by Ben Habegger | Mar 26, 2019 | Eschatology
Post #1 Post #2 Post #3 Post #4 Post #5 Post #6 Post#7
Post #8 “Zechariah 14:20–21: Jerusalem’s
Perfect Consecration to the Lord”
Last
in our series on Zechariah 14, we encounter a description of Jerusalem’s final
holiness.
20 In that day there will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, “HOLY TO THE LORD.” And the cooking pots in the Lord’s house will be like the bowls before the altar. 21 Every cooking pot in Jerusalem and in Judah will be holy to the Lord of hosts; and all who sacrifice will come and take of them and boil in them. And there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the Lord of hosts in that day.
Why mention the bells on horses?
They are mentioned in order to shock Zechariah’s audience. “Shocking here is
the reference to an item associated with the horse, a ritually unclean animal
according to Lev. 11:1–8. In this new Jerusalem, that which was once treated as
unclean is now not merely clean, but holy.”[1] The
inscription on the bells of the horses is the same as that on the high priest’s
turban! Notice the original context of this inscription:
36 You shall also make a plate of pure gold and shall engrave on it, like the engravings of a seal, ‘Holy to the Lord.’ 37 You shall fasten it on a blue cord, and it shall be on the turban; it shall be at the front of the turban. 38 It shall be on Aaron’s forehead, and Aaron shall take away the iniquity of the holy things which the sons of Israel consecrate, with regard to all their holy gifts; and it shall always be on his forehead, that they may be accepted before the Lord. (Exod. 28:36–38)
Under the Levitical priesthood, the
high priest bore a seal of holiness which took away the lingering iniquity of
the people’s consecrated gifts; but Zechariah envisions a time when the most
ordinary items used in everyday life would be as pure and consecrated as the
garments which the high priest would wear in the holiest place of the temple
(Exod. 29:29–30)! This should signify even more to New Testament saints. The
high priest’s holy crown (Exod. 29:6) which he would bear before God’s own
presence prefigured the perfect holiness of Jesus our high priest. Christ’s
undefiled holiness renders his people’s spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God;
but one day, every aspect of the saints’ lives will overflow with innate
holiness. Not only will our high priest’s holiness be imputed to us, but it
will have thoroughly transformed us to be holy as he is holy.
Zechariah reinforces his point by also speaking of pots and
pans. “Similarly, the cooking pots in the temple would be as holy as the basins
in front of the altar. Even the most common pot would become holy, so holy that
anyone wishing to sacrifice could readily use them.”[2] Even
a premillennial interpreter like Kenneth Barker fails to adequately harmonize
these verses in Zechariah with a literal millennial temple. A literal temple
would demand a strict distinction between the holy and the common, the sacred
and the profane, as premillennialists should acknowledge if they identify
Ezekiel’s visionary temple with such a millennial temple (cf. Ezek. 42:13–14,
20; 43:12, 26; 44:13, 19, 23, 25–27; 45:1–7; 46:19–20; 48:10–14). Nevertheless,
Barker favorably quotes Perowne in his summary of Zechariah 14:20–21: “All
distinction between sacred and secular shall be at an end, because all shall
now be alike holy.”[3]
These words flatly contradict the entire notion of a literal millennial temple,
but they accurately reflect the thrust of Zechariah’s words. As MacKay puts it,
“Even the smallest and seemingly most trivial details of life are consecrated
to the Lord. This, of course,
would involve the cessation of the Levitical distinction between sacred and
common.”[4] E. B.
Pusey concludes, “In this priestly-levitical drapery the thought is expressed,
that in the perfected kingdom of God not only will everything without exception
be holy, but all will be equally holy.”[5]
Zechariah ends by
saying that “there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the Lord of hosts in that day.” The
background to this statement may be similar to the situation in Nehemiah’s day
when Tobiah the Ammonite was given storage rooms within the temple courts and
Canaanite merchants from Tyre sold merchandise in Jerusalem on the Sabbath
(Neh. 13:4–9, 16, 20–21). The word for a Canaanite also came to denote a merchant
(cf. the term’s translation in Prov. 31:24 and Isa. 23:8).[6] Given
these considerations, Zechariah may be thinking of the pollution of merchants
(such as those whom Jesus drove out of the temple) more than the pollution of a
pagan intruder. In any case MacKay is right to say, “The mention of the
Canaanite is not to debar any on racial grounds, but on ethical and spiritual.
‘Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful
or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of
life’ (Rev. 21:27).”[7]
Conclusion
The glory described in this chapter answers to the prophecy
of Zechariah’s contemporary, Haggai. In a text which Hebrews 12:26–29
interprets as describing the removal of the present creation and the resultant
establishment of God’s eternal kingdom, Haggai 2:6–9 mirrors the thoughts of
Zechariah’s final chapter:
6 For thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘Once more in a little while, I am going to shake the heavens and the earth, the sea also and the dry land.7 I will shake all the nations; and they will come with the wealth of all nations, and I will fill this house with glory,’ says the Lord of hosts.8 ‘The silver is Mine and the gold is Mine,’ declares the Lord of hosts.9 ‘The latter glory of this house will be greater than the former,’ says the Lord of hosts, ‘and in this place I will give peace,’ declares the Lord of hosts.
Even so, come Lord Jesus.
[1] Boda,
Zechariah, 779.
[2]
Gregory, Longing for God, 211.
[3] Kenneth L. Barker, Zechariah, Expositor’s Bible
Commentary, rev. ed., ed. Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland, vol. 8 (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 832.
[4]
MacKay, Haggai,
Zechariah and Malachi, 318.
[5] E. B. Pusey, The Minor Prophets: A Commentary, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1950), 414.
[6] Boda,
Zechariah, 782.
[7]
MacKay, Haggai,
Zechariah and Malachi, 319.
by Ben Habegger | Mar 21, 2019 | Eschatology
Post #1 Post #2 Post #3 Post #4 Post #5 Post #6
Post #7 “Zechariah 14:16–19: The Lord
Summons the Nations to His Feast”
Verses 16–19 of Zechariah 14 continue the thought of the
section addressed in the last post. What becomes of the Gentile nations?
16 Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Booths. 17 And it will be that whichever of the families of the earth does not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, there will be no rain on them.18 If the family of Egypt does not go up or enter, then no rain will fall on them; it will be the plague with which the Lord smites the nations who do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Booths. 19 This will be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all the nations who do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Booths.
The last post dealt with the horrible fate of the nations
who attacked Jerusalem. There are those Gentiles, however, who survive the Day
of the Lord. Though once strangers and enemies to Israel and her God, this
remnant of Gentiles are now fellow worshipers with the Israelites. This picture
of a remnant from the Gentile nations which engages in perpetual observance of
the Feast of Booths (or “Tabernacles”) beautifully reveals the deep meaning and
eventual fulfillment of this Old Testament feast.
The conversion of the nations is not pictured in terms of their being circumcised, or obeying the Law of Moses, but of worshipping the Lord. It must be noted that ‘go up’ still thinks in terms of pilgrimage to Jerusalem. The language of the Old Covenant is being used to express the reality of the New (Isa. 66:23), and especially in its culmination when John sees ‘a great multitude that no-one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb’ (Rev. 7:9). John’s great multitude also ‘were holding palm branches in their hands’ (Rev. 7:9), and while this may reflect on Christ’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem (John 12:13), it also fits in with what is said here to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. On the first of the seven days of this feast the Israelites were instructed to ‘take choice fruit from the trees, and palm fronds, leafy branches and poplars, and rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days’ (Lev. 23:40). But why is this festival singled out for mention? It came at the end of the religious calendar and so in measure summed up all the worship of Israel (note its position in Lev. 23 and Deut. 16.) It was also a festival in which the resident alien was permitted a role (Deut. 16:14). During this time the people lived in booths constructed out of branches to remind them of how they lived during the period in the Wilderness and how the Lord had guided them at that time (Lev. 23:42–43). It was also a time when they remembered the Lord’s on-going bounty to them in the harvest (Lev. 23:39; Deut. 16:13–15). The nations in coming to this feast were therefore making a double acknowledgment: that it was the Lord who had guided them to where they were, and that it was his bounty that they enjoyed in the harvest. In the light of the Lord’s providential and saving goodness, the feast was one characterised by joy. ‘Be joyful at your Feast. … your joy will be complete’ (Deut. 16:14, 15). This is why the redeemed of the nations celebrate it with joy.[1]
What harvest is celebrated by this
eschatological Feast of Booths? Barry Webb answers well. “It is people – formerly enemies, but now
worshippers – gathered in from all the
nations, to worship, at last,
their rightful Lord and King.”[2]
How fitting that the text now contrasts a harvest
celebration with the withholding of rain. “‘Rain’ here stands for all the
blessings that the Lord bestows, particularly in the harvest (10:1). These will
be withheld from those who persist in their rebellion.”[3]
Andrew Hill adds, “The lack of rainfall was one of the curses God pronounced
against Israel for covenant disobedience (cf. Deut. 28:22–24). Here that curse
is extended to the nations by virtue of God’s rule over all peoples.”[4] T. V.
Moore remarks, “In this future condition, the present mingled state of reward
and punishment shall end. Now God sends rain on the just and the unjust, then
he will separate the good and the evil, and render unto every man according to
his works.”[5]
Why does Egypt receive special mention? Again, Andrew Hill
is helpful. “Egypt is singled out for mention, perhaps because it was the
origin of the Hebrew exodus (of which the Feast of Tabernacles was to be a
reminder, Lev. 23:43), and in the past it was a nation that ‘had suffered the
most from the plagues at God’s hands. If it did not participate in the future,
it would suffer again.’”[6] Elsewhere
Egypt is envisioned as sharing in future worship with God’s people, signifying
the conversion of former pagans (see Is. 19:19–25).[7] Here,
Egypt stands for those who refuse to so worship. It is also noteworthy that the
Book of the Revelation uses Egypt as a type of the Satanic world system which
persecutes God’s church. The trumpet judgments and the bowls of God’s final
wrath all point back to the plagues which God sent against Egypt when their
king refused to let Israel go. The city where the two prophetic witnesses are
slain is symbolically named Egypt (Rev. 11:8). Why does Egypt slay the
witnesses? It does so because of the divine plagues with which these prophets
strike Egypt, including the plague of drought (Rev. 11:6, 10). Even now, the
prophetic witness of the church painfully reminds the unrepentant world that already
“the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and
unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness”
(Rom. 1:18). In the future day of which Zechariah speaks, Egypt as well as all
the unrepentant nations will forever suffer the unmitigated plagues of God’s
wrath (cf. Rev. 14:10–11; 15:1; 18:8; 21:8; 22:14–15, 18–19).
[1]
MacKay, Haggai,
Zechariah and Malachi, 316.
[2] Webb,
Zechariah, 181.
[3]
MacKay, Haggai, Zechariah
and Malachi, 317.
[4] Hill,
Haggai, Zechariah and
Malachi, 270.
[5] Thomas V. Moore, A Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, Geneva Series of Commentaries (Carlisle, PA: Banner
of Truth, 1993), 313.
[6] Hill,
Haggai, Zechariah and
Malachi, 270.
[7] Carl Friedrich Keil, The Twelve Minor Prophets, Keil and
Delitzsch’s Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1971), 457.
by Ben Habegger | Mar 9, 2019 | Eschatology
Post #5 “Zechariah 14:6–11: The Lord’s
Reign from Jerusalem,” Part 2
Post #1 Post #2 Post #3 Post #4
Continuing our discussion of verses 6–11, we pick up with
the prophecy of the holy city being raised above the now leveled land
surrounding it. The exaltation of Jerusalem in verse 10 reflects a common
prophetic theme. Perhaps the clearest parallel appears in Isaiah 2:2–3:
2 Now it will come about that in the last days the mountain of the house of the Lord will be established as the chief of the mountains, and will be raised above the hills; and all the nations will stream to it. 3 And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; that He may teach us concerning His ways and that we may walk in His paths.” For the law will go forth from Zion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
The words of this same prophecy are
also found in Micah 4:1–2, where they follow and contrast the Babylonian
desolation of an impure Jerusalem (Micah 3:11–12). God removed his presence
from the temple because of Jerusalem’s iniquity; but one day, God’s presence
will eternally dwell in a purified Jerusalem, and the city will nevermore be
put to shame. Zion will tower over all the earth, and all nations will be under
its dominion. The kingdom of the heavenly Zion will become a great mountain and
fill the whole earth (Dan. 2:35).
The geographical markers here mentioned by Zechariah had
symbolic meaning which we might easily miss. Bryan Gregory explains:
Before the exile, Geba and Rimmon denoted the northern and southern boundaries of Judah during the days of Josiah’s reform. In other words, the land will be restored to her preexilic, pre-disaster state, and being ‘leveled out,’ will provide a geological setting for the crown jewel of the new creation, the city of Jerusalem…. The city itself will then be defined by distinct boundaries, stretching from the Gate of Benjamin (on the city’s northern side) to the place of the First Gate (the location of which is now lost but possibly denotes an old gate on the east side of the city), down to the Corner Gate (on the western side), and from the Tower of Hananel (probably near the northwest corner) down to the king’s winepresses in the south. The boundaries are not only a way of tracing the city’s limits but are more importantly an allusion to Jeremiah 31 where the Lord had promised that the city would be rebuilt from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate (Jer. 31:38). Part of the promise to Jeremiah was that the whole city would once again become holy, never again to be uprooted or demolished (Jer. 31:39–40; cf. Zech. 14:20–21). In other words, the boundaries paint a picture of Jerusalem as a city entirely safe from the threat of violence.[1]
In terms the contemporary
inhabitants of Jerusalem understood, Zechariah echoed Jeremiah, promising that
the holy city would remain intact from one end (or wall) to the other, and that
it would be exalted above the whole land.
Verse 11 pointedly states that “people will live in it.” “In
the period after the return from the Exile,” says MacKay, “there seems to have
been an ongoing problem with population in Jerusalem. Many of those who
returned preferred to live in the countryside and had to be forced to come to
the capital (Neh. 7:4; 11:1–2). But there will be no problem about getting
people to live in the capital when the king has returned to it.”[2] The
absence of a curse, as MacKay goes on to explain,
refers to the ‘ban’ which the Lord imposed on the cities of Canaan because of their great wickedness (Josh. 6:17–18; see also Mal. 4:6). The fate of God’s people for their rebellion had been understood in similar terms (Isa. 43:28). But when the Lord returns to the city, ‘no longer will there be any curse’ (Rev. 22:3). His people will have been purified and will be ready to enter into his presence.[3]
Given the factors we’ve discussed in the last post as well
as this one, Zechariah’s prophecy fits better within the context of the new
Jerusalem which “will dwell in security” in the new creation than it fits with
a millennial Jerusalem which continues to experience day and night and the
(lightened) effects of the Adamic curse and is eventually surrounded by a
Satanic coalition of nations bent on her destruction (Rev. 20:9).
[1]
Gregory, Longing for God, 208–209.
[2]
MacKay, Haggai,
Zechariah and Malachi, 311.
[3] Ibid.
by Ben Habegger | Mar 4, 2019 | Eschatology
Post #3 “Zechariah 14:1–5: The Lord’s Coming
to Jerusalem,” Part 2
Post #1 Post #2
The
last post addressed verses 1–5 of the text but did not deal with some questions
about the prophetic details. If the prophecy uses the land of Judah and the
city of Jerusalem as veiled references to the New Testament church, why are
certain geographical markers emphasized?
For
instance, why does Zechariah stress that the valley of escape created by the
divided Mount of Olives will reach all the way to Azel? Davis sees in these
details a great deal of symbolism involving the escape of God’s people to a
city of refuge.[1]
More likely, much of the description of the earthquake, including the mention
of Azel, simply refers to details of the historical earthquake during the reign
of Uzziah.[2] It is as if the prophet rehearses
the details of that past event to say, “It will be like that again when the
Lord comes to defend his city. His people will have a way of escape.” That is
certainly the comparison in verse 5: “Yes, you will flee just as you fled
before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah.” There is also
conflicting manuscript evidence here which should be factored into the
interpretation.
Either this valley will become an escape route for the Hebrews fleeing Jerusalem in the face of the assault against the city by the nations (so NIV, NLT, NRSV; following the mt), or the valley will be filled and blocked like it was during the earthquake at the time of King Uzziah (so NAB, NEB, NJB; following the LXX; Targ.). A different vowel pointing of the same Hebrew root word renders the two separate meanings, and ‘either is equally possible’. Baldwin’s (1972: 218) mediation of the difficulty is helpful, noting: ‘It is impossible to be sure how the text read originally, but the general meaning is clear. The earth movements which open a valley eastwards will also block up the Kidron valley, so providing a level escape route from Jerusalem.’[3]
The
earthquake of Uzziah’s time is barely mentioned in scripture. Amos prophesied
two years before what was apparently the same earthquake (Amos 1:1). Such an
earthquake must have been severe if it was still remembered over two centuries
later in post-exilic Judah. It was an unforgettable national disaster which
doubtless gripped the imaginations of Zechariah’s original audience.[4] That historical event is
likened to the Lord’s coming, which will shake the entire earth (cf. Hag.
2:6–7; Heb. 12:26–27) and bring terror to those caught desecrating his holy
dwelling.[5]
While
appreciating the complex imagery of the text, we should perhaps not forget that
the literal Mount of Olives may have a prominent role at the Second Advent of
Christ. Matthew and Mark pointedly state that Jesus sat on the Mount of Olives
as he taught his disciples about his Second Advent (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:3).
Luke also says that Jesus ascended to heaven from the Mount of Olives (Acts
1:12). At the time of Christ’s ascension, two men in white announced to his
disciples that he would come back in just the same way which they had seen him
leave (Acts 1:10–11). Jesus ascended to heaven bodily, and he will return
bodily; he may also return to the same place, the Mount of Olives.[6] This would be in keeping with
how the prophecies of his First Advent were fulfilled. The Christ came out of
Bethlehem in Judah symbolically, since he was David’s seed and Bethlehem was
David’s ancestral town; but Jesus was also born in the literal city of
Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2; Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4–7, 11).
[1]
Davis, High King of
Heaven,
397–98.
[2] For a
discussion of the word Azel, see Mark J. Boda, The Book of Zechariah, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016), 758.
[3] Hill,
Haggai, Zechariah and
Malachi, 262. See also Hill’s discussion of the name Azel on the same page.
[4] These
online articles give summaries of fascinating archeological evidence for this
major earthquake: https://patternsofevidence.com/2019/01/20/biblical-quake-confirmed/
.
[5]
Josephus makes an intriguing connection between Uzziah’s attempted desecration
of the Holy Place (2 Chron. 26:16–20) and the earthquake. Azariah the king
(called this in 2 Kings 15 but Uzziah in 2 Chron. 26) attempted to usurp the
role of Azariah the high priest; but the Lord struck the king with leprosy and
drove him out of the temple. Josephus says that the earthquake also happened at
the same time. He even records certain effects of the earthquake which seem to
mirror Zechariah’s words: “And before the city, at a place called Eroge, half
the mountain broke off from the rest on the west, and rolled itself four
furlongs, and stood still at the east mountain, till the roads, as well as the
king’s gardens, were spoiled by the obstruction.” See Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book 9, chapter
10, paragraph 4, verse 225, William Whiston. In any case, the parallels between
King Uzziah and the “man of sin” who will attempt to usurp Christ’s
prerogatives are worthy of note (see 2 Thess. 2:3–8).
[6] Hill,
Haggai, Zechariah and
Malachi, 261.
by Sam Waldron | Jul 13, 2017 | Book Reviews, Eschatology
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11, Part 12, Part 13
Waymeyer’s Treatment of 1 Corinthians 15
The pinnacle of the systemic confusion introduced into plain and literal New Testament passages by Waymeyer is found in his lengthy treatment of 1 Corinthians 15 on pages 147 to 171 of his book. Waymeyer’s argument consists in a number of assertions. First, there is a sequence of events at the end of Christ’s reign allowed by the use of epeita in verse 23 and eita in verse 24; and this allows for a temporal gap into which a future millennium may be inserted. Second, the reign of Christ in view in the passage is a future reign which requires a future millennial reign for its complete fulfillment. Third, “the end” in verses 24-26 includes the resurrection of unbelievers at the end of the millennium. Fourth, the assertion that death is defeated by the resurrection of believers at Christ’s Second Coming does not refer to a once-for-all defeat of death the last enemy. There are plain and, in my view, unanswerable responses to each of these assertions. I will respond to the first two of these assertions in the remainder of this post. Then the last two will be answered in the next post.
‘First, there is a sequence of events at the end of Christ’s reign allowed by the use of epeita in verse 23 and eita in verse 24; and this allows for a temporal gap into which a future millennium may be inserted.’ This is the gist of Waymeyer’s argument on pages 151-155. What is the proper response?
I see no reason to deny that epeita and eita—here and in other places—speak of a sequence of events. Thus, it is possible in the abstract that a period of time may lie between the periods designated by these words. At the same time, I agree with my fellow Amillennialists that inserting both the 7-year tribulation and the millennium and thus a period of over a thousand years between verse 23 and verse 24 seems in itself far-fetched. I cannot quite say that it is impossible.
What does make it impossible is the way in which the passage itself identifies the period specified by Paul in the words of verse 24, “then comes the end.” This “end” comes “when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.” In the context this abolition of all rule and authority and power occurs and must have occurred when “the last enemy … death is abolished.” This happens—everything about the passage conspires to teach this—at the resurrection of Christ’s people at His coming. This is what the contextual emphasis on the resurrection of Christ’s people requires. It is also what the specific statement of Paul requires later in the passage when he says in 1 Corinthians 15:54-55: “But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. 55 “O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?”” Death, the last enemy, is destroyed and abolished by the resurrection of Christ’s people at His coming. Not all the attempts of Waymeyer to distract our attention from this simple and decisive affirmation of Paul in this passage should move us from his straightforward assertion.
‘Second, the reign of Christ in view in the passage is a future reign which requires a future millennial reign for its complete fulfillment.’ Waymeyer asserts: “A closer look at this passage indicates that the reign of Christ in 1 Corinthians 15:25 cannot be a present reality and therefore must refer to a future kingdom.” (1550). Waymeyer’s assertion seems to be grounded on several false premises.
In the first place, he thinks that “the present age is the only age in which Jesus will reign over the messianic kingdom.” (155). This is wrong. Though a certain phase of the messianic kingdom comes to an end with His return (the reign of conquest), the kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is eternal. Several passages say plainly that His reign once commenced is without end (Isa. 9:7; Eph. 5:5; 2 Peter 1:11; Rev. 22:3-5). Jesus reigns as king not only in this age but in the age to come (Eph. 1:21).
In the second place, he assumes that, if the present age is the age of Christ’s reign, then the saints do not and cannot co-reign with Christ (155-156). This also is mistaken for several reasons. (1) The saints reign with Christ in heaven now after their deaths. This is, in fact, the actual meaning of Revelation 20:4-6 according to Amillennialists. Revelation 3:21’s promise that the overcomers will sit down on Christ’s throne after they overcome has a preliminary fulfillment like the other promises to the overcomers in the intermediate state—as I prove in End Times Made Simple. (2) It is also true that by faith they are seated with Christ on His throne in heaven even in the present life (Eph. 2:6; Col. 3:1). Thus, they are reigning with him even now in heaven. (3) Further, it is also true that when Christ returns to destroy His enemies His people will share with Him in their destruction and in His final war of destruction. (4) Finally, since Christ’s reign does not cease with His Second Coming, the saints share for all eternity in His reign in the age to come and, thus, co-reign with Him (Rev. 5:10; 22:5).
In the third place, Waymeyer adopts Saucy’s distinction between Christ being exalted to the messianic kingship and his actual reigning (157). Here is what Saucy and Waymeyer following him actually say: “Although Christ has been exalted too the messianic kingship, nowhere else in the New Testament is he said to be presently exercising that kingship in an actual ‘reigning’ over his enemies.” This assumption and idea is also completely mistaken. Here is why. (1) The notion of Christ’s sitting on the throne, but not actually reigning is so distant from the biblical conception of kingdom as to be almost entirely foreign to its way of thought. To sit on the throne is to reign. To distinguish the two things is a notion completely without support in the Scriptures. (2) As a matter of fact, the New Testament presents Christ as exercising this reign over all things including His enemies in a number of key passages. In Acts 2 He pours out His Spirit and converts His enemies because of His reign. Cf. especially Acts 2:33-36. In Revelation 5 and 6 He takes His place on the throne of God at His ascension and opens the seals of the book of God’s redemptive purposes during the present age. As the actual opening of the seals discloses, their opening involves reigning over His enemies in different ways. (3) The quotation of Psalm 8 confirms all of this. Waymeyer and Saucy are completely mistaken in their view that Hebrews 2 supports their contention that Jesus has not yet begun to reign. When Hebrews says that we do not yet see all things subjected to Him (Heb. 2:8), it is talking not about Christ but man or, in other words, the human race. As a matter of fact, the writer immediately proceeds to say that Jesus has been crowned with glory and honor—and the implication is that all things are under His feet, even if they are not yet under the feet of His redeemed race. Ephesians 1:22 actually asserts that all things are already put under Jesus’ feet. Not only so, but that verse asserts that He is made head over all things for the sake of His church. How is this purpose of His being seated on His throne consistent with the notion that He is not exercising a reign over His enemies? Thus, Hebrews 2:8 cannot mean what Waymeyer and Saucy think and does not refer to Christ. Of course, the complete outworking of this past subjection of all things to Christ awaits the future consummation when at His Second Coming the last enemy is destroyed (1 Corinthians 15:27), but the notion that Jesus is not yet actually reigning over all things and His enemies is wholly without New Testament support.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
