Actually, yes. Jesus has been reigning the throne of David.
"Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses." (Acts 2)
The throne of David was representative of the reign of Israel. That is precisely where Jesus sits right now, reigning and subduing the nations, Israel included. As Jews and gentiles come to Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, they testify of Christ's reign.
That probably won't satisfy your hermenuetical presuppositions, but if does fit the facts.
Those who claim that Jesus will physically sit on "David's throne" can't possibly account for the fact that David's physical throne does not exist, and has not existed for millennia.
In other words, a pause or a delay in the fulfillment ...
Notice how far you're having to go to avoid the plain meaning of this text!
You've just confirmed that the "plain meaning of the text" is not so plain, and requires a certain amount of "spin" (in you case by inventing a "pause or delay") no matter what your persepctive.
It's not about David's own personal throne any more than it's about David's own personal hairbrush. It's about the kingship in the lineage of David over all of the tribes of Israel.
Acts 2 nowhere says that Yeshua is currently reigning on David's throne, and trying to claim that it does is engaging in wishful thinking. It says that God, quote, "would raise up the Christ to sit on his (David's) throne . . ." If I say that I have raised my son to succeed the running of my business, does necessarily that mean that he has already taken his office? No. I could simply be saying that I so raised him to do so in some indefinite point in the future--but that he's already been raised and prepared.
Kefa is saying that Messiah Yeshua has already been raised from the dead, so that He could sit on David's throne. He nowhere says that the sitting on the throne has begun. Indeed, consider their question in the previous chapter: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?"
And He said unto them, "Whatever art thou speaking of? The kingdom will not be restored to Israel. I'm giving it to the Gentiles forever!"
Oh, sorry, that must've been the Revised Preterist Version. The actual Bible records His answer as, "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." In other words, "I'm going to, but not yet."
Given this, the idea that the Messiah was already sitting on David's throne wouldn't have been on Kefa's mind just ten days later. No, he was plainly expecting a future restoration of the nation, based on Yeshua's own words.
Now, you're close to the mark when you write, The throne of David was representative of the reign of Israel. Unfortunately, you go right back to missing the point. David's throne was very specifically over Israel, not over all the nations. When the Messiah rules openly from Israel's capital, Jerusalem, then
I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In His days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is His name whereby He shall be called, Adonai Tzidkenu (the Lord Our Righteousness).Are you going to say that Judah, as a body, was saved after Yeshua's First Coming? Are you going to say that Israel dwelt in safety? Are you going to claim that all the nations have come to Jerusalem and have ceased to walk by their evil imaginations? Is Jerusalem truly called the Throne of the Lord?
--Jer. 23:5-6At that time (when Israel no longer talks about or misses the Ark of the Covenant; i.e., still future to us) they shall call Jerusalem the Throne of Adonai; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of Adonai, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart.
--Jer. 3:17
No so you'd notice.
Sorry, topcat, but your thesis that Yeshua is sitting on David's throne does not fit with what the prophets said would happen when the Messiah ruled from Jerusalem.
Notice how far you're having to go to avoid the plain meaning of this text!
You've just confirmed that the "plain meaning of the text" is not so plain, and requires a certain amount of "spin" (in you case by inventing a "pause or delay") no matter what your persepctive.
Oh, you have got to be kidding me. Topcat, the idea that God keeps His promises, but that He chooses when He will keep them, is pretty standard theology. God promised Abraham a son. How long did Abraham wait on one? He promised Abraham a specific lot of land for his seed, and then said that they would have to wait 400 years until God was good and ready to punish those currently in the land. God promised David an heir from whom God would not take away His love. That was a thousand years before the Messiah came, and long after the Davidic line had been supplanted from ruling Israel.
If you're not going to accept such delays as being within the plain meaning of God's promises, topcat, you may as well stop being a Christian, since there's no way you could accept that the Messiah was truly the answer to God's promise to David even after the line had stopped being kings!
I'm still waiting for you to offer a coherant alternative interpretation of Jer. 33.