Spurgeon's View of the MILLENNIUM

Pilgrim Pub. ^ | MARK A. MCNEIL

[xzins]

---

CONFUSED ABOUT SPURGEON'S PROPHETIC VIEWS?

— WELL, NO LONGER!  HERE IS...

. Charles Haddon Spurgeon's VIEW OF THE
MILLENNIUM
	Annotated Summary by
	MARK A. MCNEIL

"I am not now going into millennial theories, or into any speculation as to dates. I do not know anything at all about such things, and I am not sure that I am called to spend my time in such researches. I am rather called to minister the gospel than to open prophecy. Those who are wise in such things doubtless prize their wisdom, but I have not the time to acquire it, nor any inclination to leave soul-winning pursuits for less arousing themes. I believe it is a great deal better to leave many of these promises, and many of these gracious out-looks of believers, to exercise their full force upon our minds, without depriving them of their simple glory by aiming to discover dates and figures. Let this be settled, however, that if there be meaning in words, Israel is yet to be restored. Israel is to have a SPIRITUAL RESTORATION or a CONVERSION."

[from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 429, Ezekiel 37:1-10 (age 30)]

INTRODUCTION

There has been some considerable difference of opinion regarding the position that C. H. Spurgeon, the great Baptist preacher from the 19th century, held in the area of Eschatology — regarding the doctrine of the Millennium. Each of the three major divisions within this area of doctrine have proponents who claim Spurgeon as one of their own. Many times authors claim a different millennial view than what Spurgeon actually believed.

It is not our task to sort out the arguments for each view. Such an assignment would take a very large volume (many are available) and the issue would still not be solved for all. We would simply like to define the basic positions and then demonstrate from Spurgeon's own words which one view he held.

PREMILLENNIALISM

The first view regarding the Millennium is that of PREMILLENNIALISM. The prefix, "Pre," denotes "before." The prefix is telling us at what point in relationship to the millennium that Christ will come. This view holds that our Lord will Literally return before a 1,000-year reign of Christ begins. The millennium of Revelation 20 is taken to be literal. If not literal, it at least is speaking of an indefinite period of time following the coming of Christ during which there will be perfect peace on the earth.

Within the premillennialist camp, there have come to be two identifiable views: the "dispensationalist" position, and the "historic" position. For further information defending each of these views, one should consult Reese's The Approaching Advent of Christ [historic] and Dwight Pentecost's Things to Come [dispensational]. Though the differences between the two are important, it is not within the scope of our purpose here to delve into such matters.

AMILLENNIALISM

The second view is called AMILLENNIALISM, or sometimes called "realized eschatology". The prefix, "A-," means "no". This would suggest that those who hold this view do not believe in a millennium. This is somewhat misleading, however. This view is the the product of a consistent Spiritual interpretation of prophetic literature. To those, the millennium is not some future physical reign, but the present reign of Christ in the hearts of believers. The "millennium" is an indefinite period of time (the present age) after which Christ will physically return. Prophecy in the Church, by Oswald Allis, is a standard work for the amillennial position.

This is the position of the Roman Catholic Church, also many other Protestant denominations. It grew out of St. Augustine's spiritualizing of these issues in his writings, and the tendency of many early Christian writers to see the Church as the "new Israel" and therefore the recipient of the promises of the Old Testament for the Jewish nation. Those who hold this view do not speak of the millennium as a future happening.  It is, to them, a Present Reality.

POSTMILLENNIALISM

The third, and last, major view is that of POSTMILLENNIALISM. The prefix "Post" speaks of "after." This teaching promotes the view that the physical return of Christ will Follow an actual millennium. The influence of Christianity will over-take the world for an extended period of time, then Christ will return.

This view appears to be a mixture of the principles that work to produce the first two views. It is not consistently spiritual or literal in its interpretation of the prophetic material relevant to this issue. Perhaps the foremost writing for this position today is The Millennium, by Loraine Boettner.

Spurgeon's VIEW  

With basic definitions before us, then, let's look at some quotes from Spurgeon to see what his position was on the Millennium.

"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial — that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial — that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]

Spurgeon here specifically identifies the Postmillennial view with a clear DENIAL of any adherence to it! Those who attempt to claim Spurgeon for this viewpoint do not demonstrate their contention by referring to clear comparisons such as this one. They rather go to sermons not specifically dealing with both positions and pull out of them ideas that are "compatible" with Postmillennial thinking. This is a faulty way of proving a point, however* — especially when they meet squarely with a Spurgeon statement like the one above, and those below.

*NOTE: Furthur, a few postmillennialists (especially GARY NORTH), are guilty of misrepresenting Spurgeon constantly in articles and books; NORTH has repeatedly alleged that "Spurgeon was Postmillennial" — yet neither his supplied quotations "say" so, and/or he deliberately does not present a statement by Spurgeon that North will speculate "implies" a Postmillennial position. Our advice is to ignore anything North states regarding Spurgeon's views and Prophecy!

Again, consider Spurgeon's View here in light of 'Postmillennial' teaching...

"Paul does not paint the future with rose-colour: he is no smooth-tongued prophet of a golden age, into which this dull earth may be imagined to be glowing. There are sanguine brethren who are looking forward to everything growing better and better and better, until, at last, this present age ripens into a millennium. They will not be able to sustain their hopes, for Scripture gives them no solid basis to rest upon. We who believe that there will be no millennial reign without the King, and who expect no rule of righteousness except from the appearing of the righteous Lord, are nearer the mark. Apart from the second Advent of our Lord, the world is more likely to sink into a pandemonium than to rise into a millennium. A divine interposition seems to me the hope set before us in Scripture, and, indeed, to be the only hope adequate to the occasion. We look to the darkening down of things; the state of mankind, however improved politically, may yet grow worse and worse spiritually." [from The Form of Godliness Without the Power MTP Vol 35, Year 1889, pg. 301, 2 Timothy 3:5 (age 54)]

"We are to expect the literal advent of Jesus Christ, for he himself by his angel told us, 'This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven,' which must mean literally and in person. We expect a reigning Christ on earth; that seems to us to be very plain, and to be put so literally that we dare not spiritualise it. We anticipate a first and a second resurrection; a first resurrection of the righteous, and a second resurrection of the ungodly, who shall be judged, condemned, and punished for ever by the sentence of the great King." [from Things to Come MTP Vol 15, Year 1869, pg. 329, 1 Corinthians 3:22 (age 35)]

Here, stress is laid upon the Literal Nature of the second coming.  Also, after this literal return is stressed a reigning upon the earth.

"We have done once for all with the foolish ideas of certain of the early heretics, that Christ's appearance upon earth was but a phantom. We know that he was really, personally, and physically here on earth. But it is not quite so clear to some persons that he is to come really, personally, and literally, the second time. I know there are some who are labouring to get rid of the fact of a personal reign, but as I take it, the coming and the reign are so connected together, that we must have a spiritual coming if we are to have a spiritual reign. Now we believe and hold that Christ shall come a second time suddenly, to raise his saints at the first judgment, and they shall reign with him afterwards. The rest of the dead live not till after the thousand years are finished. Then shall they rise from their tombs at the sounding of the trumpet, and their judgment shall come and they shall receive the deeds which they have done in their bodies." [from The Two Advents of Christ MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pg. 39, Hebrews 9:27-28 (age 28)]

[from The Sinner's End MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pgs. 712-713, Psalms 73:17-18 (age 28)], Spurgeon is discussing the final condition of the sinner — "Let us go on to consider their end. The day of days, that dreadful day has come. The millennial rest is over, the righteous have had their thousand years of glory upon earth."

In the quotes above, the order of events fits perfectly the PREmillennial point of view. The final end of the sinner is faced after the righteous have enjoyed a thousand years with Christ.

.
	"Our Hope is the Personal PRE-MILLENNIAL RETURN of the   Lord Jesus Christ in Glory."
	— August 1891, age 58

Of the various articles and writings by those who deny the conclusion that we feel is obvious, none that I have found bases itself on the same type of quotes we have produced (many others could have been given — see those that follow). To the contrary, their's are based on "interpreting" Spurgeon's statements apart from such quotes that we have given.

.

We feel safe in concluding, then,

that of the three views we began with,

Spurgeon expressly states that he believes in a

Literal Return of Jesus Christ

BEFORE

a Literal Millennium on the Earth.

———————————————————————————

.

Written by Mark A. McNeil (Houston TX USA), B.A., M.A., & PhD. Student

Author of An Evaluation of the 'Oneness Pentecostal' Movement

$3 + $1 shipping — Published by Pilgrim Publications

— also Read C. H. SPURGEON on "PRETERISM" <<< Click Link

  Join our company... Psalm 68:11 "The Lord gave the WORD:

Great was the COMPANY of those that PUBLISHED it."

Please, Copy this article, pass it on, and mail to others.

Permission granted by Bob L. Ross — No Copyright

NOTES OF INTEREST

Watching and Waiting Magazine

                                          by C. W. H. Griffiths

Published by Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony

1 Donald Way, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 9JB United Kingdom

Stephen A. Toms, secretary

— Write and Request the Complete Article            

From the Summer 1990 issue of this magazine, C. W. H. Griffiths states Spurgeon "was a valued standard bearer for historic Pre-millennialism," and then presents an excellent article defending his Pre-millennial position.

Documenting additional quotations which we have added and expanded below —

Spurgeon (age 43) — There is moreover to be a reign of Christ. I cannot read the Scriptures without perceiving that there is to be a pre-millennial reign, as I believe, upon the earth and that there shall be new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness...

Spurgeon (age 49) — Then all His people who are alive at the time of His coming shall be suddenly transformed, so as to be delivered from all the frailties and imperfections of their mortal bodies: The dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed. Then we shall be presented spirit, soul, and body without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; in the clear and absolute perfection of our sanctified manhood, presented unto Christ Himself.

Spurgeon (age 50) — When the Lord comes there will be no more death; we who are alive and remain (as some of us may be — we cannot tell) will undergo a sudden transformation — for flesh and blood, as they are, cannot inherit the kingdom of God — and by that transformation our bodies shall be made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.

Spurgeon (age 52) — His coming will cause great sorrow. What does the text say about his coming? All kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Then this sorrow will be very general.

Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pgs. 427-430, Ezekiel  37:1-10] — Under the preaching of the Word the vilest sinners can be reclaimed, the most stubborn wills can be subdued, the most unholy lives can be sanctified. When the holy "breath" comes from the four winds, when the divine Spirit descends to own the Word, then multitudes of sinners, as on Pentecost's hallowed day, stand up upon their feet, an exceeding great army, to praise the Lord their God. But, mark you, this is not the first and proper interpretation of the text; it is indeed nothing more than a very striking parallel case to the one before us. It is not the case itself; it is only a similar one, for the way in which God restores a nation is, practically, the way in which he restores an individual. The way in which Israel shall be saved is the same by which any one individual sinner shall be saved. It is not, however, the one case which the prophet is aiming at; he is looking at the vast mass of cases, the multitudes of instances to be found among the Jewish people, of gracious quickening, and holy resurrection. His first and primary intention was to speak of them, and though it is right and lawful to take a passage in its widest possible meaning, since "no Scripture is of private interpretation," yet I hold it to be treason to God's Word to neglect its primary meaning, and constantly to say — "Such-and-such is the primary meaning, but it is of no consequence, and I shall use the words for another object." The preacher of God's truth should not give up the Holy Ghost's meaning; he should take care that he does not even put it in the back ground. The first meaning of a text, the Spirit's meaning, is that which would be brought out first, and though the rest may fairly spring out of it, yet the first sense should have the chief place. Let it have the uppermost place in the synagogue, let it be looked upon as at least not inferior, either in interest or importance, to any other meaning which may come out of the text.

The meaning of our text, as opened up by the context, is most evidently, if words mean anything, first, that there shall be a political restoration of the Jews to their own land and to their own nationality; and then, secondly, there is in the text, and in the context, a most plain declaration, that there shall be a spiritual restoration, a conversion in fact, of the tribes of Israel.

The promise is that they shall renounce their idols, and, behold, they have already done so. "Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols." Whatever faults the Jew may have besides, he certainly has no idolatry. "The Lord thy God is one God," is a truth far better conceived by the Jew than by any other man on earth except the Christian. Weaned for ever from the worship of all images, of whatever sort, the Jewish nation has now become infatuated with traditions or duped by philosophy. She is to have, however, instead of these delusions, a spiritual religion: she is to love her God. "They shall be my people, and I will be their God." The unseen but omnipotent Jehovah is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth by his ancient people; they are to come before him in his own appointed way, accepting the Mediator whom their sires rejected; coming into covenant relation with God, for so our text tells us — "I will make a covenant of peace with them," and Jesus is our peace, therefore we gather that Jehovah shall enter into the covenant of grace with them, that covenant of which Christ is the federal head, the substance, and the surety. They are to walk in God's ordinances and statutes, and so exhibit the practical effects of being united to Christ who hath given them peace. All these promises certainly imply that the people of Israel are to be converted to God, and that this conversion is to be permanent, for the tabernacle of God is to be with them, the Most High is, in an especial manner, to have his sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore; so that whatever nations may apostatize and turn from the Lord in these latter days, the nation of Israel never can, for she shall be effectually and permanently converted, the hearts of the fathers shall be turned with the hearts of the children unto the Lord their God, and they shall be the people of God, world without end.

We look forward, then, for these two things. I am not going to theorize upon which of them will come first, whether they shall be restored first, and converted afterwards, or converted first, and then restored. They are to be restored, and they are to be converted too. Let the Lord send these blessings in his own order, and we shall be well content whichever way they shall come. We take this for our joy and our comfort, that this thing shall be, and that both in the spiritual and in the temporal throne, the King Messiah shall sit, and reign among his people gloriously.

Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Lamb — the Light MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 439, Revelation 21:23] — (Spurgeon says of the millennial earth), They shall not say one to another, "Know the Lord: for all shall know him, from the least to the greatest." There may be even in that period certain solemn assemblies and Sabbath-days, but they will not be of the same kind as we have now; for the whole earth will be a temple, every day will be a Sabbath, the avocations of men will all be priestly, they shall be a nation of priests — distinctly so, and they shall day without night serve God in his temple, so that everything to which they set their hand shall be a part of the song which shall go up to the Most High. Oh! blessed day. Would God it had dawned, when these temples should be left, because the whole world should be a temple for God. But whatever may be the splendours of that day — and truly here is a temptation to let our imagination revel — however bright may be the walls set with chalcedony and amethyst, however splendid the gates which are of one pearl, whatever may be the magnificence set forth by the "streets of gold," this we know, that the sum and substance, the light and glory of the whole will be the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, "for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." Now, I want the Christian to meditate over this. In the highest, holiest, and happiest era that shall ever dawn upon this poor earth, Christ is to be her light. When she puts on her wedding garments, and adorns herself as a bride is adorned with jewels, Christ is to be her glory and her beauty. There shall be no ear-rings in her ears made with other gold than that which cometh from his mine of love; there shall be no crown set upon her brow fashioned by any other hand than his hands of wisdom and of grace. She sits to reign, but it shall be upon his throne; she feeds, but it shall be upon his bread; she triumphs, but it shall be because of the might which ever belongs to him who is the Rock of Ages. Come then, Christian, contemplate for a moment thy beloved Lord. Jesus, in a millennial age, shall be the light and the glory of the city of the new Jerusalem. Observe then, that Jesus makes the light of the millennium, because his presence will be that which distinguishes that age from the present. That age is to be akin to paradise. Paradise God first made upon earth, and paradise God will last make. Satan destroyed it; and God will never have defeated his enemy until he has re-established paradise, until once again a new Eden shall bless the eyes of God's creatures. Now, the very glory and privilege of Eden I take to be not the river which flowed through it with its four branches, nor that it came from the land of Havilah which hath dust of gold — I do not think the glory of Eden lay in its grassy walks, or in the boughs bending with luscious fruit — but its glory lay in this, that the "Lord God walked in the garden in the cool of the day." Here was Adam's highest privilege, that he had companionship with the Most High. In those days angels sweetly sang that the tabernacle of God was with man, and that he did dwell amongst them. Brethren, the paradise which is to be regained for us will have this for its essential and distinguishing mark, that the Lord shall dwell amongst us. This is the name by which the city is to be called — Jehovah Shammah, the Lord is there. It is true we have the presence of Christ in the Church now — "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." We have the promise of his constant indwelling: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." But still that is vicariously by his Spirit, but soon he is to be personally with us. That very man who once died upon Calvary is to live here. He — that same Jesus — who was taken up from us, shall come in like manner as he was taken up from the gazers of Galilee. Rejoice, rejoice, beloved, that he comes, actually and really comes; and this shall be the joy of that age, that he is among his saints, and dwelleth in them, with them, and talketh and walketh in their midst.

"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial — that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial — that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]

[CCWoody]

You have my sympathy. I've been accused of being at least 4 other people.

If I have an alter ego, I would like to be most like the other fool who posts regularly.

I was actually inquiring if you had a previous personality that is now longer around, much as I once had a different Freep name. I guess I'm hanging off the wrong peg, huh.

BTW, your corpus christi comment was really good.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Are you still seething because you called a direct gospel quote, i.e. the gospel itself, a circular argument? Perhaps you should just quit reading FR and concentrate of being able to recognize the gospel when it is quoted to you.

BigMack

[RnMomof7]

P.S. How dare you post your disparaging comments about OP's argument without flaggin him? (LOL)

I KNEW you would say that. He and I have discussed that before..no neutral ground or discussion left..he is wrong..PERIOD

Op is wrong and the author of my post correct...Jesus HAD to meet all the requirements..God would not do less

[philman_36]

you two have kissed and made up
I haven't. I just left the conversation as it was circular and going nowhere. A one sided conversation isn't one.

[CCWoody]

You should know that Jesse is a "wierd" taste. It took me a while to enjoy it. And that is my la$t comment about that.

[CCWoody]

Just a simple question for ya' Taz; is the following a single period of time or is it going to take 1000 years?:

The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, to the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, to the resurrection of damnation.

BTW, I thought that dancing was an evil thing for an independent Baptist to do. Yet, there you are spinning round and round.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I believe that there is a sense in which God is eager to consummate the final destruction of sin

Well, not according to the "full" or "Hyper"-Preterists. (grin) According to the "full" or "Hyper"-Preterists, God is going to tolerate the Presence of Sin in His Creation forever.

---

Aside to PresbyRev -- there are some very serious problems with the Hyper-Preterist dogma ascribing the Parousia, the Second Coming, to the Israel-Judgment of 70AD.

The Hyper-Preterist heresy is not a mere "stumbling block" to the Elect like PreMillenialism or PostMillenialism (although Hyper-Preterism duplicitously masquerades as a form of PostMillenialism... and as I have said before, Amillenialists such as "the_doc" and I can't help but sadly chuckle to ourselves at the plight of poor PostMillenialists like Gary North, who wonder "why-oh-why" these Hyper-Preterist Tares keep springing up in the oh-so-lovely Garden of PostMillenialism which they are trying to cultivate). Rather, Hyper-Preterism is in and of itself a very nearly fatal Heresy, on a Prima Facie basis.

The fact that such giants as Charles Spurgeon and RC Sproul have (without, God bless, actually adopting the Hyper-Preterist Heresy) failed to notice the intensely-heretical nature of Hyper-Preterism, calling it "interesting and harmless" or "thought-provoking", does not make the Hyper-Preterist Error any less dangerous. It only proves that Spurgeon and Sproul are better Flock Pastors than they are careful Theologians. They have overlooked the dangerous Error of Hyper-Preterism. But that failing on Spurgeon and Sproul's part is not a legitimate endorsement of Hyper-Preterism, it is just what I say it is... a failing on their part.

I'll try to discuss this with you a little more in depth when (God willing) I have the Time (whenever that is).

God bless, OP

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Unfortunately, I am way too busy right now to be helpful. 2111 posted on 10/14/02 8:28 AM Pacific by theAmbassador

I "empathize" with your "tribulation", believe me!!

Thanks for lurking. Hope we can learn from eachother.

God bless, op

[PresbyRev]

Grace and Peace to you in Christ.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Your hypocrisy in this matter is beyond measure. Show me in the law where it says that the son of David through Nathan was not entitled to sit on the thrrone of David.

BEEN THERE, already.
DONE THAT, already.

---

NoNoNo OP, show me where it says that the throne belongs to the House of Solomon forever. It goes to the House of David forever, and Nathan was of David's House, so if Solomon's line falters or becomes "childless" for the purposes of the throne, then the throne goes to the next in line from the House of David. The word cannot be broken -- right? ~~ Woodkirk

The Word cannot be Broken -- exactly right.

And for exactly this reason, it is not proper to speak only of "The Davidic Throne".
It is only strictly correct to speak of The Davidic Throne of the Solomonic House.

II Samuel 7
12 And when thy (David's) days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
13 He (Solomon) shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
The Word cannot be Broken.

And for exactly this reason, it is not proper to speak only of "The Davidic Throne".
It is only strictly correct to speak of The Davidic Throne of the Solomonic House.

I Chronicles 17
11 And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.
12 He (Solomon) shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.
13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:
14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.
The Word cannot be Broken.

And for exactly this reason, it is not proper to speak only of "The Davidic Throne".
It is only strictly correct to speak of The Davidic Throne of the Solomonic House.

I Chronicles 22
10 He (Solomon) shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.

The Royal Right to the Davidic Throne is granted exclusively to the House of Solomon forever, and only a Royal Son of Solomon may reign upon the Davidic Throne.

If ANY House but that of the Solomonic Descent EVER reigns upon the Throne of David, the Word of God has been Broken.

But there is one iron-clad reservation, established until the end of the very Earth which was called as a witness (Jeremiah 22:29) -- the Royal House of Solomon, after the Curse of Jeconiah, may never any more reign on the Davidic Throne in Old Jerusalem of Judah upon This Earth:

Jeremiah 22
28 Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not?
29 O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the LORD.
30 Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.

AND SO:

• UNLESS the King be legally of the Royal Descent of Solomon, then He may not Reign upon the Davidic Throne. (II Samuel 7:12-13, I Chronicles 17:11-14, I Chronicles 22:10)
• But IF the King be legally of the Royal Descent of Solomon after Jeconiah, then He may not rule an earthly Kingdom from Old Jerusalem in Judah (Jeremiah 22:28-30) for as long as This Earth, called as a witness, remains (Jeremiah 22:29).

Of course, this is what we would expect, given that once the Government of the Throne and Kingdom of David is upon the shoulder's of Jesus Christ, He must rule that throne and that kingdom from that time on and forevermore -- not a mere "1,000 years", that would *also* break Prophecy!!

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish this. (Isaiah 9:6-7)

Once the Government of the Throne of David is upon His shoulders, He must rule on that Throne and over that Kingdom from that time on and forever.

Any literal and physical Throne and Kingdom of David which is literally and physically burnt up (II Peter 3) at the end of the age, is a "Davidic Throne and a Kingdom" which is literally and physically NOT "forever".

But realize this -- all of these matters this resolve perfectly if the King rules FOREVER upon the Davidic Throne of New Jerusalem, which Descends upon the New Heavens and the New Earth (Revelation 21:2) after the Old Earth called as a Witness against the Jeconiahic Descent (Jeremiah 22:29) is burnt up and passed away (Revelation 21:1).

The Word cannot be Broken.



857 posted on 9/18/02 2:14 PM Pacific by OrthodoxPresbyterian

---

I think it is time to establish a Point which will break the PreMillenial position upon the rocks of its own fallacy. Let's finish this.

• You must either affirm that the Word of God is True -- that the Davidic Throne is promised exclusively to the Solomonic House -- unconditionally and everlasting; OR....
• You must deny that the Solomonic Prophecies of God unto David were true. You must call God a Liar.

If you AFFIRM the fact that the Davidic Throne is promised exclusively to the Solomonic House -- unconditionally and everlasting -- then the PreMillenial position is hopelessly broken upon the eschatological FACT of the Jeconiah Curse.

But if you DENY the fact that the Davidic Throne is promised exclusively to the Solomonic House -- unconditionally and everlasting -- then you have just called God a liar, proving "the_doc"s argument that PreMillenialism leads to demonic error.

[JesseShurun]

Haggai 2:21-23 "Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth; (22) And I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the heathen; and I will overthrow the chariots, and those that ride in them; and the horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his brother. (23) In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel, my servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the LORD, and will make thee as a signet: for I have chosen thee, saith the LORD of hosts."

[xzins]

Please notice the distinction between the two passages mentioned below. In the Rev 21 passage there is no death. Amillennialism believes this era is ushered in by fire IMMEDIATELY upon the 2nd coming of Christ. Amil says there is no millennial kingdom.

Now look at the era mentioned in Isaiah 65. There is death. There is peace, prosperity, and a special time of God's blessing. (Do you recall a time when we considered a "child" of 100 years old to be a young death?) It is speaking of the millennial reign of Christ on earth when "he shall rule the nations with a rod of iron."

One says "death will be no more." That's pretty clear, isn't it? The other says "child shall die." Also clear. Decidedly different eras. Walvoord and premil is right....the amils are wrong.

Revelation 21 1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. 18 But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy. 19 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying. 20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. 21 And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them. 22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands. 23 They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the LORD, and their offspring with them. 24 And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear. 25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.

[JesseShurun]

God is addressing the Messiah through Zerrababel and the promise is future, on the Day of the Lord:

Isaiah 13:9 "Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. (10) For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. (13) Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger."

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Haggai 2:21-23 "Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth; (22) And I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the heathen; and I will overthrow the chariots, and those that ride in them; and the horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his brother. (23) In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel, my servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the LORD, and will make thee as a signet: for I have chosen thee, saith the LORD of hosts."

Yup.

See my #780 and #784 re: Zerubbabel

[jude24]

That was the clincher for me. (I just finished Isaiah for personal quiet-time study, and I cannot square the above with the amil perspective.)

It seems, to me, that this is at least as devastating to the amil perspective as the Jeconiah curse (which others have adequately explained, IIRC. I know I briefly explained it earlier -- The Marian/Jospehan geneologies are discernably different between Mat. 1 and Luke 3.) How 'bout it, OP, doc, or Woody? Care to address xzin's point?

I'll listen to an honest argument, but if all I get is the "premil is of the devil" crap, I'll just ignore it.

[RnMomof7]

Jesus was adopted receiving the full rights of Joseph's line and the curse was removed..I was adopted with full rights by MY heavenly Father. The curse was also removed from me .

If you chose to invalidate adoption in the eyes of God then you had better look else where for your hope kiddo

[jude24]

Now there's an intriguing take...

[ksen]

Here you go doc, it was at #751:

But in all seriousness, can you see no interpretive problem whatsoever for your premillennial position in 2 Peter 3?

Hi doc, sorry it has taken me awhile to get back to you in this.

Let’s go ahead and take a look at 2 Peter 3:

[1] This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
[2] That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
[3] Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
[4] And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

Peter introduces us to the problem. Some people don’t believe Jesus is coming again, and their false teaching was causing trouble for the people. Peter wrote this in order to comfort those who may have been led astray into believing that Jesus wasn’t really coming back.

[5] For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
[6] Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
[7] But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Peter makes the case that what God has said, God will do. God said that He would destroy the Earth with a flood; God did destroy the world with a flood. God has said that Jesus will come again; Jesus WILL come again.

[8] But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
[9] The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
[10] But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Here, I think, we come to the meat of your 2 Peter 3 case.

Peter is comforting his readers by assuring them that no matter how much time passes here, Jesus will come again. Jesus could come in a day, Jesus could come in a thousand years, Jesus could come in a million years, it is all the same to God. He will fulfill what He has promised.

The rest of the chapter is exhortation on how we should conduct ourselves in the knowledge that Jesus really is coming again.

Peter does not mention the Millenial reign here because it was not germane to his purposes. Peter’s purpose was to comfort those who were beginning to think that Jesus may not really be coming back to judge the world after all. To do that there was no need to go into detail about the resurrections and the Millenial reign. Peter points his readers, in verses 15 and 16, to the letters Paul has written them if they need more information.

I think that if you are honest you will say Yes.

I think you will see by my above statements that I am being honest with you when I say No.

Thanks again for taking time out of your day to bat this back and forth with me.

Ok, feel free to tear it apart. ;^)

[JesseShurun]

Some sages say that the curse was lifted. The curse was 3fold: He was to have no more children. He was not to prosper and his descendents were not to prosper on the throne. He had 8 more kids. Shealtiel means "asked of God". Asir means "prisoner". It's possible that he repented and God relented. Later he was taken out of prison and his throne set above the thrones of other kings in the king's palace. Besides God definitely chose Zerubbabel as the "signet ring" so something occurred.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Op is wrong and the author of my post correct...Jesus HAD to meet all the requirements..God would not do less ~~ 2143 posted on 10/14/02 2:32 PM Pacific by RnMomof7

That's exactly the point. Jesus HAD to meet ALL the requirements. As I said before, mark that word "all".

For the Promises were two-fold:

• 1.) God promised David that the Davidic Throne would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER be removed or "transferred" from the Royal Sons of the Solomonic House (the duplicitous assertions of the "bait-and-switch" author of #796 and #2091 aside) -- II Samuel 7: 12, I Chronicles 17: 11-14, I Chronicles 22: 10; AND...
• 2.) God promised Jeconiah that the Royal Sons of the Solomonic House would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER again rule as Kings in old Jerusalem of Judah on this Earth... and He called the very Earth as a witness to this Promise (which must therefore remain in effect until this Earth is utterly destroyed) -- Jeremiah 22: 28-30

Which means you can't treat the Solomonic Prophecies as a PreMillenial Salad Bar.

• You can't tell God that you believe the Solomonic Promises granting Jesus the everlasting Throne of David (although PreMills don't even really believe this, for the purported "Millenial Throne" isn't even everlasting in PreMillenial Eschatology when it is alleged to be established in an earthly, carnal "Millenial Kingdom" which will be destroyed by fire at the Final Judgment)...
• And yet at the same time tell God that you think that He was "just kidding" about the Jeconiah Curse on the Solomonic House.

It doesn't work that way!! The Solomonic Prophecies are not an Eschatological Salad Bar which you can "pick and choose" to support a PreMillenial belief construct. You either believe ALL the Solomonic Prophecies, or you don't really believe any of them.

IMHO, that's what "the_doc" is talking about when he says that "premillenialism is demonic". He is not saying that PreMillenialists are deliberately and intentionally serving the cause of Satan. He is saying that once a False Doctrine is presumed to be true, the advocate of that false doctrine has painted himself into a demonic "corner" from which he must affirm some Prophecies, deny others, and thereby unconsciously begin to call God a Liar.

---

And so let's test that assertion, using RnMomof7's quote from PreMillenial author Lenny Esposito as our Text:

First, we will look at the prophecy of the Messiah given to David. We know that the Messiah was promised to be of "the house and lineage of David." Most people make the error of assuming that those are synonyms. This is not so. The House of David usually refers to the Royal Line. This is the reign of kings that descended from David through Solomon. They ruled over Judah as documented in the books of I & II Kings and I & II Chronicles. Though there were three major revivals in Judah, most of the kings were wicked in the sight of the LORD, culminating with Jehoiachin; also known by the name of Jechoniah or Coniah. Jehoiachin was considered so wicked that the LORD put a blood curse on his descendants, stating that none of his offspring will ever again sit on the throne of David.

Enter the LIE, stage left. Esposito says that NONE of the House of Solomon will EVER again sit upon the Throne of David.

But Esposito CAN'T say this. The Promises given to Solomon are unconditional and everlasting.

It is not proper to speak only of "The Davidic Throne".
It is only strictly correct to speak of The Davidic Throne of the Solomonic House.
I Chronicles 17
11 And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.
12 He (Solomon) shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.
13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:
14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.
The Word cannot be Broken.

And for exactly this reason, it is not proper to speak only of "The Davidic Throne".
It is only strictly correct to speak of The Davidic Throne of the Solomonic House.

I Chronicles 22
10 He (Solomon) shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.

The Royal Right to the Davidic Throne is granted exclusively to the House of Solomon forever, and only a Royal Son of Solomon may reign upon the Davidic Throne.

If ANY House but that of the Solomonic Descent EVER reigns upon the Throne of David, the Word of God has been Broken.

Let's continue:

The curse, as recorded in Jeremiah 22:30, causes a problem, though. Just five verses later, Jeremiah writes of the Messiah, "Behold the days are coming," declares the LORD, "When I shall raise up for David a Righteous Branch; and He will reign as king and act wisely and do justice and righteousness in the land. In His days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely." What becomes confusing is that David is promised by God the throne to which his son Solomon succeeds him will never end. 2 Samuel 7:16 states, "And your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever." Isaiah 11 also makes reference to the Messiah being from David’s line by saying He will spring from "the stem of Jesse (David’s father)". Matthew 1:1 and Romans 1:3 confirm that Jesus was in fact a son of David. Luke 1:32 even states that Jesus "will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord GOD will give Him the throne of His father David, and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever." So here we have an apparent contradiction. God has decreed that none of the descendents of Jehoiachin will EVER sit on the throne of David or rule in Judah, but the prophecies in 2 Samuel and Luke say the opposite! The problem can be resolved, though, when one realizes that the curse placed on Jehoiachin and his descendents was a blood curse. In other words, the curse would only apply to the physical offspring of Jehoiachin.

Lenny Esposito is just making this up as he goes. He knows full well that the Jeconiah Curse is absolutely DAMNING to the PreMillenial argument. So he invents the argument that this is a "Blood Curse".

But the Bible does not say anything of the sort.

It is a

DESCENT CURSE

Read your interlinear -- they are the same Hebrew Word, of Solomon and of Jeconiah: Zera`, "descent".

Jesus was adopted into the Solomonic DESCENT.

If He was not adopted the Solomonic DESCENT, He has no Right to the Davidic Throne (II Samuel 7, I Chronicles 17 Promise)
If He was adopted into the Solomoic DESCENT, then He was adopted into the Solomonic DESCENT (Jeremiah 22 Curse).

SAME DESCENT.

Ergo, NO EARTHLY KINGDOM.

Let's continue:

What we must realize is two Old Testament legal technicalities come into play here. The first is that an adopted son can inherit all the rights and privileges that would be available to a natural son. In Genesis 15 verse 2, Abram lamented the fact that he had no natural son to inherit his estate, and it would fall to his chief servant Eliezar. This passage shows how all the rights and rank of a house can be transferred to a non-blood relative.

Lenny Esposito has just shot himself in the foot... or rather, he has just shot himself in his own Achilles' heel.

This passage shows how ALL the rights and rank of a house can be transferred to a non-blood relative.

But that's EXACTLY THE POINT, Lenny me' boyo. ALL the rights and rank of the Solomonic House are legally transferred in full to the Rightful Adoptive Heir, Jesus Christ.

God did indeed "do what He had to do" to fulfill His everlasting promises to David.

For the Promises were two-fold:

• 1.) God promised David that the Davidic Throne would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER be removed or "transferred" from the Royal Sons of the Solomonic House (the duplicitous assertions of the "bait-and-switch" author of your #796 aside) -- II Samuel 7: 12, I Chronicles 17: 11-14, I Chronicles 22: 10; AND...
• 2.) God promised Jeconiah that the Royal Sons of the Solomonic House would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER again rule as Kings in old Jerusalem of Judah on this Earth... and He called the very Earth as a witness to this Promise (which must therefore remain in effect until this Earth is utterly destroyed) -- Jeremiah 22: 28-30

And God "did what He had to do" to fulfill His promises -- ALL His promises.

By ordaining Jesus to be the (adoptive) Royal Son of Joseph (ben-Jeconiah, ben-Solomon), God ordained Jesus' of Nazareth rightful place as a Royal Son of Solomon through Jeconiah (remember, Matthew specifically establishes the Legal Descent of Jesus smack-dab through the Legal Descent of Jeconiah).

As such, as the Rightful and Legal adoptive heir of the Solomonic House, the Royal Son of Joseph-ben-Jeconiah-ben-Solomon, Jesus is the Legal Inheritor of ALL (mark that word, "all") of the Solomonic Promises.

Let me re-iterate that for emphasis: Jesus is the Rightful Legal Inheritor of ALL of the Solomonic Promises.

And so, in order for BOTH prophecies to be fulfilled:

• UNLESS the King be legally of the Royal Descent of Solomon, then He may not Reign upon the Davidic Throne. (II Samuel 7:12-13, I Chronicles 17:11-14, I Chronicles 22:10)
• But IF the King be of the Royal Descent of Solomon through Jeconiah, then He may not rule an earthly Kingdom from Old Jerusalem in Judah (Jeremiah 22:28-30) for as long as This Earth, called as a witness, remains (Jeremiah 22:29).

Let's continue:

In Numbers 27:6-11 we read of the daughters of Zelophehad, who were the only heirs of their father. Because there were no males born to the family, the inheritance of Zelophehad would be passed to his daughters and to their offspring. If there were no children to inherit, the nearest living relative would be entitled to the inheritance. Jesus was a son of David through Mary and entitled to all the benefits of the house of Eli. Because Johoiachin was counted as childless, none of that line was entitled to David’s throne, so the inheritance was to be transferred to a near kinsman. Jesus not only was entitled to the throne through adoption, but also as a kinsman redeemer of the Davidic line. So the promise that the Messiah would be of the house of David, as well and David’s throne would be everlasting takes on a more clear meaning. Jesus was legally entitled to the throne of David, being the oldest son of Joseph, but was subject to none of the consequences of the blood curse because He was adopted. He was also a direct descendant of King David, and therefore in the lineage of the king. Because all Jewish genealogies are to be reckoned from the father to the son, Luke lists Joseph as the assumed father of Jesus, however he becomes the heir of that line through the rule established with the daughters of Zelophehad. So no contradiction really exists, just a remarkably precise fulfillment of prophecy.

NO, Lenny, this will NOT be permitted!! You may NOT call the Word of God a LIE, no matter how much you require your Lies to shore up the desperate needs of your own PreMillenial Eschatology!!

• You MAY NOT assert that the Solomonic House has FAILED -- this is calling God a Liar. The Solomonic House CAN NOT fail -- The Royal Right to the Davidic Throne is granted exclusively to the House of Solomon forever, and ONLY a Royal Son of Solomon may reign upon the Davidic Throne. (I Chronicles 17: 11-14, I Chronicles 22:10).

• You MAY NOT assert that the Davidic Throne has been packed up and carted off to one of the Lesser Houses -- because such a "bait and switch" would violate every Solomonic Promise made by God to King David, which were uniformly unconditional and everlasting)

• And what is more, Lenny, the only valid point which you have made -- regarding the Legal Inheritance of the Adoptive Heir, which I freely admit and affirm -- only serves to ADVANCE my own argument and serves to ANNIHILATE your own.

For as you yourself admit, Lenny:

This passage shows how ALL the rights and rank of a house can be transferred to a non-blood relative.

And as I said before, that's EXACTLY THE POINT, Lenny me' boyo. ALL the rights and rank of the Solomonic House are legally transferred in full to the Rightful Adoptive Heir, Jesus Christ.

God did indeed "do what He had to do" to fulfill His everlasting promises to David.

For the Promises were two-fold:

• 1.) God promised David that the Davidic Throne would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER be removed or "transferred" from the Royal Sons of the Solomonic House (the duplicitous assertions of the "bait-and-switch" author of your #796 aside) -- II Samuel 7: 12, I Chronicles 17: 11-14, I Chronicles 22: 10; AND...
• 2.) God promised Jeconiah that the Royal Sons of the Solomonic House would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER again rule as Kings in old Jerusalem of Judah on this Earth... and He called the very Earth as a witness to this Promise (which must therefore remain in effect until this Earth is utterly destroyed) -- Jeremiah 22: 28-30

And so, in order for BOTH prophecies to be fulfilled:

• UNLESS the King be legally of the Royal Descent of Solomon, then He may not Reign upon the Davidic Throne. (II Samuel 7:12-13, I Chronicles 17:11-14, I Chronicles 22:10)
• But IF the King be of the Royal Descent of Solomon through Jeconiah (and remember that Matthew traces the Royal Descent of Jesus smack-dab through the House of Jeconiah), then He may not rule an earthly Kingdom from Old Jerusalem in Judah (Jeremiah 22:28-30) for as long as This Earth, called as a witness, remains (Jeremiah 22:29).

---

The Evidence of Scripture is INCONTROVERTIBLE, Lenny Esposito. It is ABSOLUTE. And it is DAMNING to the PreMillenial position.

In order to shore up the desperate needs of PreMillenial Eschatology, you must commit no less that two crimes against Scripture:

• You must assert (as you do) that the Solomonic House has failed. But this is a Demonic Lie against God, Lenny Esposito -- For the Solomonic House CANNOT fail. (II Samuel 7:12-13, I Chronicles 17:11-14, I Chronicles 22:10)
• You must assert (as you do) that the Davidic Throne has been "transferred" from the Solomonic House. But this is a Demonic Lie against God, Lenny Esposito -- For the Davidic Throne CANNOT be "transferred" from the Solomonic House. (II Samuel 7:12-13, I Chronicles 17:11-14, I Chronicles 22:10)
• And Lastly, the only Truth in your entire Argument -- the Legal Right of the Adoptive Heir -- is an Absolute Testimony AGAINST your PreMillenialism and an Absolute Testimony FOR the Amillenial position. For as you, yourself, affirm: ALL the rights and rank of the Solomonic House are legally transferred in full to the Rightful Adoptive Heir, Jesus Christ.

And so, in order for BOTH prophecies to be fulfilled:

• UNLESS the King be legally of the Royal Descent of Solomon, then He may not Reign upon the Davidic Throne. (II Samuel 7:12-13, I Chronicles 17:11-14, I Chronicles 22:10)
• But IF the King be of the Royal Descent of Solomon through Jeconiah (and remember that Matthew traces the Royal Descent of Jesus smack-dab through the House of Jeconiah), then He may not rule an earthly Kingdom from Old Jerusalem in Judah (Jeremiah 22:28-30) for as long as This Earth, called as a witness, remains (Jeremiah 22:29).

.

---

And so, in closing.....

.

Lenny Esposito did not "tear my argument to shreds". No offense, that's bloody ridiculous. Esposito only tore himself to shreds with his demonic DENIAL of the Everlasting and Unconditional character of the Solomonic Prophecies -- Not to put too fine a point on it, he LIED AGAINST GOD.
And he tore himself to shreds with his demonic eisegetical foolishness of proposing to pack up the Davidic Throne and cart it off to one of the Lesser Houses -- Not to put too fine a point on it, HE LIED AGAINST GOD, again.

He shot himself in his own Achilles Heel -- twice. The only point which he managed to make, the Legal Right of the Adoptive Heir, is an Absolute Testimony AGAINST your PreMillenialism and an Absolute Testimony FOR the Amillenial position.

And that's the way the cookie crumbles.

---

I predict that this will be the FINAL evidentiary argument on the Solomonic Prophecies.

The PreMillenials will bring up NO new arguments which I have not answered already, in this very post. They will just bring up THE SAME hopeless arguments, and I will quote my own arguments from Scripture RIGHT BACK to them.

Because the PreMillenials have NO arguments they can bring against these Eschatological FACTS. From this point on, they will do nothing more than simply DENY the Plain Facts of Solomonic Prophecy.

Because that's the way the cookie crumbles.

CAUSA FINITA EST.