You are hereWill David Reign Again?
Will David Reign Again?
by Albert Persohn
Some Historic Dispensationalists teach that King David will be resurrected and sit on the throne of Israel forever. They teach that some prophecies speaking of David's throne refer to Christ while others refer to David. Their futurization of Ezekiel allows them to place a resurrected David on an eternal throne as the prince of Ezekiel.Some Historic Dispensationalists teach that King David will be resurrected and sit on the throne of Israel forever. They teach that some prophecies speaking of David's throne refer to Christ while others refer to David. Their futurization of Ezekiel allows them to place a resurrected David on an eternal throne as the prince of Ezekiel.This article was inspired by the answer to "Will David Reign Again?" offered by Dispensational ministry "Herald of Hope".
The Dispensational Position and Luke 17:20
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 Luke 17:20
From the H.O.H. FAQ: John the Baptist came to announce that the son of David had arrived to sit upon the throne of David. He preached, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand (near)”. Jesus and His disciples preached the same message, but when the nation rejected His miraculous claims He told the Pharisees that the kingdom “cometh not with observation (literally, near view)”. It had been deferred, until His return as the lightning in the heavens (Luke 17:20-24)
H.O.H. chooses to translate "observation" (Gr: paratērēsis) as near, not as "without external showing" or "without outward show". This would be their paraphrase of Luke 17:20b: "The Kingdom of God cometh not soon". It would seem that they have John the Baptist and Jesus disagreeing about the timing of the Kingdom. They say that John's "at hand" meant "near" to the hearer. In the Dispensational model John would have been right when he declared the "at hand" Kingdom because Israel had not rejected Christ. Jesus' statement in John 17:20 would also have been right because God had, by that time, switched to His alternate plan.
Was John's "at hand" Unique?
According to the Dispensational position John's "at hand" Kingdom was deferred because Jesus was rejected. What then do we make of the "at hand" statements made by the inspired Apostles? (listed at the bottom). Paul certainly believed that his death (2 Tim 4:6) was "at hand" and it was. Was Paul's "at hand" statement correct about his death and wrong about the Eschaton? If so, how can we declare that he was inspired at all?
The Tabernacle Of David
From the same article we find an interesting set of assumptions, in brackets, about James' comments on the restored tabernacle of David:
“God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name (the Church)... 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: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles (in the Millennium), upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things”(Acts 15:14-17).
Rather than read James' dissertation simply and directly as the fulfillment of Amos 9 these Dispensationalists ignore the reason for the Acts 15 Congress itself and hold that James was talking about an event some 2000 years and counting in the future. What they would have us believe is that 1) Gentiles start coming into the church 2) James invokes Amos prophecy about a time when God will bring Gentiles into the church 3) it is concluded that the Gentiles coming into the church are not the fulfillment of Amos prophecy and will not really happen until the millennium.
James states that the "words of the Prophets agree" with the testimony of Paul, Barnabas and Peter. If Paul, Barnabas and Peter were talking about Gentiles coming to Christ in the first century and Amos was talking about Gentiles coming to Christ in the Millennium would not James have said "the Prophets disagree with Paul, Barnabas and Peter?" The Dispensational reading of Amos 9 and Acts 15 is a case of ultra-literalists spiritualising a literal passage.
The Question: "Will David Reign Again"? and the answer provided by Dispensational ministry Herald of Hope can be read here: http://www.heraldofhope.org.au/questions/15davidreignagain.pdf
The curious reader can download a three part talk by Boyd Roberts and Al Persohn in response to Herald of Hope's book: "Preterism Weighted And Found Wanting" at www.wordofvictory.com
At Hand Statements From The Epistles
Romans 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.
Philippians 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.
2 Thessalonians 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
2 Timothy 4:6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.
1 Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
Revelation 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
Revelation 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.