Enemies Under His Feet?

[veteran]

The idea of Christ's future reign on earth with His saints is a very important matter.

Ps 110:2
2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.
(KJV)

Heb 10:12-13
12 But this man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool.
(KJV)

1 Cor 15:23-28
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when He (Christ) shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He (Christ) must reign, till He (Christ) hath put all enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
27 For He (The Father) hath put all things under His (Christ's) feet. But when He (The Father) saith, all things are put under Him (Christ), it is manifest that He (The Father) is excepted, Which did put all things under Him (Christ).
28 And when all things shall be subdued unto Him (Christ), then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him (The Father) That put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.
(KJV)

Our Lord Jesus MUST reign first, until He has put all enemies under His feet. Only then can the Kingdom be delivered up to The Father to start the Eternal new heavens and a new earth. The Father is "excepted" in that particular reign. The Father has given that job to His Son.

Rev 3:9
9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.(KJV)

Our Lord Jesus has revealed He will make His enemies of the synagogue of Satan to come and worship Him at the feet of His elect, to know He has loved His saints. When is that for? Has it ever happened in this world? No. That's for the time of Christ's future "thousand years" reign on earth with His elect priests and kings. THAT is when Christ will rule over His enemies, when their knee shall bow to HIm as KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS. That's what that "thousand years" is going to be for, besides being a great time of teaching and understanding God's Word (one of the priest's duties).

 

[whirlwind]

 

[Drew]

When is that for? Has it ever happened in this world? No. That's for the time of Christ's future "thousand years" reign on earth with His elect priests and kings.

I disagree and believe that the scriptures teach us that Christ is already reigning.

You quoted Psalm 110:2. Well here is this verse again, this time with the preceding verse:

The LORD says to my Lord:
"Sit at My right hand
Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."
2The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying,
"Rule in the midst of Your enemies."

Now, what does Jesus say when Caiaphus asks Him if He is the King ("Messiah means king)?:

But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?" 62And Jesus said, "I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

Jesus is quoting from Psalm 110:1, and when he says that Caiaphus will see Jesus ruling at God’s right hand, the clear implication is that Jesus will be enthroned as king during Caiaphus’ lifetime. Remember, Jesus was talking to Caiaphus, so when Jesus says that Caiaphus will see Jesus enthroned, this places Jesus’ enthronement back in the 1st century.

 

[veteran]

Yes, and the time when that will occur will be when the resurrection of the dead happens. That's how that false priest of the Pharisees will see Jesus coming in the clouds. That's how all will see Him when He comes, literally, even you.

 

[Drew]

Yes, and the time when that will occur will be when the resurrection of the dead happens. That's how that false priest of the Pharisees will see Jesus coming in the clouds. That's how all will see Him when He comes, literally, even you.

Two points. First, as I have already pointed out, Jesus tells Caiaphus that he (Caiaphus) will see Jesus sitting at the right hand of God and coming on the clouds of glory. This means these events must have happened in Caiaphus' lifetime. Jesus was not talking to someone other than Caiaphus - someone living thousands of years in the future - He was talking to Caiaphus.

Second, and on a related note, we need to talk about the "coming on the clouds" image - Jesus tells Caiaphus that he (Caiaphus) will see Jesus "coming on the clouds". Jesus is quoting from this text in Daniel 7:

As I looked,
"thrones were set in place,
and the Ancient of Days took his seat.
His clothing was as white as snow;
the hair of his head was white like wool.
His throne was flaming with fire,
and its wheels were all ablaze.

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

With all due respect, the only reason that the “coming on the clouds†image gets taken as denoting Jesus’ return to earth from heaven is that it is easiest to take the expression literally and not chase up the Old Testament allusions which Jesus is clearly making. When you do the checking, you discover that the “coming on the clouds†image has nothing to do with a descent from heaven to earth, as in the 2nd coming, but rather is about an ascent from earth to heaven, in this case clearly metaphorically denoting Jesus’ enshrinement as King. So when Jesus talks about coming on the clouds, if we are going to be true to Biblical precedent, we cannot take such an allusion as being about a second coming.

It is about installation as king – something that Caiaphus did indeed live to see, just as Jesus said.

 

[veteran]

That Bible verse you quoted has nothing to do with any such idea that Christ's second coming happened then.

Mark 14:62
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(KJV)

Just what does that "sitting on the right hand of power" phrase mean, for that's what Jesus said he would see?


Mark 16:19
19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, He was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
(KJV)

Heb 1:3
3 Who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;(KJV)

Now exactly what would be required for that high priest, a non-believer, to see Christ sitting on the right hand of God? Either a vision like what God gave His prophets, which is not likely since that one refused to believe Jesus of Nazareth is The Christ, or, by RESURRECTION AFTER DEATH.

Acts 7:52-56
52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of Whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
54 When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.
55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.(KJV)

Christ's servant Stephen saw Christ next to the right hand of God, by vision from The Holy Spirit just before he was stoned to death. In other words, God opened the Heavenly to Stephen's sight. All this shows how Christ meant the high priest would see The Son sitting on the right hand of God, also by His coming with clouds.

Will the Preterist doctrine also mock God's cloud in Exodus 13 that led the children of Israel through the desert?

 

[Drew]

That Bible verse you quoted has nothing to do with any such idea that Christ's second coming happened then.
Mark 14:62
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(KJV)
Just what does that "sitting on the right hand of power" phrase mean, for that's what Jesus said he would see?

I should have explained more. My point was that when Jesus told Caiaphus that he (Caiaphus) would see him sitting at God’s right hand and coming on the clouds on the glory, Jesus intended Caiaphus to understand the following:

1. Jesus about to be enthroned as King, not thousands of years in the future, but in Caiaphus’ own lifetime. Both the Psalm 110 allusion and the Daniel 7 allusion both make this clear – kingship is asserted in both cases.

2. “Coming on the clouds†is a quote from Daniel 7 and, if you read the whole account, the image is an upward movement from earth to heaven in vindication, and in particular in vindication after suffering. This is Jesus’ way of suggesting that Caiaphus will see Jesus vindicated through resurrection and not least as a prophet. And one of the central prophetic threads of Jesus’ ministry was judgement against Jerusalem and the temple. That prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD. It is critical to understand the “coming on the clouds†image Biblically. It is not to be taken literally since the entire Daniel 7 account from which it was drawn is clearly metaphorical.

3. Jesus is also alluding to His divinity in invoking both these texts – they are both suggestive of equality between the two persons on the two thrones.

4. Jesus is, in no sense, referring to a second coming (I am aware that you – veteran – do not hold this view anyway)

Christ's servant Stephen saw Christ next to the right hand of God, by vision from The Holy Spirit just before he was stoned to death. In other words, God opened the Heavenly to Stephen's sight. All this shows how Christ meant the high priest would see The Son sitting on the right hand of God, also by His coming with clouds.

I do not agree that this is the main thrust of what Jesus telling Caiaphus, but I think it can be integrated into the model I have presented.

Will the Preterist doctrine also mock God's cloud in Exodus 13 that led the children of Israel through the desert?

You first need to make a case that I am mistaken – that has not been done yet.

 

[veteran]

You mean you actually need more verses that prove Jesus's coming with clouds is going to be an actual event?

Rev 1:7
7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.
(KJV)

All peoples are going to know beyond all doubt when Christ returns, not just a few that the false Preterist doctrine supposes.

1Thes 4:17
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
(KJV)

Mark 13:26-27
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
27 And then shall He send His angels, and shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
(KJV)

The "four winds" is a metaphor for the last trump change at the twinkling of an eye. It's about the resurrection Paul covered in 1 Cor.15. When those four winds blow, the end of this world will come. Has this world today ended? No, because it means a literal ending of this world, as Peter taught in 2 Peter 3.

There's so much Bible evidence that Christ's second coming is still some time in the future, that one would have to be totally duped to not grasp that point. Did the early Church fathers say Christ's second coming had already happenned? No, for they understood it to be yet future also, and they were the closest disciples to the original disciples of our Lord Jesus. Surely they would have noted the second coming if it had happenned already. They didn't note it, because Christ's return was still expecting in their day, even as it is in our day. When Christ does return, I won't have to tell you about it.

 

[Drew]

You mean you actually need more verses that prove Jesus's coming with clouds is going to be an actual event?

Rev 1:7
7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.
(KJV)

You conveniently ignore the Biblical precedent of how the "coming on the clouds" metaphor is actually used in the book of Daniel - to denote an upward motion of vindication and instead apply your own interpretation - that the image represents Jesus returning down from heaven to earth.

I know that you think it is "obvious" that Rev 1:7 is talking about Jesus' 2nd coming. But it is not. It is giving the same message as Jesus is giving - foreshadowing events of the first century including Jesus' enthronement (again, as the Daniel image suggests). And both Jesus and John (author of Revelation), unlike most evangelicals, know their Old Testament and would use the "coming on the clouds" image as Daniel uses it - a use that is entirely inconsistent with a 2nd coming interpretation.

 

[Drew]

The "four winds" is a metaphor for the last trump change at the twinkling of an eye.[ It's about the resurrection Paul covered in 1 Cor.15. When those four winds blow, the end of this world will come. Has this world today ended? No, because it means a literal ending of this world, as Peter taught in 2 Peter 3.

The four winds refer to the vindication of Christ’s followers in the events of the first century, not events in the future. I will not argue the point in detail just yet – I will do what you have done, state a position without substantially defending it. But I will take issue with your interpretation of 2 Peter 3. The images there do not denote any kind of literal end of the world. We know from other passages such as this one from Romans 8, that God is not going to blast this world to smithereens, He is going to redeem and transform it:

For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but (AQ)because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

In 2 Peter 3, the author uses apocalyptic “end of the world†language as a literary device to explain the theological significance of events in “the real worldâ€Â. Such language is never intended to actually signify the destruction of the world. How could it? Paul tells us in Romans 8 that the world will be redeemed, not destroyed.

Properly understanding Biblical language takes work. Many Christians take “end of the world†language in texts like Matthew 24 and 2 Peter literally, not realizing how such language is actually used in the Old Testament. This oversight, of course, is the very same problem that leads people to think that “coming on the clouds†language is about the 2nd coming.

This is not mere speculation on my part – we have concrete evidence that this was so. Isaiah writes:

10For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises
And the moon will not shed its light

What was going on? Babylon was being destroyed, never to be rebuilt. There are other examples of such metaphorical “end of the world†imagery being used to describe much ore “mundane†events within the present space-time manifold.

 

[Drew]

There's so much Bible evidence that Christ's second coming is still some time in the future, that one would have to be totally duped to not grasp that point.

Please do not make assumptions about what I believe. I believe that Jesus will indeed return a 2nd time.

Did the early Church fathers say Christ's second coming had already happenned? No, for they understood it to be yet future also, and they were the closest disciples to the original disciples of our Lord Jesus.

I have never suggested or implied that Jesus 2nd coming has happened, so you are talking about a belief I do not hold. But there is a "coming" of Jesus that has indeed happened.

“Parousia†is the Greek word rendered as “coming†in the disiples’ question in Matthew 24 (this one: Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age. The word “parousia†simply means “presence after at time of absence†– the word in and of itself does not necessitate a reading where Jesus descends to us from the heavens. You will perhaps assert this reading of parousia still only leaves the 2nd as the possible referent – Jesus ascended to heaven and has promised to return. First, and most obviously, it needs to be asserted that we can have a “coming†of Jesus other than the 2nd coming and yet still embrace the reality of a second coming. There is no “rule†that Jesus can only “come to us†in one sense only and at one time only. Second, and more importantly, within the Old Testament framework, we have texts like this one from Daniel 7:

As I looked,
"thrones were set in place,
and the Ancient of Days took his seat.
His clothing was as white as snow;
the hair of his head was white like wool.
His throne was flaming with fire,
and its wheels were all ablaze.

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

No doubt, the careful reader will realize that Jesus is quoting this very passage in his statement from Matthew 24 where He speaks of “coming on the clouds of the skyâ€Â. For present purposes, the important point is that we have a picture of a “son of man†figure “coming†in a sense other than that of a return from heaven to earth – here the son of man figures “comes†from earth to heaven to be enthroned. I suggest that the disciples’ question of Matthew 24:3 could be about this kind of coming.

Your implied critique of my position presumes that the only kind of "coming" is a descent from heaven to earth. Well, that is not what Daniuel thinks. Having presumed this, you then argue that my position is incoherent. I trust that you see the problem with this.

 

[whirlwind]

You mean you actually need more verses that prove Jesus's coming with clouds is going to be an actual event?

Rev 1:7
7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.
(KJV)

You conveniently ignore the Biblical precedent of how the "coming on the clouds" metaphor is actually used in the book of Daniel - to denote an upward motion of vindication and instead apply your own interpretation - that the image represents Jesus returning down from heaven to earth.

I know that you think it is "obvious" that Rev 1:7 is talking about Jesus' 2nd coming. But it is not. It is giving the same message as Jesus is giving - foreshadowing events of the first century including Jesus' enthronement (again, as the Daniel image suggests). And both Jesus and John (author of Revelation), unlike most evangelicals, know their Old Testament and would use the "coming on the clouds" image as Daniel uses it - a use that is entirely inconsistent with a 2nd coming interpretation.

Drew...the "Ancient of days," it appears to me, came to earth and it is here that the Son of man came with clouds and it is here that He is given the kingdom.

• Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, Whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
  
  7:13-14 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, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

An angel explains the vision to Daniel in which he said....

• 7:21-22 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.

 

[Drew]

Drew...the "Ancient of days," it appears to me, came to earth and it is here that the Son of man came with clouds and it is here that He is given the kingdom.

Yes and no. First, the thrones are being represented as being in heaven, not on earth. Second, the text has the son of man figure coming up from earth to heaven to the Ancient of Days:

One like a (W)Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.

Given the rather clear connection of the son of man to humankind on earth, the image is really quite clear - the son of man figure ascends from earth to heaven. If the son of man comes up to the Ancient of Days - clearly God the Father - what else could be going on except an ascent from earth to heaven. And this is re-inforced by Jesus' statement to Caiaphus casting Himself (Jesus) in the son of man role. Jesus is on earth when He makes this statement.

I see no way to sustain the view that you are suggesting here.

The thrones are heavenly thrones. The Ancient of Days sits in one, the Son of Man in the other. This means that Jesus is enthroned as a King. But the fact that the entire image is set in heaven should not lead one to conclude that Jesus is not king on earth. There is a strong scriptural tradition of having events in heaven described to reveal the "parallel" events on earth.

 

[whirlwind]

Drew...the "Ancient of days," it appears to me, came to earth and it is here that the Son of man came with clouds and it is here that He is given the kingdom.

Yes and no. First, the thrones are being represented as being in heaven, not on earth. Second, the text has the son of man figure coming up from earth to heaven to the Ancient of Days:

One like a (W)Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.

Given the rather clear connection of the son of man to humankind on earth, the image is really quite clear - the son of man figure ascends from earth to heaven. If the son of man comes up to the Ancient of Days - clearly God the Father - what else could be going on except an ascent from earth to heaven. And this is re-inforced by Jesus' statement to Caiaphus casting Himself (Jesus) in the son of man role. Jesus is on earth when He makes this statement.

I see no way to sustain the view that you are suggesting here.

The thrones are heavenly thrones. The Ancient of Days sits in one, the Son of Man in the other. This means that Jesus is enthroned as a King. But the fact that the entire image is set in heaven should not lead one to conclude that Jesus is not king on earth. There is a strong scriptural tradition of having events in heaven described to reveal the "parallel" events on earth.

Drew, you are seeing what you want to see. The "little horn" is on earth. Those are the earthly thrones being cast down. The beast, the first beast which is a world-wide political system, is destroyed but, "the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time." Prolonged for the millennium which is yet future. :D

This is the "Ancient of Days" on earth with His throne, just as His throne was shown here in Ezekiel. We know it is here as....

• 7:10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him: thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.

That happens here. The King James DOES NOT say "came up." It isn't there. Rather what is written is, "one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days." There was no going up.

Consider how the Son of Man can also stand in front of the Ancient of days? Because when you closely read it we see who actually stands in front of the Ancient of days. It is "one like the Son of Man," and He/they are those that came with the clouds of heaven. It is the man child standing before Him.

 

[whirlwind]

Two points. First, as I have already pointed out, Jesus tells Caiaphus that he (Caiaphus) will see Jesus sitting at the right hand of God and coming on the clouds of glory. This means these events must have happened in Caiaphus' lifetime. Jesus was not talking to someone other than Caiaphus - someone living thousands of years in the future - He was talking to Caiaphus.

Consider what is meant. Caiphas, just as the rest of us, will see...will understand what is meant by Jesus sitting on the right hand of God and coming in the clouds. Right now, many of us don't see, don't understand, how Jesus can sit at the right hand of Himself, God.

Jesus was talking to us...two thousand years in the future, as well as those who have lived through time.