Questions for Amillennialism

[Arial]

That's fine. You didn't like Peter's Scriptural argument about David. Besides, discussions about the throne is one of those dividing issues between Historical Premillennialism and Amillennialism. The topic is relevant to the OP in question of "spiritual reign" and to "whose throne." After all, Amillennialism asserts: 'Christ is already reigning and ruling on David’s throne now.' If Christ is already reigning and ruling on David’s throne, then why does Scriptures say he is waiting for his enemies to be made his footstool (Heb 10:12-13)? And it's a valid question to ask and also deserves an explanation.

Since Christ is waiting, or expecting, anticipating, looking forward to a future moment, and not yet exercising the thing he is waiting for. Then by logic this is not the language of Christ the king actively ruling over his enemies. It is the language of a king awaiting the moment when ruling over his enemies will to be made manifested. That means "ruling now" doesn't Scripturally and logically follow "waiting now." From that standpoint is gives you more questions than answers. For instance, how can Christ be ruling on David’s throne now if the New Testament says he is waiting for the very thing David’s throne is already supposed to accomplish?

Hebrews 10:12-13 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool.​

​

Hebrews 2:8 ...and put everything under their feet.” In putting everything under them, God left nothing that is not subject to them. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them.​

Notice that the 'restoration of all things' must occur first before the Father sends the Christ.

Acts 3:19-21 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, and that he may send the Messiah, who has been appointed for you—even Jesus. Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.​

The universal Kingdom in 1 Corinthians 15:24 is the eternal, all‑encompassing reign of God’s sovereign rule over all creation. The universal Kingdom is handed to the Father at the end (1 Cor 15:24–28), but the Davidic throne is handed to the Son by the Father (Luke 1:32) after the restoration of all things.

1 Corinthians 15:24-28 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.​

​

Strike through by Mod. Violates the rule against misrepresenting someone's position.​

That's not the moment when Davidic throne is given. I already addressed the two throne categories. Davidic kingdom comes in Christ's second coming after the restoration. So, what Is “the restoration of all things”? It is the future, renewal of the entire created order, including Israel’s national restoration, the resurrection, death itself, the renewal of the heavens and earth, and the visible establishment of Christ’s Davidic kingdom on earth which is the launching point of the age to come. Not an overlap of "this present age" with "age to come" and confusing their categories. Did you notice that, Ariel? I have underlined it for you. Christ at seated on the Father's throne is not the Davidic throne. The Father and the Son have their own distinctive thrones (Revelations 3:21). The kingdom comes AFTER his will is done on earth (Matthew 6:10, Luke 1:32–33; Isaiah 9:7; Daniel 7:13–14; Revelation 11:15).

This is just more of your circular conversation that is operating off of unproven assumptions. That is the very reason it is circular and repetitive. Answer the questions asked and maybe the circle will be broken, And do so without resorting to you two thrones assumption or referring again to Matt 6:10; Luke 1:32-33; Is 9:7; Dan 7:13-14; Rev 11:15. (At least I now have them down chapter and verse if nothing else. Are they the only passages in the Bible?). Answering the three questions does not require their use.

Where does the NT ever say Christ is not yet seated on David's throne?
What purpose does a thousand-year reign of Christ in Israel, and the restored boundaries of a geopolitical Israel serve in the grand plan of redemption?
If Acts 2 is not the fulfillment of the Davidic enthronement, then where does the NT ever identify when that promise is fulfilled?

 

[makesends]

Binyawmene said:
Hebrews 2:8 ...and put everything under their feet.” In putting everything under them, God left nothing that is not subject to them. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them.
Notice that the 'restoration of all things' must occur first before the Father sends the Christ.

But, that WE DON'T AT PRESENT SEE IT, is no force of argument against it having already happened.

Binyawmene said:
1 Corinthians 15:24-28 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

And he has done it, whether WE see it or not.

This is just more of your circular conversation that is operating off of unproven assumptions. That is the very reason it is circular and repetitive. Answer the questions asked and maybe the circle will be broken, And do so without resorting to you two thrones assumption or referring again to Matt 6:10; Luke 1:32-33; Is 9:7; Dan 7:13-14; Rev 11:15. (At least I now have them down chapter and verse if nothing else. Are they the only passages in the Bible?). Answering the three questions does not require their use.

Where does the NT ever say Christ is not yet seated on David's throne?
What purpose does a thousand-year reign of Christ in Israel, and the restored boundaries of a geopolitical Israel serve in the grand plan of redemption?
If Acts 2 is not the fulfillment of the Davidic enthronement, then where does the NT ever identify when that promise is fulfilled?

In Church today, something in the passage the pastor had up on the overhead caught my eye: Colossians 2:13-15 ends with, "And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross." The language, there, describes a past tense accomplishment.

 

[Arial]

For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

And he has done it, whether WE see it or not.

Well, the death of death has not occurred yet and the devil and his minions and the wicked and sin is still around. Jesus defeated sin and death on the cross, so they have no power over those in Christ to condemn or kill. The delay is not about two powers that are almost equal, however. What remains for now is by permission while Christ continues to gather his people. A strong case for specific atonement. He knows who they are and where and when to gather them and some likely aren't even born yet.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

And he has done it, whether WE see it or not.

Well, the death of death has not occurred yet and the devil and his minions and the wicked and sin is still around. Jesus defeated sin and death on the cross, so they have no power over those in Christ to condemn or kill. The delay is not about two powers that are almost equal, however. What remains for now is by permission while Christ continues to gather his people. A strong case for specific atonement. He knows who they are and where and when to gather them and some likely aren't even born yet.

Actually, they have no power over anyone to condemn or kill, but for God's purposes, (whether they intend it for God's purposes or not). (And not that you said otherwise.)

Your statement —"the death of death has not occurred yet and the devil and his minions and the wicked and sin is still around"— is true in the temporal sense. But we are not the arbiters of fact. "Already but not yet' applies here, too.

I think the death of death was accomplished fact at the cross. That WE don't see it and that WE do see the devil and his minions still milling about doesn't not change the fact that the devil IS utterly defeated. That the walking dead (the lost) are still milling about, philosophizing and wreaking havoc, doesn't mean they aren't dead.

Which is one of my problems with the arrangement @Binyawmene supports. Christ IS reigning now, and all his enemies ARE under his feet. That WE don't see it yet doesn't change that.