The Reign of God
As part of the commentary thread in response to my post "A Warning of Impending Punishment OR An Announcement of Salvation Through Jesus Christ?" an anonymous commentator shared the following quotations:
Matt 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (AV).
Matt 3:2 'Reform, for come nigh hath the reign of the heavens,' (YLT, 1st publ. 1862).
Matt 3:2 “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has arrived.” (R. T. France).
“While no statement would command universal assent, there is general agreement that, rather than denoting a specific time, place, or situation called “the kingdom” — a misleading abbreviation which is conspicuously absent from the Synoptic tradition as it is dominant in modern discussion — the phrase “the kingdom of God” in both Hebrew and Greek forms denotes the dynamic concept of “God ruling.” It represents, in other words, a sentence of which the subject is not “kingdom” but “God.” This dynamic sense is now better conveyed by an abstract noun such as “kingship” or “sovereignty rather than by “kingdom,” which has become in general usage a concrete noun” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT, p.102).
“Our traditional English phrase derives from the KJV (following William Tyndale), which was translated at a time when “kingdom” in English still carried this dynamic sense of “kingship,” a sense now rightly described by the OED as “obsolete.” The concrete sense of “kingdom” in current English (as a place or group of people under a common rule) now inevitably distorts the more dynamic connotations of he basileia ton ouranon [transliteration supplied instead of the Greek] when “the kingdom of God” continues to be used in Bible versions despite the changed meaning of the word. Translators have still to catch up with the scholarly preference for such phrases as “the rule of God”...” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT, p.102).
“Matthew’s summary of John’s (and Jesus’) declaration, “The kingdom of heaven has arrived,” might thus be paraphrased as “God’s promised reign is beginning” or “God is now taking control” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT, p.102).
“The kingdom of heaven is the rule of God and is both a present reality and a future hope” (NIVSB on Matt 3:2Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)).
“... the Kingdom of God is the redemptive reign of God dynamically active to establish his rule among men, and that this Kingdom, which will appear as an apocalyptic act at the end of the age, has already come into human history in the person and mission of Jesus to overcome evil, to deliver men from its power, and to bring them into the blessings of God's reign. The Kingdom of God involves two great moments: fulfilment within history, and consummation at the end of history” (George Eldon Ladd, The Presence of the Future, Rev. ed., p.218).
Now, while I believe that the above referenced statements by Bible scholars are consistent with the Christian canon, this concept of "kingdom" was NOT understood by Herbert Armstrong or most of those who follow his teachings! As I have noted in numerous posts here, both the Old and New Testaments draw a sharp distinction between God's notions about authority and rulership and those of humankind. In short, God's ways are NOT our ways. Indeed, Christ told his disciples that he didn't want them to imitate the way that humans had traditionally ruled over and dominated each other. Instead, he introduced the concept of "servant leadership" (the leader as the servant of all).
Moreover, as it turns out, this is consistent with the Greek word that was translated into English as "kingdom" (and the way that it would have been understood by English-speaking peoples in the time of Wycliffe's translation and the King James Version of the Bible. In the Blue Letter Bible entry for "basileia" we find the following outline of the word's usage in the New Testament: royal power, kingship, dominion, rule - not to be confused with an actual kingdom but rather the right or authority to rule over a kingdom - of the royal power of Jesus as the triumphant Messiah - of the royal power and dignity conferred on Christians in the Messiah's kingdom - a kingdom, the territory subject to the rule of a king - used in the N.T. to refer to the reign of the Messiah. In other words, the modern concept of a "kingdom" does NOT mesh with the concept suggested by the Greek of the New Testament!
In his The Kingdom of God in Eight Words, The Gospel Coalition's Jeremy Treat defined the concept in these terms: "The kingdom is God’s reign through God’s people over God’s place." He went on to note that: "The kingdom is first and foremost a statement about God. God is king, and he is coming as king to set right what our sin made wrong. The phrase 'kingdom of God' could just as easily be translated 'reign of God' or 'kingship of God.' The message of the kingdom is about God’s royal power directed by his self-giving love." Now that gives new meaning to that famous phrase from the Lord's Prayer: "May thy reign commence, May thy will be done here as it currently is in heaven." Kinda makes you want to take another look at some of Christ's Kingdom parables doesn't it?
Treat continued: "God is king, and he reigns over his creation. But in a world marred by sin, God’s kingship is resisted, and the peace of his kingdom has been shattered. After Adam and Eve’s rebellion, God’s reign is revealed as redemptive. He’s the king who is reclaiming his creation. His kingdom is not the culmination of human potential and effort, but the intervention of his royal grace into a sinful and broken world." This encompasses a much broader and more comprehensive notion than anything that Armstrong ever imagined!
Treat described it in these terms: "God’s reign is a saving reign. The kingdom of God provides a holistic understanding of salvation, including not only what we are saved from, but also what we are saved for: We are saved from death and for life. We are saved from shame and for glory. We are saved from slavery and for freedom. We are saved from sin and for following our Savior. We are saved from the kingdom of darkness and for the kingdom of light. To be saved into God’s kingdom is to embrace God’s comprehensive rule over every aspect of life. This is a far cry from merely 'asking Jesus into my heart.' It means a new life, a new identity, and a new kingdom." I would caution, however, that Scripture makes clear that God's reign begins in the hearts of Christ's disciples, and it involves embracing the Two Great Commandments (Wholehearted devotion to God, and love for each other).
Once again, when we allow a search engine and Artificial Intelligence to define the "Kingdom of God," we find: "The Kingdom of God is a spiritual realm over which God reigns as king, or the fulfillment on Earth of God’s will. The phrase occurs frequently in the New Testament, primarily used by Jesus Christ in the first three Gospels1. In this kingdom, God’s authority is recognized, and his will is obeyed. The concept of a Kingdom of God is not primarily one of space, territory, or politics, as in a national kingdom, but rather one of kingly rule, reign, and sovereign control." Gives new meaning to Christ's assertion before Pilate that his kingdom was NOT of this world - doesn't it?
The Kingdom of God has already begun for those who have accepted Christ and received the gift of the Holy Spirit. God and "his" love living and reigning within us! Sure, someday God's reign will extend over all peoples everywhere, but let us all rejoice in what has been made available to us in the here and now. Our citizenship truly resides in heaven and is NOT defined in human terms! Amen!
Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix
David Pack's "short kingdom" theology is built in part on I Chronicles 28:5 - which says King Solomon ruled over the "Kingdom of God" long ago.
ReplyDeleteIt's also suggested in II Chronicles 2:1, 12 (KJV) - a "kingdom of the Lord" over Israel.
So that must mean King Charles rules over it now... right? (With apologies to Gerald Flurry.)
Salvation is automatic for all those who do good deeds from a pure heart. Religion is not required. Religious scholars are like everyone else. They are extremely biased, woefully ignorant, and frequently lack integrity. Nobody can be trusted. Nobody. Forget about organized religion. It's garbage. Do good and you have nothing to fear.
ReplyDelete"Salvation is automatic for all those who do good deeds from a pure heart."
DeleteHow does one define "good"?
Re Salvation is automatic for all those who do good deeds from a pure heart."
DeleteHow does one define "good"?<<
Matthew 5 verse 44: ''But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you'' . Jesus didn't explain all about the meaning of good. He took it to be a known. And in Ephesians:
''Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free''.
Gerald Flurry rules the kingdom where HE is the god. That's no better than following the Pope, Martin Luther, or Benny Hinn.
ReplyDeleteAt one of the Jewish sites I've visited, it is stated that Jews know there are many things that are broken about the world we were given, and that one of our God-given tasks is to fix what we can, and to make it better.
ReplyDeleteA preacher at a mainstream church I've attended told the congregation that we cannot fix the world, but there is much each of us can do about the space immediately surrounding us.
In a sense, both recognized the same truth. This is much better than throwing up our hands and saying there is nothing we can do except to endure until Jesus returns and straightens everything out. There's much each of us can do right now if we see ourselves as a piece of the Kingdom. That is the difference between a sense of present futility and the realization that it's possible to exert influence towards good on the people and space surrounding us.
BB
Col. 1:13 gives the meaning of what God has done for us that believe in and have in Him now. It is not some yonder down the road that Armstrongism teaches.
ReplyDelete“ He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son,”
The COGs never quote this verse and get up in arms to varying degrees when anyone suggests they are currently in the kingdom. One more stable COG minister said we just have to not conflate it with the Kingdom to come.
Why would I? I much prefer being under the rule of the beloved Son now. Armstrong really warped people’s concept of faith and God’s love. The verses and teachings they ignore and/or diminish is the height of folly, and folly can lead one to destruction.
BtB
"There's much each of us can do right now if we see ourselves as a piece of the Kingdom."
ReplyDeleteThat is exactly what Church members do. We live our lives according to God's instructions and that has an effect on the space around us. Some people are moved by it and try to get closer to God while others are highly offended and go on the attack.
I actually did meet a couple of members like you when I was a member, 4:51. They had good training through their families, or prior religious affiliation, and it immunized them against having the good parts of the mixture of good and bad which makes up human nature being subverted or corrupted by Armstrongism. These folks didn't just reserve kindness or help for church members, they'd share with outsiders. They'd occasionally help the helpless or homeless, would pray for outsiders they knew were going through a difficult patch, and were not critical or judgmental. They were compassionate, and empathetic without being preachy. They swam against the predominant flow of their own church and teachers. Rebellion didn't enter the equation. They walked the talk, and I admired them. And, most importantly, they stood out from typical members. It's just too bad that they were such a small minority, and I really don't believe that Lonnie or the rest of us were trashing those good ones on this topic. In fact, so far as Lonnie's messaging goes, those outstanding ones would be members of the choir.
DeleteMiller wrote, “Indeed, Christ told his disciples that he didn't want them to imitate the way that humans had traditionally ruled over and dominated each other.”
ReplyDeleteThe Kingdom of God in Armstrongist theology differs from what can be exegeted from the Bible. This is a large topic and some of the doctrinal data about this topic on the Armstrongist side might be diverse or, at least, fluid. I am not sure how the current Armstrongist denominations see this. My apologia.
My conclusion, after years of experience, is that the great theme of the Armstrongist concept of the Kingdom is Hierarchy. It seemed like to me that every time HWA spoke on church governance, he managed to insert into his lecture that God’s government is “top-down.” HWA felt that the WCG was the Kingdom of God “in embryo” and, of course, the WCG was a strongly hierarchical organization as was Ambassador College. Imperious leadership and not servant leadership is what I encountered. My view was from the cheap seats, however. My guess is that the Hierarchy was beneficent towards some and still is.
This same tendency to emphasize Hierarchy instead of service is found in the Armstrongist geopolitical eschatology. They believe that God is going to lay waste to the world with a Tribulation. Then they believe he will follow that by further crushing the world with the Day of the Lord. My guess is that they envision that the first day of the Millennium, the world will look like Hiroshima after Little Boy except where they are at the Place of Safety. Then what is left of the nations and governments of mankind will be pre-empted by refulgent Armstrongists emerging from their cocoon in Petra. And then the Armstrongists will start throwing around orders among staggering people incapacitated by PTSD. And everything will be bright and beautiful. Right. This view is a facetious comic book view that stems from simple, unbridled human belligerence.
Instead, we find that Jesus will not pre-empt but persuade over time (1 Corinthians 15:25). No doubt there will be some dramatic conflicts and Jesus will always win. But graciously and conservatively and not with total destruction. In Revelation 21:24-26, the nations of the earth and the kings of the earth, the bad buys, are still around and reformed. This betokens grace and not obliteration.
Miller has written a fine exposition.
Scout
HWA's hierarchial top-down government is a code word for the social structure found in gangs and often depicted in the Soprano's mafia TV series. All organizations have a hierarchial structure of some type, be they a steep or flat (small management), but they can exclude lording it over or mistreating their members. Yet some readers here keep insisting that hierarchy equals abuse. I suspect this comes from not understanding the concept of rights, since Armstrongism and contemporary Christianity are anti rights. And many members come from dystopian toxic anti-rights family systems
DeleteThe "kingdom" was among the Pharisees for Jesus was there with them and He is the embodiment of the kingdom - Luke 17:21, and the "kingdom" will in the future replace all the kingdoms of this world and be a singular world wide governmental administration - Dan 2:44.
ReplyDeleteI need to clarify my previous statement. Hierarchy and Servant Leadership are not mutually exclusive. The Government of God is hierarachical. And within it Servant Leadership is implemented.
ReplyDeleteBy Hierarchy with a capital "H", I mean that form of government that is pathologically concerned, to the exclusion or near exclusion of service, with hierarchical organization and the valuation of human beings based on their place in the hierarchy.
Scout
The Church hierarchy viewed both the Church and Kingdom of God like the military, rather than like a family. We had the "rank" of evangelist, pastor, etc. and if there were large groups needing attending, like at a festival site campground, they had "captains" of 10, 50, and 100. They covered all the bases! Like Scout says, the value of an individual was based on his "rank", which made most of the lay people, "privates"!
ReplyDeleteThe human race is a mess. People are bad at logic, and terrible at eliminating bias. People are capable of messing up pretty much anything. To believe in any religion or ideology is to embrace error and folly.
ReplyDeleteThere is no definition of good. Goodness is not an exact science. It is partly an art. Don't get bogged down in technicalities. In the meantime, life is moving along, and it is short.
ReplyDelete"Servant Leadership" sounds like a Rod Meredith term. I think we have some Armstrongites on here.
ReplyDeleteIt has been my experience that there are a number of different kinds of former Armstrongites. Some of us have reclaimed our ability to think and reason and have reintegrated ourselves into Christianity. Some of us have completely abandoned faith and rejected all aspects of religion, including the Judeo-Christian Bible. And some of us have rejected organized Armstrongism but have retained their devotion to some or all of HWA's theology. This latter group either challenge any post which contradicts or discredits one of their cherished beliefs OR a larger number of them simply go radio silent (they're afraid of failure in a public forum). Hence, some of us are definitely not ready to explain or give answers to questions about what they believe. This is why we will occasionally not see some of the regulars here on posts which effectively challenge or ridicule aspects of Armstrongist theology. For me, it's NOT just the abuses of power and administrative problems of our former culture - the THEOLOGY itself was wrong (and it can be clearly demonstrated that it was WRONG)!
ReplyDeleteAgreed, Lonnie! That theology modified human nature, and in so many cases the reprogramming which ensued actually made it worse! I've likened this to what we observe in communism, a philosophy of government which is responsible for creating the types of despots who universally rise to the top of all communist systems.
DeleteThe independents who often challenge us here have bypassed the tyrannical system of church government present in organized Armstrongism by going independent in their practice of the doctrines. And, of course, it is easy to practice the doctrines on your own in the privacy of your own home, not subject to toxic church government, but I would suspect that the minute you would expand that, adding others and making it into a study group, the tyranny would subtly begin to creep back in! That would appear to be axiomatic!
This does not happen to any great extent in grace-based, more forgiving church environments.
BB
Yet you both stay within "Armstrongisim". What a peculiar situation it is.
DeleteThis blog has the some of most certain people I've ever encountered. Certain Sabbath Christians are not Christians and have not an ounce of humility or doubt in insulting them as "Armstrongites". They are not allowed ever!! by the blogites here to be called Christians. Why? Because you are certain.
Herbert Armstrong is not allowed to be judged by Jesus Christ, no you are certain he's to be judged, hung, drawn and quartered by yourselves and you'll nit pick over him for the rest of your lives. Because you're certain.
Saturday isn't the Sabbath why? Because you're certain. Now your certain we don't even know which day the 7th day Sabbath is, because you are the most certain people who've ever lived.
Always certain others intelligence, education and general worth is decided by yourselves. Because you are into certainity instead of Christianity.
"But certainity is the great enemy of unity. A destroyer of peace. Certainity is the deadly enemy of tolerance. Even Jesus Christ called out on the cross " My God, My God why have you forsaken me."
If there was only certainity and no doubt, there would be no mystery and therefore, no need for faith. "
C. Lawrence, the Conclave.
Doubt is an uncomfortable condition, but certainity is a ridiculous one. Voltage