His deity in the statement “root and the offspring of David.” In this reading, the Lord reveals a great mystery but yet also a great truth, how He is both before and after king David. (1) He is after David in the sense that He is of his natural “offspring” according to the flesh. However, equally, He is likewise before Him in that He is the spiritual “root of David” (Revelation 5:5, 22:16).

Christ existed before the incarnation. He was the eternal Son of God, and therefore before David. Jesus testified in John 6:62, “ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before.” The Lord testified in John 8:58, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." Jesus declared, in His great intercessory petition to His Father, in John 17:5, “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." Through these we understand the great mystery of the two aspects of Christ’s nature – His humanity and His deity.

We see Christ exposing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, in Matthew 22:42-46, when He asked, “What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.”

Here He employs the Old Testament passage in Psalm 110:1 to impress His point. In His last question, Christ was here specifically referring to the great mystery of His eternal Sonship (or His pre-existence in all eternity) – a truth that evidently perplexed the religious Pharisees. The religious Pharisees had absolutely no grasp of that great truth. They had no comprehension that He was both before and after David. The answer to the enquiry was that He was before David (being the root of David) in His divine office as the eternal Son of God; therefore, David called Him Lord. Nevertheless, He was also his offspring in a natural sense, through the incarnation at Bethlehem, and was therefore a son of David by way of lineage.

He was also revealing the duality of His nature. As the Son of David, He was showing them His humanity, as the Son of God He was revealing His Deity. This discourse also revealed Christ’s eternal Sonship. Notwithstanding, such teaching confused the religious Pharisees. As man, He has assumed the throne of David, as God He has assumed the Father’s throne. This is speaking about authority. He has totally fulfilled every demand as man and God and He therefore reigns on high upon the throne of David and His Father’s throne.

Oscar Cullman says this: “Nothing shows more clearly how the concept of the present Lordship of Christ and also of His consequent victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought than the frequent citation of Ps. 110:1, not only in isolated books, but in the entire NT.”

It is clear from Matthew 22:42-46 that Christ applies this text to Himself thus rightly claiming the dualistic divine offices of king and of priest for Himself. It was still prior to His atoning death and glorious ascent to the throne, but He explicitly draws their eyes towards His person. In doing so, He was also revealing the duality of His nature. As the Son of David, He was showing them His humanity, as the Son of God He was revealing His Deity. This discourse also revealed Christ’s eternal Sonship. Notwithstanding, such teaching confused the religious Pharisees.

A passage often overlooked on this subject is Romans 1:3-4, which declares, “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared (or exhibited) to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.”

Here we see the duality to the nature of Christ. He was the son of David, but also the Son of God. These two titles are knitted together in the one person. Once again, they see their apex in the resurrection of the Saviour. It does matter how partial one is in their Dispensationalism these passages are irrefutable. There can be no debate from these that Christ has already assumed David’s throne.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb and covenantee

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
7,783
3,445
113
75
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
The throne of David was a physical kingdom that is well documented. It was never at the right hand of the Father, which is where Christ sits.
No mention of the throne of David here:

Rv 3:21 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.

Jesus sits with the Father on his throne...not the throne of David. He will one day occupy that throne when he rules the earth from Jerusalem.
Acts 2
30 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;
31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

According to the foregoing, at the resurrection of Christ, He was raised up to sit on whose throne?
 

shepherdsword

Encounter Team - Eagle
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 12, 2009
2,037
1,637
113
Millington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Some Premillennialists try to explain away this clear passage that confirms Christ assumed David’s throne at the resurrection by arguing that the throne referred to in Acts 2:30 is not David’s throne, but the Father’s throne. But are they right? The passage in question states: “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.”

What they seem to miss is that this is talking about Christ’s humanity and not His deity. This passage is demonstrating how “according to the flesh” (or as a man) He fulfilled the Davidic expectation and consequently took David’s Messianic throne.

Christ taking David’s throne does not refer to Him sitting on some long-preserved literal physical in the Middle East (as non-believing Jews and Premils apply this to in the future), but rather Him taking His rightful spiritual place and assuming His heavenly authority over the people of God and fulfilling the Messianic prophecies as Israel’s true king. As we see in the New Testament, the people of God or true Israel does not relate exclusively to a physical race but to spiritual grace on God’s elect. Peter is showing that Christ now reigns over His people in fulfilment of the Old Testament predictions.

Peter made it clear that Christ was currently sitting by the right hand of God exalted.” He immediately demonstrated that this was the fulfilment of the Messianic hope. He is reigning today. We see this in the fact he quotes Psalm 110 as part of his argument in Acts 2:34-35.

Peter ties up his whole argument in Acts 2:36 by saying: “let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

This statement recognizes the 2 aspects of His character - "Lord," His divinity, and "Christ" His Messianic earthly ministry as man. The title “Lord” here refers to His divine role as the “Son of God” whereas the title “Christ” relates to His Messianic office as “the son of man.” He carries a dual kingship as king of kings and Lord of lords.

The English word “Christ” is interpreted from the Greek word Christos. This word interestingly derives from the word chrio, meaning ‘to smear or rub with oil, i.e. (by implication) to consecrate / anoint to an office or religious service’. The Greek word Christos correlates with the Old Testament Hebrew word mashach meaning “anointed.”

I don’t believe this means that there are two literal physical thrones but rather two aspects to His kingship – human over His new creation, and divine over all creation. These are two aspects of the one kingship – He is both God and man. This does not in any way mean there are 2 kings, 2 kingdoms or 2 thrones. No. There are two aspects to Christ’s kingship - human and divine. As God Christ reigns over all creation; as Messiah He reigns over His new creation.

Jesus said in Revelation 22:16, “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”

This confession from Christ and this appellation describes both His humanity and His deity in the statement “root and the offspring of David.” In this reading, the Lord reveals a great mystery but yet also a great truth, how He is both before and after king David. (1) He is after David in the sense that He is of his natural “offspring” according to the flesh. However, equally, He is likewise before Him in that He is the spiritual “root of David” (Revelation 5:5, 22:16).

Christ existed before the incarnation. He was the eternal Son of God, and therefore before David. Jesus testified in John 6:62, “ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before.” The Lord testified in John 8:58, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." Jesus declared, in His great intercessory petition to His Father, in John 17:5, “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." Through these we understand the great mystery of the two aspects of Christ’s nature – His humanity and His deity.

We see Christ exposing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, in Matthew 22:42-46, when He asked, “What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.”

Here He employs the Old Testament passage in Psalm 110:1 to impress His point. In His last question, Christ was here specifically referring to the great mystery of His eternal Sonship (or His pre-existence in all eternity) – a truth that evidently perplexed the religious Pharisees. The religious Pharisees had absolutely no grasp of that great truth. They had no comprehension that He was both before and after David. The answer to the enquiry was that He was before David (being the root of David) in His divine office as the eternal Son of God; therefore, David called Him Lord. Nevertheless, He was also his offspring in a natural sense, through the incarnation at Bethlehem, and was therefore a son of David by way of lineage.

He was also revealing the duality of His nature. As the Son of David, He was showing them His humanity, as the Son of God He was revealing His Deity. This discourse also revealed Christ’s eternal Sonship. Notwithstanding, such teaching confused the religious Pharisees. As man, He has assumed the throne of David, as God He has assumed the Father’s throne. This is speaking about authority. He has totally fulfilled every demand as man and God and He therefore reigns on high upon the throne of David and His Father’s throne.

Oscar Cullman says this: “Nothing shows more clearly how the concept of the present Lordship of Christ and also of His consequent victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought than the frequent citation of Ps. 110:1, not only in isolated books, but in the entire NT.”

It is clear from Matthew 22:42-46 that Christ applies this text to Himself thus rightly claiming the dualistic divine offices of king and of priest for Himself. It was still prior to His atoning death and glorious ascent to the throne, but He explicitly draws their eyes towards His person. In doing so, He was also revealing the duality of His nature. As the Son of David, He was showing them His humanity, as the Son of God He was revealing His Deity. This discourse also revealed Christ’s eternal Sonship. Notwithstanding, such teaching confused the religious Pharisees.

A passage often overlooked on this subject is Romans 1:3-4, which declares, “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared (or exhibited) to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.”

Here we see the duality to the nature of Christ. He was the son of David, but also the Son of God. These two titles are knitted together in the one person. Once again, they see their apex in the resurrection of the Saviour. It does matter how partial one is in their Dispensationalism these passages are irrefutable. There can be no debate from these that Christ has already assumed David’s throne.
Yes...Jesus was resurrected to sit on the throne of David. However, you are confusing the resurrection with David's throne. David spoke of Christ being resurrected to one day sit on his throne but it doesn't mean the resurrection was the actual throne. That just more hyper-spiritualization millennials insert into the text. The way to interpret is "Christ will be resurrected and sit upon my earthly throne ruling Israel" as oppose to "Christ's resurrection is my actual throne"
 

shepherdsword

Encounter Team - Eagle
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 12, 2009
2,037
1,637
113
Millington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Acts 2
30 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;
31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

According to the foregoing, at the resurrection of Christ, He was raised up to sit on whose throne?
Sit on the porch and watch the big dogs hunt. Mr Me Too:


Big Dog
is a bully who doesn't hesitate to use his superior strength to intimidate other combatants. Big Dog may be smart, articulate or just plain mean, but in any case he is a remorseless fighter, brutally ripping into even the weakest of combatants. Once Big Dog securely fastens his powerful jaws on a hapless victim, Me-Too will join the attack. Me-Too is far too weak and insecure to engage in single combat, and must ally himself with Big Dog or a pack of other Warriors to bring down his quarry.

1756612944757.png
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
11,091
5,914
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
The throne of David was a physical kingdom that is well documented. It was never at the right hand of the Father, which is where Christ sits.
No mention of the throne of David here:

Rv 3:21 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.

Jesus sits with the Father on his throne...not the throne of David. He will one day occupy that throne when he rules the earth from Jerusalem.

You have a faulty perception of the kingdom. You have bought into the lie the Pharisees taught and which caused many to reject Christ. They looked for a physical kingdom, a tyrannical Messiah. They were looking for a carnal earthly kingdom with a strong draconian militaristic Messiah that would subjugate all rebellion (including all the Gentile nations). They could not grasp the idea of a suffering servant or reconcile this with the idea of a conquering king.

The Pharisees missed the spiritual reality and global scale of the kingdom. The Israel of God today embraces all nationalities. All that believe in Christ have been grafted into true Israel (the good olive tree). The kingdom has brought peace to all that enter.

Christ did not teach a literal temporal territorial physical kingdom based in physical Jerusalem. He spiritualized it and showed it was a heavenly eternal kingdom. Jesus made it clear that His kingdom "does not come with observation" (Luke 17:20) and "is not of this world" (John 18:36). Can i remind you, that we have left the old covenant arrangement forever, and have entered the new covenant? Why will you not let the old covenant go? You want to define the kingdom of God by its old covenant shadow and type, instead of its New Testament spiritual reality and substance.
 

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
7,783
3,445
113
75
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Sit on the porch and watch the big dogs hunt. Mr Me Too:


Big Dog
is a bully who doesn't hesitate to use his superior strength to intimidate other combatants. Big Dog may be smart, articulate or just plain mean, but in any case he is a remorseless fighter, brutally ripping into even the weakest of combatants. Once Big Dog securely fastens his powerful jaws on a hapless victim, Me-Too will join the attack. Me-Too is far too weak and insecure to engage in single combat, and must ally himself with Big Dog or a pack of other Warriors to bring down his quarry.

View attachment 69138
Dispensational "dogtrine" at its finest.

Keep it coming. :laughing:

Better a dog than a coward.

Every time.
 
Last edited:

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
11,091
5,914
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Of course

Yes,,,but we do not yet see all things under his feet. This will happen in the Millennial kingdom.

Heb 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.



This has nothing to do with the throne of David.

This has nothing to do with the throne of David.



" But now we see not yet all things put under him."

The kingdoms become his at the 7th trumpet. Not all things are yet under him.

Rv 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.



I am not going to waste time by answering each of these individually. We can clearly see that all things are not yet under him. Not only from scripture but from our own experience. Satan is not bound but loose and seeking to devour who he can:

1 Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

If Jesus currently had all things under his feet this would not happen. The nations ARE being deceived to this very day.




Read the entire verse. It disputes your position:

Heb 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.



He needs to hear the 7th Trumpet at which time the kingdoms of the earth, presently under satan's domain. He will then sit upon the physical throne of David which he will reestablish to rule the earth. That is what the bible teaches
You have got one string to your guitar and it is making a monotonous sound. You cannot employ the other strings in order to enjoy the full function of the instrument. I showed you that Hebrews 2:8 tells us For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.” I then explained: "this plainly speaking about everyone who is living or who has ever lived, albeit, there are enemies still being born right up until the second coming that will be placed under His feet." I addressed the second aspect of the text here (which you totally avoided). The text that you highlight says: "But now we see not yet all things put under him."

The Hebrews writer was not contradicting himself here, as you would suggest. He was not speaking out of both sides of his mouth at one time. No!

He was simply covering the past, present and future. In one breath he was telling the reader that all Christ's enemies were back then currently under His feet, without exception. He was reigning over all of them. That statement and reality is something that no Premillennialist can ever admit. To do so, would immediately destroy their false teaching. But i will repeat: For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.”

Do you see that? Do you believe that?

There were no enemies that were not under His feet. That leaves for no exclusions.

He then concludes (speaking back 2000 years ago): "But now we see not yet all things put under him." Hello! There has been 2000 years (since Christ) of countless more enemies being born and countless more enemies being placed under His feet. That is what the writer was simply referring to. That's the only way that both statements can be right at one time. Premils have to ignore the first statement and advance only the other statement in order to support their position. Amillennialists can embrace both at the one time. That is because that is the meaning of the teaching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
11,091
5,914
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Yes...Jesus was resurrected to sit on the throne of David. However, you are confusing the resurrection with David's throne. David spoke of Christ being resurrected to one day sit on his throne but it doesn't mean the resurrection was the actual throne. That just more hyper-spiritualization millennials insert into the text. The way to interpret is "Christ will be resurrected and sit upon my earthly throne ruling Israel" as oppose to "Christ's resurrection is my actual throne"
You are adding unto the text to support the error of Premil. You do that with multiple Scriptures. That is because you have zero corroboration for Premillennialism. You butcher the text to support your teaching. You play with words like the politicians to make white black and right wrong.

The text couldn't be clearer: "of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne [referring to Psalms 132:12]; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ."

Sorry for bursting your bubble, but, this doesn't allow for any Premil tampering. It is watertight. It is irrefutable, as your inability to refute it proves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
11,091
5,914
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Ac 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? 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.

This clearly indicates there WILL be a physical restoration of the literal kingdom of Israel.

The Davidic kingship was never a spiritual kingdom. It was a physical one whose boundaries are well documented. Your interpretation is a fused amalgam of over spiritualization.

I see you also sidestepped my rebuttal of your claims on Acts 1.

Acts 1:6-7 does not mention a future millennium. You're forcing that into the text. You do that with multiple Scriptures, because the Bible does not teach a future millennium. Such an interpretation is definitely not in keeping with the context of the narrative or the actual subject matter under discussion relating to the spiritual empowerment of the Church at Pentecost in order to effectively take the Gospel to the nations. Neither is it consistent with our Lord’s clear and continuous teaching on the kingdom as a spiritual entity, which was ushered in with the commencement of His earthly ministry.

The writer of the book of Acts, in Acts 1:3, highlights the context of our Lord’s teaching (post-Calvary) on the spiritual kingdom of God, saying, “he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.”

Whilst there is no definite amplification of this brief reference to the kingdom of God, there is no exegetical or theological warrant to believe that the message of the kingdom of God, which was evidently widely preached throughout these forty days, related to anything other than the same spiritual message of the kingdom of God that He so extensively and thoroughly preached prior to the cross.

The kingdom of God that Christ introduced was of a spiritual nature. This absolutely confounded the Pharisees and their misguided earthly carnal concept of the Messianic kingdom.

The two verses that go before Acts 1:6 (relating to the disciples’ question) support the idea of a spiritual kingdom. The two verses that follow Acts 1:6 (relating to the disciples’ question) show the Lord giving a spiritual response to their question.

Before the question came Christ was exhorting the disciples on the need for patience as they awaited the empowerment of the Holy Ghost to take the Gospel out to “the whosoever.” Everything about the context is spiritual. The Lord was stating “that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence (Acts 1:4-5).

Surely an unbiased look at these introductory comments would give us insight into what the Lord was teaching and what actually provoked the question that followed it. Undoubtedly the Lord was giving spiritual instruction about a spiritual kingdom that would shortly come with great power and fire? This is not territorial language.

What is “the Promise of the Father” here? Is it a material physical kingdom or is it a spiritual heavenly kingdom? Is it a millennial kingdom similar to this evil age, filled with death and rebellion, or was He speaking of the power of the Holy Ghost that would fall upon the disciples to empower them to bring the good news of Christ to all nations – starting in Jerusalem?

Evidently, Christ was referring to the day of Pentecost where the Church received its Holy Ghost baptism of fire. The whole discourse here is spiritual and revolved around the development of this spiritual kingdom subsequent to Christ’s ascension. Jesus confirms this again in Luke 24:46-49: “Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things. And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power (or dunamis) from on high.”

The promise of the Father was the baptism of the Holy Ghost, which was a power from on high that endued them for service.

Jesus had previously said to the disciples in Mark 9:1: “Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power (or dunamis).

Christ was speaking of Pentecost. He said the disciples would not die until they had “seen the kingdom come with power” – referring here the Church's baptism of fire to win a lost world. It didn't mean they would die when that happened.

The disciples then interjected with a question: Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?”

Premillennialists attribute much extravagant, extensive and grandiose detail to this simple question. They build a whole school of thought pertaining to a supposed period after the second coming out of this basic inquiry. They call it a millennial age and make it a Jewish-orientated kingdom. Nevertheless, and significantly, New Testament Scripture knows nothing of such an old-covenant-type Jewish age. That has been reduced to the history books.

What Premillennialists fail to see is: there is no mention of a future period after the second coming in the question, neither is there any intimation of that. There is not even any mention of the second coming, never mind a belief in a thousand-year reign of Christ on a still corrupt earth! No one could derive such a doctrine from this straightforward question. It would have to be taught elsewhere for it to enjoy veracity.

The most that we could take from this is that they may indeed have anticipated the introduction of a parochial, territorial and old-covenant-type physical kingdom. But that is far from a foregone conclusion. We can only, at best, speculate on that. Even if that was their assumption, that in no way proves that it was a legitimate hope. The disciples were often misguided in their expectations and narrow-minded in their tribal aspirations. They frequently saw no further than the borders of Israel. We see that played in the book of Acts, with their reluctance to advance the Gospel to the Gentiles.

It is hard to read the motives and intention of the question. Many times, the disciples were not getting the full meaning of Christ's teaching. He sent His whole ministry correcting and re-directing them. So it could have been a patriotic desire. But Christ's response nails it. That is what is key, not the disciples question. Premils tend to ignore the context and response and just talk about one verse in this narrative. That is because it suits their theology.

Regardless, it doesn’t really matter what the disciples thought, we need to rather ascertain what Christ thought and taught. We should remember: that this question came in the midst of a spiritual discourse about the kingdom of God arriving in power at Pentecost. Christ's reply is key. It is powerful. It is direct. It nails the literalist’s interpretation of this in a carnal earthly sense.

Bible students can speculate all they want as to what was going on in the disciples’ heads. They could debate over whether they were grasping the spiritual thrust of Christ’s teaching about them being part of a spiritual renewal in Israel and further afield, or whether they anticipated the Pharisaical hope of the Messiah overthrowing the Romans and reigning on a physical throne in Jerusalem. Notwithstanding, the most important aspect of this text is not the disciples question, it is Christ’s response.

Whilst it is difficult to understand the thinking of the disciples here, what is clear is what Christ was saying before the question and what Christ said after the question. That is more important than the disciples question. This gives us context to the question. This gives us perspective on what the kingdom really looked like.

Jesus reply to the disciples is telling. He responded: “It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall receive power (or dunamis), after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth (Acts 1:7-8)

Christ did in no way here ignore or dismiss the disciples’ query about natural Israel, as some would have us believe, rather the contrary, He directly addressed it in His response. In doing so, He reiterated His earlier teaching on the impending spiritual empowerment that would come upon the kingdom, just prior to the disciples’ interjection; only now He geographically confirmed that the spread of that message would embrace the actual nation of Israel (the locations of “Jerusalem,” “Judaea” and “Samaria” being identified). Nonetheless, in His response, He went further, widening out the disciples limited vision, which was still very localised, to encompass “the uttermost part of the earth.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scott Downey