The Present of the Future
"they are to rule as kings over the earth"

Many translations of Revelation 5:9–10 render the final clause in a future sense (“they will rule over the earth” or “they are to rule”), including the NWT and its Russian editions. However, the Greek verb βασιλεύουσιν appears in the present active indicative.

On what grammatical or contextual basis is a future sense preferred here, rather than understanding the verse as describing an inaugurated or present reign?

​

​

​

1. The Greek text itself (Revelation 5:9–10)

​

Key clause (v.10):

καὶ ἐποίησας αὐτοὺς τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν βασιλείαν καὶ ἱερεῖς,
καὶ βασιλεύουσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς

​

Literal, word-for-word:

“and you made them to our God a kingdom and priests,
and they are reigning upon the earth”

​

Let’s isolate the critical verb:

βασιλεύουσιν

​

• present active indicative

• 3rd person plural

• from βασιλεύω (“to reign, rule as king”)

​

There is no future marker here.
No auxiliary.
No modal.
No temporal particle.

 

Grammatically, it is present tense.

​

​

2. Why many translations render it as future

​

This is not because Greek demands it.
It is because translators make a contextual-theological decision, not a grammatical one.

​

They reason:

• Revelation later speaks of future reigning (Rev 20, Rev 22)

• Therefore, Rev 5:10 must point forward

​

So they translate:

• “they will reign”

• “they are to rule”

​

This is interpretive harmonization, not literal translation.

​

The NWT English chooses:

 

“they are to rule”

​

That phrasing quietly moves the verb into a prospective sense, even though the Greek verb itself is not future.

​

I noticed:

• Russian NWT editions are even clearer in pointing forward

• This shows the choice is doctrinally cautious, not linguistically forced

​

​

3. What the Greek actually allows (and does NOT require)

​

What Greek allows:

• Present tense can describe:

  • current activity

  • ongoing function

  • inaugurated reality

  • status already conferred

​

What Greek does not require here:

• a future-only meaning

• postponement until Revelation 20

• invisibility of present reign

​

So grammatically, the phrase can naturally mean:

 

“they are reigning upon the earth”

—not necessarily in final form, but in real function.

​

​

4. Why the present tense makes sense in Revelation 5

​

Look at the setting carefully.

Revelation 5 is not describing the future millennium.
It is describing:

• the Lamb having already been slaughtered

• the Lamb already standing

• the Lamb already receiving authority

• the scroll already taken from the right hand

​

This is an inauguration scene, not a conclusion scene.

​

So the sequence is:

1. You made them a kingdom and priests (aorist – completed act)

2. And they are reigning upon the earth (present – resulting function)

​

This is exactly how Greek often works:

• aorist → confers status

• present → describes current operation of that status

​

​

5. What “reigning on the earth” means here (without overreach)

​

Now we must be careful.

​

Present tense does not require:

• political control

• visible domination

• public enforcement

​

It can mean:

• authorized rule

• priestly-kingly function

• mediation and judgment authority exercised quietly

​

This fits perfectly with:

• “Kingdom in your midst”

• presence before appearance

• priesthood operating during formation

​

So the present reign is:

• real

• authorized

• functional

• but not yet imposed universally

​

​

6. Why later Revelation still speaks of future reign

​

There is no contradiction.

​

Revelation uses layered time:

• Revelation 5 → reign inaugurated

• Revelation 12–14 → reign contested

• Revelation 20 → reign imposed

• Revelation 22 → reign consummated

​

Same reign.
Different phases.

Greek present tense fits the first phase perfectly.

​

​

7. Why this aligns with temple–priesthood framework

​

This is crucial.

​

In temple terms:

• priests begin serving before glory fills the house

• kingship begins before enemies are subdued

• authority exists before visibility

​

So Revelation 5 is saying:

 

They are already functioning as a kingdom of priests
and already exercising reign on earth
in priestly, mediatorial, and judicial ways.

​

This is presence-phase reigning, not appearance-phase ruling.

​

​

8. A careful, defensible conclusion

​

We can say—without exaggeration and without violating Greek:

 

Revelation 5:10 grammatically allows, and contextually supports, a present reigning that precedes final visible rule.

​

Translations that move it entirely into the future:

• are not wrong doctrinally

• but they flatten the inaugurated phase

• and obscure the reality of current priestly kingship

​

​

Summary:

“The Greek in Revelation 5:10 actually uses the present tense, which suggests that the priestly kingship begins at the Lamb’s enthronement, even though its full public expression comes later.”

​