Review Of The Padfield–Weiner Debate

by Harry L. Lewis

The debate on the reign of Christ was held November 5th and 6th 1992 at the meeting house of the Northwest Church of Christ, and on November 19th and 20th a t the Catonsville Community College in Baltimore, Maryland. The first proposition read “The Scriptures teach that Jesus will reign on this earth with His saints after the advent of His second coming.” Mr. Todd Weiner affirmed that this statement is true, and David Padfield denied the truth of this statement. Mr. Weiner did not include “for 1000 years” in the proposition, but that is what he believes about it.

The second proposition reads as follows: “The Scriptures teach that the event signified by the smiting and destruction of the image in Daniel 2:35,44 began to take place on the day of Pentecost.” This debate was a good one in every respect. Good order prevailed throughout the four nights. The moderators had very little to do as each man presented his arguments and pressed his points. I personally do not see how any person could have missed seeing the truth of what the Scriptures teach on this great subject. These two propositions are apart of the general premillennialism discussion, and that concept is believed throughout the land. It is, I believe, growing in the land. It will continue to grow in every community where it meets with little or no opposition. It is up to the Lord’s church (Christians) to declare war on this false doctrine and every other false way as David did in days gone by (Psalm 119:104). Alas, I am afraid too many Christians have lost their sword in a pile of bikini bathing suits and Christmas presents.

Brother Padfield had over one hundred and fifty charts prepared for the debate. No matter where Mr. Weiner went he soon saw David had anticipated his every move. Padfield first showed his opponent’s position, and then pointed out what Mr. Weiner had to prove in order to sustain his proposition. He called attention to the fact that verses would have to be found to show a future reign of Christ which differs from His present rule. He would, Padfield said, need to find Scriptures which prove a reign limited to a 1,000 year period. Another problem for Mr. Weiner would be to find a passage which showed the reign of Christ on earth. Padfield pointed out the real problem was the question, Is Christ now reigning on the throne of David? Mr. Weiner had problems throughout the debate showing what rule he used to find out whether a passage is speaking of the first phase or the second phase of the kingdom. He never would tell how he did this, and, to me a t least, that fact showed he made the choice based upon his own concept of the “future phase” of the kingdom.

Every time Mr. Weiner tried to teach his concept of the second phase of the present kingdom of Christ David Padfield would ask questions like How will people enter that Kingdom? Will they have fleshly or spiritual bodies? Will the Great commission be in effect in the second phase of the Kingdom? Will people die during this second phase of the Kingdom? Will the New Testament be the law? Will Christ be seated on David’s literal throne? Will the temple be rebuilt during the second phase of the present Kingdom, and if it will what will go on there? Will Old Testament ceremonies be restored such as circumcision? Will people marry during the 1,000 year phase of the Kingdom. If so will children be born to these marriages? Will Christ destroy the wicked or rule over them? In whose Kingdom do we partake of the Lord’s supper? Is Christ reigning now? Are Christians reigning now? Are we living in the regeneration now? Does God now rule over all? (cf. Psalm 148:1-14; 19:1-4; Romans 13:1). What type of Kingdom does Mr. Weiner want to restore? Is it the Kingdom of David restored as it was (cf. Psalm 149:6-9; 137:8,9; 139:22; 109:7-12; 66:13-15)? Questions like these brought Mr. Weiner no little trouble as he tried to sort out what he really believed.

In the last two nights of the discussion Padfield affirmed that the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus was the day the image of Daniel two was struck by the stone (Daniel 2:44). You may read the exact proposition in the second paragraph of this article. David simply showed throughout the debate that the Kingdom came (Mark 1:14,15). Mr. Weiner did not deny that the kingdom had come on that day, but insisted that it did not fulfill Daniel 2:44. He did not seem to understand, or he did not want to understand, that when Jesus sat upon the throne of His Father, the whole concept of world dominion was done for. Jesus rules! That leaves no room for any other ruler! Ever! (Matthew 28:18-20). The Roman Empire is never coming back. The Old Testament nation of Israel is not coming back!

There can be no doubt that David Padfield made ample preparation for this discussion. If a local congregation has reason to engage in controversy David Padfield would be a good man to send for.

Mr. Weiner has not been cured of debating this subject. It seems he is going to debate Thomas Thrasher of Decatur, Alabama in the near future. I, for one, would like to be there.

The Preceptor, Vol 42, #1, pgs. 16–17
January 1993

Suggested Reading For Further Study…

View other articles on this debate or download Charts from the Padfield-Weiner Debate. Over 100 overhead charts used by Padfield in this debate. You are free to print the charts and use them in sermons and Bible classes (PDF file size: 341k).