Well, I guess it's time for the next post, about the gospel of the Kingdom. It seems to logically follow the last post, about what "the gospel" means. After I had studied out the issues related to the use of the word "gospel" in the New Testament, and concluded that it was used in a broader sense than I had thought, it occured to me that perhaps my understanding of "the gospel of the kingdom" was wrong as well, or at least too limited. I was encouraged by what I found when I spent some time looking at this, and hope you will be too. Give this little article a read and let me know what you think.
The Gospel of the Kingdom
Throughout the synoptic gospels, frequent mention is made of the Lord Jesus and the apostles either preaching the gospel of the kingdom of heaven (or of the kingdom of God) or simply "preaching the kingdom of God." In dispensational circles, this has often been taken to refer only to the good news that the long-promised kingdom of heaven (Daniel 2:44) was available to the nation of Israel, and as having no reference to individual entrance into the kingdom through faith in Christ. There are certainly biblical reasons, however, to conclude that the gospel of the kingdom was a broad term which included not only the good news that the King had come and that therefore the kingdom was available to Israel as a nation, but also included the truth of individual entrance into the kingdom by faith in Christ.
One place where this is clearly seen is in Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus in John chapter three. Jesus made it very clear to Nicodemus that only by being born again can one enter the kingdom of God (John 3:3,5) and that this second birth is received through faith in Jesus (John 3:16). The question we need to ask ourselves is, was Nicodemus the only person with whom Jesus shared this information, or does His conversation with Nicodemus provide us with a sample of part of what Jesus taught regarding the kingdom? For example, when it says in Matt. 4:23 that Jesus went all about Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, are we to assume that Jesus neglected to tell the people of Galilee what He told Nicodemus, that is, how they could individually be a part of that kingdom? I think not. It certainly would not have been very good news to the people of Galilee to know that there was a kingdom of righteousness coming in which they had no sure way of participating. While it is clear that the focus of the gospel of John is on the narrower issue of how a person receives eternal life, and the focus of the synoptic gospels is more on discipleship truths related to the coming kingdom, the good news that was told to Nicodemus, which relates to entrance into the kingdom, was certainly a part of "the gospel of the kingdom."
Another place where it becomes clear that the gospel of the kingdom included the truth of individual entrance into the kingdom or of individual salvation is in a comparison of the parable of the sower in Matthew 13 and Luke 8. In Matt. 13:19, Jesus is recorded as saying that the seed represents "the word of the kingdom." Then in Luke 8:12, Jesus says that the seed which falls by the wayside represents those who hear the word, but the devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. So, by comparing these two records of the one parable, we can see that Jesus Himself indicated that "the word of the kingdom" included truths which could be believed resulting in salvation. Surely these truths must have been those related to salvation by God's grace through faith in His Son.
From the book of John, we also know that the Lord Jesus did not limit His teaching about receiving eternal life through faith in Him to private conversations with individuals like Nicodemus or the woman at the well. That is, He did not publicly preach only a non-personal gospel of the kingdom and only privately teach about eternal life. Both John 5:24 and John 6:47 occur in the midst of public sermons or debates. The point of this is that if we confine our understanding of the gospel of the kingdom to simply the truth that the kingdom was available to Israel, then when we read the synoptic gospels it sounds like that is all that Jesus went around preaching. If, however, we see the gospel of the kingdom as a broad title for all that Jesus taught, it includes the truth of eternal life through faith in Him and indicates that this was taught throughout the land of Israel. Certainly it seems reasonable to think that the message of eternal life and of individual entrance into the kingdom through faith in Christ was taught by our Lord on more than the few occasions that it was recorded in the book of John. In fact, this must be the case, because the book of John itself in several places other than those few occasions refers to people believing in Jesus (for example John 2:23, 4:53, 7:31), which in John results in being made children of God (John 1:12), so in order for those in the crowds to have believed in Jesus in the biblical sense, they must have been taught by Him or by His disciples that He freely offered eternal life and entrance into God's kingdom to those who would believe in Him.
It seems clear that Jesus didn't go around teaching two unrelated messages. He preached good news about the kingdom, which included individual salvation truth (how to enter the kingdom), discipleship truth (how to live now as subjects of the coming kingdom), and truth about the national aspects of the kingdom. In the gospel of John, His preaching is not referred to as "the gospel of the kingdom" for the same reason that it is not referred to as "the gospel" at all. Both "the gospel" and "the gospel of the kingdom" are broader terms than what John focussed on, though both include the idea of salvation by grace through faith.
If this conclusion about the content of the gospel of the kindom is correct, it may also help to explain why the synoptic gospels make very few references to the reception of eternal salvation through faith in Christ. If the synoptic gospels were written primarily to believers about discipleship truths, and if the terms "preaching the kingdom" and "the gospel of the kingdom" were understood at that time to include the saving message, then the references in the synoptic gospels to Jesus and His disciples preaching the kingdom would have served as a sufficient reminder to those audiences that the same saving message which they had heard had been preached throughout Israel during the Lord's earthly ministry.
Of course, in the synoptic gospels, we see repentance and not only faith tied together with the gospel of the kingdom (Mark 1:14-15), but that is not surprising if we see the gospel of the kingdom as a broad term which includes both national and individual truths related to the kingdom and includes both salvation and discipleship truths. Individuals could be assured of entrance into God's kingdom through faith in Christ, and in fact became "sons of the kingdom" in the present (Matt. 13:38), though the kingdom had not yet come. Through following Christ, they could be assured of reward in the kingdom (Matt. 16:24-27). As a nation, however, Israel would only have Christ ruling over them as king if they repented (Matt. 4:17, Acts 3:19-20). This was true both during the Lord's earthly ministry and after He returned to heaven, as is indicated in the verses in Acts. So, the need for national repentance on the part of Israel was part of the gospel of the kingdom, or at least was linked with it, but was not how an individual became of citizen of the kingdom.
One final thought about the gospel of the kingdom relates to its future proclamation. Speaking of the tribulation period, Jesus said that the gospel of the kingdom would first be preached to all nations, and then the end would come (Matt. 24:14). What we have seen in the previous verses should inform our view of what the message is that will be preached worldwide in the tribulation period as well. Certainly it will not only be a general message that God will soon be sending a king to defeat the antichrist and rule over the earth, but also that that king is Jesus Christ, the One who died and rose again and who offers eternal life to all who believe in Him. It seems clear from a comparison of the gospels that the "gospel of the kingdom" preached in Jesus' time included the message of eternal life through faith in Him, therefore it is reasonable to conclude that when Jesus refers to the "gospel of the kingdom" being preached in the tribulation period, it also will include that message.
Hi Ken,
ReplyDeleteI was so glad to see that you have posted this subject about the gospel of the kingdom. I just read it and loved it. Now I need to go back and carefully digest it all and check out all the passages. That's the way I learn. Thank you so much for sharing the fruits of your labor with us~!!!
Diane :-)
Hi Ken, I find myself agreeing with what you are saying here, but as Diane I'm a muncher who takes time to chew on it.
ReplyDeleteHere are just a few thoughts I have. John 1:11,12 tells us where the focus in the Gospel of John is-in individual salvation. The call to repentance had been rejected by Israel so it's written from the view that the Kingdom is a foregone conclusion (John 3:14,15). So that is why National repentance is not part of the "Good News" there. The Nation had rejected their opportunity of the "Acceptable Year of the Lord," redemption was missed and National Israel was still in bondage. (Luke 4:18,19;Leviticus 25:9,10,47-49,54; Ruth 4:5,13-16). Jesus could have set up His Kingdom, it was a legitimate offer. Faith establishes the law, but life could not come by the law but came by way of the Promise to the children of Abraham who are also of faith. Jesus explains in John 17:3 what eternal life is "to Know God, and His Son Jesus Christ. That was explicit in the New Covenant "no longer shall every man say Know the Lord, for they shall all know Me."
Life was implicit even in the message of repentance, because to receive forgiveness of sins was to come into Harmony with God.
alvin:)
Hi Alvin,
ReplyDeleteYeah, I think you're right about why repentance is not in focus in the book of John. Maybe the things I've written here about the gospel of the kingdom will seem obvious to some, but for me it was a big realization that the same type of things Jesus said to Nicodemus and the woman at the well, He probably also preached throughout Israel. Only if people throughout Israel had heard the saving message could many have believed in Him, which they did. Somehow, with the dispensational teaching I've received, I got the idea that the gospel of the kingdom had nothing to do with individual salvation. It makes much more sense to see the gospel of the kingdom, like "the gospel," as being a broad term, encompassing lots of truths.
Ken
Hi Ken,
ReplyDeleteI agree!!!! I think you have laid it out very good, and have made it clear. I liked your point with Matt 13:19; Luke 8:12.
One other thought came to my mind just now . . . . when Jesus first came to set up His Kingdom it was the "Acceptible Year Of The Lord," to avoid the axe which was at the root (Matt 3:10; Luke 3:9). It was to avoid God's soon coming wrath (AD 70). But during the Tribulation the wrath will be poured out on them, it will not be the "Acceptible Time Of The Lord."
alvin:)
Thanks Ken for doing this study, it's got me digging in the word. It's probably caused me to go more broad than your paper intended. But it has been fruitful for me because I see that you also are a non-Calvinist. It was exciting for me to see how it ties together of a kinsman redeemer stating a brother first which Israel was God's firstborn son ( Lev 25:47-49,54; Exodus 4:22). This plays right into Christ the Son of God being like a kinsman redeemer. Also the Year of Jubilee is a principal God put in place which also pictures Christ Himself as a brother who could redeem. We know that life could not come by the law because of the flesh, but Jesus kept the law perfectly for us (Gal 3:21; Matt 3:15). And as Boaz was able to lift up a dead mans inheritance and give life so that Naomi was a nurse to the new born child (Ruth 4:5,13-16). This shows that God when He offered the "Acceptable Year of the Lord" it was a true offer ( Luke 4:19; 1:46), as Jesus said in the garden of Gethsemane take this cup from Me, but not My will but Your will be done (Matt 26:39). There was no longer another way but Jesus had to go to the cross. We know that without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin, and that the reality needed to have a better sacrifice then the earthly pattern ( Heb 8:2; 9:23). But still God's word STANDS to be True, just as Jesus saw another way that was possible for Tyre and Sodon (Luke 10:13). God is justified when we do His will, and by doing so we are agreeing with Him it is just (Luke 7:29-30). John the baptist was stating that the One coming after him would baptize them with fire (Luke 3:16). I'm curious on how that would have played out IF the nation Israel would have received their Kinsman Redeemer. Faith establishes the law (Rom 8:4; 3:31), and the law would have been written in their minds, and they would have received a new heart. Then they would have been able to be a nation of Priests unto the world as God first intended (Exodus 19:4-6). The offer was sincere Jesus wept over Jerusalem because they had missed their appointed time so He would not come again until they said "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord," (Luke 19: 41,42; Matt 23:37-39).
ReplyDeleteNow as He drew near, He saw the city and wept over it, saying, "If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.
alvin:)
Ken, is it possible that Jesus is speaking about two different Kingdoms? An earthly Kingdom that was just being offered to that generation of Jews. Matthew 10:5-7 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. “But go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. “And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The Kingdom of heaven is at hand.’
ReplyDeleteThe condition for them to see it come in was first the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, then to believe on the One who was to come ( Luke 3:3-17). “And he went into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.”
Jesus used the law as a schoolmaster in the synoptic gospels until faith was revealed (Matthew 5:18-30; Gal 3:23).
Once that generation of Jews rejected the Kingdom (Luke 17:25), Jesus started speaking in parables to them (Matt 11:20; 13:3; Mark 4:2,9-12).
The spiritual Kingdom Jesus spoke about to Nicodemus to see (enter) one needed only to be born again (John 3:3,5). Jesus eluded to this spiritual Kingdom when also speaking to the woman at the well, that the Father was seeking those to worship Him in spirit and in truth right then (John 4:21-24). This Kingdom was within (Luke 17:20-21).
The Kingdom that Jesus was offering to that generation of Jews was a physical temple where Jesus would rule, but the one Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus and the woman at the well was not located in a physical place but was spiritual, and was within.
Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The Kingdom of God does not come with observation; “nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the Kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17:20,21)
Jesus in these verses contrasts the spiritual Kingdom that is within to the physical Kingdom that He will bring in (Luke 17:20-37). Of course His physical Kingdom Rule will bring all things under His authority, and then He will deliver the Kingdom to God the Father by subjecting His authority to the Father so then God will be all and all (1 Cor 15:24-28). Right now in the spiritual Kingdom all those who have been born again are one “In Christ” who is the Head of the Church, and are complete “In Christ.”
If I’m completely out to lunch here Ken set me straight.
Alvin:)
Hey Alvin,
ReplyDeleteI don't think Jesus was speaking of two different kingdoms, but of two aspects of the same kingdom. In order for the earthly kingdom to be inaugurated, Israel must repent and believe. As I mentioned in the article, that was still true after the cross (Acts 3:19-20). But individual entrance into God's kingdom, both in the spiritual sense now and ressurection in the future, earthly kingdom, is by faith.
As far as Luke 17:20-21, many scholars think it should be translated, "is in your midst." ESV and NASB go that way. In that case, Jesus would be saying, "There are no further things you need to observe to see God's kingdom coming, because the kingdom is already among you." I think He was saying that because He, as the King, was already there.
So, I see the spiritual and earthly aspects you are talking about, but I think they are two parts of the same whole. A Bible school teacher I had once compared it to David and his mighty men. David had been anointed, and he would rule over Israel, but for a time he was in hiding. His mighty men were a part of his "kingdom in hiding," and they also had the opportunity to rule with him when he came into his kingdom. We as the church are like that. We're already part of Jesus' kingdom, even though the earthly aspect of it hasn't started yet. And if we are faithful to Him now, we have the opportunity to rule with Him then.
Anyway, that's the brief answer without many scripture references, but that's how I see the spiritual and physical aspects of the kingdom. I think that when we see one term used consistently with no indication of a change in definition, the best starting hypothesis is that it has the same range of meaning in all those cases, or refers to the same thing. Where there are differences of terminology, like "kingdom of God" and "kingdom of heaven," they are used by different authors to refer to the same thing in the same context (for example Matt. 4:17 and Mark 1:15), so I think they also refer to the same thing.
Hope that helps or at least gives you something to think about.
Ken
By the way, I was thinking about talking about repentance next, though I'm not ready to put another post up yet. Anyone else out there have other things they'd like to get into, or does repentance sound good?
ReplyDeleteKen
Hi Ken,
ReplyDeleteRepentance sounds good to me. I've been helped greatly by Zane Hodges' wonderful book... "Harmony With God," but I'm still not real clear on what John the Baptist's repentance was all about. I need a fuller understanding of that~!!! I'm hoping you can help me out there.
Also, I'm taking what is said here at your blog to heart. I appreciate Alvin's insights and your replies back to him. I'm a learner, and I only want to see as God sees, so thanks for being a vessel to help me see clearer. I'm sure there's others here at your blog being helped also. Making us all think~!!!
Thanking God for you and praying for you and your sweet family.
Diane
:-)
Good answer Ken . . . . Kind of see the two aspects in Jesus transfiguration. Even though the King was befor them He was yet to be clothed in His glory.
ReplyDeleteRepentance I think is a good topic:)
alvin:)