Is Christ King of the Nations?
By James White
IN the February number of the AMERICAN SENTINEL we published an article entitled, “National Reform Principles Exemplified,” in which it was proved, by quotations from the publications of the “Reformers,” that their professed intention is to “enthrone Christ,” to “bring him into his kingdom,” to “accept him as the nation’s king,” to make this Republic “one of the kingdoms of our Lord,” etc. They assert that Christ is, by virtue of his office, king of the nations, but that this nation is depriving him of his right, in not acknowledging, in the Constitution, his kingship and sovereignty. They affirm that he is constituted king of the nations by virtue of his mediatorial office. This we emphatically deny. Here the issue is squarely joined. Their error is strenuously held and taught by the Covenanters; it is fundamental with the National Reformers—the corner-stone of their system. They endeavor to uphold their error by fallacious reasonings and by erroneous interpretations of prophecy. We will notice these points. 1. Fallacies in reasoning. In an article in the Christian Nation, September 15, 1886, are the following words:— “It is objected that Christ is anointed king of Zion; he is the organic Head of the church, only; how then can he, as mediator, be king of nations? This, to some, seems to be an unsolvable problem. We will, however, refer the reader to the reign of Solomon for a solution (see 1 Kings 4:20–25). While Solomon was the proper organic head of the kings of Israel alone, yet it is recorded that ‘he reigned over all kingdoms from the river unto the land of the Philistines, and unto the border of Egypt; they brought presents and served Solomon all the days of his life.’ If Solomon could rule in a twofold capacity as king of Zion and king of nations, unquestionably Christ Jesus is competent to exercise dominion in the same manner.” The fatal defect in this reasoning is, that there is not the shadow of a likeness between the reign of Solomon and the present reign of Christ. The writer starts out to meet the query, How can Christ be both mediator and king of nations? and proposes to answer it by referring to the reign of Solomon, who never was mediator at all! He solves nothing; he does not touch the question. Uzziah, a king on the throne of Solomon, once essayed to act as priest, and the Lord smote him with leprosy (2 Chron. 26:16–21); and so would he have smitten Solomon if he had attempted to intrude upon the office of the priests, for that was given to the family of Aaron, and the penalty of death was threatened against anyone who trespassed upon it. Num. 3:10. So inconclusive are their reasonings. Another article in the Nation, which is highly commended by the editor, speaks of Christ as follows:— “He is not divided; he is at once a prophet, a priest, and a king. The prophet is a king, and speaks with authority. On the cross Christ is a king, accepts an address as a king—‘Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom’—and answers as a king—‘To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.’” This is equally faulty, as to its reasoning and to the facts. Christ was filling the office of prophet on earth, but not of priest or king. Paul, to the Hebrews, makes an intended argument on the priesthood of Christ, and sums up as follows:— “Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices; wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law; who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.” Heb. 8:1–5. He has before declared that Christ was not a priest after the order of Aaron, but of Melchizedek, and, according to the flesh, he was of the same tribe as Uzziah, who was smitten of the Lord for essaying to act as priest, “of which tribe,” says Paul, “no man gave attendance at the altar.” The points in the apostle’s summary are these: (1) Christ’s priesthood is in Heaven, in a sanctuary not made by man. (2) He was not of the tribe of Levi, but of Judah. (3) Therefore, he could not be a priest on earth; he could not officiate in the sanctuary where earthly priests officiated. (4) The earthly sanctuary and service were but an example and shadow of heavenly things. As is said again in chap. 9:24: “For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands; which are the figures of the true; but into Heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.” The earthly priests, service, and sanctuary were types; if Christ had officiated as a priest on earth, he must have acted as a type of his own work in Heaven! But argument on this point is not necessary; the words of Paul are plain, and must be decisive. Christ was not, and could not be, a priest on earth. Neither was he a king on earth. His34kingship or reign was always spoken of prospectively. The very petition relied upon by the writer quoted above, disproves his point; “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.” If he were reigning a king at that time—if he had already come into his kingdom—then the language of the petition was very inappropriate. He was born of the lineage of David, but he has not yet taken his throne and his kingdom. Let us examine the Scriptures on this point. In Luke 19 it is recorded that Jesus “spoke a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.” He represented himself thus: “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return. . . . And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom,” then he reckoned with his servants, and destroyed his enemies. Of course the “far country” into which he went to receive his kingdom, is Heaven. He receives it from the hand of his Father. The kingdom is on the earth; here he commits the talents to his servants; here his citizens reject his authority; here he will come to reckon with his servants; here he will destroy his enemies. Here he had to come to take “on him the seed of Abraham,” and to be born heir to David’s throne. But the gift he receives in Heaven, and has not received it yet. Certainly he did not have it on the cross nor in the grave. It is also proved by the prophet Daniel that he had to go into the presence of his Father to receive the kingdom. This opens the second point. “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away.” This proves that he shall receive his dominion at the throne of the Ancient of days, in Heaven. But that scene is laid after, not before, his resurrection and ascension. By referring to verses 9, 10, it is seen that this part of the vision of Daniel is fulfilled in the time of the Judgment: “The Judgment was set, and the books were opened.” And with this agree the words of Rev. 11:15–18. The announcement of verse 15,—“The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign forever and ever,”—is much quoted by National Reformers, but they utterly ignore the fact that it is made under the seventh trumpet, which closes up this dispensation. In this chronology of this trumpet, expositors are well agreed. It is also located by verse 18: “And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.” There can be no question about the Judgment; it is not a past event. When he will give reward, Jesus himself informs us: “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.” Matt. 16:27. And again: “Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.” Luke 14:14. In Rev. 11:18 the expression is used, “and thy wrath is come.” This leads us to quote again from a writer in the Christian Nation of March 10, 1886. He said:— “The careless reader of the word of God seems to see two opposite and irreconcilable representations of the divine character. On the one hand, severe holiness, exact justice, supreme law, resistless wrath; on the other hand, winning patience, tender mercy, infinite love, boundless grace. Even the Saviour has a twofold character—himself a paradox, whose most startling contradiction is the wrath of the Lamb.” The writer of the above has proved himself a very careless reader of the word. The careful reader of the book of Revelation knows that it is given in lines or series of symbols, each and all culminating in one point, the Judgment, the coming of Christ, and the end of this world. Turning to Rev. 6:14–17 we read:— “And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; and said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?” Here we see the condition of things on the earth when the day of the wrath of the Lamb comes. To claim that the day of his wrath comes during his priesthood and mediation is the sheerest absurdity; it is a gross perversion of the Scriptures. But it seems that no absurdity is too great to be set forth by these model Reformers. Paul’s words of hope and promise to the Thessalonians also locate this day of wrath: “Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and to you who are troubled [to recompense] rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall be punished with everlasting destruction,” etc. 2 Thess. 1:6–9. No truth is more clearly taught than this, that Christ will come to reward his saints and to punish his enemies. But the “day of his wrath” does not come—he will not appear to take vengeance on his foes—while he is mediator or intercessor. There is no paradox in the case. It is simply a question of time, as to when he fulfills the several offices assigned to him by his Father. To forward their illusive theories and schemes, the National Reformers present the work of Christ, and even himself, as a paradox—a “most startling contradiction”—when the contradiction is all their own. We must trace a little further the gift of the nations to Christ. See Ps. 2:7–9. It says:— “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” He does not convert them; he breaks them and dashes them in pieces. How is this? He does not receive the gift until the Judgment, until his mediation is closed, when “the day of salvation” is ended, and the “day of his wrath is come.” That we are not mistaken in this view is further and fully proved by the following scriptures:— “The Lord [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Adonai], Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Ps. 110:1. He sits at his Father’s right hand—he is sitting there now—as priest or mediator, and will continue to sit there until the time comes to take authority over the nations, to put off the robes of his priesthood, and to “put on the garments of vengeance.” Isa. 59:17. See Paul’s comment on this: “But this man [Christ], after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.” Heb. 10:12, 13. That is, till his foes be put under his feet; till the heathen and the uttermost parts of the earth shall be given to him; until the kingdoms of this world are become his. But, mark; while he is sitting on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, a priest or mediator, he is expecting till his foes are made his footstool. He is looking forward to the fulfillment of the promise of the Father, to give him the kingdom and the dominion under the whole heaven. We think none can fail to see the harmony of the testimony on this point. The nations are not yet given to Christ, and he will never receive the sovereignty by the votes of men; he cannot be “enthroned” by legislative enactments. The proof in this article is complete in itself, yet there is much to be said in confirmation of this view, and we will resume it next month. J. H. W.