I'm working on a couple projects and am looking for feedback from as many people as possible. Two questions:
In your understanding...
1) What is the kingdom of God?
2) What does it tangibly look like to belong to, participate in, and live/reveal the kingdom of God?
Most good things have been said far too many times and just need to be lived. - Shane ClaibornePost Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 LaughingCraig Laughlin - "thanks" for this post
#1 - I typically answer as "The rule of God" real estate ruled by God is his kingdom. This would include the real estate of our hearts, attitudes, actions as well as God's revelation of himself, the church (to the extent that it is ruled by God) and on and on.
#2 - This is the hard question in my opinion because I'm not entirely sure we can grasp the breadth and depth of God's Kingdom. I think the scope of this question is what we Christians often fight about. That is not to say that there are not "Sheep in wolves clothing" in the body who are not followers of Jesus but I think a lot of disagreement comes out of seeing my "corner" of the kingdom as the most important corner and maybe even excluding your corner of the Kingdom. I think this is where we get a lot of the "How can you be a christian and believe... abc, or do... def, or vote.... xyz.
Maybe the challenge of the living out the kingdom today is to understand and even more, appreciate just how big and diverse it really is. - Just a couple of thoughts.
Fear not those who argue but those who dodge. -- Marie von Ebner-EschenbachPost Thanks / Like - 5 Thanks, 0 Laughing
The Kingdom of God is the antithesis of the empires of the world, which are born of rejection of God (1 Samuel 8) and His rule and authority and love. Which I think is why Jesus is so subversive to the powers and principalities of this world. Love is foreign to empire because empire is based on some measure of oppression. God has always told us that oppression is not His way. We still refuse or are unable to see our oppressiveness.
How do we live it out? We try to do like Jesus. We love and love radically. Radical love requires radical vulnerability, we must open ourselves if we are to love like Jesus. He opened Himself unto death to love us. I think that it begins in relationship, one with the other. This vulnerability and entwining of lives is uncomfortable and scary, therefore we are resistant. But when we can finally overcome our fears and enter into it we have life and life abundantly. I may be wrong or not articulating it very well, but this is what I have this morning.
You can be right or you can be in relationshipPost Thanks / Like - 3 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I believe the kingdom of God is here and now and it will continue to expand as it has been for the last 2000 years, because the living risen Christ is reigning at the father right hand and he is also reigning within the hearts of his people. One day the kingdom will be complete but until then he has empower the church in it mission.see Matt.28:20
Thanks
Larry
Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
answer 1: The phrase "kingdom of God" has become a theological posh way of approving one's theological and ethical agenda. If we like some ethical course, we attach the "kingdom" label and bless it with a text.Originally Posted by Ryan Pugh
answer 2: The "kingdom of God" is a sweeping category that leaves nothing out from the arch of its reign - nothing in heaven or on earth, no human redeemed or otherwise. Many succumb to the errors of reductionism by rightly seeing a corner of truth and then absolutising it in such a way that limits the kingdom to only those "ruled by God" (see Craig's #1). All mankind is within the kingdom whether we like it or not...its equivalent to God's sovereignty (see the parable of wheat and tares or the parable of the fishing net). While "kingdom" is also sometimes used in a restrictive way (ie. unless people are born again they cannot see or enter the kingdom of God), focusing solely on the redeemed results in overlooking the sweeping ways in which God's reign is truly over all. For example, Pol Pot, Hitler, and Stalin, remained all their lives, under the unavoidable aegis of God's sovereign sway. Those who come under the power of God's kingdom are a mixed bag - true disciples and false disciples both. Beware of insisting that God demonstrate dimensions of the kingdom now that he has reserved for the consummation. Beware of assuming that all who are swept into the power of God's kingdom are the children of the kingdom. The power of the kingdom gathers many (Matt. 7:22) into its net that will be cast out in the end because they loved healing and not holiness; they loved power and not purity; they loved wonders and not the will of God.
The kingdom has arrived. The King has come. The King has dealt with sin once for all in the sacrifice of himself. The King sits at the Father's right hand and reigns now until all his enemies are under his feet. The King's righteousness is now already ours by faith. The King's Spirit is now already dwelling in us. The King's holiness is now already being produced in us. The King's joy and peace have now already been given to us. The King's victory over Satan is now already ours as we use the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God. And the King's gifts - the gifts of the Spirit - are now already available for ministry.
Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
So...Preterism?
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
As one who was scared almost out of my wits by the purveyors of speculative futurist eschatology, I'll add a hearty amen to the mention of Preterism!
I had decided that the best thing I could do regarding the cacophony of voices relative to the future tribulation, yada, yada, yada was to just plain stop up my ears and ignore. I had heard way too much in the way of scare tactics, and in almost every instance found this junk to have no foundation in scripture. Still today most every headline will have someone pulling a verse out of context and saying "see I told you so." Interesting to me is that most all of them never did actually "tell us so" with enough precision to allow for accountability. Is this considered a rant?
Well ten or twelve years ago, I noticed a phrase repeated a few times during sermons. "The disciples fully expected Jesus to come during their lifetimes." And I got to thinking and reading, turns out my Pastor was right on the money, they most assuredly did expect to see the Lord, in their time, in fact Jesus told them this directly. And then I go to thinking about some of the crazy claims of the futurists, I got to thinking about the rebuilding of the temple, and I wondered why the first destruction wasn't good enough? I got to thinking about the time of Daniel's trouble and the seventieth week, and I wondered how this got transferred to the Church? And I thought about a lot of passages in a different light than before. Like the one where we will be arrested and brought into the synagog. Synagog? Arrested? In the future? Huh, What? Then (remember this goes back a ways) I found the world wide interweb, and I found that there is a wealth of information available on this, and I found that most of it makes sense. So for me Preterism = Yes! Is there a future seven year time of horror and destruction to be visited upon us? No, nonsense, nothing doing and so glad to be free from this perverted diversion to living in the Kingdom of God!
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison KeillorPost Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I think that both of these combined fits my thoughts on the descriptor. I like Craig's definition, I believe that it accurately describes the Kingdom. While at the same time, I am incredibly leery of those who use this term often. For these folks often are talking about something else. Often they are keen on social justice, and they have co opted the term Kingdom for their use. So, accept my apology if you can, but I am averse to the term and generally my mind is closed just a bit and I tend to squint my eyes and avoid relationships with folks who espouse Kingdom this and kingdom that. Really, the Kingdom is every bit as big as Craig describes! There exist different parts of the body, and the social justice guys really shouldn't claim that their particular call is "The Kingdom" when in fact it is a part. I believe we are called differently, I believe in the value of those called differently that I am, without wishing to adopt their passion and desire. I have my own.
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison KeillorPost Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Can you tell us specifically what this question is responding too? That is, can you flesh it out a bit? Because, I really don't know what you mean here?
There is Partial or Orthodox Preterism which primarily deals on the positive side with what occurred with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70 and on the negative side it primarily deals primarily, even if incidentally with refutation of the Pre--Mil Dispensationalist futurism of all of the Olivet Discourse and related texts.
The there is Full or Consistent Preterism which is really heterodox and says everything including the second coming and general resurrection and judgement have occurred. (Kinda Whackedoodle!)
I must admit I don't know how Full Preterists deal with the kingdom, the only ones I am aware of that reject that the Kingdom is now are the Dispensationalists, whose theology doesn't fit with Wesleyan/Naz theology , so... where are you going with this???
George
"Preach the gospel; if necessary use words" is like saying "feed the poor and; if necessary use food."
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
In general, Jesus main message is about the Kingdom of God. That being the case, it is a phrase we should never abandon. Has it been abused? Really, I don't know any theological term that hasn't.
Did the disciples expect Jesus to return in their lifetime? Yes they did. But He didn't come. I guess the Father is the only one who knows that day after all.
Further, I really don't like the Hal Lindsey stuff, Chiliasm etc. I'm not a Dispensionalist either. And I dislike end time speculations and feel that Revelation was primarily written to address issues in the late 1st century. At the same time, it seems beyond dispute to me that the new heaven and new earth and the final judgement are still to come.
I don't know in what corner that puts me, perhaps I'm merely a HansenistEither way, this seems to make the most sense of the Scriptures and reality to me, and I believe we need to connect both.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 6 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Many of the Preterists I've encountered state that since 70 AD, Christ has ruled spiritually over all of the earth, while still not ruling over the physical world (unless you hold to strict supralapsarianism). One will note, this is a fairly gnostic approach to reality, in any case.
I think that unfortunately, this is the mark of somebody who needs to have things fit into an orderly shape. Our brains will try to make rational sense of random patterns, and there's a definite drive in Christian circles to take all of the prophetic work we see in the bible and make a coherent picture out of them that humans can work by. Preterism definitely is one of these outlooks.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
I'm a panmillenialist. It'll all pan out in the end.In general, Jesus main message is about the Kingdom of God. That being the case, it is a phrase we should never abandon. Has it been abused? Really, I don't know any theological term that hasn't.
Did the disciples expect Jesus to return in their lifetime? Yes they did. But He didn't come. I guess the Father is the only one who knows that day after all.
Further, I really don't like the Hal Lindsey stuff, Chiliasm etc. I'm not a Dispensionalist either. And I dislike end time speculations and feel that Revelation was primarily written to address issues in the late 1st century. At the same time, it seems beyond dispute to me that the new heaven and new earth and the final judgement are still to come.
I don't know in what corner that puts me, perhaps I'm merely a Hansenist
I am the Lone Locust of the Apocalypse! Think of me when you look to the night sky!
True, and yet the Kingdom is expansive. I think that is where the term is abused, whenever it is used in a narrow or focused sense, it is abused. To say that something is a Kingdom principle or to say that something is part of Kingdom living is fine. But when when there is a discussion where folks are called differently, for one to say that their way is "the" Kingdom way is abusive. Should we wish to retain the term, and I'm all for it, then we should at least treat it with the care and respect deserving of such a term.
Certainly you are free to believe this, no problem there. And I agree that the Father was the only one who knew the day that He would return. From my perspective, and from my reading of scripture and history. Yes he did come. Yes the tribulation week is over, yes the seventieth week of Daniel was visited upon the Jews. Yes He did come in power and great glory, yes it was visible, yes there were great signs in the heavens, yes the moon did turn to blood. Yes the people of God were set free from mans grasp on a religion which God has displaced with the incredible sacrifice of His Son. The Jews would sacrifice no longer, God has physically and forcefully stopped their practice.
While I could go on and on, there's no need, for I'm not arguing with you. Every once in a while it just feels good to talk about the wonderful freedom that comes with knowing that Scripture and history tell a completely different story than do the futurists. No gloom and doom nor any trepidation looking forward to a dark period in this planets history for me! And I'm real happy about it!
I'm with you here, I believe that Revelation is a view of 70AD from the perspective of heaven. And yes, I think you know that I don't buy into the late dating of Revelation.
Move to split the question Mr. Chairman? I also believe that the final judgement is indisputably in the future, it just must be. Yet I see the new heaven and new earth as accomplished, the kingdom is here, I see the new city as figurative. But enough of that, I'm not trying to argue.
Best place to be, we cannot inherit our faith by wrote or by agreement with a set of doctrines. We all work out our salvation with fer and trembling, we all must possess our own faith. The author and finisher of our faith writes directly upon our hearts, I believe that His writing is in support of who we are as individuals and according individually to the things that we need to hear from our Father.I don't know in what corner that puts me, perhaps I'm merely a Hansenist
While I resonate with much of what preterists have said or are saying. I came to this before I had heard of them, I'm searching for truth rather than a club membership. One thing is for sure, I do not go so far as the whackadoodle or full preterists, for while I can see some things as simply accomplished, I'm not going to speculate ahead.
As Billy Graham has once said. "I can tell you that for each and every one of us the world will end for us individually and soon, lets worry about that instead of some sort of mass exodus from the planet." (paraphrase, I can't remember the word for word.)
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison Keillor
No doubt!
-Jim
To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.
Garrison Keillor
I guess we know different Preterists. Since I am Reformed, I don't actually know any Full Preterists, Only Partial. Everyone i know is a Kingdom now person, pretty much everyone i read is a kingdom now person, although they may be Post-mil, A-Mil or Historic Pre-Mil. Most of those i associate with are A-mil Kingdom now people, and as a Covenanter the issue you bring up is a non-player as Covenanters are Strong Believers, proponents of the Mediatorial Kingship.
The only issue i am aware of in my circles that seems similar to what you are referring to is the Escondido, or Two Kingdom Theology, which is a problem for those in the OPC and maybe some PCA folks, but most recognize that this theology is a departure from the Historically Reformed position(s).
George
"Preach the gospel; if necessary use words" is like saying "feed the poor and; if necessary use food."
George did you know when Jesus told his disciples that some of them would still be standing when he would come into His kingdom (Matt.16:28) According to John Wesley note and Adam Clark both believe that Jesus was speaking of His Mediatorial Kingships that took place in AD 70. Most people here know that I'm preterist I do believe what the full preterist teaches in fact I have few of there books and one is is by late Southern Baptist evangelist and member of the National Association of Evangelical and the other author is active member of the Evangelical Theological Society. Both of these men do not believe in the second coming of Christ they believe it place in AD 70 the partial pererist believe that Christ came only in Judgement to fulfill a covenant law suit against Jerusalem.
Thanks
Larry
George, would I be correct in asssuming that the only reason Escondido has even a remote connection to theology would be beause of some dispute among some of the good people at Westminster Seminary (I believe a left coast branch of the OP institution in Philly)?
I mean, it's a nice town and welcome pit stop on the way to SD, but theologically significant?
I care very little about the temple. Gracious, even the Jews have been able to keep up their faith for almost 2000 years without the temple and without sacrifices. Guess they weren't all that important after all. All I know is that
hasn't happened yet and whatever people come up with to say He has come, if the above hasn't happened, I don't care. To me, God's rule will start when the above becomes true. Till that day, evil rules and we are merely part of a guerilla movement. The idea that the Church is the Kingdom can only be maintained if one never reads a book of history.21 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
I don't know who you are fighting, but not me. I just know that we are not in the situation God has promised yet, and without living in utter denial, that seems pretty hard to maintain. I'm not even going to bring arguments forward, might as well try to prove that 1+1=2.While I could go on and on, there's no need, for I'm not arguing with you. Every once in a while it just feels good to talk about the wonderful freedom that comes with knowing that Scripture and history tell a completely different story than do the futurists. No gloom and doom nor any trepidation looking forward to a dark period in this planets history for me! And I'm real happy about it!
I presume you need to believe all of the Scriptures were written before AD 70? I'm not sure I'd want to have a belief that would depend on the dating of books.I'm with you here, I believe that Revelation is a view of 70AD from the perspective of heaven. And yes, I think you know that I don't buy into the late dating of Revelation.
Jim, if I would have to believe Rev 21 to be true already, I would be living without any hope in this world. I'd rather die, there'd be nothing to hope for, look forward to. Evil would never be overcome, suffering would never end, death would remain victorious, resurrection denied, God would be a liar.
Perhaps you can understand why such a position would be difficult for me.
I don't believe in the rapture.
But I do believe that one day, "There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain". And I may be a fool, but it seems to me, people are still dying. I'm hoping for the day, they will not. And that day has not come yet.
Of course, I'm not arguing. If you already live on the new earth, good on you, mate! As the Aussies would say.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)Post Thanks / Like - 2 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Speaking of chapter 21 of Revelation in verse two John tell us that he saw the holy city,new Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven,prepared as bride adorned for husband." And last part of verse 9 "I will show you the bride, the lamb's wife. Why couldn't this be a symbolic picture of the Church of Christ in time and eternity. Adam Clark believe that verse 2 was talking about the Christian church in a state of great prosperity and purity..."
Thanks
Larry
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Larry, I agree and do not think the image is meant literally. Just think about the size. But, that still does not mean Rev 21 has already come true. We need to balance prophecy and the reality we see around us today.
"No scripture can mean that God is not love, or that his mercy is not over all his works" (John Wesley - Free Grace, 26)
Jesus also taught the Kingdom of God is within and one couldn't observe the activities of the Holy Spirits comings and goings. So "I" conclude its here within us and is forcing its way into this world to this day with the end result of when God finally makes His enemies a footstool for the Lords feet.
Randy
"The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?"
(Psalms 27:1)Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
Yes, John, this is correct. However, it does not seem to be another branch of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. They seem to be separate institutions from all I can tell, and that seems to be the reasoning behind the different names: Westminster Seminary and Westminster Theological Seminary. And, to my knowledge, WS is very theologically important in the world of Evangelical Presbyterians.
- Ben
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death! And to those in the tombs, bestowing life!
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν, θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας! καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι, ζωὴν χαρισάμενος!Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Laughing
The one in Cali is really big with the Association of Reformed Baptists in Amerrica
The
"Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination end in nit-picking and divisiveness."-Mildred Bangs Wynkoop
Phone much?
- Ben
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death! And to those in the tombs, bestowing life!
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν, θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας! καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι, ζωὴν χαρισάμενος!Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 2 Laughing
Good call
"Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination end in nit-picking and divisiveness."-Mildred Bangs Wynkoop
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
