Traditional dispensationalism has Christ endure a second humiliation by leaving heaven (which is His throne) to return to rule on earth (which is His footstool) only to finally have His personal kingdom rule rebelled against. One major aspect of His humiliation was His dwelling in the dust of the earth and suffering abuse during His ministry. House and Ice write that in the postmillennial view: “Messiah is in heaven and only present mystically in his kingdom. His absence from the earth during his kingdom reign robs Messiah of his moment of earthly glory and exaltation.” (House and Ice, Dominion Theology, 240.)
But Scripture teaches of Christ’s return to heaven that it is not a place where He is robbed! We must understand the majestic glory that is His, which issues from His ascension into heaven. Did He not pray to the Father just before the cross: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was” (John 17:5)? He was preparing to leave the earth to enter heaven. He considered that to be glorious not a robbery of glory!
Ephesians 1:20 speaks of His glorious condition in heaven: “Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under His feet and gave him to be the head over all things to the church.” The same concept is repeated in Philippians 2:9: “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name.” 1 Peter 3:22 agrees: “Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.”
According to classic dispensationalism, this is a robbery of His glory!
What is worse, the “moment of glory” that Christ has during His millennial rule ends up in chaos and rebellion! Pentecost states that toward the end of the millennial kingdom Satan “goes forth to deceive the nations, in order to lead a final revolt against the theocracy of God.” Pentecost admits that “there is no understanding how a multitude, ‘the number of whom is as the sand of the sea’. . . , could revolt against the Lord Jesus Christ, when they have lived under His beneficence all their lives.” (J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1958], 548, 551.)
As Walvoord put it: “Thus the last gigantic rebellion of man develops against God’s sovereign rule in which the wicked meet their Waterloo. As the battle is joined in Rev. 20:9, the great host led by Satan and coming from all directions compasses the camp of the saints. The word for camp’. . . seems to refer to the city of Jerusalem itself which is described as ‘the beloved city.”‘ (John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ [Chicago: Moody Press, 1966], 304.)
According to classic dispensationalism, Christ’s “moment of glory” ends in chaos and ultimate failure! Dispensationalism’s “moment of glory” for Jesus puts Him back in the dust of the earth, so that He might personally, physically administer a kingdom that eventually revolts against Him and attacks Him and His capitol.
Tweet
Jason Robertson is a husband and a father and a pastor. He is dedicated to leading and equipping his the Church with God’s word and biblical theology for life ministry, using a combination of pastoral, church planting and evangelism experience. He holds a Master of Divinity from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. He is experienced in church planting, evangelism, missions, and the training of pastors and Bible teachers.
Jason has been preaching the gospel since 1985, serving the first ten years of ministry as a Southern Baptist itinerant evangelist out of Milldale Baptist Church in Zachary, LA which ordained him in 1993. He has preached in hundreds of churches in over 30 States and 4 countries. He planted churches in Siberia, Russia in the summers of 1993 and 1994. He founded Murrieta Valley Church in California, which he planted in cooperation with the SBC NAMB in 2001. He also teaches ministry students at California Baptist University.
You can hear his sermons and read his manuscripts on sermonaudio.com. Just follow the link to "sermons" at the top of this page.
I disagree. Without arguing for dispensationalism being true, I simply disagree with your premise and its conclusion. Your premise upon which you base this article is that “traditional dispensationalism has Christ endure a second humiliation by leaving heaven (which is His throne) to return to rule on earth (which is His footstool) only to finally have His personal kingdom rule rebelled against.” It is simply untrue that Christ is somehow humiliated if He were to choose to leave heaven to rule on earth and have unregenerate man unsuccessfully rebel against Him as John wrote in Revelation 20. Without God’s intervening in our lives, we would all continue in our rebellion against Him no matter how perfect our life on earth is. I know that you agree with the Doctrine of Total Depravity. Instead of Christ being humiliated by man’s rebellion against His rule, wouldn’t He rather be glorified by it? Psalm 76:10 say, “Sure the wrath of man shall praise You [God].” Man’s rebellion should be seen as proving that God is truthful in His statements that unless He calls you, you cannot and will not come to Him no matter how perfect life is.
Normally I benefit greatly from your posts. Both the posts themselves and the comments made force me to get into the Word and sort through things. Several days ago you posted a blog about John MacArthur’s comments at the Shepherd conference in which he misrepresented amillennialism. You have now done the same thing to the dispensationalist and historic premillenial view of Christ’s millenial reign. This post has not been in keeping with your usual professionalism in your blog.
Hampton, hold on just a minute and consider this…
Jesus is resurrected.
Jesus is glorified.
Jesus is King of Kings, Lord of Lords.
Jesus sits on the Throne of David at the Father’s right hand.
According to Amil He reigns victoriously expanding His kingdom in the hearts of men until it is completed. No military will be needed, no politics, just the witnesses clothed with power, baptized by the Spirit, and equipped with the Gospel.
According to Premil He does not reign yet. Eventually He will remove his church from the earth and judge the world with the Great Tribulation even though only Israel broke had a covenant with Him. He will then return again and physically rule the earth from Jerusalem with political and military might. The earth will at first only be inhabited with saved Jews and millions of glorified saints. Satan will not be on the earth at all. But with even this advantage in less that a thousand years entire nations of rebellious people will reject His “sovereign rule” forcing Him to use violence. If that is not a “second rejection”, “a second humiliation”, then I don’t know what is.
I find such a scenario failing very short of biblical theology. It is not only bad eschatology, it is bad soteriology and Christology.
I agree that Jesus is resurrected, He is glorified, and He is King of kings and Lord of lords; however, I do not believe that He is sitting on the throne of David. He is sitting at the Father’s right hand as Colossians 3:1 and Hebrews 10:12 confirm.
With the wonderful search tools that we have on computers today, I was able to do a search for “throne of David” in the Bible. It only appears once in the New Testament in Luke 1:32 (“He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David.”). All the other references were in the Old Testament. Jeremiah 33:17 tells us that the throne of David is the throne of the house of Israel. 2 Samuel 3:10 refers to David’s throne as taking the place of Saul’s rule over ethnic Israel from “Dan to Beersheba.” 1 Kings 2:24 also provides a reference to the political nature of David’s throne. Christ is glorified and He is in heaven ruling over the Universe. He has not yet been given the throne of David.
I know one objection that has been put forth is that the kingdom of heaven proclaimed in the gospels has come. I believe it has. But the kingdom of heaven is never said to be the “kingdom of David” over which the throne of David rules. That understanding is an inference that is not warranted by the rest of the Bible.
I’m sorry we disagree over this issue. I’ve tried to limit what I’m discussing to historic premill and not dispensationalism (disp. also involving the Rapture, tribulation, etc.). I believe that there will be a literal thousand year reign upon the earth with a rebellion at the end. I see no other way to read Revelation 20.
Hampton, answer these questions:
What did the alter in the temple represent? Is the it on earth or in heaven today?
What was the slain lamb in Law? Is the slain Lamb on earth or in Heaven?
Who was the son of David in the OT? Who did he typologically represent? Where is the Son of David today, heaven or earth?
Is Jesus currently King of Kings and Lord of Lords?
Here are some topics to think about:
Son of David:
Solomon was the immediate fulfillment of this covenant.
Jesus is revealed as the ultimate fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant in New Testament passages such as Luke 1:31-33; Acts 2:30-34; Acts 5:31-42; Romans 1:3; Hebrews 1:5.
I Chronicles 29:22-23 says that Solomon sat upon the throne of Yahweh. The throne of David is the throne of the Lord! Thus, for Christ to sit upon the throne of the Lord is to sit upon David’s throne.
Compare that truth to Acts 2:30-34 to see without any doubt that Peter declared that the Davidic Kingdom began when Jesus ascended to the throne of David at God’s right hand.
As O. Palmer Robertson says, “When the king sits on his throne, the kingdom has come.” The Jews should have listened to John the Baptist who announced that the Kingdom had come!
Solomonic Temple:
The Solomonic Temple was the immediate fulfillment (1 Kings 6:14). Jesus declared himself to be the true Solomonic Temple (John 2:19-22).
Thus all who are “in Christ” by faith are part of the “Body of Christ” – The Solomonic Temple.
Peter, whose name reminded him of these spiritual truths, explains in 1 Peter 2:5 that all believers are “living stones” who make up the Solomonic Temple.
The issue of the covenants being fulfilled in Christ is found through out the New Testament. For example, Galatians 3:29 declares that all believers are “in Christ” and are thus Abraham’s seed and heirs of the covenant promises as was Isaac (Galatians 4:28).
Paul asked the Corinthians if they realized that they are the Temple of God (1 Corinthians 6:19), which is thus a clear theological concept based on the Davidic Covenant.
Nature of the Kingdom:
The promise was not that David would reign for a long time, but that he would reign forever. That very fact lead the prophets of the Old Testament to see that this Davidic promise would only be fulfilled in the Messiah, and that is of course exactly how the New Testament interprets it. This reign is ultimately only fulfilled in the reign of the son of David, Jesus Christ and His eternal messianic rule. Christ bore our iniquity and suffered the rod and stripes of men but was resurrected and exalted by God as was promised to David’s heir in 2 Samuel 7:14. Christ was exalted to God’s right hand after the resurrection and reigns eternally. Revelation 20:1-10 describes the present reality of the Davidic Kingdom as it is active in heaven and on earth.
Jesus:
Jesus is declared to have a “name above all names” (Phil. 2:9-11). David called him the “highest of the kings of the earth” (Psalm 89:26-28).
Peter declared to the Sanhedrin that Jesus was the “rejected stone” (Psalm 118:22) and “chief cornerstone” (Isaiah 28:16) who has the only name by which we must be saved.
Go here for more exegesis
Jason,
You and I agree on many things. As believers we are spiritual children of Abraham, and our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. I agree that there are many typologies of Christ in the Old Testament. I also have no doubt in my heart that Jesus’ name is exalted above every other name and that only in Him can we be saved. I’m glad that we have some common ground.
I just do not agree with the way you put “pieces of the puzzle” together. For instance, In Acts 2:29-36 your understanding is that Jesus has ascended into heaven and is sitting on the throne of David. I don’t see that when I read that same passage. I see Peter affirming that Jesus is the heir of whom God spoke to David. Jesus has been raised up and is fulfilling prophecy. He is at the right hand of God and as a result the Holy Spirit has been poured out. I do not see Jesus as seated on the throne of David. Verse 34-35 says He [Jesus] is seated at the Father’s right hand until His enemies are His footstool; implying that at that time He will then take His seat on the throne of David and administer reign of peace and righteousness.
I’m sure that we both feel that the other is letting his doctrine influence what the Bible says instead of letting the Bible influence our doctrine. As you are the host, you may have the last word on this issue on this post topic. I’ve greatly appreciated the dialogue and have profited from having to looking in the Bible.
For instance, In Acts 2:29-36 your understanding is that Jesus has ascended into heaven and is sitting on the throne of David. I don’t see that when I read that same passage.
Hampton,
Just as the tabernacle/temple on earth was merely a copy and shadow of the true temple in heaven (Heb. 8:5), so the “throne of David” was a mere shadow and copy of the real throne of God’s authority which is in heaven. Remember, it is not the throne that is important, but rather the one who occupies the throne. David was a foreshadowing of the greater David who would reign over His people.
Jesus is doing that right now. There is no delay in His reign. No postponement. No gap.
Peter’s argument in Acts 2 is that the pouring out of the Holy Spirit is the evidence that Christ is reigning from David’s throne.
“He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David.” (Luke 1:32)
Nowhere in the New Testament does it indicate there is a delay in Christ’s receiving His throne as typified by the throne of David. Otherwise we must conclude that Christ has not been glorified and ascended to the Father.
“To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.” (Rev. 3:21)
Christ has been exalted to the throne above every throne. The error of the futurist premillennialist is in bringing Christ low to a carnal throne on earth.
Without defending dispensationalism, I disagree with your definition of “failure.” If a rebellion at the close the thousand-year reign is automatically considered a failure, what of the Fall, the rebellion leading to Noah’s day, or the rebellion at Babel? Obviously, these were decreed by God for His purposes, and I don’t quite follow how one rebellion is not a failure, but another us. Remember, to the premil-er, this rebellion would be part of God’s eternal plan as much as any other. I’m covenantal and enjoy your posts, but ask yourself if you rashly used the term “failure” in this case simply because you do not hold a premil position.
Jordan,
I appreciate your question about the word “failure.” It was not chosen without considerable thought. But in the end the word is appropriate due to the nature the kingdom structure of Dispensationalism. The first Adam did fail in the Garden. But at CT’ers we believe that the Second Adam did not fail in his mission. And King David could not build the Lord a temple, but the Son of David is. And the Lord’s kingdom is everlasting and his enemies are becoming His footstool. And His saints reign with Christfor a millennium in heaven (Rev 20:4b) and reign without failure of any kind.
But according to dispensationalism, the resurrected, glorified physically-present-on-earth Jesus cannot convince nations (plural) that He is Lord — even though millions of saints are back from heaven ruling with Him. So eventually WAR breaks out (Gog and Magog)!!
If that sounds like success then I wonder why he didn’t just let Peter keep chopping ears off. In fact, why did Jesus say that His kingdom was not of this world in John 18:36?
And I just do not find any Scriptural basis for the Lord who sits on the throne of heaven at the Father’s right hand, to leave heaven again to be rejected again. No, I only find that He is coming back completely victorious to judge the living and the dead.
Jason,
Doesn’t your statement, “But according to dispensationalism, the resurrected, glorified physically-present-on-earth Jesus cannot convince nations (plural) that He is Lord — even though millions of saints are back from heaven ruling with Him” argue against the truth that no one can come to God except those whom He calls? I know that there are other reasons you reject the idea of Jesus physically ruling on earth, but this reason seems to be in contradiction to the Scripture. Who among us would acknowledge Jesus has Lord even with miraculous signs? The leaders of Israel rejected Him despite abundant signs. Why would people not still reject Him?
Jordan,
This is not a soteriologocial issue but a Christological issue. In other words, I am saying something about men but about Christ.