The first thing to note is what verse 11 does not say.
Luke 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
This verse does not say the kingdom of God will never appear. It just won't immediately appear like they were assuming it should and the very next verse tells us the reasons why.
Luke 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
Obviously, the kingdom can't immediately appear if Jesus has to go away first, then receive a kingdom for Himself, then return.
Let's fast forward to the following for a moment.
Luke 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
It is undeniable, this is when the kingdom literally appears. Anyone that would argue otherwise are arguing nonsense, as if there will never be a kingdom one can literally behold with their own eyes once Jesus returns. Of course there will be. Now that that's out of the way, let's look at verse 13 next.
Luke 19:13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.
To understand this part is simple. This is meaning from the time of His ascension through His return in the end of this age. That is when He comes, thus returns. In the meantime He is bodily in heaven. I don't want to get into the purpose of the 10 pounds since everyone can draw their own conclusions about that. What I do want to focus on though, thus will be the main focus of the OP, which I feel is relevant per this endless Premil vs. Amil debate is how Jesus rewards these when He returns that He entrusted with this 10 pounds. I'll get to that later. First let's look at verse 14 next.
Luke 19:14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
Who should we assume His citizens are meaning here? Because whoever they are meaning, it is not until Jesus returns that they are dealt with.
Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
This can't possibly be meaning the unbelieving Jews that were destroyed in 70 AD. Verse 27 is not meaning 70 AD, it is meaning after He has bodily returned, thus after He has stepped foot back on this planet, the same planet some Amils have literally engulfed in flames when Christ returns.
Not to mention, if true, well there goes the entire animal kingdom then, since there is no ark to preserve them this time around. Which is really bizarre that God felt a need to preserve the animal kingdom during the flood but no longer finds the need to preserve them when Christ returns. He just burns them all up instead. And it wouldn't surprise me if some of these Amils think there will be animals on the new earth. Talk about contradictions. There are going to be animals on the new earth except God burned all of the animals up when He returned.
Not to mention, infants being burned alive, children being burned alive, etc. After all, He never spared any of those during the flood so why would He spare them this time around, right? This assuming these Amils are correct that the entire planet is engulfed in flames when He returns.
BTW, all of these things are relevant if there is going to be a 1000 year era of time following Christ's return. Can't have an era of time like that if the entire planet is literally engulfed in flames when Christ returns. Thus the reason I brought some of those things up, that it doesn't make sense that the entire planet is literally engulfed in flames when Christ returns when there has to be an era of time to still fulfill after Christ has returned.
Luke 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
This verse does not say the kingdom of God will never appear. It just won't immediately appear like they were assuming it should and the very next verse tells us the reasons why.
Luke 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
Obviously, the kingdom can't immediately appear if Jesus has to go away first, then receive a kingdom for Himself, then return.
Let's fast forward to the following for a moment.
Luke 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
It is undeniable, this is when the kingdom literally appears. Anyone that would argue otherwise are arguing nonsense, as if there will never be a kingdom one can literally behold with their own eyes once Jesus returns. Of course there will be. Now that that's out of the way, let's look at verse 13 next.
Luke 19:13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.
To understand this part is simple. This is meaning from the time of His ascension through His return in the end of this age. That is when He comes, thus returns. In the meantime He is bodily in heaven. I don't want to get into the purpose of the 10 pounds since everyone can draw their own conclusions about that. What I do want to focus on though, thus will be the main focus of the OP, which I feel is relevant per this endless Premil vs. Amil debate is how Jesus rewards these when He returns that He entrusted with this 10 pounds. I'll get to that later. First let's look at verse 14 next.
Luke 19:14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
Who should we assume His citizens are meaning here? Because whoever they are meaning, it is not until Jesus returns that they are dealt with.
Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
This can't possibly be meaning the unbelieving Jews that were destroyed in 70 AD. Verse 27 is not meaning 70 AD, it is meaning after He has bodily returned, thus after He has stepped foot back on this planet, the same planet some Amils have literally engulfed in flames when Christ returns.
Not to mention, if true, well there goes the entire animal kingdom then, since there is no ark to preserve them this time around. Which is really bizarre that God felt a need to preserve the animal kingdom during the flood but no longer finds the need to preserve them when Christ returns. He just burns them all up instead. And it wouldn't surprise me if some of these Amils think there will be animals on the new earth. Talk about contradictions. There are going to be animals on the new earth except God burned all of the animals up when He returned.
Not to mention, infants being burned alive, children being burned alive, etc. After all, He never spared any of those during the flood so why would He spare them this time around, right? This assuming these Amils are correct that the entire planet is engulfed in flames when He returns.
BTW, all of these things are relevant if there is going to be a 1000 year era of time following Christ's return. Can't have an era of time like that if the entire planet is literally engulfed in flames when Christ returns. Thus the reason I brought some of those things up, that it doesn't make sense that the entire planet is literally engulfed in flames when Christ returns when there has to be an era of time to still fulfill after Christ has returned.