Christ's Reign on the Father's Throne by Joseph Harvey Waggoner

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · May 12, 1874

Christ's Reign on the Father's Throne

By Joseph Harvey Waggoner

But it remains to notice more fully the error which has Christ reign on the earth, over the nations, till his enemies are subdued unto him.

5. Christ rules on the throne and in the kingdom of the Father until his enemies are put under his feet. Mr. Marsh has laid great stress on his construction of this text, considering it sufficient to prove his whole theory. But his construction is wrong, and his theory baseless. Others besides him have used this text as a stronghold; but with the establishment of this truth in regard to the reign, all claims of the Age to Come on this text are forever put at rest; and a mass of parallel scriptures, urged by the writers on that theory, are taken out of their hands and arrayed in favor of the truth that the enemies of Christ will be “dashed in pieces” at his coming.

Now, that Christ will reign as king in two localities, that is, occupy two thrones, is proved by Rev. 3:21: “To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame and am set down with my Father in his throne.” Thus, while Christ is on the throne of the Father, he is only in expectation of his own throne. That this is the past and present position of our exalted Head, is further proved by Heb. 8:1: “We have such an High Priest who is set down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens.” And that that is where he will reign till all enemies are put under his feet, is clearly proved by the Scriptures. Ps. 110:1: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” This is quoted by Jesus, as recorded by the gospels. Matt. 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42, 43; and also by Peter, Acts 2:34, 35, in his argument on the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus: “For David is not ascended into the Heavens; but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool.” This is a sure application of David’s prophecy, and proves the location of the reign (until his foes are made his footstool) to be “in the Heavens,” where Jesus is ascended.

Paul makes mention of the same in Heb. 1:13, in remarking on the superiority of Christ to angels. And again, in his argument concerning the work of Christ as priest on his Father’s throne, he says, “But this man, 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. This point is established beyond the possibility of doubt; and the true sense of this scripture clearly appears, Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the mediatorial kingdom to God, even the Father; when the Father shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and power. For Christ must reign on the Father’s throne, till his enemies are put under his feet, or made his footstool. Then the Son delivers up or leaves the throne of the universe, and takes his own throne in subjection to that of his Father. It thus appears that,

6. Christ delivers up that kingdom, or leaves the Father’s throne, and receives the throne of David, before his coming. The first part of this proposition is proved by the text. And that he takes the throne of David, or his own throne, before his return to the earth, has also been proved in our argument on the kingdom. Luke 19:12, 15, says, “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.” The receiving of the kingdom is first; his return follows it; and his receiving the kingdom in this text is the same as that of Dan. 7:13, 14, and both are identical with all things being put under Christ. And it has been shown that he sits at his Father’s right hand till this is accomplished.

Another important text is Dan. 7:13, 14, and it has been perverted in a worse manner, if possible, than the former one. Thus we quote an Age-to-Come author:—

“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.

“The order laid down is— “a. Coming of the Son of man. “b. Giving of the Son of man dominion, glory, and a kingdom. “c. All people, nations, and languages, and all dominions [rulers], serve and obey the Son of man, the Lord and King of the whole earth.”

It is not very surprising that a superficial reading of 1 Cor. 15 should produce such a view as that we have been reviewing; but no one, however superficial, can possibly read the advent of Christ out of Dan. 7:13, 14, unless it be first assumed that the Ancient of days is on the earth prior to the second advent. For he came to the Ancient of days, and was brought near before him. But that view would make it read that he came from the Ancient of days, and was taken far away from him to receive the kingdom. And, were it even assumed that the Ancient of days shall be on the earth, that view would not then harmonize with Luke 19, and other scriptures, which teach that he has received the kingdom at the time of his second advent. His receiving the kingdom is identical with “the marriage of the Lamb,” which takes place before he comes; as the “little flock” “wait for their Lord when he will return from the wedding.” Luke 12:36. And then will they be taken to the mansions prepared in the “Father’s house,” where they will sit down at the marriage supper.

There can be no difference between his receiving the kingdom and having his enemies put under his feet; they must be identical. But there is a great difference between having his enemies put under him and his destroying them. In 1 Cor. 15:28, the same Greek word is used to express the subduing of all things to the Son, and the subjection of the Son to the Father. “And when all things shall be subdued [hupotasso] unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject [hupotasso] unto him that put all things under him.” The order of the events is given in Ps. 2:8, 9: The Father gives them to the Son. The Son breaks them with a rod of iron, and dashes them in pieces; which dashing takes place at his coming.

7. Death, the last enemy of them that are Christ’s, will be destroyed, or swallowed up in victory, at his coming. After having arrived at the true sense of the text in other respects, there is left but little chance for controversy on this point. No one will deny that the resurrection of the righteous to immortality is the same as death being swallowed up in victory. See verses 53, 54. And it is only as the enemy of the saints that death is destroyed; the wicked will never be released from death—the second death. If they are, they must have a second resurrection.

Whiting renders verse 24, death will be conquered. The expressions conquered or destroyed, and swallowed up in victory, appropriately refer to the last enemy of the saints, but not to that of the wicked. Dr. Clarke says, “Death shall be destroyed: katargeitai: shall be counter-worked, subverted, and finally overturned. But death cannot be destroyed by there being simply no further death; death can only be destroyed and annihilated by a general resurrection.” This is truth, but the wicked are never released from the power of death. Their resurrection is unto damnation and the second death.

Against the view here presented, that the kingdom is set up, and Christ receives his kingly power before the second advent, it is objected that as Christ is David’s son, it would be inconsistent to have him commence his reign in Heaven, where David never reigned.

All our ideas of the necessity or consistency of any action on the part of God must give way to his own revelation of what he has done or will do. But the objection has no weight, as there are certain facts revealed concerning the reigns of David and of Christ which make the view we advocate a consistent one.

1. The New Jerusalem is the capital of the kingdom of Christ; but that is in Heaven, and will there remain till after the second advent. And there is surely no inconsistency in commencing his reign at his capital.

2. David reigned only part of his time in Jerusalem, and never in the New Jerusalem.

3. Christ was born heir to David’s throne; but, partaking of our nature, he died, as had David and all his sons. And, of course, what he gained by birth he lost by death, and his being David’s son would have

availed him nothing had he remained dead. Thus, though born heir, he receives the throne by the gift of God, through the resurrection. “The Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David.” Luke 1:32. See especially on this point Peter’s remarks: “Therefore [David] being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; he seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.” Acts 2:30, 31.

4. David had many sons, but Christ was superior to David; for he called him Lord. And David will also be raised from the dead, but Christ will supersede him in the throne. His special right arises from his being Son of God as well as son of David, and being raised from the dead without seeing corruption.

5. As he is the Son of God, so his throne will be in the house and city of God. Notice 1 Chron. 17:14: “I will settle him in mine house, and in my kingdom forever, and his throne shall be established forevermore.” Also verse 12, “He shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne forever.”

6. From all this it is evident that no plea can be raised of informality; it was God’s kingdom, and he first ruled over it. When the Israelites desired a king, he said, “They have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.” 1 Sam. 8:7. David’s was a secondary right, held by sufferance. Many talk as if David had the first right, and as if everything was illegal that differed from his reign.

Now, no one will deny that, before the selection of David or Saul, the ruler of Israel reigned in Heaven. And there is no reason that can be given why he “whose right it is,” should not commence his reign in the same locality. On the contrary, there is abundant proof that he does take the kingdom while yet he is there. How long he will continue to reign there can only be determined by ascertaining when the New Jerusalem will come down to earth. As that is the capital of his kingdom, the seat of power is of course determined by its location.

J. H. Waggoner.