“The World to Come”
It is crucial to read Hebrews 2:5 very carefully. In it the writer states,
“For He has not put the world to come, of which we speak, in subjection to angels.”
The angels right now minister to the heirs of salvation” (Heb. 1:14 cf. 1:7). In “the world to come” (Heb. 2:5); of which the Son is the heir (Heb. 1:2), in seems as though the Son will be much more prominent, the coming age being subject to Him (“we do not yet see all things put under him.” – Heb. 2:8c).
Does this mean that a major theme of the book of Hebrews is “the world to come”? Has he been speaking about it already and we missed it? And what does the author mean by the designation? To answer the second question first I do not think there can be much objection to the view that it refers to the coming kingdom after the return of Christ to earth. It may be viewed by some as speaking of the millennial kingdom and by others as the new heavens and earth. My own view is that it has both in mind as it savors of leaving this present aeon behind forever. This possible theme is alluded to in Hebrews 1:8, 13, and we should be willing to count Jesus being called “the heir of all things” in Hebrews 1:2, and the mention of inheriting salvation in verse 14 as possible references to the new aeon. Hebrews 1:4 where it says “He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name” than the angels also suggest it since the “inheritance” may be seen as this-worldly and still to come. Hebrews 1:5 quotes from Psalm 2:7, which in David certainly refers to the messianic kingdom (“Yet I have set My King on My holy hill of Zion.” – Psa. 2:6).
Then there is Hebrews 1:6 and its possible second coming reference: “when He again [pallin]brings the firstborn into the world” as in NKJV, NASB, NET, Westcott.[1] If these verses point to the coming kingdom – and there is more than a suggestion that they do – then the chances of it being a subject matter of Hebrews looks promising. And this reintroduces the divine covenants.
Right after the phrase “the world to come” appears the writer appeals to Psalm 8, a psalm which speaks of the reason God made man. Man may have been made “a little lower than the angels” (Psa. 8:5; Heb. 2:7), but to obtain “glory and honor.” As a race we have not obtained anything approaching glory and honor, but Jesus has (Heb. 1:4, 8, 13; 2:9). In citing Psalm 8:5-6 Hebrews is explaining how Jesus has paved the way for those He has saved to inherit the dominion and glory planned for them. Hence, we read the contrast, “we do not yet see all things put under him. But we see Jesus…” (Heb. 2:8-9). Jesus brings “many sons to glory” according to Hebrews 2:10. He gives “salvation” to man (Heb. 1:14; 2:3, 10. Cf. 9:28[2]) but all things are rightfully His (Heb. 2:10 – “for whom are all things and by whom are all things”).
The reference to “the seed of Abraham” in Hebrews 2:16 appears to fit Israel more than the church[3]; an impression which is strengthened in Hebrews 2:17 when it says that Jesus as “a faithful and merciful high priest” makes “propitiation for the sins of the people”; which would be a most peculiar way of talking about the Jew/Gentile church.
Please do not misunderstand me here. I am not saying that Jesus is not the High Priest of the Church. God forbid. That would undo my entire teaching about the New covenant being for the Church as well as for Israel. I am simply trying to point out the somewhat uncomfortable fact that Hebrews is written to, well, Hebrews! We need to take that seriously.
Getting back to the first question I posed above, namely, is “the world to come” a major theme in the book? – I think the Psalm 8 reference in Hebrews 2 reinforces this. The data looks like this:
- Christ is “Appointed heir of all things” (Heb. 1:2)
- He has “obtained an inheritance” (Heb. 1:4)
- Psalm 2:7 in its context refers to the reign of Messiah (Heb. 1:5).
- If “again” connects to the verb “to bring in” the reference is to the second advent (Heb. 1:6).
- A throne, a scepter, and a kingdom are mentioned in relation to His incarnation (Heb. 1:8)
- Psalm 110:1 referring to the Davidic covenant is cited (Heb. 1:13)
- The author expressly says that he is speaking about “the world to come.” (Heb. 2:5)
- He then goes to Psalm 8, which is about man’s dominion over creation. (Heb. 2:6-8).
And we have not yet looked into the repeated use of the verb “rest” in Hebrews 3 and 4.
The “Rest” of God and the World to Come in Hebrews
Hebrews 3 speaks of God’s “rest” twice in verses 11 and 18 and in both cases, it refers to the rest for Israel in the promised land after their wilderness wanderings (Heb. 3:8-19).[4] This is the illustration (I did not say “type”) that will be employed in chapter 4 for the “rest” (katapausis – a beautiful word denoting a ceasing from toil; repose). So, in the first verse of Hebrews 4 we read,
Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it. – Hebrews 4:1.
The main commentaries all associate this “rest” with going to heaven but let us allow the author to say what he wants to say. The first thing I want to call your attention to is the strong tone of the warning that is penned. Not to get technical, but the word is an aorist passive conditional (subjunctive) of phobeo and is rightly translated “let us fear lest” in the NKJV. There is a chance that some of those addressed will not make it into “rest.” What was said above about the influence of the theme of “the world to come” in Hebrews should be applied here as it flows out from that argument. It is the “therefore” of what was said in Hebrews 1-3. Notice next in Hebrews 4:2 that the word “gospel” is used to describe the message of hope that was preached to “us” as well as to “them.” That is, the Israelites in the wilderness wanderings heard a gospel, but what was it? It was that God was taking them to and land flowing with milk and honey (Exod. 3:17; Lev. 20:22-24; Num. 14:7-8; Deut. 26:9; Jer. 11:5). Apart from a presumption (understandable as it may be) that this is applied to the church in Pauline terms why would we think that the “gospel” in Hebrews 4:2 is equivalent Paul’s gospel?
The next few verses take some effort to get one’s head around. The basic message is that although those unbelievers in the wilderness did not enter into rest (Heb. 4:2, 3, 5, 6, 8), there yet is a rest that some will indeed enter (Heb. 4:3, 6, 9). This rest is likened to the Sabbath day (“the seventh day” – Heb. 4:4), and Yahweh’s own cessation from His work of creation (Heb. 4:10).
I grant that my resistance to applying all of this to the Christian church and accommodating it within Paul’s doctrine is risks disorienting the reader, but please stick with me. You see, as well as being a day of rest (not necessarily of worship), what is special about the Jewish sabbath? The answer is found in Ezekiel:
Moreover I also gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me, that they might know that I am the LORD who sanctifies them. – Ezekiel 20:12.
I am the LORD your God: Walk in My statutes, keep My judgments, and do them; ‘hallow My Sabbaths, and they will be a sign between Me and you, that you may know that I am the LORD your God.’ – Ezekiel 20:19-20.
The sabbath was a God-given sign for Israel. Of what was it a sign? The author of Hebrews links God’s “sabbath” rest with the future “rest for the people of God” in Hebrews 4:9. Very interestingly, it just so happens that Ezekiel 20 goes over the exact same ground that the author of Hebrews is covering! And Ezekiel 20 is extremely covenantal. Seven times in the chapter Yahweh mentions an “oath” that He took about the promised land. After rehearsing the history of the people’s rebellion and excoriating them for their heathen practices and abominations the prophet expresses a word of hope for the future of Israel in Ezekiel 20:33-44.[5]
Then you shall know that I am the LORD, when I bring you into the land of Israel, into the country for which I raised My hand in an oath to give to your fathers. – Ezekiel 20:42.
Just like the book of Hebrews the prophet Ezekiel brings together the land promise and the sabbath sign (Heb. 4:8-10).
Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to the same example of disobedience. – Hebrews 4:11
Notice how the author is pressing his readers toward something. They have not achieved it. Moreover, there is the threat that they may not achieve it. It is hard to place this doctrine next to Paul’s doctrine of justification without feeling the disparity. Again, what is this “rest” of which the author speaks? He says they must exert themselves – spoudazo (“hasten, labor diligently”) to be certain of entering it. This is a rather heavy-handed way of promoting progressive sanctification if it is aimed at saints in the church hoping for heaven. But heaven has not come into view. Everything points to the fact that “the world to come” is what this coming “rest” is about; that is, the Kingdom of God. The important passages are Hebrews 1:2, 6, 8, 12, 14; 2:3, 5, 8; 6:5, 12; 9:28; 10:13, 35-37; 11:10, 13-16, 39; 12:22, 28; 13:14.[6] But perhaps the impression will disappear?
[1] Coincidently, Psalm 2:8 refers to Yahweh giving His Son “the nations for Your inheritance.”
[2] If we relate “salvation” to the “rest” of which the writer often speaks there are hints that it refers in Hebrews as much to the kingdom as it does to the saving of the soul.
[3] There is no argument for how believing Gentiles are Abraham’s seed such as one finds in Galatians 3.
[4] In Hebrews 3:2-6 the writer speaks of Moses and his “house”, which is Israel, and Jesus and His own “house.” Lane observes, “Moses stands among the covenant people and the whole retinue of God as ‘honored servant’.” – William L. Lane, Hebrews 1 – 8, Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991, 78. Moses occupies an exalted station in Judaism (Ibid, 74), but he is still only a “servant.” Jesus, on the other hand is the “Son” and the people of God that He is over are His own house. Although in Jesus’ case the “house” could be the church, it must be conceded that in this context it could just as well be redeemed Israel.
[5] See also The Words of the Covenant: Old Testament Expectation, 284-285.
[6] These passages are seen as important Kingdom texts by Hutson Smelley, Better with Jesus: A Mission 119 Guide Through Hebrews, self-published, 2015, 5.
12 comments On Hebrews: Another Reading (Pt. 2)
Dr does not Paul’s statement to us in Eph 2 wherein he states to us Gentiles that at one time we were outside of the covenants and promises, and in fact were children of wrath; does this not imply that the saved Gentile is no longer outside but is now partakers in? It seems that to keep separate these two the church and Israel is to miss the point of Abraham’s promise to make of him a multitude of nations, and also to miss the point that Jesus made in John 10 where He said: I have other sheep and them I must bring also that there be one flock and one shepherd over the flock. Is this not why Paul called us one new man? One with the saints? Is there ever a place in Paul’s writings to which we can point where he makes a distinction between Israel’s saints and us as Gentile saints? I’m asking this because I have been unable to find that distinction. In Romans he makes clear that what we have received belonged to Israel. He even stated his desire to give up his own salvation if they could only be saved as he and we have been. How can we then continue to expect that when they are saved that they will not be one with us? And if we are now partakers in the covenants and promises that we were at one time outside looking in upon does that not then mean that we will partake in the kingdom with them to rule with Christ over the nations?
Jerry,
You are operating from a mindset wherein every counter argument (e.g., the covenant oaths which you make into a wax nose) are interpreted through Paul’s epistles to the Church. If Paul writes “Church-theology” then he must be interpreted within those confines without ignoring e.g., “Israel-theology.”
I cannot make you see what you don’t wish to see.
Hum, interesting. I guess anyone can play that game. I know that there is a church started by Jesus. I think if Scripture is correct it began when He was in paradise in the lower regions of the earth, and as Paul implies in Ephesians 4 He led paradise (captivity) captive to that Church from where it had been. All of that seen in Scriptures teaching. On Pentecost the church was added to. Christ died for the sins of the whole world, but only those of the world accepting of that gift will be in Him and see the resurrection. Paul makes that clear in 1 Cor 15 where he is teaching on the resurrection. One man Adam brought sun to this world. One man Christ Jesus brought victory over sin unto the resurrection to eternal life. What about any of this should I see differently? This is Scripture laying out God’s truth. Paul began as a Student of Israel’s theology. He fully understood that he was lost until he was found by Israel’s messiah. Why else would he say this: Romans 9:30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith;
Romans 9:31 but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at [that] law.
Romans 9:32 Why? Because [they did] not [pursue it] by faith, but as though [it were] by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone,
Romans 9:33 just as it is written, “BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.” (NASB1995)
You imply that I am a twister of the Scriptures. But you must explain where I have done so. Paul explains who the true Jews are. They are change in their hearts just as we are.
By faith in Christ Jesus and His finished work are we and The remnant from Israel saved.
I am certainly not accusing you of twisting Scripture. I don’t agree with your interpretations because, as per your comments above, you use Church epistles to prove Church theology and then expand it through the whole Bible. But you ignore God’s covenant oaths (or alter them). Jews and Gentiles are one in the Church, but Israel has a future as a nation. E.g., you might read my position of the triadic people of God here:https://drreluctant.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/christ-at-the-center-pt-5a/
I tried the link, but takes me to the musings of a reluctant Dispensationalist? So help me understand your reluctance?
I do not think dispensations drive the Bible’s storyline. I do not think they are hermeneutically solid nor theologically primary. Also, Dispensationalists generally have not produced academic work of the caliber or number as CT’s. I believe God’s covenants are the basis for sound biblical theology.
Perhaps you can help me understand just how you see these two verses playing out for the Church. Thanks
Ephesians 2:12 [remember] that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
Ephesians 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. (NASB1995)
Well, he is writing to Gentiles who previously were not included in the proclamation of the Mosaic covenant or the good news (e.g., Matt. 10:5). Now that the Gospel is preached to them they are brought near to the provisions formerly only known to Israel. In the Church there is neither Jew nor Greek, but “one new man” (Eph. 2:15).
As I have shown before the Church (which was future from the perspective of Matt. 16:18) could not exist prior to Christ’s resurrection and the descent of the Holy Spirit; hence its “newness” and the fact that it was a mystery not previously known (Eph. 3:8-10; Col. 1:26-27).
Ok, I know that you are Dr Reluctant, so you are open to legitimate discourse. So help me understand then about Old Testament saints and paradise. We know that Jesus promised the thief that he would be with Him in paradise not in three days or after the resurrection of Jesus, but on that very day. So it’s reasonable to believe that the thief was a Jew. And certainly Jesus was dying for the whole world. He had not yet resurrected so based on Jesus’ telling of Lazarus and the rich man, then paradise was where the saved went before the resurrection. Abraham was waiting for their souls in paradise. So help me to understand how paradise was in Heaven when Paul was caught up to the third heaven? Does this not imply that Jesus at His resurrection delivered the first fruits (those in paradise) to the father in heaven after having preached to every soul on both sides of the belly within the earth; even as Peter states in 1 Peter? So are we not one new man with the saints of all the world for whom Christ died?
Ephesians 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ). 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: (KJV)
Are you Dr Reluctant absolutely sure that we are not made part of a church that Christ began with the saints located in Paradise, for on Pentecost there were about 3000 souls added to the church? Help me to understand where these facts are true. Yes this creates other questions which must be answered, but Scripture has those answers.
But you are placing the burden of truth on the wrong person. OT saints who went to heaven after Christ arose are nowhere said to be part of the Church. Eph. 3:4 is written to the Church and simply declares that Gentiles are NOW fellow heirs with Jews of the promise in Christ (the Church).
I do not have to reconfigure the oaths of God in the OT like you do. I simply assert what the NT asserts regarding the newness of the Church. You believe the OT saints were added to the Church but you have not produced any scriptural proof of it; just texts which speak of Jews and Gentiles now being in one body. That is not enough brother. You are making big claims concerning the promises to national Israel being reinterpreted in the Church (or it certainly seems so). Therefore, you have the burden of proof.
I believe that in past comments on your site that I have given that proof, but I will attempt to clarify it. In Isaiah chapters 53 and 54 there is given us the O.T. Description of Israel’s and we could even say mankind’s Messiah dying in Chapter 53, causing Israel’s widowhood in chapter 54, leading to a later remarriage to her redeemer later in chapter 54. Then there is Paul’s I believe conclusive teaching in 1 Corinthians 15 concerning the resurrection, where he makes it clear that there is only one man Christ providing only one way into this future resurrection just as there was only one man Adam through sin entered into all of mankind. In verse 18 he makes clear that he is arguing this resurrection for those who are “in Christ” who are the subjects of this resurrection. So being in Christ is what makes us worthy of resurrection unto eternal life. Our Lord Himself before He established this new Church in Luke 20 when teaching on the resurrection because of the question brought Him by the Sadducees sect of the Jews, told them that if worthy to achieve the resurrection that they would be sons of God just as we are promised in John’s gospel chapter 1. Then again in John 10 when teaching on His being the good Shepherd, He makes. Lear that the sheep fold, which He has come to shepherd constituting His sheep or followers will not only include the believing Jews, but others whom He must bring, that there will be one flock and one Shepherd over the flock. But to me the proof of this understanding is in the New Covenant itself. Jesus’ blood established that Covenant. It was a covenant promised to Israel of which we have been given access through our belief in Him who provides it. All men must come through that covenant including Israel to whom it was promised in The O. T. The only reason they are not presently in that covenant and in fact have been removed from it is their unbelief. But as Paul says not all reside in unbelief. There is the remnant of which he was a part. These truths are a part of why I believe that Paul in Ephesians where he in a mysterious way reveals that paradise, which before was in captivity now has been led captive, and we gentiles who were outside of these covenant promises including the New Covenant, are now one with the saints in these promises brought forth through Abraham’s seed – Israel’s messiah (Christ). Peter said “Thou art the Christ, Son of the living God. That concept was a Jewish concept. We are adopted into what the religious leaders (not all) of Israel rejected. I believe that these scripture passages meet the burden of proof , and have been given us by the Holy Spirit for that very purpose. Lord bless you Paul.