Did Paul teach that the body of Christ will be living and reigning on the earth?

In a recent public comment on Facebook, one believer challenged another to provide scriptural support for his position, as follows:

“Christ is going to return to the earth to establish His kingdom on the earth. Can you please provide me a scripture that indicates that He is going to take us from the earth to a celestial realm? I can provide many that state that His kingdom will be established here and that the saints will be here.”

This same believer went on to state the following in a subsequent comment:

“…yes, scripture mentions that we are seated in the heavenly places, that our allotment is celestial, etc, but that is no different than believing Jews being told by Christ that the kingdom is “of the heavens” or that they lay up rewards in heaven. They are heavenly in origination or character; not in ultimate location.”

The believer’s assertion that “the saints will be here” (i.e., here on the earth) presupposes that every person who has ever lived (or ever will live) who could be considered a “saint” (i.e., in the scriptural sense of the term) will be among “the saints” who will be enjoying eonian life in the kingdom of God after it has been established on the earth. But is that, in fact, the case? I don’t think that it is.

Now, this believer would agree that the company of saints to whom Peter, James, John and the author of the letter to the Hebrews wrote will, in accord with what we read in Rev. 5:10, be “reigning on the earth” during the eons to come. He would also agree that, when the terms “heaven(s)” or “celestial” are used outside of Paul’s thirteen signed letters in connection with the expectation of the saints who will be reigning on the earth, they refer to the source and character of their blessings (and not to the location where the blessings will be enjoyed).

For example, in 1 Peter 1:3-5, we read that Peter and those to whom he wrote had been “regenerated…for the enjoyment of an allotment incorruptible and undefiled and unfading, kept in the heavens for you, who are garrisoned by the power of God, through faith, for salvation ready to be revealed in the last era…” What, exactly, is the “allotment” that Peter had in mind here, which he said was being “kept in the heavens” for the believing Israelites (i.e., the “chosen expatriates of the dispersion”) to whom he wrote? It should be noted that we’re not told that Peter and those to whom he wrote would enjoy this “allotment” in the heavens. Rather, it’s in the heavens that this allotment is being “kept.” The fact that it’s being “kept” there doesn’t mean it’s going to remain there.

We know that, during his earthly ministry, Christ was the “Servant of the Circumcision, for the sake of the truth of God, to confirm the patriarchal promises” (Rom. 15:8). In accord with this patriarchal promise-based administration, the eonian allotment of which Christ spoke during his earthly ministry – and which he promised those who followed him – is one that will be terrestrial in its location (Matt. 5:5). Keeping this fact in mind, Christ declared the following in Matthew 6:19-21: 

“Do not hoard for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and corrosion are causing them to disappear, and where thieves are tunneling and stealing. Yet hoard for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor corrosion are causing them to disappear, and where thieves are not tunneling nor stealing; for wherever your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

Did Christ believe that those to whom he spoke would be enjoying their “hoarded-up treasure” in heaven? No; the “treasure” to which Christ was referring here has to do with the rewards that the faithful among Israel will receive from him after his return to earth. Later – in Matthew 19:28-30 – Christ declared the following to his disciples:

Yet Jesus said to them, “Verily, I am saying to you, that you who follow Me, in the renascence whenever the Son of Mankind should be seated on the throne of His glory, you also shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who leaves houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or fields, on account of My name, a hundred-fold shall be getting, and shall be enjoying the allotment of life eonian. Yet many of the first shall be last, and the last first.”

The “hundred-fold” that Jesus promised his faithful followers would receive after his return to earth will be the “treasures in heaven” that these same followers were exhorted by Christ to “hoard” for themselves through their faithful conduct prior to his return to earth. In Rev. 22:12, Christ declared the following to those whose eonian expectation will involve reigning on the earth (Rev. 5:10): “Lo! I am coming swiftly, and my wage is with me, to pay each one as his work is.” Notice that Christ said that the “wage” with which he would pay the saints was “with [him].” It is after Christ has returned to earth that those whom he had in view will receive their “wages”; until then, this “wage” is being “kept in the heavens” for them.

Later in his letter – and in accord with what Christ himself declared in Rev. 22:12 and elsewhere – Peter explained what he had in mind by the “incorruptible” and “unfading” allotment referred to in 1 Pet. 1:3-5: “…when the Chief Shepherd is manifested, you shall be requited with an unfading wreath of glory” (1 Pet. 5:4). Whether one understands this “unfading wreath of glory” to be a literal or figurative “wreath,” it’s clearly something with which the saints among Israel will be requited at the coming of Christ referred to in places such as Matthew 24:29-31, Acts 3:21 and Rev. 1:7 (which is undoubtedly the “manifestation” of the “Chief Shepherd” to which Peter was referring here). Until then, this allotment – like the “treasure” referred to by Christ in Matt. 6:19-21 – is being “kept in the heavens” for those who are called through the evangel of the Circumcision, and who endure to the end.

In Heb. 3:1 we read of the “celestial calling” of those to whom this letter was written. However, every occurrence of the term “celestial” in the letter to the Hebrews – with the sole exception of its use in Heb. 12:22 (concerning which see below) – is in the genitive case. Unlike the dative case (which denotes the location in which something is found or occurs), the genitive denotes the source or character of something. And not all that is celestial in character or source need be understood as celestial in location (although anything celestial in location is also celestial in character – and can thus be referred to as such). Thus, those who we’re told tasted “the celestial gratuity” (Heb. 6:4) didn’t taste a gift that was up in heaven (for they were on the earth when they “tasted” it). Rather, they tasted a gift that was celestial in its source and character. What, then, did the author have in mind when he referred to the “celestial calling” of those to whom he wrote? 

Answer: In Hebrews 12:25-28 we read the following:

Beware! You should not be refusing Him Who is speaking! For if those escaped not, refusing the One apprizing on earth, much rather we, who are turning from the One from the heavens, Whose voice then shakes the earth. Yet now He has promised, saying, Still once more shall I be quaking, not only the earth, but heaven also. Now the “Still once more” is making evident the transference of that which is being shaken, as of that having been made, that what is not being shaken should be remaining.

Wherefore, accepting an unshakable kingdom, we may have grace through which we may be offering divine service in a way well pleasing to God, with piety and dread, for our God is also a consuming fire.

Note the contrast between “the one apprizing on earth” and “the one from the heavens.” The “celestial calling” of which we read in Heb. 3:1 is that which comes from the one who is speaking “from the heavens.” However, on both sides of the contrast being made here, God’s covenant people (Israel) are in view. The words, “whose voice then shakes the earth” refer to what took place in the past, when the old covenant was made with Israel through the mediation of Moses. However, the “celestial calling” that is from “him who is speaking…from the heavens” pertains to events that are yet to come (i.e., when Christ – who is presently in heaven – returns to earth, and the new covenant of which he is the Mediator goes into effect). It is at this time that those to whom this letter was written will receive “an unshakable kingdom.”

With regard to the expression “celestial Jerusalem” in Heb. 12:22, this is, of course, a reference to new Jerusalem. Since this city is now located in heaven, it is referred to as “celestial” in a locational sense (in accord with the use of the dative case). But we know that heaven is not going to be the location of new Jerusalem during the final eon of Christ’s reign. After the creation of the new heaven and new earth, this city is going to be ”descending out of heaven from God.” And after it has descended from heaven (and thereby becomes the home of those who will be dwelling there during the last eon of Christ's reign), it will cease to be celestial in a locational sense; any sense in which it could be considered “celestial” after it has descended out of heaven will be with regard to its character and/or source (hence the use of the genitive case in, for example, Heb. 3:1).

The eonian allotment of the saints in the body of Christ

We know that it is after Christ has returned to earth that the saints among God's covenant people Israel (i.e., those who are in view in Rev. 5:10 and elsewhere) “shall be reigning on the earth.” But will the earth be the only location where the kingdom of God is going to be present during the eons to come? No. In fact, the earth is not even going to be the first location in which the kingdom of God will be present when Christ begins exercising his God-given authority to establish the kingdom and begin his eonian reign.

Prior to the establishment of the kingdom of God on the earth, the kingdom over which Christ will be reigning for the coming eons is first going to be established “in the heavens” and “among the celestials.” In Rev. 12:7-12 we read of certain heavenly events that will be occurring before Christ returns to earth and establishes the kingdom of God here:

And a battle occurred in heaven. Michael and his messengers battle with the dragon, and the dragon battles, and its messengers. And they are not strong enough for him, neither was their place still found in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, the ancient serpent called Adversary and Satan, who is deceiving the whole inhabited earth. It was cast into the earth, and its messengers were cast with it. And I hear a loud voice in heaven saying, “Just now came the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ, for the accuser of our brethren was cast out…Therefore, make merry, ye heavens, and those tabernacling in them! Woe to the land and the sea, for the Adversary descended to you having great fury, being aware that brief is the season that he has.”

Since the events being prophesied in this passage will be occurring before Christ returns to earth, we can conclude that the coming of the kingdom of God in heaven (i.e., the realm from which “the accuser of our brethren” will be “cast out”) will be taking place before the kingdom of God is established on the earth. But will there be a company of saints enjoying an eonian allotment in the kingdom of God in heaven after it has been established in this realm? Yes.

In 1 Cor. 15:47-49 we read the following:

The first man was out of the earth, soilish; the second Man is the Lord out of heaven. Such as the soilish one is, such are those also who are soilish, and such as the Celestial One, such are those also who are celestials. And according as we wear the image of the soilish, we should be wearing the image also of the Celestial.

The saints to whom Paul wrote this letter were such that they could be referred to collectively as “the nations” (Rom. 1:13; 11:13, 25; 15:16, 18), and belonged to what Paul referred to in Rom. 16:4 as “all the ecclesias of the nations.” It was those who comprised these various “ecclesias of the nations” who, in Paul’s day, constituted the company of saints that Paul referred to in his letters as “the body of Christ” and “the ecclesia which is [Christ’s] body.” And it’s evident from what Paul wrote that the earth will not be location where the saints who constitute the body of Christ will be enjoying their future “allotment.” 

According to what we read in the above verses, the saints to whom Paul wrote (and indeed all who have been spiritually baptized into the one body of Christ referred to in 1 Cor. 12:12-13) will, at some future time, come to wear “the image of the Celestial,” and – in doing so – will become “celestials.” Since we’re destined to become “celestials,” it follows that our “soilish” and “terrestrial” body must be transformed into a body that is fit for the heavenly realm – i.e., the realm where Christ, “the Celestial One,” now resides and inherently belongs.

After referring to the kind of beings that we’re to become after we’re been vivified, Paul went on to write the following in verses 50-52:

Now this I am averring, brethren, that flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God, neither is corruption enjoying the allotment of incorruption. Lo! a secret to you am I telling! We all, indeed, shall not be put to repose, yet we all shall be changed, in an instant, in the twinkle of an eye, at the last trump. For He will be trumpeting, and the dead will be roused incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

The kingdom of God in which “flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment” can’t be the kingdom of God on the earth. How do we know this? Answer: Because on the earth during the eon to come, “flesh and blood” will be able to “enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God” (see, for example, Ezekiel 36:8-12; 37:25-26; 44:20-25; cf. Isaiah 11:6-8; 65:20-25; Jeremiah 23:3-6; 30:18-20 [cf. v. 3]; 33:10-11, 19-22; 59:20-21). In these and other passages, we read of things said concerning people in the future kingdom on earth that can only be said of mortal, flesh-and-blood humans, and in which only those who are mortal will be involved during this time (such as marrying and “multiplying” in the land).[1]

If Paul had in mind the kingdom of God as it will exist on the earth when he wrote what he did in 1 Cor. 15:50, then he would’ve been contradicting the scriptural fact that there will, in fact, be mortal, flesh-and-blood humans in this kingdom during the eon to come. But of course, Paul wasn’t contradicting Scripture. He simply didn’t have in mind the kingdom of God as it will exist on the earth. But if the future location of the kingdom of God that Paul had in mind in 1 Cor. 15:50 is not going to be the earth, then what location did Paul have in mind? Answer: Paul had in mind the heavenly realm, where Christ is presently located.

It is in contrast with the conditions that will characterize the kingdom of God on earth during the eons to come that Paul told those in the body of Christ that “flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God.” Rather, what Paul had in mind in 1 Corinthians 15:50 was the kingdom of God into which the saints in the body of Christ will be entering after the snatching away and meeting in the air – i.e., the kingdom of God as it will exist in the heavenly realm (and which Paul referred to in 2 Tim. 4:18 as the Lord’s “celestial kingdom”). It is the kingdom of God in heaven – not the kingdom of God on earth – in which “flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment.”

Consider the following argument:

1. The kingdom of God to which Paul was referring in 1 Cor. 15:50 is such that “flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment” in it.

2. Mortal, flesh-and-blood humans will be enjoying an allotment in the kingdom of God that’s going to be established on the earth after Christ’s return.

3. In 1 Cor. 15:50, Paul was not referring to the kingdom of God on the earth.

That Paul was referring to the kingdom of God in its heavenly location in 1 Cor. 15:50 – i.e., the Lord’s “celestial kingdom” – is further confirmed by what Paul wrote in his second letter to the saints in Corinth. After referring to the resurrection of the saints in the body of Christ in 2 Cor. 4:13-14, Paul went on to write the following in verses 16-18:

Wherefore we are not despondent, but even if our outward man is decaying, nevertheless that within us is being renewed day by day. For the momentary lightness of our affliction is producing for us a transcendently transcendent eonian burden of glory, at our not noting what is being observed, but what is not being observed, for what is being observed is temporary, yet what is not being observed is eonian.

Since Paul had in mind that which exists at this present time when he referred to that which is “being observed” (and which is “temporary”), it follows that he had in mind a future reality when he referred to that which is “not being observed” (and which is “eonian”). Thus, the period of time that Paul had in mind when he used the term “eonian” in these verses is a future period of time. But what future period of time? Answer: the period of time during which we’ll be enjoying our eonian life (1 Tim. 1:16; Titus 1:2; 3:7) – i.e., the “oncoming eons” in which God “will be displaying the transcendent riches of his grace in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:7).

Keeping this point in mind, let’s now consider what Paul went on to write in the next two verses (2 Cor. 5:1-2):

“For we are aware that, if our terrestrial tabernacle house should be demolished, we have a building of God, a house not made by hands, eonian, in the heavens. For in this also we are groaning, longing to be dressed in our habitation which is out of heaven…”

Notice Paul’s use of the term “terrestrial” when describing the present, mortal body of those in the body of Christ. There would’ve been no good reason for Paul to have described the present, mortal body of the saints in the body of Christ as “terrestrial” if he expected the body with which believers are going to be roused to also be terrestrial. Thus, the very fact that Paul described the present body of the saints to whom he wrote as “terrestrial” implies that the future, resurrection body of the saints in the body of Christ will not be terrestrial.

Moreover, that which is implied by Paul’s use of the term “terrestrial” when describing our present, mortal body is explicitly confirmed by Paul’s subsequent description of our future body as “eonian, in the heavens” and “out of heaven.” The first expression (“eonian, in the heavens”) reveals that “the heavens” will be the realm for which our future spiritual body will be suited during the eons to come. With regard to Paul’s use of the expression “the heavens” here, it should be noted that Paul used the same exact expression in his later letters to the saints in Phillipi and Colosse:

“For our realm is inherent in the heavens, out of which we are awaiting a Savior also…” (Phil. 3:20)

“…because of the expectation reserved for you in the heavens…” (Col. 1:5)

“…we have a building of God, a house not made by hands, eonian, in the heavens.” (2 Cor. 5:1)

While the expression “eonian, in the heavens” reveals that heaven will be the location of our eonian allotment, the second expression – i.e., “out of heaven” – reveals that heaven will be the source of the body that Paul figuratively referred to as “a house not made by hands.” The same term translated “out of” in this expression (ek) is used in a similar sense in 1 Corinthians 15:47, as follows: “The first man was out of [ek] the earth, soilish; the second Man is the Lord out of [ek] heaven.” Paul wasn’t, of course, saying that Adam pre-existed in the earth before he was formed; rather, the idea being communicated by Paul’s use of the word ek is that the earth is the source of that from which God formed Adam (Adam and his mortal descendants are thus referred to as “soilish” – i.e., made from the elements of the earth). Similarly, in 1 Cor. 11:8, 12 we read that “the woman is out of [ek] the man.” Here the same word “ek” was used by Paul to express the idea that Adam was the source of that from which God formed Eve (cf. Gen. 2:21-22), and not that Eve was brought into existence inside Adam.

Thus, in 2 Cor. 5:2, Paul’s use of the expression “out of heaven” should be understood to mean that heaven will be the source of the elements that will constitute our body after we’ve been vivified (just as the earth is the source of the elements that constitute our body at the present time). 

In fact, the same can be said concerning Christ. When Paul referred to Christ as “the Lord out of [ek] heaven” in 1 Cor. 15:47, he was communicating the fact that heaven (rather than earth) is the source of the spiritual body that now composes Christ (and which Christ has had since his resurrection). Just as it would be erroneous to say that Adam (who is “out of the earth”) pre-existed in the earth before he existed with a soulish body – or that Eve (who is “out of the man”) pre-existed in Adam before she existed with a soulish body – so it would be erroneous to say that Christ pre-existed in heaven before he existed with a soulish body. Rather than pre-existing with a spiritual body, it was when Christ was roused from among the dead that his body was changed from being soulish (and soilish) to spiritual. And this change from soulish/soilish to spiritual involved a change in the very source of that which makes his body the kind of body that it is (with the new source of Christ’s body – and thus of Christ himself – being heaven rather than earth). Paul thus went on to refer to Christ as “the Celestial One” in the very next verse (since Christ is now a celestial – rather than a terrestrial – being).

The “soilish” material of which our body presently consists (and which makes it “terrestrial”) will, at the moment of our vivification, be replaced with elements that are heavenly in nature. It is in this way that the “body of our humiliation” will be “transfigured” (Phil. 3:21) and “delivered” (Rom 8:23) when we’re vivified in Christ. When we’re “dressed in our habitation which is out of heaven,” we will no longer be “soilish” (as we are now); we’ll be celestial beings, as Christ now is (1 Cor. 15:48-49). It’s this change in our nature that will make us suited for eonian life “in the heavens” (and not merely for life on the earth).

In accord with what Paul wrote to the saints in Corinth concerning the location of our eonian allotment (and the nature of our body after being vivified), we read in Ephesians 1:3 that God “blesses us with every spiritual blessing among the celestials, in Christ.” The expression translated “among the celestials” in this verse is “en tois epouraniois,” and occurs four more times in this letter (Eph. 1:20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:10). But what is the meaning of this expression? Some scholars believe that, when Paul used this expression, he was referring to celestial regions, or realms (which is the idea expressed in the more common translation, “in the heavenly places”). Others, however, think the expression refers to celestial beings (or both celestial beings and celestial things). According to this view (which I think is most likely), Paul had in mind the same heavenly beings to which he was referring when he declared that Christ ascended ”up over all who are of the heavens” (Eph. 4:10; cf. Heb. 7:26, where we read that Christ came to be “higher than those of the heavens”). It’s also possible that Paul purposefully chose an expression that could refer to both celestial regions and celestial beings/things.

In any case, it can be reasonably concluded that the location that Paul had in mind when he used the expression “en tois epouraniois” is the location that he referred to elsewhere as “the heavens,” and which the author of the letter to the Hebrews referred to as both “the heavens” (Heb. 4:14; 7:26; 8:1-2) and “heaven itself” (Heb. 9:23-24). This is evident from the fact that the term epouraniois (“celestials” or “heavenlies”) is in the dative case, and thus denotes locality (as opposed to the genitive case, which denotes source or character).

Paul’s use of the expression “among the celestials” in Eph. 3:10 and 6:12 can be understood as further confirmation that the location to which the expression refers is the same location as that referred to by the related expression “in the heavens.” Compare these verses with Colossians 1:16:

“…that now may be made known to the sovereignties and the authorities among the celestials, through the ecclesia, the multifarious wisdom of God…”

“…for it is not ours to wrestle with blood and flesh, but with the sovereignties, with the authorities, with the world-mights of this darkness, with the spiritual forces of wickedness among the celestials.”

“…for in Him is all created, that in the heavens and that on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or sovereignties, or authorities, all is created through Him and for Him…”

Since Paul wasn’t referring to “the sovereignties and the authorities” that are on the earth in Eph. 3:10 and 6:12, he must’ve been referring to those who are “in the heavens.” From this consideration it follows that the location to which the expression “among the celestials” refers in Eph. 3:10 and 6:12 is “the heavens.” 

Thus, regardless of whether the expression “among the celestials” is referring to celestial regions (i.e., regions that comprise “the heavens”) or to the beings that are “of the heavens,” we can be sure that Paul had in view the entire celestial realm in which Christ presently sits enthroned at God’s right hand (Eph. 1:20). And it is in this realm that the saints who comprise what Paul referred to in Eph. 1:22 as “the ecclesia which is [Christ’s] body” are destined to be “blessed with every spiritual blessing.”  

Consider also Eph. 2:4-7:

“…yet God, being rich in mercy, because of His vast love with which He loves us (we also being dead to the offenses and the lusts), vivifies us together in Christ (in grace are you saved!) and rouses us together and seats us together among the celestials, in Christ Jesus, that, in the oncoming eons, He should be displaying the transcendent riches of His grace in His kindness to us in Christ Jesus.”

Just as Paul was referring to a future event and reality when he referred to the vivification and rousing of the saints (which is the future aspect of our salvation in grace), so, also, Paul was referring to a future event and reality when he referred to us being seated “together among the celestials, in Christ Jesus.” The time period during which this future aspect of the salvation of the saints in the body of Christ is going to be enjoyed is “in the oncoming eons,” while the location where it is going to be enjoyed is said to be “among the celestials.”

In accord with Paul’s use of the expression “among the celestials” in Ephesians, we read in Phil. 3:20 that “our realm is inherent in the heavens, out of which we are awaiting a Savior also.” The word translated “realm” in this verse is politeuma, and occurs only here in the Greek Scriptures. This term – which is derived from the more commonly-used word “polis” (“a place of many people,” i.e., a city) – most likely denotes a ruled domain. Significantly, although the expression translated “the heavens” in Phil. 3:20 is plural, the term politeuma is in the singular. And since the expression translated “out of which” (ex hou) is also singular (the plural form – which Paul didn’t use – is ex hon), it means that it is from this realm (singular) that we are awaiting our Savior, Christ.

It’s also worth noting that this realm is not merely said to be “in the heavens” but rather “inherent in the heavens.” The word translated “inherent” is huparch’ō (“UNDER-ORIGINate”), and expresses the idea that the realm in view permanently belongs to the heavens. We therefore have good reason to understand the term politeuma to denote the realm (or ruled domain) in which we will be enjoying our allotment during “the oncoming eons,” when God will be “displaying the transcendent riches of His grace in His kindness to us in Christ Jesus.”

What Paul wrote in Colossians 3:1-4 provides us with further confirmation that the location in which we’ll be enjoying our allotment is in the heavens rather than on the earth. In these verses we read the following:

“If, then, you were roused together with Christ, be seeking that which is above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Be disposed to that which is above, not to that on the earth, for you died, and your life is hid together with Christ in God. Whenever Christ, our Life, should be manifested, then you also shall be manifested together with Him in glory.”

It’s important to understand what, exactly, Paul was exhorting the saints to whom he wrote to be doing in this passage. Although some understand Paul’s words here as having simply been an exhortation for believers to keep their focus on Christ, that’s not what Paul wrote here. As important and necessary as it is for us to keep our focus on Christ and on what he did for us, the focus of this passage is actually on the location where Christ is presently seated. It is the heavenly/celestial realm itself (i.e., “where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God”) that we are to be “seeking,” and to which we are to be “disposed.” And there would be no good reason for Paul to exhort believers to be “seeking” the heavenly realm in which Christ is seated if this wasn’t the location in which we’ll be enjoying our eonian life after we’ve been “manifested together with [Christ] in glory.” Thus, when Paul previously wrote that members of the body of Christ have an “expectation reserved for [us] in the heavens” (Col. 1:5), we can conclude that this expectation reserved for us in the heavens will actually be enjoyed by us in the heavens. 

---

[1] This category of Israelites in the kingdom will initially consist of those belonging to the generation that will be alive on the earth at the time of Christ’s return (such as the 144,000 sealed Israelites and the “vast throng” referred to in Rev. 7:2-17). However, multitudes more will be born into, and grow up in, the kingdom that’s going to be restored to Israel when Christ returns to earth.

There will, however, be some immortal people enjoying eonian life in the kingdom of God on earth. But this category of saints will be constituted exclusively by those believing Israelites (and certain believing “God-fearers,” such as Cornelius and his household) who died before Christ’s return to earth. It is these who are going to be restored to life in what is referred to in Scripture as the “resurrection of the just” (Luke 14:14) and the “former resurrection” (Rev. 20:4-6; cf. John 5:29). And – as I’ve argued elsewhere (A commentary on 1 Thessalonians 4:13) – this is a resurrection that will occur 75 days after the return of Christ to the earth. Those who are raised from the dead by Christ at the “former resurrection” will be “neither marrying nor taking out in marriage” during the eon to come, “for neither can they still be dying, for they are equal to messengers, and are the sons of God, being sons of the resurrection” (Luke 20:35-36). 

In contrast with those who will take part in the “former resurrection,” the rest of the people who will be enjoying an allotment in the kingdom of God after it’s been established on the earth will be mortal, flesh-and-blood human beings. In fact, both before and after the “resurrection of the just” takes place, the mortal, flesh-and-blood Israelites who will be enjoying their eonian allotment in the kingdom of God on earth will likely far outnumber the resurrected Israelites and God-fearers who will be enjoying their eonian allotment there. 

This will also be the case during the fifth and final eon as well (and likely to an even greater extent). For, in addition to what we read concerning the kingdom of God on earth during the next eon (which will include the “thousand years” referred to in Rev. 20), it can also be reasonably inferred that there will be mortal human beings living on the new earth during the final eon, as well. Not only is this implied by Paul’s words in Eph. 3:21 (where we read of “all the generations of the eon of the eons”), but it accounts for the fact that the “log of life” will be present in the New Jerusalem to provide its life-sustaining fruit and healing leaves for those who will need it during this time (see Rev. 2:7 and 22:2). 

A defense of the doctrine of Satan’s superhuman, spiritual nature, and a response to objections

According to Scripture, there exist numerous non-human, intelligent beings whose capabilities far exceed those belonging to mortal humans, and whose created nature is such that they are able to exist in (yet without being confined to) the super-terrestrial realm that is commonly referred to in Scripture as “the heavens” or simply “heaven.” Examples of these superhuman, celestial beings are those who belong to what is referred to in Scripture as the “host of heaven” (see, for example, 1 Kings 22:19; Neh. 9:6; Isaiah 24:21-22; Dan. 4:35; Luke 2:13). Not only are these beings generally unseen by mortals, but we have reason to believe that they are normally invisible to humans. On the rare occasions when such beings are seen by humans, it is apparently because they have either chosen to make themselves temporarily visible, or because God has enabled humans to see them (see, for example, Numbers 22:21-39 and 2 Kings 6:15-17).

We also know that the Hebrew and Greek words translated “spirit” (ruach and pneuma, respectively) were sometimes used to refer to these superhuman beings. For example, in 2 Chronicles 18:20, a member of the heavenly council is referred to as “a spirit.” We also read in Rev. 5:5 that the “seven torches of fire” which John saw “burning before the throne” represent “the seven spirits of God.” These “seven spirits of God” are later referred as “the seven messengers who stand before God” (cf. Luke 1:19, where the celestial messenger, Gabriel, identifies himself to Zechariah as “Gabriel, who stands before God”). In accord with this fact, all of the non-human messengers with whom Christ is contrasted throughout the first chapter of the letter to the Hebrews are referred to as “spirits” (Heb. 1:14).

Concerning the nature of spirits, we read the following in Luke 24:36-40:

Now at their speaking these things, Jesus Himself stood in their midst and is saying to them, “Peace to you!” Yet, being dismayed and becoming affrighted, they supposed they are beholding a spirit. And He said to them, “Why are you disturbed? And wherefore are reasonings coming up in your hearts? Perceive My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and perceive, for a spirit has not flesh and bones according as you behold Me having.” And saying this, He exhibits to them His hands and feet.

According to what we’re told Christ said to his disciples in this passage, the kind of being that the disciples mistakenly believed Christ was when he appeared to them on this occasion (i.e., “a spirit”) does not have “flesh and bones.”

Now, in a five-part series of articles that I posted on my blog last year (http://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-nature-purpose-and-destiny-of.html), I argued that the being commonly referred to in Scripture as “(the) Satan” and “the Adversary” – i.e., the being whom we’re told tried Christ after he was led into the wilderness (Matt. 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13) – is an intelligent, superhuman being who belongs to the same general category of spiritual beings as those referred to in the above verses. As a follow-up and supplement to this earlier series of articles, the remainder of this article will consist of a more summarized defense of this position, followed by a response to some objections that have been raised against it (and which I’ve encountered since the original series of articles was posted).

Satan in the Hebrew Scriptures

In part three of my original series on the subject of Satan (http://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-nature-purpose-and-destiny-of_73.html), I noted that the Hebrew noun שָׂטָן (śāṭān) means “adversary” or “one who opposes/resists” (https://biblehub.com/greek/4567.htm). Although there are a number of verses in the Hebrew Scriptures in which the term “satan” occurs, the only verses in which it occurs with the use of the definite article (haś·śā·ṭān) are in Job 1-2 and Zechariah 3:1-2. In every other occurrence of this term in the Hebrew Scriptures, the definite article is not used. However, in these verses, the noun can be understood as the title of a particular being (i.e., “the satan” or “Satan”). It should also be noted that, in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (i.e., the Septuagint, or LXX), the title ho diabolos (“the Adversary” or “the Devil”) is used to translate the title haś·śā·ṭān in Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-2. Thus, these verses are the only verses in the entire Hebrew Scriptures and LXX in which a certain being is identified as “(the) Satan” and “the Adversary.”

I further argued in my earlier study that we have good reason to believe that, like the “sons of God” referred to in Job 1-2 and 38:7 (and “the messenger of Yahweh” referred to in Zech. 3), the being referred to as “Satan” in Job and Zechariah is a superhuman, spiritual being. I also believe we have good reason to believe that this being is malevolent. For example, in Zech. 3:1, Satan is seen in a vision standing at the right hand of Joshua the high priest, to accuse him. And then in v. 2, we read that the following was declared to Satan by Yahweh (or by the messenger of Yahweh speaking on Yahweh’s behalf): “Yahweh rebuke you, O Satan! Yahweh who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?” The fact that Yahweh/the messenger of Yahweh considered Satan to be deserving of a rebuke from Yahweh (and note that the rebuke is repeated for emphasis) indicates, at the very least, that Satan was in the wrong here.

The malevolent nature of Satan is even clearer in the first two chapters of Job; there, it’s implied that Satan is an adversary to not only God’s servants (in this case, Job) but to God himself. Despite Yahweh’s own commendation of Job and his positive assessment of Job’s character (Job 1:8), Satan believes that Job has a selfish, benefit-based motivation for serving God. In Job 1:9-11 we read the following:

Then Satan answered Yahweh and said, “Does Job fear God for no reason? Have you not put a hedge around him and his house and all that he has, on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. But stretch out your hand and touch all that he has, and he will curse you to your face.”

Thus, not only does Satan not agree with God’s own assessment of Job’s character, but he implicitly accuses God of “buying” men’s devotion to him with his blessings and protection. And with God’s permission, Satan then does everything in his power – aside from directly harming Job – to get Job to “curse” (or “scorn”) God, and thus expose what he believes to be a fundamental defect in Job’s character. In Job 1:12 we read:

And Yahweh said to Satan, “Behold, all that he has is in your hand. Only against him do not stretch out your hand.” So Satan went out from the presence of Yahweh.

After Satan’s first attempt at getting Job to curse God is unsuccessful, God repeats his previously-stated positive assessment of Job’s character: “There is no one like [Job] on the earth, a man flawless and upright, fearing Elohim and withdrawing from evil.” God then adds, “And he still is holding fast to his integrity, though you would incite Me against him to swallow him up gratuitously.” God told Satan, in other words, that if he had done what Satan originally asked him to do (as recorded in Job 1:11), it would’ve been gratuitous, or without good reason. And yet Satan is still not satisfied, and insists that severe physical affliction would expose the character defect that he was convinced Job had: “Skin for skin! All that a man has he will give for his life. But stretch out your hand and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse you to your face” (Job 2:4-5). God then replies to Satan’s proposal as follows: “Behold, he is in your hand; only spare his life.”

Thus, the words and actions of Satan in Job 1-2 reveal him to be someone who is not only antagonistic toward God’s servants (indeed, toward the man whom God himself considered to be the most righteous man on earth at the time), but who considered God (1) mistaken concerning Job’s true character, and (2) guilty of “buying” love from humans. The reader should also note the fact that what happens to Job after God gives Satan permission to act (and for which God is, therefore, ultimately responsible) is directly brought about by Satan’s own power (hence God’s repeated references to Satan’s “hand” in his responses to Satan’s proposals).

Satan in the Greek Scriptures

With these considerations in mind, let’s now consider the first and last occurrences of the titles “the Adversary” (ho diabolos) and “Satan” (Satanas) in the Greek Scriptures:

Matthew 4:1, 10

Then Jesus was led up into the wilderness by the spirit to be tried by the Adversary.

Then Jesus is saying to him, “Go away, Satan, for it is written, The Lord your God shall you be worshiping, And to Him only shall you be offering divine service.”

Mark 1:13

And He was in the wilderness forty days, undergoing trial by Satan, and was with the wild beasts. And messengers waited on Him.

Luke 4:1-2

Now Jesus, full of holy spirit, returns from the Jordan, and was led in the spirit in the wilderness forty days, undergoing trial by the Adversary.

The last occurrences of these two titles are found in Revelation 20. In Revelation 20:1-3 we read the following:

And I perceived a messenger descending out of heaven, having the key of the submerged chaos and a large chain in his hand. And he lays hold of the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the Adversary and Satan, and binds him a thousand years. And he casts him into the submerged chaos and locks it, and seals it over him (lest he should still be deceiving the nations) until the thousand years should be finished. After these things he must be loosed a little time.

A few verses later (vv. 7-9), we read the following:

And whenever the thousand years should be finished, Satan will be loosed out of his jail. And he will be coming out to deceive all the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to be mobilizing them for battle, their number being as the sand of the sea. And they went up over the breadth of the earth, and surround the citadel of the saints and the beloved city. And fire descended from God out of heaven and devoured them. And the Adversary who is deceiving them was cast into the lake of fire and sulphur, where the wild beast and where the false prophet are also. And they shall be tormented day and night for the eons of the eons.

The Greek term translated “Satan” in the above verses (Σατανᾶς, or Satanas) is actually a transliteration of the Hebrew term that, as noted earlier, means “adversary” or “one who opposes/resists,” and which was used to identify the being who sought to find fault with Job and accuse Joshua the chief priest. In light of this fact, let’s now consider the following question: What would the original Jewish readers of the Greek Scriptures have most likely believed concerning the nature and identity of the being referred to in the verses quoted above?

We know that the LXX was familiar to many of the earliest readers of the Greek Scriptures, and was more widely read outside of the land of Israel than the Hebrew Scriptures. And as I noted earlier, the title ho diabolos (“the Adversary”) was used to translate the Hebrew title haś·śā·ṭān in the LXX translation of Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-2. Since these verses are the only verses of Scripture in which a certain being is referred to as both “Satan” (in the Hebrew) and “the Adversary” (in the LXX), it’s therefore reasonable to conclude that, when the earliest Jewish readers of the Greek Scriptures encountered an individual who is identified as both “Satan” and “the Adversary,” these titles would’ve brought to mind the individual who is referred to by the use of these exact same titles in Job 1-2 and Zechariah 3:1-3.

In any case, I don’t think it would be at all unreasonable or unwarranted to make this connection, and to identify “the Adversary” and “Satan” referred to in the Greek Scriptures (e.g., Matt. 4:1, 10) with the being referred to by the use of these same titles in Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-3. It would also not be unreasonable to require those who believe that no such connection should be made to provide a compelling, scripture-based reason for why they think such a connection shouldn’t be made, and why we shouldn’t identity a certain being referred to as both “the Adversary” and “Satan” in the Greek Scriptures with the being referred to by the use of these same titles in Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-3.

It may be objected that, by identifying the being referred to as “the Adversary” and “Satan” in the Greek Scriptures with the being referred to by the use of these same titles in Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-3, we’re led to the inescapable conclusion that this being is, in fact, superhuman in nature. But so what? It would be begging the question to assert that this conclusion is somehow unacceptable or problematic because no such being exists. If we have no good reason not to believe that the being referred to as “the Adversary” and “Satan” in the Greek Scriptures is identical with the being referred to by the use of these same titles in Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-3, then we have reason to believe that this being is superhuman in nature (although, as argued elsewhere, one would be justified in arriving at this conclusion just based on what is revealed concerning Satan in the book of Job alone).

Further support for the position that the individual referred to by the use of the titles “Satan” and “the Adversary” in Scripture is superhuman in nature can be found in Revelation 12:7-12. In this passage, we read the following:

And a battle occurred in heaven. Michael and his messengers battle with the dragon, and the dragon battles, and its messengers. And they are not strong enough for him, neither was their place still found in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, the ancient serpent called Adversary and Satan, who is deceiving the whole inhabited earth. It was cast into the earth, and its messengers were cast with it. And I hear a loud voice in heaven saying, “Just now came the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ, for the accuser of our brethren was cast out, who was accusing them before our God day and night. And they conquer him through the blood of the Lambkin, and through the word of their testimony, and they love not their soul, until death. Therefore, make merry, ye heavens, and those tabernacling in them! Woe to the land and the sea, for the Adversary descended to you having great fury, being aware that brief is the season that he has.”

A few verses earlier, the “great dragon” referred to in this passage was described as ”a great fiery-red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and on its heads seven diadems” (Rev. 12:3). As is the case with the seven-horned, seven-eyed “Lambkin” (Rev. 5:6-7) and the seven-headed, ten-horned “wild beast” (Rev. 13:1-2), the fiery-red dragon is most likely a composite symbol or figure that represents both a single individual as well as a particular group of beings with whom the primary individual represented is closely associated.[1] According to this understanding, the dragon represents both a particular group of high-ranking, adversarial spiritual beings (i.e., those referred to by Paul in Eph. 6:12) as well as the leader of this group of beings (i.e., the Adversary/Satan).

That a single individual was primarily being represented by the “great dragon” (as is the case with the “Lambkin” and the “wild beast”) is confirmed by the fact that John referred to the dragon as a “him” and a “he” (and not just an “it”) in the above passage. Specifically, the particular individual represented by the “dragon” is (according to John’s inspired interpretation) the being “called Adversary and Satan, who is deceiving the whole inhabited earth.” But what kind of being did John have in mind here? Well, we know that the individual with whom the being represented by the dragon will be battling (i.e., Michael) is not a symbol, but a real, superhuman, celestial being (Daniel 10-12; Jude 9). And Michael’s messengers are not symbols, either; they’re real, superhuman, celestial beings. Since the individual represented by the dragon will be battling Michael and his messengers, the implication is that he is also a superhuman, celestial being.

But do we have any reason to believe that John would’ve understood the being “called Adversary and Satan” to be the same being referred to as “Satan” (Hebrew) and “the Adversary” (LXX) in Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-2? I think so. Notice how, after Satan is cast out of heaven, a “loud voice out of heaven” identifies him as “the accuser of our brethren” who “was accusing them before our God day and night.” Who does this sound like? Who, in the Hebrew Scriptures, is first revealed as an individual who seems determined to find fault in God’s servants, and accuses them before God? Answer: the being referred to as “Satan” (Hebrew Scriptures) and “the Adversary” (LXX) in Job 1-2 and Zech. 3:1-2.

In addition to this key point, I believe we can further conclude the following concerning the nature of this adversarial “accuser of our brethren,” based on what we read in Rev. 12:7-12:

1. He is just as much a person – i.e., an intelligent, self-aware individual – as the other persons referred to in this passage (e.g., Michael, his messengers, God, Christ, the brethren, etc.).

2. He is a being who, like Michael (who is elsewhere referred to as a “chief messenger”), has messengers who are subordinate to him.

3. His nature is such that he can exist in both heaven and on the earth (and, prior to being forcibly removed from heaven by Michael and his messengers, has access to this super-terrestrial realm).

4. His nature and power is such that he will be able to engage in a future heavenly battle with Michael and his messengers (and this battle will, apparently, be necessary in order for him to be removed from his place in heaven).

5. He has an inherently adversarial, deceptive and malevolent nature (for example, he is deserving of being cast out of heaven, but attempts to prevent this from happening by battling Michael and his messengers; he “is deceiving the whole inhabited earth”; he is “accusing [the brethren] before our God day and night,” etc.).

Scripture interprets Scripture, and is its own best interpreter. In light of this key interpretational principle, I believe it is reasonable to conclude that the individual who is identified as both “Satan” and “the Adversary” in Job 1-2, Zech. 3:1-2, Matt. 4:1, Mark 1:13 and Rev. 12 is the same adversarial being (and is thus a superhuman, spiritual being). Moreover, I strongly suspect that those who resist this conclusion do not do so because the scriptural data itself suggests a more plausible view; rather, they resist this conclusion because they have a prior commitment to a doctrinal position that does not allow them to accept this conclusion.

A Response to Objections

Objection: We’re not told in Genesis 3 that the serpent by which Eve was deluded was under the control of something (or someone) else, or that any other being was involved. We should therefore conclude that the serpent was acting on its own accord. And just because serpents that exist today don’t talk doesn’t mean that they didn’t do so at first.

Response: What we refer to as “serpents” (or “snakes”) today are essentially the same kind of creatures that existed when the book of Genesis was originally written. Thus, when the inspired author of Genesis first referred to a “serpent” in the narrative (and stated that this creature ”became more crafty than any other animal of the field that Yahweh Elohim had made”), he had in mind a creature that, in his day, lacked both a natural ability to speak as well as the intelligence/reasoning ability that was displayed by the serpent by which Eve was deluded. Serpents don’t even have the ability to unintelligently mimic human words (like parrots do); thus, even if serpents today were intelligent enough to reason, they wouldn’t be able to use human language to verbally communicate with us. Thus, it’s not just the case that “serpents that exist today don’t talk.” They lack the natural capacity to either speak or reason. So how do we account for the extraordinary abilities displayed by the serpent by which Eve was deluded?

The view of the objector is that, when serpents were first created by God, they naturally possessed both the intelligence and the speaking ability manifested by the serpent by which Eve was deluded (this view would also necessarily imply that serpents lost these abilities at some point subsequent to the time at which the event described in Genesis 3:1-6 occurred). But this particular explanation for the serpent’s ability to speak and reason is just as “theoretical” in nature – and requires just as much inference – as the view that the serpent received its ability to speak and reason from an unseen being who (unlike the serpent) naturally possessed the ability to both speak and reason.

Thus, the view expressed in the above objection has no textual advantage over the view to which I hold; both my view and that of the objector affirms what is explicitly revealed in the text itself (i.e., that a serpent spoke to Eve, and that it influenced her to transgress God’s command). The difference between my view and that of the objector concerns how the serpent was able to speak and reason. Thus, although the objector sees his explanation for the serpent’s ability to speak and reason as being more in accord with a literal, straightforward reading of the text, the fact is that his view necessarily involves no less inference or assumption than my own (for we’re not told that the serpent was created with the abilities to speak and reason, or that such abilities were taken away from the serpent when it was judged).

But let’s suppose that the objector’s understanding of the serpent’s ability to speak and reason is correct, and that the serpent was in fact “acting on its own accord.” That is, let’s suppose that serpents were either created by God with the natural ability to talk and reason or that the serpent by which Eve was deluded had been directly (and temporarily) endowed by God with a supernatural ability to speak and reason. Would this view undermine my understanding of the nature of the being referred to elsewhere in Scripture as “Satan” and “the Adversary” (and for which I argued in parts two through five of my original study on the nature and identity of the Adversary)? Not at all. The overall position defended in the last four articles of my study in no way depends on what I wrote concerning how the serpent referred to in Genesis 3 was able to speak and reason. One need not agree with what I wrote concerning the serpent in order to agree with the overall position defended in my study. And if I am in error concerning my understanding of how/why the serpent was able to speak and reason, this error would not logically entail or necessitate that everything else I wrote concerning the nature and identity of Satan is also mistaken. 

Having said that, I do think we can determine which explanation for the serpent’s ability to speak and reason is more likely correct. For, as I noted in the first installment of my study, there are two verses in Revelation that identify the serpent by which Eve was deluded with a malevolent, superhuman being who was in existence in John’s day (and who, it’s reasonable to conclude, was controlling and acting through the serpent, and thus responsible for the serpent’s extraordinary abilities). In Rev. 12:9 and 20:2 we read the following:

And the great dragon was cast out, the ancient serpent called Adversary and Satan, who is deceiving the whole inhabited earth. It was cast into the earth, and its messengers were cast with it.

And he lays hold of the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the Adversary and Satan, and binds him a thousand years.

In both of these verses, the being who was symbolically represented as a “great dragon” in John’s visions is identified with “the ancient serpent” who is “called Adversary and Satan.”[2] The term translated “ancient” means “original,” or “that which existed in the beginning.” Thus, there can be no doubt that John had the serpent of Genesis 3 in mind here. And this means that the being symbolically represented in John’s visions as a “great dragon” is being identified with the serpent by which Eve was deluded. And if – as I believe is likely – the “ancient serpent” was in fact indwelled and controlled by the being whom John saw represented as a dragon (“the Adversary and Satan”), then the terminology John used (“…the ancient serpent, who is the Adversary and Satan”) would be natural and appropriate. For as long as the serpent was indwelled and controlled by this being, it would’ve been the temporary guise of the being (and could thus be identified with this being).

Objection: Satan is only an allegory that appears in the OT only in poetic/dramatic context in two non-history books after the exile. It's not real.

Response: The fact that Job is written mostly in poetic form does not mean the events of which it gives an account never happened, or that the persons referred to in it should be understood as non-historical or allegorical. Historical events can be described in poetic form and with poetic elements while still being just as non-fictional in nature as historical narratives written in a more straight-forward way. In accord with this point, I believe that Job existed in history, and that the being who was permitted to afflict Job (i.e. Satan/the Adversary) is a superhuman, celestial being who existed in Job’s day (and who still exists in our day).

Some considerations that make it reasonable to believe that Job was not merely a literary figure are the inclusion of certain details and particulars about Job, his life and his family (e.g., Job is introduced as a man from a specific location – the country of Uz). The inclusion of such details does not seem consistent with the view that the story is an allegory. However, such details are exactly what we would expect if the book of Job provides us with an historical account that was written in largely poetic form. Moreover, Job is referred to elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures as though he were a real, historical person. In Ezekiel 14:14, 20, God mentions Noah, Daniel, and Job as examples of righteous men (with the implication being that Job was just as real as Noah and Daniel). Similarly, Job is named in James 5:11 as an example of endurance. Since the other persons mentioned by James existed in history (i.e., Abraham, Rahab and Elijah), it’s reasonable to believe that Job did as well.

As far as the reference to “the Satan” in Zechariah 3, the fact that he is seen in a vision does not make him a fictional, allegorical being any more than it makes the other persons mentioned (i.e., Joshua the high priest, the angel of Yahweh and Yahweh himself) fictional, allegorical beings. Joshua is mentioned again in Zech. 6:9-14 as if he was an actual person, and I think even the objector would agree that both “the messenger of Yahweh” and Yahweh himself are real, non-allegorical beings. Thus, I don't think it’s at all unreasonable to believe that the being identified as “Satan” in Zech. 3:1-2 is just as objectively real as both the messenger of Yahweh and Yahweh himself are.

Objection: The whole book of Job is about God testing Job. Satan’s role in Job’s test is, at most, instrumental, and can be considered largely (if not entirely) irrelevant to the story.

Response: I agree with the objector that Satan only had an instrumental role in what happened to Job. God is operating all in accord with the counsel of his will (Eph. 1:11), and this includes the actions of Satan in relation to Job. God was, therefore, ultimately and absolutely responsible for the tragic and devastating events of which we read in Job 1-2, and I believe it was God’s plan all along that Satan do precisely what he did. Satan was simply the direct, most proximate cause of Job’s affliction. 

However, the fact that God was ultimately responsible for what happened to Job does not warrant the belief that Satan is a superfluous element in, or somehow irrelevant to, the narrative. As is evident to anyone who has read the first two chapters of Job, the narrative is just as clear about the involvement of Satan in Job’s test as it is about the involvement of God himself. We can no more understand and appreciate the book of Job by omitting Satan from the narrative than we can understand the account of Jesus’ trial in the wilderness by omitting Satan from it.

Objection: During Jesus’ trial in the wilderness, he was tempted with the lust of the flesh (Matt. 4:3-4), with the pride of life (Matt. 4:5-7) and with the lust of the eyes (Matt. 4:8-10). He was tried in all ways (as we are) yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15). But we are not tried by a superhuman being (if that were the case, then this being would have to be omnipresent). Our trials, as with Jesus, come from within (James 1:13-15, 1 John 2:16, Mark 7:20-23).

Response: The objector is presenting us with only two options with regard to how we understand who/what was involved in Jesus' trial: either (1) Jesus was tried by (and personally interacted with) an intelligent, superhuman being, OR (2) Jesus’ trial involved an “internal” struggle/conflict with his own “flesh,” or desires. However, this is a false dilemma. Although it’s certainly true that there can be no sin-related “trials” apart from the presence of certain desires within us, this in no way means that Jesus’ trial did not involve a personal being whose existence was external to Christ (and with whom Christ interacted and conversed). Consider the following: It is usually – if not always – the case that something external to us is what awakens (or in some cases creates) the desires within us which, if yielded to, result in sin. And these external things can be both impersonal things (such as something that may stimulate the desire to possess or take something that doesn't belong to oneself) or other persons (such as an attractive person who just happens to be married to someone else). In some cases, a person whose words or actions lead to the "awakening" of a sinful desire may be aware of the fact that he or she is doing it. In the case of Jesus’ trial, the Adversary simply served as the external means through which certain desires within Jesus were either awakened or strengthened, and through which Jesus was led to focus more on these desires than he would have otherwise.

Although everyone’s trials necessarily involve certain desires/wants (just as Jesus’ did), there are many different circumstances in which these desires will arise and become strong enough to create a particular “trial” for someone. Hebrews 4:15 is simply emphasizing what Jesus, during his time on earth, had in common with all humans. However, this verse in no way suggests that everyone is "tried" in the exact same way, or by means of the exact same circumstances. In fact, one could argue that, even aside from how we understand the nature of “the Adversary” who was involved in Jesus’ trial, Jesus’ trial was of an exceptional nature (for each part of Jesus’ trial by the Adversary was in some way based on, and derived its force from, Jesus’ unique Messianic status and God-given power/authority). I doubt, for example, that any other human being has ever been tempted to turn stones into bread in order to satisfy his or her hunger (for no other human has been given such power from God). And yet, Hebrews 4:15 remains true. And in light of these considerations, the objection that the adversary involved in Jesus' trial couldn’t have been a superhuman adversary (since we are not all tried by a superhuman adversary) fails to undermine the position defended in this article and my previous articles.

Objection: If Jesus was taken to the pinnacle of the temple, would not someone have seen this (remember He was in the wilderness)?

Response: There are at least two different views regarding the circumstances that were involved in this particular trial (and – contrary to the assumption implied in the objection – both views are perfectly consistent with the position that the Adversary involved in Jesus’ trial was a superhuman, spiritual being). One view is that these events occurred in a supernaturally-induced vision, trance or dream-like state that the Adversary was permitted to cause Jesus to experience at that time. The second view is that, when we’re told that the Adversary led Jesus to Jerusalem and stood him on the wing of the sanctuary, this event actually happened. This would, of course, imply that Jesus was no longer in the wilderness during this part of his trial. But there’s nothing problematic about this view; Luke’s account indicates that the first trial involving the Adversary occurred after the 40 days of fasting had concluded (4:2-3), and there’s no reason why the trial that involved being in Jerusalem did not also occur after this forty-day period in the wilderness had concluded.

As far as whether someone would’ve seen Jesus standing on the wing of the sanctuary at this time, such a question is irrelevant with regard to the identity and nature of the Adversary. If someone did see Jesus at this time, it obviously didn’t prevent any subsequent, God-ordained event that had to happen from happening. On the other hand, if (for whatever reason) it was necessary that no one see Jesus standing on the wing of the sanctuary at this time, then I’m sure God could’ve very easily arranged the circumstances that would’ve ensured this (even if it meant supernaturally preventing people from seeing Jesus). Either way, this objection is simply a “red herring,” and does not undermine either a literal understanding of this particular trial or a literal understanding of the personal nature of the Adversary.

Objection: The Adversary by whom Jesus was tried couldn’t have been in possession of “the authority and glory of all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth,” since that would contradict dozens of verses that say otherwise (e.g., Psalm 22:28, Psalms 24:1, Psalm 88:11, Isaiah 41:21-31,1 Cor. 10:26, etc.).

Response: In the verses to which the objector is appealing, God is said to have authority over, and possession of, the earth and its kingdoms. However, these verses are perfectly consistent with the fact that, under God’s absolute sovereignty, there are other created persons with greater or lesser degrees of delegated authority over the earth and its peoples. For example, in Daniel 2:37-39 we read that Daniel declared the following to Nebuchadnezzar:

“You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory, and into whose hand he has given, wherever they dwell, the children of man, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the heavens, making you rule over them all—you are the head of gold. Another kingdom inferior to you shall arise after you, and yet a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.”

Obviously, while Nebuchadnezzar had been given more authority and greater dominion than any other human had ever enjoyed up to that point (making him the “king of kings”), God still had ultimate and absolute authority and dominion. But since that’s the case, it follows that the objector’s appeal to verses in which God’s authority and dominion is affirmed in no way proves that a superhuman, spiritual being could not be in a position of authority that, while necessarily inferior to God’s, was superior to (and longer-lasting than) that which was possessed by Nebuchadnezzar (or any other human king besides Jesus Christ himself).

In fact, elsewhere in Daniel it’s clear that there are, in fact, non-human beings who are in positions of authority over human kingdoms (and who thus have even greater authority than the human kings of earth’s kingdoms). Two such beings are referred to in Daniel 10 as “the chief of the kingdom of Persia” and “the chief of Greece,” while the chief messenger Michael is referred to as “one of the first chiefs” and “the great chief who is standing over the sons of [Daniel’s] people” (Daniel 10:12-14, 20-21; 12:1). For a more in-depth defense of this understanding of the “chiefs” referred to in Daniel 10, see part four of my study on the Adversary (http://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-nature-purpose-and-destiny-of_6.html).

In further support of this understanding of Satan’s relatively great degree of authority over the earth, we read in Rev. 13:1-8 that, after “the dragon” (whom John previously identified as Satan/the Adversary) gives its power, throne and great authority to “the wild beast,” the wild beast will then have authority “over every tribe and people and language and nation,” and that “all who are dwelling on the earth will be worshipping it…” We have good reason to believe that the “the wild beast” represents the ruler of the final world kingdom that will be present on the earth prior to Christ’s return at the end of the eon. And as John makes clear in Revelation 12 and 20, the dragon symbolically represents Satan/the Adversary (and thus represents the same being by whom Christ was tried following his forty days in the wilderness).

Thus, what we find being prophesied in Rev. 13:1-8 is that Satan is going to give worldwide authority to the ruler of the final world kingdom. And since this state of affairs will be perfectly consistent with the fact that God has (and always will have) absolute authority and sovereignty, so all of the verses in which God’s sovereignty over the kingdoms of the earth is affirmed are perfectly consistent with the view that Satan does, in fact, have the degree of authority that he claimed to have had when he was trying Christ (and that he is going to give it to someone who will accept it from him at some future time).

Objection: According to what Christ told the Sadducees, those who will be resurrected to enjoy eonian life in the kingdom of God will be “equal to messengers” (see, for example, Luke 20:34-36). But if the titles “Satan” and “the Adversary” refer primarily to a being who belongs to the same general category of spiritual, superhuman beings as Michael and Gabriel (both of whom are celestial messengers), then wouldn’t this mean that we’ll be able to sin in the kingdom of God after we’re made immortal?

Response: Let’s first consider what Christ said in his response to the Sadducees. In Luke 20:34-36 (CLNT), we read that Christ declared the following:

“The sons of this eon are marrying and are taking out in marriage. Yet those deemed worthy to happen upon that eon and the resurrection from among the dead are neither marrying nor taking out in marriage. For neither can they still be dying, for they are equal to messengers, and are the sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.”

Any time we read of “messengers” (or “angels”) in Scripture, the question that every student of Scripture should ask themselves is, “whose messengers?” For any messengers referred to in Scripture are always the messengers of someone else (or, to put it another way, there are no messengers referred to in Scripture who are not the messengers of someone else).

For example, in Psalm 91:11, 103:20 and 148:2 we read the following:

"For [Yahweh] will command his messengers concerning you to guard you in all your ways."

"Bless Yahweh, O you his messengers, you mighty ones who do his word, obeying the voice of his word!"

"Praise him, all his messengers; praise him, all his hosts!"

And in Hebrews 1:6-7 we read the following:

Now, whenever He may again be leading the Firstborn into the inhabited earth, He is saying: And worship Him, all the messengers of God! And, indeed, to the messengers He is saying, “Who is making His messengers blasts, And His ministers a flame of fire.”

Notice the expressions, “all the messengers of God,” “[God’s] messengers,” and “[God’s] ministers.” It is crystal clear whose messengers the inspired writers had in mind when they referred to “the messengers” in these verses. And, it should be noted, God’s messengers are also Christ’s messengers (Matt. 13:41; 16:27; 24:31), of whom Michael is the chief messenger or “archangel” (Jude 1:9; Rev. 12:7). And I submit that the same messengers referred to in the above verses as “the messengers of God” are the messengers whom Christ had in mind when he declared what he did to the Sadducees concerning those in the resurrection being “equal to messengers.”

That Christ had in mind God’s messengers is confirmed from Matthew’s account of his response to the Sadducees. There, we read that those who will be taking part in the resurrection of the righteous will be neither “marrying nor taking in marriage, but are as messengers of God in heaven” (Matt. 22:30). It should be noted that, even in those manuscripts in which the words “of God” are omitted (and which instead read “messengers in heaven”), it’s still implied that the “messengers in heaven” whom Christ had in mind are God’s messengers (a point which even the objector would most likely concede).

But are the messengers of God – i.e., the messengers who we’re told are “obeying the voice of [God’s] word” (and who are said to be “ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation”) – the only messengers of whom we read in Scripture? No. In fact, Paul’s reference to “the chosen messengers” (or “the elect angels”) in 1 Tim. 5:21 implies that there are some messengers who are not “chosen” or “elect.” And elsewhere in Scripture, we read of certain messengers who are most assuredly not members of the messengers of God in heaven who are “obeying the voice of God’s word” and serving for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation. For example, in Matthew 25:41 Christ referred to another category of messengers:

Then shall He be declaring to those also at His left, “Go from Me, you cursed, into the fire eonian, made ready for the Adversary and his messengers.”

These messengers of the Adversary are referred to again in Revelation 12:7-9, as follows:

And a battle occurred in heaven. Michael and his messengers battle with the dragon, and the dragon battles, and its messengers. And they are not strong enough for him, neither was their place still found in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, the ancient serpent called Adversary and Satan, who is deceiving the whole inhabited earth. It was cast into the earth, and its messengers were cast with it.

Besides the messengers of Satan/the Adversary who are referred to in the above verses, we also read of certain “sinning messengers” who, unlike those who will be involved in the future battle referred to in Rev. 12:7, are presently imprisoned and awaiting future judgment. These imprisoned messengers are referred to in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6 as follows:

For if God spares not sinning messengers, but thrusting them into the gloomy caverns of Tartarus, gives them up to be kept for chastening judging…

Besides, messengers who keep not their own sovereignty, but leave their own habitation, He has kept in imperceptible bonds under gloom for the judging of the great day.

These sinning messengers were, I believe, previously referred to in 1 Pet. 3:19-20. In these verses we read that, after Christ was “vivified in spirit” (i.e., after he was resurrected), he went to “the spirits in jail also,” and heralded “to those once stubborn, when the patience of God awaited in the days of Noah while the ark was being constructed…” We know that these “spirits in jail” to whom Christ heralded are not humans, because (1) the humans who were alive on the earth in the days of Noah are dead, (2) dead humans are not “spirits,” and (3) the dead are unconscious.

Some have attempted to identify the “sinning messengers” referred to in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6 with certain deceased human beings. According to one theory, Peter and Jude had in mind the people who perished in the judgment associated with the rebellion led by Korah, Dathan and Abiram (as recorded in Numbers 16; cf. Jude 11). Another theory is that the “sinning messengers” in view are the men who were sent by Moses to spy out the land of Canaan, and who brought up a bad report of the land (Numbers 13-14). However, neither those who took part in Korah’s rebellion nor the men who gave a bad report of the land are referred to as “angels” or “messengers” in either the Hebrew Scriptures or the Septuagint translation. Nor are the people who were involved in either event said to have “left their own habitation.” On the other hand, if Peter and Jude had wanted to refer to certain sinful beings who belong to the same general category of non-human, spiritual beings referred to in (for example) Rev. 12:7-9 as “messengers,” we have good reason to believe that they would’ve used the exact terminology that they did, in fact, use.

In any case, we can be sure that the “messengers” referred to in all of the above verses are not members of the same category of messengers referred to by Christ in his response to the Sadducees, and that Christ didn’t, therefore, have these particular messengers in mind when he said what he did concerning the condition of the saints in the resurrection.

Objection: According to what Christ taught his disciples to pray, when the kingdom of God comes, God’s will is going to be done “on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:10). Doesn’t this imply that heaven is a sinless realm in which God’s will is always obeyed (and thus contradicts the idea that there could be wicked, superhuman beings presently active there)?

Response: When the kingdom of God comes and Christ and his saints begin to reign, the wicked will no longer be able to afflict the righteous, or prevent the righteous from enjoying the blessings that God has planned for them during this future time. In contrast with how things generally are today, the righteous will prosper and live in peace and security during the eon to come. But this doesn’t mean that the earth will be a sinless place during this time.

Although much of the outward evidences and expressions of sin during the eon to come will be greatly restrained because of the “iron-club rule” of Christ and the saints, there will still be enemies among the nations (Psalm 72:9; 149:7-9; Micah 5:8-10), and people who must be threatened with punishment in order to secure their outward obedience (Zech. 14:16-19). We also know that, after Satan is released from his thousand-year-long imprisonment, he will incite an insurrection among the nations that will result in multitudes coming against ”the citadel of the saints and the beloved city” (Rev. 20:7-9).

Since the earth is not going to be a sinless place after the kingdom of God has been established, there’s no reason to believe that heaven is, at present, a realm from which wicked beings are wholly absent. However, it’s worth noting that heaven will become a sinless place after the battle referred to in Rev. 12:7-8 occurs (for this battle will result in Satan and his messengers being banished from heaven). And this event – which will involve the kingdom of God being established in heaven (v. 10) – is going to occur at least 3 ½ years before the kingdom of God is established on the earth.

Objection: Since the sun-clothed woman and seven-headed dragon of Revelation 12 are symbolic representations, the “heaven” in which they were seen by John (and in which the battle referred to in Rev. 12:7-8 takes place) should be understood as figurative as well. 

Response: Although the signs that John saw (i.e., the woman clothed with the sun and the seven-headed dragon) are symbolic representations, there’s no reason to believe that the location in which these signs were seen by John (i.e., heaven) is also symbolic. A few considerations indicate that the heaven in which the signs were seen (and in which the battle referred to in Rev. 12:7-8 will occur) is just as literal as the heaven referred to in, for example, Matt. 6:10. For example, in Revelation 11:15 and 19, the heaven of which we read is undoubtedly a real location that is above the earth and inhabited by real, heavenly beings. Similarly, the heaven of which we read in chapter twelve refers to the realm in which God and Christ sit enthroned, and in which the holy messengers reside (Rev. 12:5, 10, 12; cf. 13:6). It is in this heaven that John saw the signs that we find described in this chapter, and it is here that the battle referred to in Rev. 12:7-8 will take place.

Moreover, even though the signs seen by John are symbolic representations, they are nonetheless symbolic representations of real, living individuals who will be involved in real events that will be occurring in real locations. And a clear distinction is made in chapter twelve between prophesied events that will be occurring on the earth and events that will be occurring in heaven. For example, it’s clear that the events involving the people represented by “the sun-clothed woman” (i.e., Israel) will be occurring on the earth. After the woman brings forth the male son (and the child is subsequently “snatched away to God and to his throne”), we read that “the woman fled into the wilderness, there where she has a place made ready by God, that there they may be nourishing her a thousand two hundred sixty days” (Rev. 12:5-6).

In contrast with the future events involving those represented by “the woman,” the being represented by “the dragon” is going to be involved in events that will be occurring both on the earth and in heaven. For it is immediately after we’re told of the woman fleeing into the wilderness to be nourished for 3 ½ years that we read of a future event occurring in heaven that will involve “Michael and his messengers” (who we know to be heavenly beings) battling “the dragon and its messengers.” This heavenly battle will, of course, result in Satan and his messengers losing their place in heaven, and being cast out of heaven and into the earth (v. 8-9). Thus we read in v. 12 that the “loud voice in heaven” declares the following: “Therefore, make merry, ye heavens, and those tabernacling in them! Woe to the land and the sea, for the Adversary descended to you having great fury, being aware that brief is the season that he has.” And in v. 13 we read, “And when the dragon perceived that it was cast into the earth, it persecutes the woman who brought forth the male.”

Just as the earth is clearly the location where the events involving those represented by “the woman” (Israel) will be occurring, so heaven is clearly the location in which the events involving the “the dragon” (Satan) will first be occurring. Thus, we have just as much reason to believe that the being referred to as “Satan” and “the Adversary” in Rev. 12 (and Rev. 20) is a superhuman, spiritual being (like Michael, the chief messenger) as we have reason to believe that those represented by the sun-clothed woman are mortal, earth-dwelling humans.

Objection: That which is represented by the “dragon” in Revelation should be understood as a political (or religious) institution rather than a superhuman, spiritual being (or a group of such beings).

Response: Political and religious institutions do not exist apart from (and must therefore be understood as essentially including and comprised of) individual persons. And in accord with what we read in Dan. 7, “the wild beast” referred to in Revelation can be understood as representing the final Gentile kingdom – and, by extension, its representative ruler – that will have dominion over the earth before Christ returns at the end of this eon. It is, specifically, the final form of the “fourth kingdom” referred to in Daniel 7:23. Keeping this fact in mind, John makes it clear that the dragon is distinct from “the wild beast” of which we read in chapter thirteen of Revelation. Not only are they clearly distinguished, but their relationship is made clear in Rev. 13:2: “To [the wild beast] the dragon gave its own power and throne, along with great authority.”

Thus, the being who is represented by the dragon – i.e., the Adversary and Satan (Rev. 12:9; 20:2) – not only possesses his “own power and throne, along with great authority,” but will empower and give his authority to the kingdom and ruler represented by the “wild beast.” The dragon, therefore, does not represent the earthly kingdom itself; it must be understood as symbolic of the adversarial being(s) who will be behind the political opposition to and persecution of the saints prior to Christ’s return. And the fact that the being represented by the dragon is presently a heavenly being – and will not be banished from this realm until after losing a battle with other heavenly beings (i.e., Michael and his messengers) – is further evidence that, in contrast with the two “beasts” referred to in Revelation 13, the dragon does not represent an earthly political and/or religious institution (and its representative political/religious rulers).

Objection: Couldn’t “the chief of this world” to whom Christ referred in John 12:31, 14:30 and 16:11 be a reference to Jesus himself (with Jesus simply referring to himself in the third person)?

Response: Even if Jesus was referring to himself as “the chief of this world” in these verses, it wouldn’t undermine the position that Satan is as a superhuman spiritual being possessing a relatively great degree of authority over the world and its kingdoms. However, I believe that “the chief of this world” is most likely a reference to Satan (and that Christ was therefore not referring to himself in the third person in these verses).

Throughout much of John’s account, the term “world” refers to human society as it exists during this present wicked eon, and thus as a realm characterized by sin, unbelief and falsehood (John 3:19; 7:7; 14:17; 15:18, 19; 16:20; 17:25). The same negative view of the world is presented in John’s first letter as well (see, for example, 1 John 2:15-17; 3:1, 13; 4:4-5; 5:4, 19). Several times in John’s account, Christ declared that he and his disciples were “not of this world” (John 8:23; 15:19 17:14-16; notice also how, in 17:15, Christ associated “the wicked one” with this world, but not he and his disciples).

Moreover, in John 19:36 we read that Jesus declared to Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My deputies, also, would have contended, lest I should be given up to the Jews. Yet now is My kingdom not hence." Why isn’t Christ’s kingdom “of this world?” Answer: Well, according to 1 John 5:19, “the whole world is lying in the wicked one.” In accord with this fact, we also read in 1 John 2:17 that “the world is passing by, and its desire, yet he who is doing the will of God is remaining for the eon.”

So I’m not sure it makes sense to believe that Jesus is “the chief of this world” when he himself declared that he is “not of this world, that his kingdom is “not of this world.” Since this world and its desire “is passing by” (and thus will not be “remaining for the eon”) – and since “the whole world is lying in the wicked one” – it makes more sense to me to understand “the chief of this world” as a reference to the wicked one himself (i.e., Satan). That is, it makes more sense to me that “the chief of this world” is the same spiritual being to whom Paul referred to as “the chief of the jurisdiction of the air, the spirit now operating in the sons of stubbornness” (Eph. 2:2).

Moreover, notice how, in John 14:30, Christ declared that the chief of this world “is coming” (not “coming away” or “departing”). It wouldn’t make sense for Christ to refer to himself – even in the third person – as “coming” anywhere at that time, when he hadn’t yet gone anywhere (although Christ went on to say in 14:31, “We may be going hence,” and also stated in John 16:28 that he was “going to the Father”). It seems to me that Christ was referring to someone who was not, at that moment, in their presence, but who was approaching (and would soon be present). But do we have any evidence that Satan was “coming” (and would soon be in Christ’s presence)? Yes.

Earlier, we read that, at the end of their dinner, Satan entered Judas (John 13:27; Luke 22:3). Judas – now indwelled by Satan – then departed from Jesus’ presence. And later, in John 18:3, we read that “Judas, then, getting a squad and deputies of the chief priests and Pharisees, is coming there with lanterns and torches and weapons.” Since it’s reasonable to believe that Judas was still indwelled by Satan at this time, it would make sense for Christ to have referred to Satan (and not himself) as “coming” in John 14:30.

---

[1] In the case of the seven-eyed, seven-horned “Lambkin,” for example, the immediate context makes it clear that the primary individual being represented is Jesus Christ (who, when represented by the “Lambkin” symbol, is consistently referred to as “it”). However, we’re also told that the seven horns and eyes of the Lambkin represent “the seven spirits of God, commissioned for the entire earth” (Rev. 5:6). These seven spirits of God were first represented by “seven torches of fire” which John saw “burning before the throne” (Rev. 4:5), and are later referred to as “the seven messengers who stand before God” (Rev. 8:2; cf. Luke 1:19). Their inclusion in the “Lambkin” symbol is, evidently, due to the fact that these spirits/messengers will play a key role in executing the judgments associated with the opening of the seven-sealed scroll by Christ (who, by virtue of his sacrificial death, is revealed to be the only created being worthy of opening the scroll and breaking its seal; see Rev. 5).

[2] It should be noted that if John wasn’t identifying the serpent with Satan in Rev. 12:9 and 20:2, then John was using a metaphor. That is, John would’ve been saying that Satan (the being who was symbolically represented as a “great dragon” in his visions) is, in some sense, like – i.e., is characteristically similar to – “the ancient serpent.”