Most agree with much of what we said earlier about Christ as our Prophet and Priest, but there is great disagreement concerning Christ in the role of King. The primary reason for the disagreement centers on dispensationalism’s position on the establishing of a future earthly kingdom with one of David’s sons sitting on the throne of that kingdom as king. This is referred to as “the Davidic kingdom.”
Scripture is quite clear in 2 Samuel 7:1-17 and 1 Chronicles 17:1-15 that God promised David that he, God, would establish a future kingdom and raise up one of David’s sons to sit as king on a throne in that kingdom. No one disputes the fact of that covenant. However, all do not agree on either the nature of the promised kingdom to David or the time of the promise being fulfilled. I insist that the kingdom promised to David was a spiritual kingdom that was established by Christ at his first coming. I believe Christ is already sitting on the throne of that kingdom. The kingdom promised to David is the Church and Christ is David’s greater son. Classical dispensationalism disagrees and insists that the kingdom promised to David was an earthly kingdom, and it is not yet established. Jesus is said to have offered that kingdom to the Jews at his first coming, and they rejected it. It was postponed and will be fulfilled in a future earthly millennium. The following note in the first edition of the Scofield Bible sets forth classical dispensationalism’s position on the Davidic kingdom and throne.
II. Four forms of the Gospel are to be distinguished:
(1) The Gospel of the kingdom. This is the good news that God purposes to set up on the earth, in fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant (2 Sam. vii. 8, and refs.), a kingdom, political, spiritual, Israelitish, universal, over which God’s Son, David’s heir, shall be King, and which shall be, for one thousand years, the manifestation of the righteousness of God in human affairs.[1]
Dispensationalism is clear that Christ is not yet reigning as king. These writers will often state that Christ is our Prophet, Priest and coming King. The following Scofield footnote defining the second “form of the Gospel” refers to Jesus as the “rejected king.” It is the second of four forms of the Gospel.
(2) The Gospel of the grace of God. This is the good news that Jesus Christ, the rejected (italics added) King, has died on the cross for the sins of the world, that He was raised from the dead for our justification, and that by Him all that believe are justified from all things.[2]
I do not believe that it was a “rejected king” that died on the cross for my sins. I totally reject the statement, “Jesus Christ, the rejected King, has died on the cross.” It was not a rejected king that died for me. This idea is a necessary consequence of holding the postponement theory. I believe the death of Christ on the cross is the good news that Jesus Christ, not a rejected king, but God’s anointed Son and ordained Prophet, Priest and King, has, in perfect fulfillment of the eternal purpose and promise of the Father, died on the cross as promised and covenanted.
It is no accident that another consequence of rejecting the present kingship of Christ is the carnal Christian doctrine. Many modern dispensationalists reject the carnal Christian doctrine, but others say such people are inconsistent in so doing. I am sure it is not intended, but Scofield in the above quotation makes the cross sound like a “plan B” or after-thought. God’s real purpose and goal, or plan A, was establishing the earthly kingdom, but the Jews refused to go along with that so plan B, the cross and the Church, was put into effect. Plan A was “postponed” until the second coming of Christ. The nature of the kingdom and its supposed rejection and postponement is at the heart of the theology of dispensationalism. It seems to me this downgrades the cross even though that was certainly not its intention.
It might be well to mention several things that are often not discussed when dispensationalism is taught. For instance, the footnote just quoted defines the kingdom promised to David as being “political, spiritual, Israelitish, universal, over which God’s Son, David’s heir, shall reign as King.” If Jesus would have offered the Jews a kingdom that was “political, spiritual, Israelitish and universal,” they would have accepted it without hesitation. They would never have crucified him. They would have shouted, “Amen!” Those words, especially the word Israeltitish, perfectly describe the very kind of kingdom the Jews wanted. Another point established in the quotation is that this covenant made with David has not yet been fulfilled. It will be fulfilled when the millennium is supposedly to be established. The New Testament makes it clear the Davidic kingdom is already established.
The whole subject of an earthly kingdom would be much easier to understand if we remembered one clear fact. The whole idea of an earthly kingdom and king to rule over Israel was born out of Israel’s rebellion to God. The first mention of an earthly kingdom is found in 1 Samuel 8. Israel insisted they wanted to be like the other nations and have a king. Their desire for a king was a deliberate rejection of God as their king.
So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.” But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king (1 Sam. 8:4-7).
God instructed Samuel to warn the Israelites of the demands that a king would make of them and told them that they would be sorry for rejecting him as their king.
As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.” Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day” (1 Sam. 8:8-18).
The people refused to heed God’s warning but insisted that they wanted a king. They wanted to be like all the other nations. They chose Saul as their king and suffered the disastrous results. Regardless of what millennial view you hold it must take into account the fact that an earthly king over God’s people in an earthly kingdom “like the other nations” was born out of Israel’s conscious and deliberate rejection of God as their king. There is no mention or intimation that God desired an earthly king to be established. The idea totally originated in Israel’s rejection of God as their king.
But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.” When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the Lord. The Lord answered, “Listen to them and give them a king” (1 Sam. 8:19-22).
In 1 Samuel 12, Samuel recounts some of Israel’s history and reminds them of their rash decision to reject God as their king and choose an earthly king to rule over them, “… you said to me, ‘No, we want a king to rule over us’–even though the Lord your God was your king” (v 12). It seems to me that any doctrine that has its origins in man’s rebellion should at least make us tread lightly. We surely should not use something born out of rebellion to God as the foundation points of an important doctrine.
I am sure that many of my readers would like to ask, “Why would God deliberately allow Israel to choose an earthly king and reject him as their king.” I cannot answer that question—nor can anyone else. We may speculate and come up with some very plausible reasons, but they would all be mere speculation. We face two dangers in seeking to understand Scripture. One, we need the courage to follow Scripture as far as it goes on any subject. We must not either avoid or minimize anything Scripture says. Many sincere people feel a subject should be avoided if it is controversial. That is saying that God put something in Scripture that should not be there. If God put something in Scripture, we must seek to understand it. Two, we need the humility to stop where God stops. Hyper-Calvinism uses human logic to deduce more than Scripture actually says. John Calvin emphasized this need for humility when discussing predestination. He said we must admit to having a “learned ignorance.” Logic is a wonderful handmaid but a hard master. Logic cannot deduce truth that is not stated in actual texts of Scripture. It is just as arrogant to add our human wisdom to Scripture as it is to detract from Scripture.
The kingship of David begins with his secret anointing by Samuel as recorded in 1 Samuel 16. That is an interesting passage. God instructs Samuel to anoint one of Jesse the Bethelemite’s sons as king. Samuel assumes it would be Eliab, the oldest son. Samuel thought, “Surely, the Lord’s anointed stands here … “ but God said no and then gave Samuel a lesson on choosing leadership.
“… Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The Lord does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart” (1 Sam. 16:7).
You would think that Israel would have learned the folly of judging by outward appearance. Saul won the beauty contest by unanimous vote, but he was a dud. He was not God’s man. Jesse brought in every son until only David was left and each time God said no. Jesse did not even bring David in. Samuel had to ask, “Are these all the sons you have?” (1 Sam. 16:11). Then David was brought in and God told Samuel, “Rise and anoint him; he is the one” (1 Sam. 16:12).
It will be a long and tumultuous time before David is anointed king by all of Israel. After Saul’s death he will be anointed by the tribe of Judah (2 Sam. 2) and later by all 12 tribes (2 Sam. 5).
The next important event in David’s kingship is God making a covenant with David. It is recorded in 2 Samuel 7 and 1 Chronicles 17. David has been anointed king over all Israel. He wants to build a house for God to dwell in. He shares his desire with Nathan the prophet and Nathan says, “Go ahead, God is with you.” That night God told Nathan that he did not want David to build him a house. God then promises to build a house for David. That house is the Church and David’s greater son who will build the house is Christ. That is not speculation on my part; it is quoting the New Testament interpretation of the Davidic covenant.
After the king was settled in his palace and the Lord had given him rest from all his enemies around him, he said to Nathan the prophet, “Here I am, living in a palace of cedar, while the ark of God remains in a tent.”
Nathan replied to the king, “Whatever you have in mind, go ahead and do it, for the Lord is with you.”
That night the word of the Lord came to Nathan, saying:
“Go and tell my servant David, ‘This is what the Lord says: Are you the one to build me a house to dwell in? I have not dwelt in a house from the day I brought the Israelites up out of Egypt to this day. I have been moving from place to place with a tent as my dwelling. Wherever I have moved with all the Israelites, did I ever say to any of their rulers whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, “Why have you not built me a house of cedar?”‘
“Now then, tell my servant David, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty says: I took you from the pasture and from following the flock to be ruler over my people Israel. I have been with you wherever you have gone, and I have cut off all your enemies from before you. Now I will make your name great, like the names of the greatest men of the earth. And I will provide a place for my people Israel and will plant them so that they can have a home of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked people will not oppress them anymore, as they did at the beginning and have done ever since the time I appointed leaders over my people Israel. I will also give you rest from all your enemies.
“‘The Lord declares to you that the Lord himself will establish a house for you: When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with the rod of men, with floggings inflicted by men. But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever.’”
Nathan reported to David all the words of this entire revelation (2 Sam. 7:1-17).
The heart of God’s covenant with David is found in verse 13, “He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.” Hebrews 3:6 specifically calls the Church God’s house, “But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. We are his house, …” Believers are the true and final temple of God in which God dwells. We are the true house of David. Christ is David’s greater son and is building the true house of God out of living stones. Again, this is not speculation; it is quoting the New Testament. In 2 Samuel 7:12 part of the promise to David was that God would “… raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, …” When Peter quotes that text in Acts 2:30, he changes the word “seed” to the word “Christ,” “…he would raise up Christ (David’s seed) to sit on his throne.” Look at the two texts.
When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring [“seed” – KJV] to succeed you, … (2 Sam. 7:12)
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 (Acts 2:30 NKJV).
David understood that God was talking about Christ. David also understood that when God said he would “raise up your offspring to succeed you,” (2 Sam. 7:12) he was talking about the resurrection of Christ. Again, this is quoting the New Testament Scriptures. Peter is interpreting the Davidic covenant recorded in 2 Samuel 7.
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 (Acts 2:30-32 NKJV).
This covenant was the basis for David’s hope in both life and death. He spells this out in 2 Samuel 23:5, his last words.
David rejoices that God made:
… an everlasting covenant,
arranged and secured in every part…
Will he not bring to fruition my salvation
and grant me my every desire?
Matthew Henry has some excellent comments on this text.
God has made a covenant of grace with us in Jesus Christ, and we are here told, First, that it is an everlasting covenant, from everlasting in the contrivance and counsel of it, and to everlasting in the continuance and consequences of it. Secondly, that it is ordered, well ordered in all things, admirably well, to advance the glory of God and the honour of the Mediator, together with the holiness and comfort of believers. Thirdly, That the promised mercies are sure on the performance of the conditions. Fourthly, That it is all our salvation. Nothing but this will save us, and this is sufficient: it is this only upon which our salvation depends. Fifthly, That therefore it must be all our desire.[3]
The New Testament immediately announces that Jesus would inherit the Davidic throne and kingdom. When the angel spoke to the Virgin Mary, she was confused. Part of the angel’s message concerned Jesus receiving the throne of the kingdom promised to his father David.
Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end” (Luke 1:29-33).
Acts 2 is a crucial passage. Like most key passages, it is also very controversial. The first section records the coming of the Holy Spirit and the subsequent speaking in tongues. The unbelieving Jews said those speaking in tongues were drunk (vv. 1–13). Peter shows that the event was the fulfillment of two Old Testament prophecies. First, the promise of the Gospel and establishing the kingdom promised in the prophet Joel (vv. 14-21). Second the promise to David (2 Sam. 7) to raise one of his sons from the dead and crown him as king over an eternal kingdom (vv. 22-36).
We will begin by looking at Acts 16-21. Peter says the phenomenon of tongues was an evidence of a prophecy that was made by the prophet Joel is being fulfilled. It is clear that Peter spiritualized Joel’s prophecy. Peter definitely understood that the kingdom prophesied in Joel was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. The gift of the Holy Spirit was the proof that Christ was enthroned in heaven on David’s throne and the promised kingdom had come. There is no way you can take Peter’s interpretation “literally” without seeing that he spiritualized Joel’s prophecy.
No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: [“this is what” cannot mean anything but “this is what.”]
“‘In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.
Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days,
and they will prophesy.
I will show wonders in the heaven above
and signs on the earth below,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.
Dispensationalism cannot spiritualize kingdom promises and must therefore insist the events of Pentecost are only a type or prefiguring of the kingdom promised in Joel. In that system, the words “this is what” which was spoken by Peter must be understood to mean that Pentecost is not a fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy but only a prefiguring of what will happen when Christ, in the future, establishes the Davidic (millennial) kingdom. John MacArthur is typical of dispensational writers. Here are two quotations from his Study Bible. The first quotation is from the introduction to the Book of Joel, and the second one is from Acts 2.
A second issue confronting the interpreter is Peter’s quotation from Joel 2:28-32 in Acts 2:16-21. Some have viewed the phenomena of Acts 2 and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 as the fulfillment of the Joel passage, while others have reserved its fulfillment to the final Day of the Lord only—but clearly Joel is referring to the final terrible Day of the Lord. The pouring out of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost is not a fulfillment, but a preview and sample of the Spirit’s power and work, to be released fully and finally in the Messiah’s kingdom after the Day of the Lord.[4]
Joel’s prophecy will not be completely fulfilled until the millennial kingdom and the final judgment. But Peter by using it, shows that Pentecost was a pre-fulfillment, a taste of what will happen in the millennial kingdom when the Spirit is poured out on all flesh …[5]
Peter next gives us the new covenant fulfillment of the covenant made with David in 2 Samuel 7. He first shows that Christ had all the credentials to prove that he was David’s greater son to whom the kingdom promises had been made.
“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know” (Acts 2:22).
Despite the fact that Jesus gave ample proof that he was David’s son who was the heir the Davidic throne and kingdom, the Jews still crucified him, but God raised him from the dead as prophesied in the Davidic covenant.
This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him (Acts 2:23, 24).
Peter assures us that David died in the sure hope that not only would he be raised from the dead, but one of his sons would be the Messiah who establish the eternal kingdom promised to David’s greater son.
David said about him:
“‘I saw the Lord always before me.
Because he is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.
Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;
my body also will live in hope,
because you will not abandon me to the grave,
nor will you let your Holy One see decay.
You have made known to me the paths of life;
you will fill me with joy in your presence’ (Acts 2:25–28).
The next few verses give us the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of how David understood the covenant that God made with him.
“Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day” (Acts 2:29).
Why would Peter emphasize that David was dead and buried? Because the covenant to raise up one of his sons and seat him on the throne of an eternal kingdom was to be fulfilled while “you [David] rest with your fathers” (2 Sam. 7:12; cf. 1 Chr. 17:11). The Davidic kingdom was to be established with a resurrected Christ but before David was resurrected. David’s son would be raised from the dead and the kingdom would be established while David rested with the fathers. He is still sleeping in the grave and will remain there until the second coming. Again, this is not idle speculation. David understood this timing of the establishing of the kingdom. Read the following verses carefully. It is impossible to read a future earthly kingdom into Peter’s words. Peter specifically identifies the time of David assuming the kingship of the kingdom was at the resurrection of Christ while David was still in the grave. It is definitely past—not future. It happened when David’s greater son was raised from the dead and David was still dead and buried. The whole argument of verses 30-34 hinges on the fact that the resurrection of Christ, not the resurrection of David, established the kingdom promised to David concerning one of his sons. Follow Peter’s argument carefully in Acts 2:30-36. Note how clearly Peter shows that the Davidic covenant has been fulfilled and David’s greater son is presently seated in heaven on the Davidic throne. There is a not a hint of an earthly future kingdom.
But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, [The Davidic covenant promised that one of David’s sons, not David, would be raised from the dead and seated on a throne. The establishing of this throne and kingdom would take place at the resurrection of Christ and not at a supposed future millennium when David will be raised from the dead] that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus [not David] to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. Exalted to the right hand of God [This cannot be referring to David since he is not exalted at the Father’s right hand. David has not ascended to heaven], he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,
“‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.”‘
“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2: 30-36).
It is interesting that Peter said that God made Jesus both Lord and Christ. We would expect him to say, “Lord and Savior.”