BACK


(4) Kings did not do homage to Christ when he came here as a man amongst men. Herod's statement that he would come and do him homage was no doubt a lie as his subsequent conduct in killing the children in Bethlehem showed, apart from the warning to the wise men not to return to him (Matthew 2:12).


It is to be noted that the narrative is not made to agree by the Gospel writer with the prophetic scriptures. This tends to confirm that the story was not an artificial concoction. Apart from this, the Gospel writer does not say that the story fulfilled scripture, although he continually does regarding other episodes in the life of Christ (see for example Matthew 2:15). What the story does teach us is that wise men did when Christ came here in humiliation what kings will do in a coming day when he comes in glory.

Today every knee should bow to Jesus (Philippians 2:10); in a coming day every shall bow (Romans 14:11). Christendom goes on as if Christ is in honour here now and this may well have something to do with the fact that they have mixed up the wise men with the kings of prophecy.


What is the difference between Christ's first and second coming ?

The point that a difference has to be made between Christ's coming in humiliation and his coming in glory has wide application. In a coming day "the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf be unstopped; then shall the lame [man] leap as a hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing" (Isaiah 35:5 & 6). What we have in Christ's ministry of healing are samples of what will take place in a general way in a coming day. The writer to the Hebrews calls the works that Christ and the apostles did the "works of power of [the] age to come" (Hebrews 6:5). Clearly we are not living in the age to come yet though we may speak of it (Hebrews 2:5). It has sometimes been asked; "Do we speak of it ?"; it is clear that Paul did (Acts 28:23 & 31).


Why is the distinction between Christ's first and second coming hidden in prophecy ?

It may be asked why Christ's first and second coming are not clearly distinguished in the Old Testament prophetic scriptures. The reason I believe is that when Christ came amongst men he came to be received by them. The way was open for him to be received and, if he had, he would have taken power and reigned. However, he was not generally received, though individuals did believe on him (John 1:11-13). God with his foreknowledge knew that he would not be generally received, but so far as man was concerned this was not a foregone conclusion. However, when he was rejected by the religious and civil authorities the force of the prophecies that spoke of his death at the hands of men became apparent. However, even after he had passed through death and ascended to glory the way of repentance was still open and this would have enabled Christ to return and reign (Acts 3:19-21), but although there was a harvest for God (the 3,000 and 5,000 at the beginning of Acts) the Jews generally did not repent (Acts 22:18). However, in a day to come there will be a general repentance of God's earthly people (Zechariah 12:8-14) when God intervenes to save and then reign over them in the person of his Son, Jesus Christ.


Conclusion

It is significant that it was a star that heralded the birth of Christ; he is the bright [and] morning star, the harbinger of day (Revelation 22:16). In a day to come he will arise as the Sun of righteousness (Malachi 4:2). The wise men (magi) were simply foreign individuals who acknowledged Christ in private before the time when he will publicly appear in power and be recognised by the world at large.


Written March 1999
Revised January 2001


NEXT