2. A brief survey of content and its significance.
B. Important advances in the history of redemption in 1,2 Samuel
1. Samuel records the provisional
fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham concerning the extent of the
promised land (everlasting possession: Gen 17:8; Ps 105:8 11).
This was one of the central elements of
the covenant with Abraham (Gen 15:18 21) arid was confirmed in Gen
17:8; Num 34:1 12; Deut 1:7; 11:24; Josh 1:4, Ps. 105:8 11 . This was,
it is true, initially fulfilled when Joshua entered the land (Joshua
11:23), but only partially (Joshua 13:1 6) and was not followed through
to completion (Judges 1). The promise included borders from Egypt to
the Euphrates. The realization of this came under David (2 Sam 8) who
internally (Philistines) and externally extended Israel's sovereignty
to these boundaries. Thus it could be said of Solomon (1 Kgs 4:21,24)
that Israel controlled the territory that had been promised to Abraham.
So the seemingly mundane statements of 2 Samuel 8 that record David's
conquests contain a great declaration to us. God is faithful. He will
accomplish what he says. During the time of Samuel and Saul this
appeared impossible even unthinkable. But in the providence of
God the great nations of the fertile crescent (Babylon, Elam, Assur,
the Hittites) were brought to weakness, while in Israel the kingdom of
David and Solomon grew to the extent promised to Abraham.
2. In 1 Samuel we have the record of the establishment of kingship in
Israel and the association of anointing with kingship.
It is in the book of Samuel that the
phrase "the anointed of the
comes to be used as synonymous with "king". The
significance of this is seen when it is realized that "anointed" and
"Messiah" are the translation and transliteration of the same Hebrew
. the Greek
translation in both the NT and LXX for
comes from the
Greek root meaning to anoint. This term of course becomes Christ in our
The story of how Saul and David were anointed is clearly given in 1 Sam
9:16; 10:1; 16:13.
The "anointed of the LORD" as a designation for the king appears in 1
Sam 2:10; 24:10; 26:9; 2 Sam 1:14,16; 19:21; 22:51; 23:1.
The idea of kingship in Israel does not appear without previous
expectation. It is first explicitly expressed in Jacob's prophecy (Gen
49:10; cf., Gen 17:6,16) of Shiloh, the ruler out of the tribe of
Judah, then further developed in the oracle of Balaam. in Num. 24:7,17.
Deut 17:14 20 looks forward to the time that the LORD will place a king
of his choice over his people after entrance in the promised land.
1 Samuel shows us how kingship was established. It is significant that
this was done in a way that assured covenantal continuity. More about
this later (C.5).
The striking thing is that when Saul's kingship proved to be a failure,
David is given the remarkable promise that his dynasty would endure
forever (2 Samuel 7:11 16; 23:1 5).
This is the highpoint of the entire book. The line of the promised seed
from Jacob to Judah is now narrowed and sharpened. The seed of the
woman will come out of the royal line of David. David is to be the
ancestor of the great Messiah king to come. This promise is ultimately
fulfilled in Christ (Ps 89.3 29ff). Jesus comes as the son of David,
the son of Abraham (Matt. 1:1). The angel Gabriel said to Mary that her
son "would sit on the throne of his father David (Lk 1:32,33). Jesus is
addressed in Matt 20:30 by two blind men sitting by the roadside as the
Son of David "Have mercy on us, 0 LORD thou Son of David."
Jesus says of himself (Rev 22:16) "I am the root and the offspring of
David, and the bright and morning star."
It should be noted, however, that it is not so much David's
accomplishments or qualities as a leader as it is God's purposes that
were to be accomplished in and through him that are most significant.
He is, therefore, not idealized or placed on a pedestal, and his
weaknesses are evident. But in spite of his weaknesses he is still
known as "a man after God's own heart" (Acts 13:22; 1 Sam 13:14; 16:7).
In general it can be said that David sought to rule as God intended the
occupant on the throne in Israel to rule. He strove to pattern his
reign on the requirements of the book of the law, and served the LORD
in his capacity as king with his whole heart. His reign is summarized
in 2 Sameul 8:15 as a king who "did what was just and right for all his
people." Yet even with an individual as godly as David it is clear that
no human king could fulfill the high ideal required. He sinned and fell
short of God's standards. It is out of recognition of this fact, and
even more so with subsequent occupants of David's throne, that the
future Messianic hope begins to emerge namely, that at some
future time one will occupy the throne of David who will be greater
than any ordinary man, he will be a divine king (Isaiah
7:14 a worthy representative of the house of David will
replace Ahaz he will be called Immanuel, God with us;
Isaiah 9:6, a child is to be born with names that indicate deity
[mighty God, everlasting father, prince of peace] and the government
will be upon his shoulder, "and of the increase of his government and
peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne 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.'). Cf., also, Jer. 23:5,6; 33:15,16.
Here then in 1,2 Samuel is the record of the establishment of kingship
in Israel. This points forward to something greater that was to
come the Messiah the King of all the earth.
Kingship and Messianic expectation become central to the eschatology of
both the Old and New Testaments. This all begins to take shape in 1,2
3. 1,2 Samuel record how Jerusalem became the political and religious
center of Israel.
David took the Jebusite city of Zion
and made it his capital city (2 Samuel 5:6 14). Later he brought the
ark to Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6) making it the religious center of the
nation and implicitly demonstrating that he recognized Yahweh as the
supreme ruler of the land Yahweh was enthroned between the
cherubim the ark which contained the tablets of the law was
V.C. The Life of Samuel
5. The establishment of kingship and
covenant continuity - 1 Samuel 8-12.
1 Samuel 8-12 describes the rise of
kingship in Israel. This section of
1 Samuel naturally divides into five sub-sections.
1. The request for a king - 1
2. Samuel anoints Saul privately to be king - 1 Samuel 9:1-10:16
3. Saul is publicly chosen to be king by lot at Mizpah - 1 Samuel
4. Saul's choice as king is confirmed by his victory over the Ammonites
- I Samuel 11:1-13
5. Saul's reign is inaugurated at a covenant renewal ceremony convened
by Samuel at Gilgal - 1 Samuel 11:14-12:25
It has often been claimed that this section of Samuel is composed of
sources that reflect differing attitudes toward the monarchy. Sections 1,3 and 5 are said to be late, historically unreliable anti monarchialSections 2 and 4 are said to be earlier, more historically
reliable pro monarchial
sources reflecting a more optimistic and favorable attitude toward
This sort of literary analysis, however, does not stand up to closer
scrutiny. While sections 1, 3 and 5 do have strong statements about
Israel's sin in requesting a king (thus a negative stance toward kingship),
they, at the same time, also make it clear that it is Yahweh's purpose
to give Israel a king (thus a positive
stance toward kingship).
were written subsequent to a long and bad experience with kingship.
Kingship represented as sinful:
1) 8:7b; 3) 10:19; 5)12:17,19,20
Kingship represented as the Lord's will:
1) 8:7,9,22; 3) 10:24,25; 5) 12:13
The tension in 1 Samuel 8-12, then, is not that of a conflict between
sources that are either pro- or anti- kingship. Kingship itself
is not the issue. The tension centers on whether or not kingship
affirms or denies Israel's covenant relationship with Yahweh. When
Israel sought national security by desiring a human king "like the
nations round about" (1 Sam 8:5, 20) she in effect rejected Yahweh who
was her king (1 Sam 8:7; 10:19; 12:12). This abrogation of the covenant
was the sin for which Israel was condemned. When Samuel gave Israel a
king, at the LORD's command, he did so in the context of a covenant
renewal ceremony held at Gilgal where kingship was established in
the setting of a reaffirmation of allegiance to Yahweh (1 Sam
11:14-12:25). This passage (1 Sam 11:14-12:25) is, in fact, the key to
the resolution of the alleged pro/anti monarchy tension in the previous
Understanding these narratives in this way throws light on the question
of why kingship did not arise in Israel until several centuries after
Israel had arrived in Canaan. All the surrounding nations (Canaanite,
Edomite, Ammorite, Moabite etc.) had kings. Why did Israel remain
without a king for so long? Some have suggested it was the consequence
of the need for a transition from a nomadic to a sedentary way of life.
Others have suggested that the people were separated geographically in
a way that did not allow for a central authority to arise. These
circumstantial explanations, however, are insufficient. The Old
Testament does not view the presence or absence of kingship in early
Israel as a circumstantial issue, but rather as a principial issue.
Israel had been chosen by God to be his people. He was their king. He
dwelt in their midst. The ark was his throne seat. It was the LORD who
led Israel in battle and gave them victory. It was the LORD who gave
them the land of Canaan. Israel, however, was not satisfied with this
arrangement, and came to view a direct theocracy as a liability and
weakness, rather than as a privilege and strength. When they requested
Samuel to give them a king their request constituted a rejection of the
LORD who was their king (1 Sam 8:7; 10:19; 12:12). Israel wanted a
human king in place of Yahweh.
They wanted a national hero, a symbol of national power and unity,
someone who would provide them with a visible guarantee of security and
rest. So their request for a king reflected:
a. skepticism concerning the adequacy
of the rule of Yahweh as their king
b. fear for the enemies who were threatening them (the Philistines, and
c. an attempt to find national unity and security in the pattern of
In God's purposes, however, the time for kingship, already anticipated
in previous revelation, had now come. Even though Israel desired a king
for the wrong reasons, after warning them about their error, God told
Samuel to give them a king. One might place the words of Joseph over
this situation ("You thought evil against me; but God meant it unto
good, to bring to pass as it is this day, to save many people alive."
So kingship was established in Israel. But it was a different sort of
kingship than the people had requested. In 1 Sam 10:25 and Deuteronomy
17:14 20 the king is placed under the law of the LORD. The king in
Israel was not to be autonomous in his authority. In surrounding
nations the king's will was the law and he answered to no one. The king
was viewed as either divine or as the direct spokesman for God with
divine authority. In Israel there was no place for this understanding
of kingship. In Israel the king was not to be exalted above his
brethren. He was not to be worshiped (Deut 17:20). He was not to
multiply horses or wives (Deut 17:16,17). And he must govern in
accordance with God's law. (Dent 17:18,19).
Kingship thus came to Israel at God's command, although its
establishment was occasioned by the misdirected desire of the people
for a king. But the sort of kingship inaugurated by Samuel was designed
to be a kingship within the covenant (1 Sam 11:1412:25, cf. Josiah, 2
We will look at 1 Samuel 8
and then 1 Samuel 11:14-12:25
1 Samuel 8
The people ask for a king (1 Sam 8:5). Samuel is displeased (1 Sam
8:6). But the Lord told Samuel to give the people a king (1 Sam 8:7 9,
There had been a deterioration in the people's relationship with Yahweh
since the LORD gave them victory over the Philistines (1 Samuel 7). The
people attributed their weakness to their lack of a king rather than to
their unfaithfulness toward Yahweh. They believed that a king would be
able to deliver them from their enemies (1 Sam 8:5, 20).
Yahweh granted their request for a king, but the first king (Saul) did
little to deliver them from their enemies. In fact at Saul's death the
Philistines were more of a threat to Israel than they were when he
began to reign. The reason for this was that Saul did not place himself
under the word and law of Yahweh. He did not listen to the voice of the
prophet. He turned out to be an anti theocratic king. This anti
theocratic kingship was a disaster for Israel, and an example for
Saul's successors. In Saul, God showed Israel what kingship would be
like when it was separated from submission to the word of Yahweh and
faithfulness to His covenant.
Nevertheless in 1 Samuel 8 Yahweh's answer to Samuel shows that the
time had come for the establishment of kingship in Israel. To this
extent there was agreement between God's purpose for Israel and the
people's desire. But the kind of kingship that God commanded was not
identical with the kind the people desired.
1 Sam 8:9,11
"the manner of the king" (
; mispat hammelek)
This "manner of the king" is not what the kings should
do, but what a king "as the
nations" (vs. 5) would
A king "as the nations round about" will "take
" (6 times in vss.
11-17). This is given as a warning. The description of "the manner of
the king" in 1 Samuel 8:9-17 is to be contrasted with the "manner of
the kingdom" (
; mispat hamme
in 1 Sam 10:25. In 1 Sam 10:25 the "manner of the kingdom" is a
description of what a true covenantal king should
be like. It undoubtedly
contained material similar to the law of the king found in Deut 17: 14
Literary Criticism of 1 Sam 8-12 (slide 66)
1 Sam 8:19
The warning fell on deaf ears. The request became a demand, "We must
have a king over us."
1 Sam 8:20
Israel lost her concept of her distinctness
as the people
of God, and forgot that this distinctness
was precisely her reason for existence.
1 Sam 11:14-12:25
We will look first at 1
1 Samuel 12 describes Samuel's challenge to Israel to renew her
allegiance to Yahweh on the occasion of the introduction of kingship
into the structure of the theocracy.
1 Sam 12:1-5
Samuel secured vindication of his own
covenant faithfulness during the previous conduct of his office as he
presented the people with one who was to assume the responsibilities of
kingship. Note he has not "taken" cf. 8:11-17.
I Sam 12:6-12
Samuel used a resume of the righteous
acts of Yahweh in the events of the exodus and the period of the judges
in order to judicially establish Israel's apostasy in requesting a king.
I Sam 12:13
Samuel indicated that in spite of this
apostasy, Yahweh had chosen to use kingship as an instrument of His
rule over his people.
1 Sam 12:14-15
By a restatement of the basic
stipulation or "covenant conditional" Samuel confronted Israel with her
continuing obligation of total loyalty to Yahweh with the integration
of human kingship into the structure of the theocracy.
There has long been a general consensus of interpreters that vs. 14 has
only a protasis (the subordinate clause expressing a condition in a
conditional sentence) and lacks an apodosis. The translation normally
adopted is similar to RSV and NIV:
RSV: "If you will fear the LORD and serve him and hearken to his voice
and not rebel against the commandment of the LORD, and if [MT: then]
both you and the king who reigns over you will follow the LORD your
God, it will be well
The last phrase does not occur in the MT and must be added to complete
the sentence. As H. P. Smith (A
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Samuel
Edinburgh, 1951, 88) has pointed out "to begin the apodosis with wihyitem
; then] is grammatically
the correct thing to do. . ." Yet, Smith feels that to do so produces a
redundancy because "it makes an identical proposition: if you fear
Comparison of vs. 14 with vs. 15 confirms that the apodosis rightly
; then]. The two verses are
parallel in structure.
RSV (1 Sam 12:15): "But if you will not hearken to the voice of the
LORD, but rebel against the commandment of the LORD, then the hand of
the LORD will be against you and your king."
Smith's objection turns on his understanding of the expression ...
(wihyitem ... ahar
; then you will follow Yahweh).
This phrase occurs in several other places in the OT:
2 Sam 2:10; 15:13; 1 Kgs 12:20; 16:21.
In all of these places it is used to indicate that the people of
Israel, or a certain segment of the people have chosen to follow a
particular king in a situation where there was another possible
2 Sam 2:10
The decision of Judah to follow David while Ishbosheth reigned over the
remainder of the nation.
1 Kgs 12:20
Judah followed the house of David at the time of the division of the
Divided loyalties between Tibni and Omri after the death of Zimri.
2 Sam 15:13.
The rebellion of Absalom. The men of Israel choose to give allegiance
to Absalom and recognize him as king instead of David.
Using this understanding of the phrase, then, one can say that here at
Gilgal Israel entered a new era in which the old covenant conditional
took on a new dimension (cf. Exod 19:5,6; Deut 11:13 15, 22-25, 26 28;
28:lff; 30:17; Josh 24:20; 1 Sam 7:3). With the institution of kingship
the potential is created for the people to have divided loyalties
between Yahweh and the human king. Because of this Samuel challenged
the people to renew their determination to obey Yahweh, and not to
rebel against his commandments, and thereby to demonstrate that they
continued to recognize Yahweh as their sovereign.
It is, then, not necessary to conclude that the expression "if you fear
Yahweh... then you will
follow Yahweh" is a redundancy or an identical proposition. Rather,
this is the expression of the basic covenant conditional in terms of
the new era that Israel was entering. If Israel fears Yahweh, etc. she
will show that she continues to recognize Yahweh as her sovereign even
though human kingship has been introduced into the structure of the
theocracy. Israel must not replace her loyalty to Yahweh with loyalty
to her human ruler.
Cf., the translation of 1 Sam 12:14 in NLT (2nd edition
"Now if you fear and worship the LORD and listen to his voice, and if
you do not rebel against the LORD's commands, then both you and your king will
show that you recognize the LORD as your God."
1 Sam 12:16-22
A sign is given from heaven at Samuel's
request to demonstrate the seriousness of Israel's apostasy in asking
for a king to replace Yahweh (vss. 16-18a).
As 1 Sam 8:20 made clear, Israel desired a king to fight her battles.
She sought her security in a human leader rather than in Yahweh. This
was a serious breach of covenant. It displayed contempt for previous
deliverances (1 Sam 12:6-11), and a lack of confidence in Yahweh's
One of the prominent features of Hittite treaties was the Great King's
promise to protect his vassal against their enemies. Yahweh gave a
similar promise to Israel (Exod 23:22, cf. Exod 34:11). It was in this
Israel was to find her sense of national security. Deut. 20:1 4 tells
Israel never to fear even when the enemy is stronger than she.
This sign led to a confession of sin (vss 18b 19), a challenge to
renewed covenant faithfulness (vss. 20,2 1) and a reminder of the
constancy of Yahweh's faithfulness to his people (vs. 22).
1 Sam 12:23-25
Samuel describes his own continuing
function in the new order (vs. 23), and concludes his remarks with a
repetition of Israel's central covenantal obligation (vs. 24)
reinforced by the threat of the covenant curse if Israel again
apostatizes (vs. 25).
1 Samuel 11:14-15
These two verses are a short lead
paragraph or summarizing introduction to the more detailed account of
the same Gilgal ceremony contained in chapter 12.
There are two primary issues addressed in both 1 Sam 11:14,15 and 1 Sam
1) transition in national leadership
2) restoration of covenant fellowship after covenant abrogation.
1. Transition in national leadership
Here the emphasis is on Samuel's
covenant faithfulness in his past leadership of the nation as well as
his continuing role in the future (12:23) when human kingship assumes
its legitimate place in the structure of the theocracy.
2. Restoration of covenant
fellowship after covenant abrogation
Confession of sin with respect to the
wrongly motivated desire for a king (12:19).
1. Transition in national leadership
Emphasis on the inauguration of Saul.
2. Restoration of covenant fellowship after covenant abrogation
The restoration of covenant fellowship
is signified by the sacrificing of peace offerings (11:15).
Both passages describe the primary purpose of the assembly as a renewal of allegiance to Yahweh
This suggests that the "renewal of the kingdom" (vs. 14) is a reference
to Yahweh's kingdom
and not Saul's
explains how the kingdom could be "renewed" and at the same ceremony
Saul could be "made king" (vs. 15).
There is no need to adopt the standard conclusion of most main stream
biblical scholars that this phrase ("renew the kingdom") is a
redactional insertion. As B.C. Birch (The Rise of the Israelite Monarchy
The Growth and Development of 1 Sam 7-15
1970, 101) says about 1
Sam 11:14: "Most scholars have regarded this verse as the clearest
evidence of redactional activity in this chapter and there would seem
to be little reason for challenging this conclusion... It would seem
clear that an editor has in the process of ordering the traditions as
we now have them attempted to harmonize an apparent duplication. Saul
has already become king in 10:24 so the instance in 11:15 has been
transformed into a renewal."
The problem that surfaces in 1 Sam 11:14 is the question of how Saul's
kingdom could be renewed if he had not yet been "made king" (i.e. been
officially inaugurated). In other words, how could his kingdom be
"renewed" if his reign had not even begun.
In verse 15 we read that "they
made Saul king
(NIV: "confirmed Saul as king"). The Hiphil form
that is used here is consistently used elsewhere in the Old Testament
to designate the official inauguration of someone's reign as king. See,
1 Sam 13:1 where the regular formula indicating the beginning of the
reign of a king appears.
If one regards both
they made [Saul] king) as referring to the kingship of Saul a serious
problem is created. How could Saul's kingship be renewed
before he was
actually made king
The normal solution of main stream biblical scholars has been to
consider v. 14 as a "redactional insertion" intended to harmonize
competing stories of how Saul came to be king. All things considered a
better solution is to take
renew) as a reference
to the kingdom of Yahweh and
they made [Saul]
king) as a reference to Saul's inauguration in the context of covenant
It should be understood that
does not mean reaffirm
, or celebrate
the kingship - it
means the restoration or repair of something that already exists, but
is in a condition of deterioration.
Saul had previously been privately anointed (1 Sam 9:1), and then had
been selected by lot as king designate (1 Sam 10:17 27), but he had not been
inaugurated as king
. Now, in I Sam 11:14 12:25 Saul is
inaugurated as king after a seal has been placed on his leadership by
his victory over the Ammonites (1 Sam 11:1-13).
The NW translates 1 Sam 11:14,15 as: "Then Samuel said to the people,
'Come let us go to Gilgal and there reaffirm the kingship
all the people went to Gilgal and confirmed Saul as king
the presence of the LORD..." This seems to be an attempt by the NTV
translators to resolve the problem inherent in the text, but the NIV
translation is not justified by the clear meaning of the Hebrew words.
The TNIV is an improvement:
"Then Samuel said to the people, 'Come
let us go to Gilgal and there renew
the kingship. So all the people went to Gilgal and made Saul
king in the presence of the LORD."
Then Samuel said to the people, 'Come
let us all go to Gilgal to reaffirm
Saul's kingship. So they went to Gilgal, and in a solemn
ceremony before the LORD they crowned
"Then Samuel said to the people, 'Come
let us all go to Gilgal to renew
the kingdom. So they all went to Gilgal, and in a solemn
ceremony before the LORD they made
Thus the role of the king in Israel was carefully defined at the time
it was established. From this time forward when a king in Israel
departed from the law a prophet was sent to admonish him. The prophet
was not under the king but above him as a spokesman for God. Samuel
laid the foundation for this relationship in 1 Sam 12:23.
Samuel - Saul; 1 Sam 13:l0ff.;
Nathan, Gad - David; 2 Samuel 12:1, 24:11
Elijah - Ahab; 1 Kings 17; 21:17-19
So at the same time that the royal house was established in Israel
provision was made for a line of prophets who down through the
generations would have the job of presenting the demands of the
covenant to both the king and the people. In Israel the royal house was
always under the scrutiny of the prophets. The prophets reminded the
king and the people that God was their supreme ruler and their Great
King. The human ruler was at best a representative of Yahweh's rule,
and at worst a usurper. The prophets were able to function in this way
throughout Israel's history because Israel's existence as a nation was
grounded in the Sinai covenant in which Yahweh was the Divine Suzerain,
and Israel his vassal people.
With this concept of kingship in Israel a surprising thing took place
in the time of David. The LORD entered into a covenant with David
insuring that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Samuel 7). As the
descendants of David regularly fell far short of the covenantal ideal
for kingship, the permanency of the Davidic covenant may seem
problematic. The resolution to this problem becomes clearer with the
development of the Messianic idea by the prophets (see, e.g., Isa 7:14,
9:6; Jer 23:5,6 etc.). The prophets looked forward to a king who was
both human and divine. The prophets envision a time when God himself
will sit on the throne of David. Then both the covenantal ideal for
kingship would be realized and the promise to David maintained.
Within the context of the Sinai covenant the continued possession of
the land was related to the obedience of the nation. It was a symbol of
God's favor. As punishment for not keeping the covenant, God would take
away possession of the land (2 Kgs l7:7ff, 18:9-12; cf. Deut 28:45ff).
In due time Israel went into captivity for breaking the covenant. Even
after a partial return under the Persians, Israel never again (except
for a brief interlude under the Maccabees) regained her independence.
She traded masters through the Babylonian, Persian, Greek and Roman
periods. Under the Roman domination Jesus was born. As he established
himself as the one who fulfilled the prophecies of the OT Messiah many
Jews began to look to him as the King who would expel the Gentiles and
reestablish the kingdom of God.
At his triumphal entry into Jerusalem Jesus was welcomed as a King. Yet
several days later he was rejected. Jesus made it clear that he did not
come to drive out the Romans, and as a result the people turned against
him. Paradoxically, the chief priests were afraid he would start a
revolt so they were also against him. In God's plan, however, the
Messiah was to come first not as a King, but as a Servant. He was to
take the curse upon himself, in order to meet the demands of the Sinai
covenant on behalf of God's people. In so doing he would institute
another edition of the covenant in which all who put their trust in His
work might partake.
After his resurrection Jesus spoke with his disciples concerning the
phase of the kingdom of God that was yet to come (Acts 1:3 if.). In the
programmatic unfolding of God's kingdom, Christ is to return and sit
upon the throne of David and establish the Kingdom of God on earth in
which the blessings of His rule will extend over all the earth.