Table of Contents

Publication Details
INTRODUCTION
Confrontation
PART ONE
THE OLD TESTAMENT REVELATION OF THE KINGDOM
PICTURES OF THE KINGDOM

The Exodus
Kingdom Announcement - The Revelation of the Divine Name
Kingdom Intervention - The Spiritual Battle
Kingdom Intervention - The Military Battle
The Kingdom Song of Liberation
The Kingdom Confession
What does this mean?
Kingdom and Covenant
Kingdom and Conquest
The Davidic Monarchy
Psalm 2
2 Samuel 7-8
2 Samuel 7
2 Samuel 8
Solomon's Reign
1 Kings 4
How Do We Experience God's Reign?

PROMISES OF THE KINGDOM

The Language of Promise

The Promise in Isaiah
God Will Come
The Coming King
 The Coming Spirit
The Coming Salvation
The New People
The New Order
The Promise in Daniel
Daniel 2
Daniel 7
To Sum Up

PART TWO
THE NEW TESTAMENT REVELATIOIN OF THE KINGDOM
FULFILMENT OF THE PROMISES

Mark's Gospel
The Immediacy of the Kingdom
The Authority of the King
The Mystery of the Kingdom
It Is Here!
It Is Not Here

THE MYSTERY OF THE KINGDOM

The Kingdom Will Come

The Kingdom Has Come
Matthew 11.11-15 and Luke 16.16-17
The Kingdom Is Coming Immediately
The Mystery of the Kingdom
Fulfilment Without Consummation

THE CENTRALITY OF CHRIST

The Ministry of Christ

 The Cross
The Resurrection
Pentecost
Conclusion

THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE KINGDOM

BRINGING IN THE KINGDOM

Jesus, the Personification of the Kingdom

Jesus the Messiah
Jesus, the Announcer of the Kingdom
The Great Announcement
1. Kingdom Expectation
2. Kingdom Prayer
3. Kingdom Announcement

ACTS OF INTERVENTION

Acts
The Act of God
The Acts of Jesus Christ
The Acts of the Holy Spirit
The Acts of the Apostles
The Acts of the Church

PART THREE
THE THEOLOGY OF THE KINGDOM
THE PARABLES OF THE KINGDOM

The Kingdom Comes in the Future

The Future Impinges on the Present
The Kingdom Creates a Crisis of Decision
 Vehicles of Grace
Parables of Jesus

KINGDOM LIFESTYLE

Entering the Kingdom

Divine Grace
Repentance and Faith
Living in the Kingdom
The Beatitudes
The Poor in Spirit
Those Who Mourn
The Meek
Those Who Hunger and Thirst
The Merciful
The Pure in Heart
The Peacemakers
The Persecuted
Changing Values

THE MESSIANIC BANQUET

The Lord's Feast in Isaiah

The Messiah's Feast in Zechariah
Jesus the Bridegroom
Kingdom Meals with Jesus
Table fellowship with Jesus
Miracle feasts with Jesus
The ordaining of the kingdom meal

THE KINGDOM AND THE CHURCH

 Which is Which?
Caught Between the Times

"ALREADY" "NOT YET" PEOPLE"

The "Groaning" Tradition

The Perfection Tradition
Methodist Triumphalism
Pentecostal Triumphalism
Baptist Triumphalism
The Kingdom Perspective

THE END OF CESSATIONISM

What is Cessationism?
Kingdom Teaching
The Last Days
Preaching the Gospel
Expectation
Refutation

HEALING
ISRAEL

What is Dispensationalism?
Israel and Dispensationalism
Israel Without Dispensationalism
Israel in New Testament Perspective
How Many People of God Are There?
Israel's Future
Conclusion
CONFUSION ABOUT THE KINGDOM

The Debate
Kingdom Now Or Then?
World-denying Texts
World-transforming Texts
Biblical Balance
Views of the Millennium
Historic Premillennial Faith
Fanatical Premillennialism
Augustine and Amillennial Faith
Postmillennial Believers
Dispensational Faith
The Lessons of History

A FINAL PERSPECTIVE

Kingdom or Denomination?
Future Expectation

STUDYING THE THEOLOGY OF THE KINGDOM

The Thesis
The Antithesis
The Synthesis - The Older Consensus
The "symbolic" Kingdom - The Later Consensus
Systematic Theology
The Third Quest
Important Criteria

APPENDIX I
 How we Break Bread
Summary Statement
The Biblical Terminology
Biblical Texts
The Biblical Teaching
The Passover meal (a 12 step meal)
The haburah (pronounced with an "h" as in "Chutzpa")
We learn about the breaking of bread from the love feasts of the early
church
The Meaning of the Breaking of Bread
"Do this in remembrance of me."
"This is the New Covenant in my blood"
"This is my body … this is my blood"
"The cup of thanksgiving is a participation (koinonia) in the blood of
Christ"
"As often as you do this you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes"

APPENDIX II: The Promise of the Kingdom in Isaiah

The Coming of God

Good News
God Will Come
To Save His People
To Comfort His People
And Reveal His Glory
The Coming King
The King Will Come
To Rule With Justice
To Establish the Covenant
To Minister as God's Servant
 The Coming of the Spirit
The Coming Salvation
Salvation
The Forgiveness of Sins
Liberation for the Captives
Peace for God's People
The Resurrection of the Dead
Eschatological Joy and Praise
The New People of God
Jerusalem, the City of God
The Regathering of God's People
The Gathering of the Nations
The New Order
The Day of Judgement
A New Heaven and a New Earth

APPENDIX III: The Vineyard Statement of Faith

BIBLIOGRAPHY
FOOTNOTES

Publication Details
Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom
Derek Morphew Publications

84 Starke Road, Bergvliet, 7945, South Africa

www.derekmorphew.org
Email: [email protected]

ISBN: 978-0-9869723-7-9
 Copyright © Derek J Morphew 2011

The scripture quotations in this publication are taken from The Holy Bible, New
International Version, Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, International Bible
Society. Used by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the copyright owner.

INTRODUCTION
My own discovery of the kingdom of God occurred during the late 1970s. It was
one of the reasons I felt an immediate affinity with John Wimber in the early
1980s, since the writings of George Ladd on the kingdom had been a formative
influence for both of us. John was bringing the message of the kingdom to
Anglican leaders and churches at the same time. The first decade in the genesis
of a number of movements (The Association of Vineyard Churches, New Wine,
and Holy Trinity Brompton) saw the kingdom of God being established as the
primary theological model. Since then a new generation of Christians and
Christian leaders has emerged. We have tended to assume that this generation
has been raised on the same foundation.
Assumptions and reality do not always coincide. During the last ten years I have
found myself teaching on the kingdom in conferences linked to the same
movements in 16 countries and multiple languages. The perception of the leaders
has been the same everywhere. We need to lay this foundation once again. The
subject is so fundamental to scripture and to our spiritual genesis that we cannot
allow a single generation, church or group of churches to miss it.

I generally try to explain how crucial the kingdom is to this emerging tradition,
or these networks of churches. Although Jesus has been known and worshipped
as Lord and Saviour by countless generations, in another sense he has been
rediscovered, for the first time since the first century, following the modern
discovery and translation of the literature of his era. He has been rediscovered as
the Jewish prophet/messiah, who came announcing and demonstrating the
kingdom of God, a reality that belongs to the end of the age. It was this
rediscovered, eschatological Jesus that Ladd introduced to the evangelical
church. It is now common in theological circles to speak of the ministry and
message of Jesus as "inaugurated eschatology". However, it is not at all common
to have churches and leaders believe that we should do the same today, or enact
the message and ministry of Jesus, or make this theology the basis of their whole
agenda. This was the particular step taken by John Wimber and it is this legacy
that leavened the two church networks.

Karl Barth, the great Swiss theologian, warned us not to make any biblical theme
or principle other than the name "Jesus Christ" the focus of Scripture.[1] Christ
alone unifies all Scripture. When we look at the Word of God from the
perspective of the centrality of Christ, we realise that the message, ministry and
self-understanding of Jesus are inseparably linked to the kingdom. Jesus came
announcing the kingdom. His parables explained the kingdom, and his miracles
bore witness to its presence. In fact, the theme of the kingdom as preached by
Jesus Christ unites the whole flow of biblical truth, from Moses, through the
Prophets, the Writings, the Gospels, the Epistles and the Revelation of John.

Confrontation
God's rule is eternal and universal in the sense that he is, he was, and he always
will be the supreme ruler of all things. He rules the heavens, the angels, the
planets, nature, history, and all reality, yet we do not necessarily experience his
rule in our lives. The coming of the kingdom involves God's intervention in the
course of human history. His power breaks into the affairs of men, confronting
the forces that withstand him and imprison people, and interrupting the normal
course of society.

This is what happened to the Israelites when they were in bondage in Egypt,
ruled by the occult powers operating through the cruel system of Pharaoh's
government. The gods of Egypt, Pharaoh's rule and his army kept Israel in
slavery. Then the kingdom came. Moses spoke, and the "I am" of Israel judged
the gods of Egypt through plagues, signs and wonders, and his "outstretched
arm". Two powers were locked in conflict: the power of Egypt crumbled, and
Israel was set free.
The same thing happened when Israel invaded Canaan. The armies of Israel
clashed with the forces of the land, but God went before them to secure the
victory. When the Spirit of God anointed David as king, he defeated every
power that held Israel in subjection. The peace of David's rule was synonymous
with the peace of the kingdom. It reached its peak in the glorious rule of
Solomon, his son. The Lord of Israel ruled in and through his anointed kings.

These interventions of God led Israel to confess: "Our God reigns!" As Israel
experienced the rule of God, they grew to understand that it extends over nature,
foreign nations, the course of history, the heavenly beings, the sea, indeed, over
all. But God's rule is not a guarantee of his blessing. He intervenes according to
his sovereign will. When Israel misused and misconstrued God's reign, he
intervened in a new and painful way: he raised up foreign nations to judge Israel
and bring her into bondage again.
In this context, the prophets received the promise of the kingdom, not as an
immediate event as in the time of Moses, but as the assurance of the dawning of
a new age. This promise eclipsed everything that had gone before. God would
break through into human history once more, in a comprehensive revelation of
his kingly rule.
The prophets spoke of wonderful, dramatic things. A stone would fall from
heaven, pulverize all the kingdoms of this world, and grow to cover the earth.
The glory of God would outshine the sun. The Spirit of God would make the
wilderness into the Garden of Eden. God's anointing would rest on a descendant
of David and he would rule in universal power. All nations would bow at his
feet. The prisoners would be set free; the blind would see; the lame would walk;
and a new, special peace would come to God's people. This would be God's final
day, the event of his coming. The result would be a new people of God living in
a new world. Life in this age would be transformed into that of a new age where
God alone would reign and all his enemies would finally be defeated.

Prophet after prophet spoke of this new covenant, of a new priesthood, a New
Jerusalem, a new nation, and a new day. They waited, ruled relentlessly by one
foreign power after another. Was God's anger so great that he had turned his
back on them forever? Centuries passed until even the voices of the prophets
grew still. God's blessings in the times of Ezra and Nehemiah and the war of
independence led by the Maccabees was a glimpse of what had been promised.
When would the kingdom come?

Suddenly and unexpectedly, strange and mysterious things began to take place.
A wild-looking prophet appeared in the desert, predicting the arrival of the
anointed one. He introduced a carpenter from Nazareth as the fulfilment of all
Israel's dreams. Yet, in and through this carpenter, something new began to take
place. The Pharaohs of his age were spared for the moment, but the powers of
darkness came under heavy attack. The lame walked, the deaf heard, cripples
walked, sinners were forgiven, demons were cast out, the dead were raised,
demonic storms were calmed with a word, and the nearness of the kingdom was
announced with an authority that had never been heard before.
Multitudes came to hear this man. Everything he did and said testified of the
revelation of God. He spoke continually of the kingdom in parables and
beatitudes; in sayings, and stories. There was no doubt that an event of great
importance was taking place. He spoke of the kingdom in mysterious ways, as
though it was already present and yet still to come. In some ways, he seemed to
burst the confines of what the prophets had expected, yet he seemed unwilling to
reveal the total expectation of the kingdom, pointing instead to a final,
cataclysmic intervention.

The mysterious way in which he manifested the kingdom was one thing. The
blindness of the nation and its leaders was another. Was he the Messiah? Was he
a pretender? The blind affirmed the latter; God authenticated the former. Events
that were only expected in the future, final breakthrough of the kingdom, kept
occurring in and through Jesus Christ. The mystery of his person and the
blindness of the nation created a confrontation expected by the prophets but
understood by few - his message and his following began to collide with the
religious authorities.
Jesus took on the role of the servant, described by Isaiah as the one who would
suffer for the nation. He was crucified, but he rose again, manifesting a form of
life that was only expected in the age to come. After the resurrection, he spoke
continually of the kingdom, promising a further intervention of God's reign in
power. He commissioned his disciples to proclaim the kingdom to the ends of
the earth. Then he ascended, and the power of the Holy Spirit came upon the
early disciples.
The events that followed Pentecost resembled those that had occurred during
Jesus" life and ministry. Once again, the breakthrough of the kingdom was
manifested in confrontation. The good news confronted the darkness of the
ancient world. Demons were cast out. The sick were healed. The dead were
raised. Sinners experienced forgiveness. Towns and villages were cast into
turmoil as Jesus was proclaimed king. The testimony of the disciples who
witnessed these events, recorded in the Gospels, Acts, the letters, and the
Revelation of John, speaks of the kingdom.
Jesus commissioned his disciples to proclaim the kingdom to all nations to the
end of time, and we live in a time when the message is spreading as never
before. Church history has given evidence of continued interventions of the
kingdom, in nation after nation and from generation to generation. On the one
hand we await the ultimate breakthrough of God into human history when this
age will finally give way to a new age and God will rule supreme in a new
heaven and a new earth. On the other hand, the end has already come in Jesus
and through the outpouring of the Spirit. The church lives by the powers of the
future age while the powers of this age continue around us. The kingdom calls to
us from the future and breaks in on us with a final summons. It is worth selling
all we have to purchase this one pearl of great value. Let us respond therefore to
the word of Jesus to 'seek first the kingdom of God" (Matthew 6.33).
 PART ONE
THE OLD TESTAMENT
REVELATION OF THE KINGDOM
The teaching of both Testaments on the kingdom of God can be summarised in
short sentences that enable us to encapsulate the overall theme.

The Old Testament teaching can be summarised in two statements:

The Lord is king.

The Lord will become king.

These will be replaced by four statements that encapsulate the New Testament
teaching:

The kingdom of God will come.

The kingdom of God has come.
The kingdom of God is coming immediately.
The kingdom of God will be delayed.

You will notice that these statements relate to time, present and future. For the
Old Testament people of God, the kingdom was first present (the Lord is king)
and then future (will become king). For the New Testament people of God the
nature of the kingdom was more mysterious.
The two statements that summarise the Old Testament teaching relate to the
major sections of the Old Testament. "The Lord is king," reflects the pre-
prophetic writings (Pentateuch, Historical books and Wisdom Literature) that
bear witness to the Exodus event, the conquest and the Davidic monarchy. "The
Lord will become king," reflects the promise of the prophetic writings, which
looked forward to the Messianic coming of the kingdom after the loss of the
kingdom during the exile.

PICTURES OF THE KINGDOM

The thinking of the biblical writers was shaped by the great tradition of the
Hebrew prophets, who saw reality in a unique way. Their visions were symbolic
pictures of the visible world. Scripture is therefore filled with the pictures of the
kingdom.
The Exodus provides us with the first picture of the kingdom: the collision of
two powers.

The covenantal relationship between Yahweh, the victorious king, and Israel, the
vassal nation, presents us with the next picture of the kingdom
In the conquest of Canaan, we again see two powers in conflict, one invading the
other. The rise of the kingdom under David and Solomon is the final result of
conquest. It gives us a third picture. This time, the collision of powers develops
into a golden age.
Let us explore these historical events and begin to see what the prophets saw:
events pointing ahead to the kingdom of God.

The Exodus
The first explicit mention of the kingdom of God is found in Exodus. There are
implicit references as far back as Genesis one, where the use of the plural
(Genesis 1.26) may imply "throne language" for God the creator.[2] One could
follow such implicit themes prior to the Exodus event. However, the intention
here is to expound the more obvious biblical teaching on the kingdom.
The way the kingdom is presented in Exodus has much to do with the structure
of the narrative. The actual text that confesses, "The Lord will reign for ever and
ever" (15.18), forms the climax of a deliberate build up. Examining the text
backwards from this climax reveals much.

The base of the whole development is the revelation of the divine name. From
this point, the narrative flows until it reaches the climax of the confession of the
kingdom. The connection between the divine name and the revelation of the
kingdom runs as a theme through scripture. The revelation of the divine name
constitutes the announcement of the coming reign of God. Inherent in the name
of God is his nature to come down and intervene in the affairs of men. His
intervention takes place at two levels: first the spiritual-invisible and then the
military-visible. The result of the two-dimensional battle is liberation for God’s
people. The climax of their song of liberation is the confession of the kingdom.
The whole narrative, from chapter three, is therefore the prior commentary on
the key text, namely Exodus 15.18.

Kingdom Announcement - The Revelation of the

Divine Name
The Exodus reveals the name or character of God the king. The naming of a
person in Hebrew thinking involved more than the mere act of selecting a name.
A name encapsulated the character of a person. For Moses to ask, "What is your
name?" was therefore to ask, "What is your nature, or character?"

When Moses asked this question, God said to him, "I am who I am" (Exodus
3.13-14). The Hebrew name for God in this text is YHWH. It was considered so
holy in subsequent centuries that few ever pronounced it, leading to the loss of
the vowel signs. No one really knows how it was pronounced. Older translators
used Jehovah. More recent ones use Yahweh. Whatever its pronunciation, its
meaning is much more significant. It derives from the Hebrew verb to be (I am),
which carries the unique ability to refer to "being" in the past, present, or future
tense. Hence, when Moses asked about the divine name, the reply, "I am," can be
translated

I Was Who I Was,

I Am Who I Am, or

I Will Be Who I Will Be.

Notice the emphasis on the name in Exodus 6.6. Literally it reads, "Therefore,
say to the Israelites: "I am the I Am Who I Am, and I will bring you out from
under the yoke of the Egyptians.""
Further, if one examines how this verb is used in the Old Testament, one
discovers that it often described the word of the Lord coming to a certain prophet
(Jeremiah 1.4; Ezekiel 1.3). In each case, it carried the idea of "becoming
present." When the word of God came to prophets it meant that what they said
unleashed events. Their words were deeds, or "event-words." One could say that
the word carries the idea of being dynamically present or "coming" to be present.
It signifies that God has entered the situation. He has invaded history. He is
manifestly present. He is now present - He "is" in a special sense. It introduces
us to the profound theme of the God who "comes" to his people.[3]

Words have meaning in contexts. The context here is vital. The cry of the
Israelites in their slavery has reached God. He is announcing his purpose to
come down and intervene with signs and wonders. In so doing, He will confront
and interrupt the historical situation (3.7-15; 6.2-8). The whole passage is the
commentary and explanation of the divine name.[4]

If one could put the whole meaning-field of this name into a sentence it would
be,

I was, I am, and I will be, from generation to generation, the becoming
present one, coming down into the situation of man, to deliver and
transform, from bondage to liberty.

Kingdom Intervention - The Spiritual Battle

The message of the Exodus is of two kingdoms in collision: the power of God
against the power of darkness, the power of Yahweh against the power of Egypt.
To say, "kingdom of God," is therefore to say something about power, battle,
conquest, and victory.
The way of scripture is to show the invisible before the visible. Once the
invisible battle has been won, it translates into the visible battle, a point
understood by intercessors. Behind the political and military might of Egypt
were the spiritual powers of darkness. The story of the snakes (Exodus 7.10-12)
is a striking example of the spiritual battle. The snakes of the magicians
symbolized their occult powers. Aaron's rod swallowed their rods. The symbolic
meaning of this could not be missed.

The Lord declared that he would execute judgement against all the gods of
Egypt (12.12). Each Egyptian god had a physical representation or symbol. The
plagues (7-11) were a carefully devised way of saying, "your gods are defeated."
Let us look at some of the more evident examples.

The Nile was believed to be the sacred abode of the Nile god, Ha"pi. In the first
plague, the Nile god died: Ha"pi turned to blood. In the second plague, frogs, the
symbol of Heqit, goddess of fertility, multiplied beyond control. Instead of
making the crops and the livestock fertile, Heqit herself began to multiply. In the
fifth plague, the livestock began to die. The bull was sacred to Apis; cows, to
Isis; and the ram, to Ammon. The representations of three Egyptian gods were
exterminated. In the seventh plague, heaven, the home of the gods, was cast into
disarray. One of the highest deities in Egypt was Ra, the sun god. In the ninth
plague, Ra was blotted out. Probably most important in Egyptian belief was the
fact that Pharaoh and his first-born were held to be of divine conception. This
was the basis of his authority. The death of Pharaoh's first-born in the tenth
plague represented the death of a deity.

Each plague was preceded by Moses" prediction that it would take place. This
made it impossible for the Egyptians to believe that the events were coincidental.
Pharaoh could not contest the fact that a superior power lay behind the events.
The God of Israel was revealing himself as the sovereign Lord of nature. The
prediction, timing, and intensity of events took place at his behest. He showed
himself to be king over nature and over the gods of Egypt.[5]

Kingdom Intervention - The Military Battle

Having defeated the powers of Egypt in the heavenly realm, the Lord defeated
them on the military front. When the horses and horsemen of Pharaoh went into
the sea with their chariots, the Lord brought back the waters and drowned them.
This victory of God was the final act of deliverance for Israel.

The Kingdom Song of Liberation

The first thing that strikes one about this song is the repeated use of the divine
name. If one reads the introduction to the New International Version you will see
that whenever Yahweh appears, the NIV uses LORD, rather than Lord, which is
used when the Hebrew name Adonai (Lord) appears. Notice how often LORD/
Yahweh is uttered in this song (15.1, 2, 3a, 3b, 6a, 6b, 11, 16, 17b, 17c, 18). The
song is an exposition of the name, or character, of God as promised and revealed
to Moses at the burning bush, now known and experienced by the people of
Israel. It celebrates the Warrior God who wages war against Pharaoh and defeats
him. It is a song of liberation. Now, for the first time, a population of slaves was
a free people. Pharaoh, king of Egypt, had held the children of Israel in bondage.
The Lord confronted Pharaoh with the demand that he let Israel go. Pharaoh
refused, and the result was all-out war, decisively won by the LORD.

The Kingdom Confession

The climax of the song is Miriam's confession: "The LORD will reign for ever
and ever" (15.:18).

The Hebrew word Melek, "king", comes from Malak, "to be king; to reign." As
with the divine name, the concept is a dynamic one referring to dominion, rule,
and power. The "kingdom of God" refers only in a secondary sense to the realm
or area over which the king reigns. [6] The reign of God is not a place but an
event: God's intervention or breakthrough in the affairs of men.[7]

What does this mean?

The king isfor his people: he hears their cry and intervenes on their behalf. The
king is against the oppressor of his people: he declares holy war on the gods and
powers of Egypt. The king is a mighty man of war bringing deliverance through
battle. Moses pictures the Lord invading Egypt from the direction of Sinai, his
holy mountain, with "myriads of holy ones" (Deuteronomy 33.2-5). He comes
because he loves his people. The king's rule means freedom for his people.
Between them and bondage lies the sea. As they realize that they are finally free,
they begin to celebrate. The God of Israel is king and redeemer. His kingdom
brings liberation.

People who have been oppressed identify with the Exodus. When the early
settlers felt trapped and oppressed by British imperialism at the Cape, they
trekked into the hinterland. They saw themselves as the children of Israel being
led out of Egypt. The Latin American oppressed see their quest for liberation
from oppressive structures as another Exodus. African Americans and leaders of
the liberation struggle in South Africa have found the Exodus picture helpful in
the same way. These identifications are possible because the Exodus is a
powerful symbol of God's intervention in history and the affairs of men. He is
not a distant, faraway God. He is the active, invading, dynamic God who is very
much involved with man. We must add, though, that there were many oppressed
peoples during the time of Moses. God chose to liberate Israel because she was
his covenant nation.
The picture of the kingdom in the Exodus points forward to the fulfilment of the
kingdom in Jesus Christ. Matthew's Gospel shows how Jesus is the second,
greater Moses. Just as God came down and intervened for his people Israel so, in
Jesus Christ, God intervened for the sake of lost humanity. The same sense of
powers in collision emerges in the ministry of Jesus. As he cast out demons,
healed the sick, stilled the storm, and raised the dead, he was invading the prison
house of the strong man and setting the captives free.

Christians are people who can look back on the Exodus as the first picture of the
liberation they have experienced in Christ. As you read this, you may remember
what your life was like before Christ intervened. You may, on the other hand,
find yourself oppressed by the pain and misery of a life lived without the reality
of God. You too can experience the breakthrough of the kingdom, in and
through Jesus Christ. Just as the Exodus intervention was an expression of God's
grace, so too, in Jesus Christ, God has revealed "grace upon grace."

Kingdom and Covenant

The second picture of the kingdom is found in the Sinai covenant, introduced by
Yahweh calling to Moses, "You will be for me, a kingdom of priests and a holy
nation" (Exodus 19.3,6). The Lord delivered Israel in the Exodus so that they
could become his people and enter a covenant with him. Israel was under treaty
to Pharaoh as contract or slave labour. Yahweh defeated Pharaoh in battle and,
as the conquering king or suzerain, entered a treaty with the conquered nation -
yet not with Egypt, but with Israel. The Sinai covenant is a kingdom covenant. It
is a treaty laying down the terms upon which the conquering Lord is prepared to
relate to the conquered nation.

At the beginning of this century, archaeologists unearthed the archives of the

ancient Hittite empire at a village called Bogazkoy. This followed numerous
similar discoveries in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. An interesting aspect of
the Hittite archives was their international treaties. Sometimes nations entered
into friendship treaties with undertakings of mutual respect. These were parity
treaties. At other times, a suzerain or ruling king of a conquering nation entered
into an unequal treaty with the conquered nation. Ancient oriental scholars call
these 'suzerainty treaties."
These international treaties followed clearly defined conventions in whatever
nation they occurred. A modern example would be the forms used in hire-
purchase contracts. The fine print always follows certain legal and social
conventions with only names, addresses, terms, and interest rates differing.
The Sinai treaty followed the conventions of the day. Egypt was conquered to
liberate Israel from her contract labour treaty so that she could enter a new
covenant with Yahweh. Israel moved from the status of a slave nation to that of a
kingdom nation. No other suzerain lived among the people he had conquered. He
lived in his own land and ruled the conquered nation from a distance. This
suzerain, the Lord, came to live in the conquered nation as king. His relationship
with Israel was an unheard-of, new kind of suzerainty treaty (Deuteronomy 4.32-
34).

God entered the social and legal conventions of the day to enable Israel to
understand the nature of their relationship. His intervention created a new,
clearly defined relationship with oaths, testimonies, blessings and curses,
stipulations, statutes, and commandments. Once he became their king, their
relationship with him was secure (7.7-9; 10.14-17).[8]

We should pause here to consider the relationship between kingdom and

covenant. Traditionally, the covenant theme has been regarded as the most
fundamental biblical theology. Reformed theologians have drawn attention to the
Old and New Covenants, or Testaments, as testimony to it. Within the Old
Testament, the covenants of creation, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David are
taken as a key to unlock the comprehensive teaching of scripture. While such
views are still largely valid, one needs to affirm that the covenant relationship
between Yahweh and Israel is an outworking or expression of the coming of the
kingdom. Because the "I am" became present and enabled them to make the
confession, "The LORD will reign," and because he delivered them from Egypt
as a conquering suzerain king, therefore they became his covenant people. The
terms of the covenant are simply the terms of the Lord-vassal relationship. The
kingdom creates the covenant.

Kingdom and Conquest

The third clear picture of the kingdom is found in the conquest and the Davidic
monarchy. The Lord, the king in the midst of Israel, gives them victory as they
invade Canaan. Psalm 47 describes the Lord as the "great king over all the earth"
who "will subdue the peoples under us, and the nations under our feet" (verses 2-
3). Under Joshua, each tribe obtained its portion, the inheritance provided for
Israel (verse 4). If, in the Exodus, Israel came to know God as king over Egypt
and nature, they encountered his rule over "the nations" in the conquest. Through
his power, each nation Joshua invaded was subdued.

The Davidic Monarchy

Although the period of the Judges is a hiatus between the conquest under Joshua
and the victories under David, the Davidic monarchy is the real fulfilment of the
promises made to Moses of the good life in the Promised Land. There are three
primary texts for the Davidic monarchy: Psalm 2, 2 Samuel 7-8 and 1 Kings 4.

Psalm 2

This time, the confrontation is not between two kingdoms. Instead, all the
kingdoms of this world rise up against the Lord, the supreme king (Psalm 2.1-2).
But the Lord's power is overwhelming. He laughs as he rebukes and terrifies the
nations because they are easily destroyed (verses 4-5, 12).

In the Davidic monarchy, God would no longer speak through a prophet like
Moses. He would rule from heaven through the representative king he had
established on earth. This was a break with the past, which Samuel could not
understand. For him only Yahweh could be king. To have an earthly king like
the other nations was to depart from the unique relationship Israel had with the
Lord (1 Samuel 8.4-9; 19-22). But Samuel had to change his ideas and lay down
the terms of a new manifestation of the kingdom (10.25). There would, in fact,
be two kings: one in heaven and one on earth, the Lord reigning through the king
he had ordained.

The term Messiah, "anointed one," was the Israelite name for their king. David
was the first "anointed one." [9] Psalm 2, the Messianic Psalm, lays down the
calling and authority of the king of Israel. It is his letter of appointment. "I have
set my King on my holy hill of Zion" (verse 6). God says to him: "You are my
Son, today I have begotten you" (verse 7). From this privileged position, the
representative king can ask for power from the king under whose authority he
stands. With this anointing, he will rule the nations and even crush them into
submission (verses 7-9).

2 Samuel 7-8

There are obvious parallels between the Exodus event and the establishing of the
Davidic monarchy. The sequence of the Exodus was

The kingdom announcement inherent in the divine name,

The kingdom intervention through spiritual and military battle, and
The kingdom song of liberation.

With the Davidic monarchy we have

The prophetic promise of the kingdom,

The kingdom wars of David, followed by
The golden age of the kingdom under Solomon.

2 Samuel 7 and 8 are the texts for the first two stages. I Kings 4 is the major text
for the third stage.

2 Samuel 7

The chapter deals with the promise of the kingdom through the prophet Nathan.
It is sandwiched between two stages of victorious battle. David had just
completed the battles required to establish him as king over all of Israel (7.1).
The following chapter describes his victories over the surrounding nations. The
chapter itself falls into two obvious sections, the prophetic promise (verses 5-17)
and the response of David (verses 18-29).

The prophetic promise has various key elements:

There is a play on the word house . David wants to build a physical "house"
or temple for the Lord, but the Lord is going to build a "house" or dynasty
for David (verses 5-7, 11b-16).
Giving David a "house" or dynasty means giving him a great name, "like
the names of the greatest men of the earth" (verse 9). This anticipates the
focus of David's response, which is to exalt the great name of the LORD.
So there is "house" and "House" and "name" and "Name."
The essence of the "house" and the "name" is the establishing of the
kingdom. The dynasty, or sonship, or line of kings to follow David has the
divine promise spoken over it, "I will establish the throne of his kingdom
for ever … your house and your kingdom shall endure for ever before me,
your throne shall be established for ever" (verses 13, 16). House,name, and
kingdom are interchangeable concepts.
The basis of the kingship, as with Psalm two, is adoptive sonship. The same
formula is spoken, "I will be his father and he shall be my son" (verse 2;
Psalm 2.7).

The response of David matches the nature of the promise.

The exaltation of the name of David by the Lord (verse 9) now leads David
to exalt the name of the Lord. We have noted that where LORD is found in
the NIV, the Hebrew YHWH is in the original. Where YHWH and Adonai
are found together, the NIV translates, 'sovereign LORD." Where YHWH is
used with Sabaoth (hosts), it translates, "LORD Almighty." "These
renderings convey the sense of the Hebrew, namely, "he who is sovereign
over all the hosts (powers) in heaven and on earth, especially over the hosts
(armies) of Israel."" [10] Once again, the idea of kingship is inherent in the
name of God. The most pervasive thread running through David's response
is this name. Sovereign LORD is found in verses 18, 19 (twice), 20, 22, 28,
29. LORD Almighty is found in verses 26 and 27. LORD is found in verses
24, 25. God has done something to "make a name for himself" (verse 23).
Clearly, David is using all his verbal skills to speak the divine name, in
every way he knows how!
David is supremely aware of the unusual privilege of being a recipient of
the coming kingdom. The kingdom interventions of God are not his "usual
way of dealing with man" (verse 19), but his extraordinary way. They are
the times when Yahweh becomes manifestly present, revealing the essence
of his mysterious name. This is a "great thing" (verse 21). It not only sets
Yahweh apart so that no other God can be compared to him (verse 22), but
it sets Israel apart, as a truly unique people, delivered through the first great
coming of the kingdom in the Exodus (verse 23). The language echoes the
Song of the Sea (Exodus 15.11).
The basis of the coming kingdom is the promise of God. Almost all of
David's response is worship and praise. The only sense of intercession is
when David says, "Do as you promised" (verse 25). This is hardly a
difficult request, because for Yahweh to fulfil his promise, he simply has to
be himself, to be true to his great name.
Although the word covenant is not specifically mentioned, it lies
submerged behind the whole passage. It is most clearly implied in what
many have called the covenant formula; "Israel has become your people
and you have become their God" (verse 24), which finds its final expression
 in the eternal city of God (Revelation 21.3).

2 Samuel 8

The spiritual, invisible basis of the kingdom has been revealed in the prophetic
promise, where the name and names of God are clustered together as the
foundation of the Davidic house, or monarchy. Chapter 8 takes us through the
visible, military expression of the kingdom. It has a recurring refrain; "The
LORD gave David victory wherever he went" (verses 6, 14), enabling him to
subdue his enemies, make them subject, and cause them to bring tribute (verses
1, 2, 6, 11, 14). The chapter gives a chronicle of David's victories over all the
surrounding nations. The climax is found in verse 15, "David reigned over all
Israel, doing what was just and right for all his people." It functions in the same
way as Exodus 15.18. The whole of the previous narrative is its commentary.

Solomon's Reign
1 Kings 4

1 Kings 4 describes the kingdom of Solomon at its zenith and provides us with a
picture of what God's kingdom is supposed be like. Each section describes a
different aspect of Solomon's rule. Because Solomon was the representative
king, his rule describes the various facets of the kingdom of God manifest in his
time.

Kingdom celebration and multiplication

God promised Abraham that Israel would be like the sand on the seashore; under
Solomon it began to happen. This was a growing nation who ate, drank, and was
happy (verses 20-21). It was party time - God's party. They were tasting the
Messianic banquet, living to the fullest and prospering because Solomon's reign
reflected God's rule - because Israel had the kingdom of God; they had it all!

Kingdom prosperity

An oriental monarch was judged by the magnificence of his court. The greater
the table at his court, and the more state officials, foreign dignitaries, and
ambassadors he had, the greater the king. Solomon ruled from Tiphsah to Gaza,
and his influence extended way beyond his direct rule. His court must have
exceeded the full United Nations in session! One day's provision in Solomon's
court included thirty kors of fine flour, sixty kors of meal, 10 fatted oxen, 20
pasture-fed cattle, 100 sheep, deer, gazelles, roebucks and fatted fowl. What a
buffet! The queen of Sheba was overwhelmed at Solomon's wisdom and
prosperity (1 Kings 10.4-7).

Kingdom peace

The Hebrew term for peace, shalom, means much more than the absence of war.
It means total well-being in every aspect of your life - your health, marriage,
children (lots of them!), your relationship with your neighbour, your crops,
herds, vines, fruit trees, the weather, feasts, worship, and celebration. Not only
was the royal court something to behold, but also every Israelite family lived
under their own vine and their own fig tree. They experienced shalom because of
the sheer power of Solomon's rule expressed in his military machine and
efficient economy (1 Kings 4.25-28).
Kingdom life-style

Israel never distinguished between the material and the spiritual. The glory of
the kingdom included far more than material prosperity. God gave Solomon
wisdom and great insight (verses 29-31). Because he was God's king, he saw
things from the perspective of the kingdom. When a man's mind is shaped by the
kingdom, he becomes a great visionary, an expansive thinker. The text draws our
attention to this through a deliberate comparison: the nation is compared with the
sand on the seashore (verse 20). So is the mind of their king (verse 29). The
enlarged size of the nation is a measure of the enlarged mind of their king. It is
not possible to see the world, creation, mankind, and life through the eyes of the
kingdom and remain petty or small-minded.

Solomon spoke 3,000 proverbs (verse 32). As one reads the book of Proverbs,
most of which is attributed to Solomon, one is struck by the practicality of his
guidance for everyday life. Kingdom living is both glorious and profoundly
simple and practical.

His songs numbered 1,005 (verse 32), a further expression of the Messianic
anointing. We should remember that the Song of Songs, attributed to Solomon,
is one of the most uninhibited pieces of romantic and sexually explicit literature.
Like his father, most of his songs would have been for worship. However, the
fact that the songs of Solomon, both romantic and spiritual, are an expression of
the kingdom, is testimony to the Hebrew world-view that incorporates the whole
of life under the rule of God. When the kingdom comes to you, all your
relationships are transformed - not just the 'spiritual" ones.

He was also a biologist, zoologist, ornithologist, herpetologist, and ichthyologist

(verse 33). There was no aspect of creation that he could not comprehend. This
is the epitome of the Hebrew understanding of the wholeness of life that flows
from the rule of God. The kingdom involves the whole experience of man as the
servant of God. The rule of God applies to every possible area of our endeavour.
The Davidic monarchy ushered in a period of great worship. David established
the tradition of musicians and singers and Solomon built a magnificent temple.
This is the context of many of the Psalms - the faith of Israel that sprang from
this golden age of kingdom power. As subsequent generations suffered foreign
occupation and defeat, they declared their faith in God the king, beginning with
the Exodus, conquest, and re-conquest under David. God is king of all the earth
(Psalm 47.7), seated on a glorious throne in his heavenly temple (verse 8). The
Lord is king because he intervenes in the course of history. The better we
understand the extent of God's reign, the more glorious we perceive his throne to
be. Myriads of angels surround him and his presence is awesome. He is "clothed
with majesty" (Psalm 93.1), reigning in power. His rule is eternal and universal,
extending over all nations and all of nature (145.13).[11]

How Do We Experience God's Reign?

God's intervention always brings liberty: from slavery in the Exodus, from
wandering in the desert, and from foreign oppression before David. The
kingdom brings the rule of justice. Knowing God as your king means living
under his wise, righteous administration rather than oppressive rule (Psalm
96.10). He upholds the cause of the oppressed and gives food to the hungry. He
sets the prisoner free, watches over the alien, and sustains the fatherless and the
widow (146.7,9,10; 99.4). God's rule encompasses our entire lives - our family
life, community life, international relations, prosperity, poetry, philosophy of
life, and the wonders of nature. This Davidic shalom points beyond itself to its
full expression in Jesus, Son of David.

The Davidic picture teaches us to avoid all attempts to reduce the rule of Jesus to
a purely 'spiritual" and personal experience. If the kingdom had such massive
scope for ancient Israel, how much more should the reign of Jesus fill his
church? Christ should be Lord over the whole of our lives. We know that the
golden age will elude us prior to the final coming of the kingdom. It will only
really emerge when the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdom of our
Christ. But once we have grasped this picture of the kingdom, we can never
settle for less. Our vision of reality will always be pushing towards the ultimate
goal, shaping our whole approach to life.
 PROMISES OF THE KINGDOM
The reign of David and Solomon was a peak experience for Israel, but the peace
did not last. Israel and Judah entered a period of apostasy that ended in the
Babylonian exile.

A refrain echoes through the history of the kings of Israel: A certain king did
evil in the sight of the Lord and worshipped Baal. He died and his son ruled in
his stead. He also did evil in the sight of the Lord, worshipping Baal and
Asherah. Periodically, a good king emerged who reversed the process, but the
slide towards apostasy continued. Prophet after prophet warned Israel of certain
doom, but none was really heeded. Eventually, the judgement of God had to fall.
Israel was invaded and subdued by the Assyrians and then the Babylonians, and
the nation returned to bondage. Babylon became the new Egypt. The kingdom
was lost.

This dark night of the soul for Israel is expressed in Psalm 137: "By the rivers of
Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion" (verse 1). They were
asked by their captors to sing the songs of Zion, but how could they sing songs
of joy in a foreign land? The Psalm was popularised by Bony M in their hit,
Rivers of Babylon.

In these dark circumstances the prophets of Israel received the promise of

the kingdom: the Lord will become king. As they looked back at the
deliverance from Egypt and the Davidic monarchy, the conviction grew that
God would again redeem his people. Had he not promised David, "Your
house and your kingdom shall endure forever before me. Your throne shall
be established forever" (2 Samuel 7:16)?

The prophets saw that the future breakthrough would be far greater than the
previous interventions of the kingdom. There would be new elements in the final
intervention of God in human history, eclipsing the entire previous history of
redemption. This time, the kingdom would involve more than the Middle East. It
would cover the whole earth and reach cosmic proportions, eventually including
a new heaven and a new earth.

The Language of Promise

The study of the final intervention of God's kingdom at the end of the world is
known as eschatology, from the Greek eschatos, "last" and logos, "discourse".
Eschatology examines the destiny of the individual and mankind in general.
Another term closely associated with eschatology is apocalyptic. As life became
more and more negative and depressing for Israel, visions about the eschaton
became more graphic, and a specific type of prophetic symbolic language
emerged. The word apocalypse (apokalypsis) means a "revelation" or
"unveiling". Apocalyptic writings reveal things that are hidden and unveil the
future. Although the apocalyptic writings came after the prophetic writings (200
B.C.-A.D.100) and represent a later development in thought, many apocalyptic
passages can be found in the prophets.

Isaiah and Daniel are the two major Old Testament books about the kingdom.
They are important because Jesus drew frequently from them and understood his
role in terms of their kingdom promises. Both couched their prophetic word in
the context of deliverance from the Babylonian exile. To some extent, their
predictions were fulfilled in the return from exile and the restoration of the land
in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, but their promises ranged far beyond this
historical period, reaching to the ultimate horizon of world history. If the Lord
had made previous promises and kept them, he could make new ones and keep
these as well. The prophets realized that the future would eclipse the past. The
God who made a way through the Red Sea, who destroyed the chariots and
horses of Pharaoh, told them to forget the former things and not to dwell on the
past: he would do a new thing (Isaiah 43.16-19). Habakkuk looked back at the
Exodus and prayed for a glorious new coming of God (Habakkuk 3.1-15).
While the prophets looked to the future, they were firmly rooted in the past.
Exile was a traumatic experience for Israel, as it called into question everything
she believed about God, but she remembered the first experience of kingdom
intervention in the Exodus. God did not bring Israel out of Egypt because she
was a great nation, "But it was because the Lord loved you, and kept the oath he
swore to your fathers" (Deuteronomy 7.8). If God had fulfilled his promises in
the past, he could make further promises and fulfil them too. Also, this God had
revealed himself as "the First and … the Last" (Isaiah 44.6), Lord of all time.
The New Testament says: " 'I am the Alpha and the Omega", says the Lord God,
'who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty" " (Revelation 1.8). Only
such a God could reveal the meaning of history and declare what is yet to come.

The future orientation, based on the past, is so widespread in the prophets that
instead of explaining over and over what they were talking about, they
developed stock phrases that summed up the promise of the kingdom. The "day
of the Lord," "the latter days," and "in that day" all referred to the final
revelation of God's power and glory at the end of human history. Because the
prophets were seers, they were not strictly logical or systematic in their thinking.
Dreams and revelations do not operate on that level. They did not lay down neat
time scales or define whether the events God was showing them were near or
distant - exactly how and when God would fulfil the promise was up to him. As
a result, they were able to hold together the immediate and the distant future and
to describe events that were fulfilled in the deliverance and restoration from
exile in the same context as events that occurred at the first coming of Jesus
Christ or are yet to take place at the Second Coming of Jesus.
"That day" would not only be a day of blessing. Many passages speak of the end
as a moment of devastating judgement. It was naïve to believe that it would be a
purely positive experience. For some, it would be as if a man fled from a lion
only to meet a bear, or as though he rested his hand on the wall only to have a
snake bite him (Amos 5.18-19). It would be a cruel day for many, a time of
wrath and anger, a time of doom for the nations. Further, as part of their sense of
anticipation, the prophets often felt "the day" to be very near.

The Promise in Isaiah

Isaiah was one of the Old Testament books most quoted by Jesus and much of
his language has been carried into the New Testament.[12] He weaves together
various themes like a classical composer. The major theme, the coming of the
kingdom or of the Messianic era, runs throughout but emerges in a multiplicity
of movements and finer details. His starting point is one he holds in common
with the general prophetic view of the future: God, the king, will come and the
Spirit will be poured out, bringing salvation. In Isaiah's terms, salvation includes
the whole spectrum of God's mercy and peace in creating a new people of God
who will enter the new order.

God Will Come

Isaiah announces the good news that God will come to save and comfort his
people. This is where the idea of "gospel" or good news can rightly be said to
have originated. The good news to Zion is that God will deliver his people
(Isaiah 40.9-10). "How beautiful up on the mountains are the feet of those who
bring good news, who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim
salvation" (52.7). God has been waiting for this moment. He will come like a
pent-up flood. The glory of this coming will eclipse every previous coming. It
will be like people who have been walking in darkness seeing a great light. The
moon and sun will be abashed because they will be unable to compete with the
glory of the Lord Almighty. The impact will be so great that all mankind will see
it together. The people of God will "arise" and 'shine" because the glory of God
has come to them (60.1-2,19-20).
The Coming King

The Davidic monarchy had become firmly established as the permanent

expression of the kingdom. The new Davidic king would come - the anointed
one, the "Branch of the Lord", the 'stem of Jesse" (4.2). The government would
be placed on his shoulders and he would bear all the Messianic titles: Wonderful,
Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, and Prince of Peace (9.6-7). As the
justice of God flowed through David to Israel bringing freedom from oppression,
the new David would come with justice and righteousness for all nations in the
new, eternal covenant inaugurated through his death (11:4-5).

The Coming Spirit

Some of the most beautiful passages in Isaiah are about the coming of the Spirit.
He uses the symbols of water, rain, and rivers to signify the life-giving quality of
the Spirit's work (32.15; 35.1-7; 41.16-17; 43.19-20; 44.1-5).

In South Africa, we have the annual phenomenon of the Namaqualand flowers.

After the spring rains, the dry, semi-desert area just south of Namibia is
transformed into a carpet of flowers stretching as far as the eye can see. The
source is water, the miracle-working power of rain. Isaiah pictures people
blossoming and growing in abundant life because of the outpouring of the Spirit.
The descendants of Israel would spring up like grass, the desert would burst into
life, and water would gush forth in the wilderness for the poor and needy.
The knowledge of the Trinity - the fact that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit -
was revealed through the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ
and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. One cannot see this in the Old
Testament without New Testament hindsight, but in describing the coming of
God, the coming of the king, and the outpouring of the Spirit, Isaiah makes it
clear that it is the Triune God who will finally break through into human history.
God will come in the fullest sense, bringing salvation.
The Coming Salvation

Isaiah promised that God's salvation would reach the ends of the earth. It would
be universal and last forever (49.6; 51.4-6). We said that the word shalom
conveys a sense of total well-being. The term salvation is equally all- embracing.
It implies complete wholeness. The reign of God would affect man's entire being
and his total environment. There would be the forgiveness of sins, the liberation
of the captives, shalom for God's people, the resurrection of the dead, and the joy
and praise of the end times.

There would be the forgiveness of sin and healing. No one living in the city
of God would be ill and the sins of all who dwell there would be forgiven.
God would blot out their transgressions (33.24; 43.25).
Salvation would bring freedom: the deaf would hear, the blind see, the lame
leap like deer, the dumb shout for joy, and those imprisoned would be set
free (29.17-19; 35.5-6; 42.6-7; 49.8-9). The anointing of the Spirit gave the
Messiah the authority to proclaim this freedom (61.1; Luke 4.18).
Salvation would mean peace for God's people. For the writer of Kings and
Chronicles, peace was the term that best described the quality of David's
rule. For Isaiah, peace is part of a salvation that includes healing,
forgiveness, liberation, and resurrection. He describes this peace
graphically:

The wolf will live with the lamb,

The leopard shall lie down with the goat,

The calf and the young lion and the yearling together;

And a little child will lead them.

 They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain,

For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord

As the waters cover the sea. (11.6, 9)

Every symbol of danger and depravity would lose its power to harm. The
serpent would eat dust and the lion straw, and the wolf and the lamb would
feed together. Man's work would no longer be in vain. In effect, the results
of the fall would be reversed. God would provide peaceful, secure homes
and an end to violence and destruction (65.20-25).

Salvation would include the resurrection of the dead. "He will swallow up
death forever. The Sovereign Lord will wipe away the tears from all faces;
He will remove the disgrace of his people from all the earth" (25.8). Death
will be abolished in the end time: "Your dead shall live; their bodies will
rise" (26.19).
Isaiah spoke of this time of salvation, forgiveness, healing, and resurrection
as a time of great joy, the joy of the future age. When salvation comes to
the people of God, they will want to shout aloud and sing for joy. Because
salvation will be universal, the sound of joy will be heard from the ends of
the earth. The heavens, the earth, and the mountains will burst into song
together (12.3-6; 24.14-16; 49.13).

In Jewish thinking, a time of great joy and celebration meant a feast. As the
prophets continued to speak about the future Messianic age, the idea developed
of the final feast to eclipse all feasts with God himself as the host. Solomon's
table formed the basis for this anticipation of the future.
Isaiah also had the joyous return from exile in mind. "The ransomed of the Lord
will return. They will enter Zion with singing; everlasting joy will crown their
heads. Gladness and joy will overtake them, and sorrow and sighing will flee
away" (51.11). The ruins of Jerusalem would join with the mountains, the hills,
and all the trees of the field in the great celebration.
As a result of this powerful salvation, God's people would be completely
reconstituted. There would be a new people forming a new nation, living in a
new city with a new temple.

The New People

The new people would be formed out of every nation and all the tribes of Israel
scattered abroad. At God's final, decisive summons - a great trumpet whose
sound would reach to Assyria and Egypt and to the ends of the earth - God's
scattered people would return to Jerusalem from the four corners of the earth
(27.12-13). All the nations would be gathered to Jerusalem, the city of God,
which would become the capital of the world. Jerusalem is depicted as a great
mother, suckling God's people at her comforting breasts (66.10-14). The wealth
of nations will flow into the city. The whole world will see the glory of God.
David's just rule will extend to all nations as the salvation of God reaches to the
ends of the earth. The peace and joy of the kingdom will be found in all nations.

The New Order

A redeemed people, forgiven, healed, liberated, and raised from the dead,
gathered into a new Jerusalem, consisting of people from every nation, requires a
totally new context. Isaiah does not shrink from taking the message to its
ultimate conclusion: there will be a new earth and new heaven - a totally new
order (65.17; 66.22-23).
We said that the prophets spoke of both the positive and the negative dimensions
of the "day of the Lord." It would be a great day and, simultaneously, a day of
devastation. Alongside this glorious new order we learn of devastating
judgement. God will lay waste to the earth and devastate it. He will scatter its
inhabitants. Terror awaits those who face God's punishment (24.l-13, 17-22;
66.15-16). His anger is directed at the pride and arrogance of man: the worm will
not die and the fire will not be quenched for those who have rebelled against
God (2.12-18).

Isaiah's vision of the coming kingdom is massive in its scope. He saw the
coming of the kingdom as one great event: God in his glory, the king in his
justice, the Spirit in abundance, salvation, forgiveness, healing, liberation, joy,
resurrection, the new international people of God, the new Jerusalem, the new
order, and the final judgement was all part of the "day of the Lord". All this
together is what Isaiah meant by the Messianic hope or the kingdom of God.
The first breakthrough of God in the Exodus led to the calling of a covenant
people. This covenant people only really achieved a covenant lifestyle during the
Davidic monarchy under Solomon, a golden age that led to a more complete
picture of shalom.This in turn became the basis for Isaiah's further understanding
of the Messianic era of salvation culminating in the new world order, a
development pregnant with expectation.

The Promise in Daniel

Jesus referred to himself as the 'son of Man." This is the key to his understanding
of the kingdom. We find one of the major sources of this name in Daniel, and the
context in which it appears is crucial to our understanding of Jesus" teaching.
We will discuss the visions in Daniel 2 and 7.

Daniel 2

Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, had a dream that no one but Daniel could
understand. He saw a large human image that was struck by a stone that fell
from heaven. The stone grew until it covered the whole earth. Daniel's
interpretation concerned the fate of the kingdoms of this world and the
breakthrough of the kingdom of God (Daniel 2.31-45). The image is that of a
man, representing various human kingdoms - the successive manifestations of
governments and powers in history. Traditionally, the image is interpreted as
follows:

Head of gold Babylonian Empire

Breast and arms of silver Medo-Persian Empire
Belly and thighs of bronze Greek Empire
Legs and feet Roman Empire[13]

We could add the names of all the great human empires: Charlemagne,
Napoleon, Ottoman, German, Russian, and American. The image is a symbolic
way of describing all the kingdoms of this world as they succeed one another to
the end. By way of contrast, the stone is not cut by human hands. It falls from
above, initiated by the God of heaven, and fills the whole earth as God's
everlasting kingdom.
There are two kinds of kingdoms, totally different in nature.

One is earthly and human, the other heavenly and divine. The contrast between
the kingdom of man and the kingdom of God is the basis of one of the most
fundamental concepts of biblical eschatology, the difference between this age
and the age to come. The four world empires in the vision represent the history
of this world, this present age. The coming of the kingdom of God refers to a
new world, the age to come.
This is the basic conceptual framework of all the New Testament writers. Jesus,
in the parable of the two kinds of seed (Matthew 13.24-30, 36-43), speaks of the
"end of the age" and the "kingdom of their Father," which is to come. In Mark
10.30 he speaks of "this present age" and the "age to come," as does Paul in
Ephesians 1.21.
A word about the "new age" may be appropriate here. The devil, and occult
movements in general, counterfeit the works of God. Many interpreters have
noted in Revelation the false trinity of the dragon, the beast, and the false
prophet that sets itself up against the Triune God. The genuine revelation of God
is paralleled by a demonic counterfeit. The idea of a new age is one such
instance. The idea has its origin in the Old Testament prophets and comes into
particularly clear focus in Daniel. This age will be superseded by the new age or
age to come; the age of the Messiah. False pretenders to Messiahship have
attempted to initiate such a period. Hitler proclaimed a thousand year reign (the
Third Reich) focused on himself. Today, an occult movement proclaims its own
"new age." The phenomenon is therefore not new.
The issue is not the language one uses, but what one means by that language. I
will use the age to come or the new age to mean the promise of the kingdom of
God. Others may use the term to refer to an occult utopia, but the two usages
could not be more different. The one is the very antithesis of the other.
Christians are in danger of throwing away their birthright, the "new age" in the
Scriptures, out of fear that they may absorb some of the ideas of the New Age
movement. Why should we allow the devil to steal our language and then be
afraid to use it ourselves? I will continue to speak of the "new age" or
"Messianic era" or "age to come!" Those who accuse me of being "new age"
because of this would be guilty of a deliberate misrepresentation. Can Christians
speak of the kingdom of God in an unbiblical manner and be deceived into
occult new age thinking? We will tackle this in the next module. At this point, I
simply wish to clear the way on the question of terminology.
The transition from this age to the age to come is cataclysmic.

The stone pulverizes the image (2.34-35). The kingdom of God "crushes all
those kingdoms" (2.44). This is no gentle, evolutionary change. The transition is
radical and drastic - very different from its occult counterfeit.
The human and divine kingdoms of Daniel 2 are viewed both individually
and corporately.

Nebuchadnezzar, the head, is an individual king, but the fourth kingdom is

described as two groups that intermarry but never merge into one. The same
applies to the heavenly kingdom. Commentators use Daniel 2.34 to refer to the
divine origin of Christ, but the kingdom brought by the individual stone grows
into an empire that covers the globe. This point becomes more explicit in Daniel
7.1-28.

Daniel 7

Daniel 7 parallels Daniel 2. Once again, we have four world empires culminating
in an empire with ten subdivisions, the ten toes (2.41) and the ten horns (7.7).
These empires end abruptly with the coming of a heavenly kingdom of
everlasting duration. The beast is slain, ushering in the future, everlasting
kingdom. As with the former vision, the beasts, following the traditional
interpretation, represent the four great world empires.

Lion Babylonian Empire

Bear Medo-Persian Empire
Leopard Greek Empire
Fourth beast Roman Empire

There is a total contrast between the earthly and heavenly kingdoms.

The beasts rise out of the sea, an apocalyptic symbol for the people of the earth,
the sea of humanity. This is why they are also said to arise out of the earth. The
kingdom of the age to come is heavenly in origin. It is initiated by the court
sitting in heaven. One comes on the clouds of heaven and the people of this
kingdom are the 'saints of the Most High."

The bringer of this kingdom is the Son of Man.

The Son of Man is a heavenly, pre-existent, divine figure (Ezekiel 1.26). He

appears out of heaven as though he has always been there and has no origin in
time, a heavenly man who is both human and divine. He comes with the clouds
of heaven and takes his place before the throne. To him is given dominion and
glory and kingdom (7.14).

The idea of this heavenly man developed in the apocalyptic writings, particularly
the Ethiopic Enoch. In this literature, the Son of Man rises out of the sea and
comes riding on the clouds of heaven for the great day of revelation. He will
deliver creation and judge the world. He is sometimes identified with the
Messiah.[14] To the Jewish mind therefore, to say Son of Man was to refer to the
pre-existent, heavenly man who would come from heaven to destroy the
kingdoms of this world and set up the eternal kingdom of God.

The Son of Man is a corporate personality.

This was a concept to which the Hebrews were quite accustomed. The Son of
Man is both individual and corporate. In Daniel 7.13, an individual man appears.
To him is given dominion and glory and kingdom. However, in Daniel 7.18 we
are told that the 'saints of the Most High" will inherit the kingdom and in verse
27 that the "kingdom and sovereignty … will be handed over to the saints, the
people of the Most High." The text speaks about an individual Son of Man and
in the same passage, about a corporate body.
The heavenly man is a representative figure. Though individual, he contains
within himself an entire people. His name is really "mankind." This is exactly
the way Paul speaks of Adam in Romans 5. Adam (meaning man) is both the
individual husband of Eve, who sinned, and the representative of the human
race. When he fell, we fell in him. All men are either "in Adam" or "in Christ."
In fact, Christ is called the "last Adam" or 'second Adam" (1 Corinthians 15.45-
48). Just as Adam contains the fallen human race within himself, so the Son of
Man contains a new, heavenly, redeemed human race within himself. When he
comes, a new humanity begins. A heavenly "mankind" or human race comes to
reign. We have then, two kinds of human race: the sea of humanity in this age,
out of which beastly or subhuman empires arise and the heavenly race, out of
which an everlasting kingdom emerges. The first human race is depraved or
beastly; the second is redeemed or heavenly.

To Sum Up
God deals with man in terms of two ages, this one and the age to come. The
dawning of the new age is the same as the coming of the kingdom promised in
Isaiah. The kingdoms that exist now are of human origin, corrupt and consigned
to divine judgement. The kingdom that is coming is the work of God. It is
eternal. The change from this age to the age to come will be violent and
cataclysmic. The one who ushers in the kingdom, the Son of Man, is a heavenly,
divine, human figure who contains within himself the future redeemed humanity
that will occupy the kingdom of God.

What is the promise of the kingdom? It is a vision that grew out of Israel's
understanding of the breakthrough of the kingdom in the Exodus, the Sinai
covenant, and the Davidic monarchy. The vision burst the bounds of past
experience to include a future coming of God that will be final, the "day of the
Lord." It sees God breaking through again, this time more gloriously, once and
for all. God will come in all his glory. The king will come with justice. The
Spirit will be poured out in abundance. And the result will be salvation,
forgiveness, healing, liberation, resurrection, and eternal joy that reaches the
whole world. This will create a new people of God in a New Jerusalem, a new
heaven, and a new earth. Human rebellion and sin will be judged. And all this
will come about decisively and suddenly, violently, like a stone falling from
heaven and pulverizing the world we live in. The one who ushers it in is the Son
of Man.

The Lord is king, and he will become king!

We are now ready to turn to the New Testament.
 PART TWO
THE NEW TESTAMENT
REVELATIOIN OF THE
KINGDOM
The kingdom of God will come.

The kingdom of God has come.

The kingdom of God is coming immediately.

The kingdom of God will be delayed.

Herein lies the mystery of the kingdom.

FULFILMENT OF THE PROMISES

The Old Testament drew to a close with a sense of great expectation. Isaiah and
Daniel pictured the kingdom as vast and majestic. The day of the Lord would be
the complete, final revelation of God to mankind. Every previous coming of the
kingdom involved confrontation between the power of God and the oppressor of
his people. The living God would again demonstrate his supreme power and
authority. This kingdom breakthrough was expected at any moment; but instead,
hundreds of years of silence, oppression, and waiting followed.

Can you imagine a people waiting for centuries for the fulfilment of such a
promise? As time passed, their expectations became desperate and bizarre. The
promises of God were exaggerated, politicised, or trivialised. The literature of
the intertestamental period illustrates thIsaiah Some writings said that when
Messiah came, each vine would bear a hundred clusters of grapes, each cluster
with a thousand grapes, and every woman would have a hundred children. A
frightening thought for the ladies! Pretenders arose, claiming to be the Messiah.
Each claim was proved false, but their attempts made a mockery of a dying
hope. Others accepted the Roman status quo as the Roman system continued its
relentless control. Only a few kept the hope of the kingdom alive. Those who
were moved by the births of John and Jesus were the last glowing embers of a
fire that was almost extinguished. Zacharias and Elizabeth, Simeon, and Anna
were old people, holding on to an ancient promise.

A prophet arose in the desert, and for the first time in hundreds of years, the
people heard the ring of authority. Someone had actually heard from God! His
words of judgement and promise echoed those of the Old Testament prophets.
People must repent. The time was short. The kingdom of God was near. He
would be followed by the one who was to come. He announced this event in
terms that spoke unmistakably of the end, the day of the Lord. The axe was laid
to the root of the trees. Wrath was coming. The bad fruit would be thrown into
the fire.

As John preached a repentance that required moral change, Jesus arrived and
received the anointing promised for the Messiah. The voice of God spoke from
heaven, authenticating him as the Son of promise. The message of John and
th978-0-9869723-7-9 e baptism of Jesus fulfilled the promise of Isaiah (Mark
1:2-3, 11).

The confrontation was immediate. This time the enemy was not Pharaoh, the
nations that had held Israel captive in her own land or the Babylonian kingdom,
but the ultimate enemy of God's people, the devil himself. The Spirit drove Jesus
into the wilderness to do battle with him for forty days, a Hebrew way of
describing a fairly short period (1.12-13). Jesus returned from the desert
triumphant, "filled with the Holy Spirit" (Luke 4.1). He proclaimed the same
message as John, the language of Isaiah placing his words unmistakably in an
"end of the world" context. The time of waiting had ended. The good news had
arrived. People must repent and prepare to meet their God because the kingdom
was near. The breakthrough had come!

Mark's Gospel
This sense of rapid, dramatic fulfilment is made particularly plain in Mark's
Gospel. His story reads like an exciting eyewitness account. Three words
characterise the coming kingdom:

Immediately,
Authority, and
Mystery.

The Immediacy of the Kingdom

Everything seems to happen immediately, the next day or, at the most, a few
days later. Jesus was driven into the wilderness "immediately." He called Simon
and Andrew and they followed him "immediately." James and John followed
him without hesitation. People were amazed at Jesus" teaching in the synagogue.
A demon began to manifest, but Jesus rebuked it and it left "immediately." This
was all-out spiritual warfare. "As soon as" he left the synagogue, Jesus went to
Peter's house and healed his mother-in-law. That evening, the whole community
gathered and more healings occurred. Jesus was driven by a sense of urgency.
Very early the next morning, he was on the go again. He had to preach in all the
villages. When a leper asked for mercy, he was healed "immediately." Jesus sent
him away "at once." A few days later, the story continues in another area.
All this happens in the first chapter of Mark's Gospel, and the point is obvious.
The kingdom came suddenly, dramatically, and unexpectedly.
The Authority of the King

The Old Testament prophets had been calling out for centuries to a rebellious
people who would not obey. Now, Jesus called men with the authority of God,
and they dropped everything to follow him. Through him they heard the final
summons of God.

When Jesus spoke in the synagogue, the people recognised an authority

they had never heard before. According to Matthew, Jesus spoke with an
authority that superseded the Law of Moses. In Jewish culture, only God
could do that. That is why the people were amazed.
He had authorityover demons. They immediately recognised it. With a
word, he rebuked them so that the people could understand the authority of
God.
His authority extended over sickness. He told a fever to go, and it did. He
healed a leper and a paralytic.
His healing of the paralytic demonstrated that he had the authority to
forgive sins . The scribes believed that God alone could forgive sins. Jesus
made his claim abundantly clear: "But that you may know that the Son of
Man has authority on earth to forgive sins … I tell you, get up, take your
mat and go home" (Mark 2.10-11). Daniel spoke of the 'son of Man," the
heavenly One who would come to earth with the full authority of God.
God's rule had drawn near. His authority was breaking through and
destroying every power that stood in its way.
The account of the stilling of the sea (4.35-41) reveals that Jesus" authority
over nature was that of God himself. What Jesus did amazed the disciples
and made them ask: "Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!"
(4.41). In Hebrew thought, the roaring of the sea symbolised the chaos and
disorder that challenge the rule of God. Only the living God could intervene
 against such a power. Jesus spoke to the storm in the same way that he
spoke to demons, indicating that the same evil power had caused the storm.
A cosmic battle was raging between the rule of God and the power of
Satan. Jesus dealt with it with complete authority. Just as the sea raged, so
the demoniac raved amongst the tombs, totally out of control (5.1-20).As
with the storm, no human power could still him. He was powerfully
controlled by a legion of demons. The demons pleaded for mercy because
they feared the rule of God that had drawn near in Jesus. Delivered, the man
was calmed as the sea had been.
The account of the demoniac is followed by the healing of the woman with
the twelve-year bleeding problem (5.21-43). When she touched him, power
went out of Jesus, showing that the new authority was resident in him. The
woman approached him while he was responding to Jairus's plea to heal his
daughter. His daughter died and Jesus promptly demonstrated that he had
authority over death as well. The people were completely astonished (5.42).

Each account of Jesus" authority has one common element: men are set free
from whatever binds them. The other Gospel writers show how these events
fulfil Isaiah's promise. Luke tells us that Jesus read the passage about the
liberation of the captives at his opening address in Nazareth (Luke 4.16-19).
According to Matthew, Jesus consciously fulfilled Isaiah's expectations
(Matthew 11.1-5).

The Mystery of the Kingdom

Running through the entire ministry of Jesus is the same sense of confrontation
that we saw in the Old Testament picture of the kingdom. But, the enemy now
assumes a different shape. He is no longer identified with particular nations and
the gods that rule them, but with all the evil of the world and all opposition to
God. The final cosmic battle has begun. The strong man himself comes into
view: his fortress or headquarters is being attacked (Mark 3.26-27). The
presence of Jesus resists him at every point. The demons recognise what is
happening to a far greater extent than the people, and they are caught off guard.
Has the end arrived? (Matthew 8.29). Everything about Jesus indicates that the
final judgement has drawn near. Yet strangely, other aspects of the ministry of
Jesus seem to run counter to this dramatic realisation. Perhaps the end has not
arrived.

It Is Here!

Jesus" acts of authority and his confrontations with Satan force people to ask
ultimate questions: Who is this? What is happening? As we look at Jesus, we
find that his every action speaks of the fulfilment of the promise of the kingdom.
This becomes clear with the feeding of the multitude.

Moses had led Israel to safety in the wilderness. There, God taught and
miraculously fed them. When they wandered, God was their shepherd. Moses
prayed that another shepherd would be raised up to give the nation ultimate
security (Numbers 27.17). Ezekiel promised that the Davidic Messiah would
shepherd the people of God in the wilderness (Ezekiel 34:5, 23, 25). The
wilderness symbolised the place of Messianic rest for the people of God. Jesus
therefore chose to take his disciples to rest in the wilderness (Mark 6.31-32). The
people came to him and he had compassion on them like the true shepherd of
God (6.34). He taught them many things and fed them miraculously from a few
loaves and fishes. The Messiah was revealed to the common people.

The previous passage (6.11-29) depicts the wealth and luxury of Herod's court.
Herod was a king who exercised his power by executing the prophet of the
kingdom. His sumptuous feast compared very badly with the glory of God,
revealed to the common people at another, heavenly feast, prepared in the
wilderness.
Jesus commanded the crowd to sit down in groups of hundreds and fifties, just as
Moses had done (Exodus 18.21). Although they were in the wilderness, there
were patches of grass for them to sit on. Already, the wilderness was turning into
green pastures where the Shepherd would feed his flock (Psalm 23) and they
could partake of the Messianic banquet. The twelve filled baskets spoke of
overflowing abundance, and the twelve disciples of the new nation of God.
This event was followed by another stilling of the storm. This time Jesus showed
his authority over nature in an even more dramatic manner by actually walking
on the water. The disciples were amazed because "they had not understood about
the loaves" (Mark 6.52). If they had realized that the feeding of the multitude
revealed that Jesus was the Messiah, they would not have been so surprised at
his command of nature.

The feeding of the five thousand took place in a Jewish environment. The
miraculous feeding of the four thousand took place in the region of the
Decapolis, a Gentile environment (7.31, 8.1-12). As Isaiah had anticipated, the
Messianic salvation was reaching beyond Israel to include the nations.

It Is Not Here

In these and so many other ways, the Gospels testify to the fact that the kingdom
of God broke through in Jesus. What had been expected for so long was now
really taking place. But there was much about Jesus that the disciples and his
followers found mysterious and difficult to understand. They were looking for
the kingdom and deeply excited by the signs of its presence in Jesus, but they
were confused about the veiled way in which Jesus revealed it. The demons
seemed to know more than the people did. They failed to grasp who Jesus really
was.
Jesus bemoaned their dullness. "Do you still not see or understand? Do you have
eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don"t you remember? When I
broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets of pieces did you
pick up?" (8.17-19).
There was more to the mystery of Jesus" identity than the disciples" blindness.
He forbade some from saying too much about who he really was (1.43-44) and
did not share the secrets of the kingdom openly with everyone (4.11). When it
was revealed to Peter that Jesus was the Christ, he was warned to "tell no one
about Him" (8.30). The revelation of Jesus" glory was limited to the inner circle
of Peter, James and John (9.2-13). He forbade them from sharing the secret until
he had risen from the dead.

Why did the Messiah choose to hide himself in this way? Why did some of the
things promised by the Old Testament prophets take place and others not? When
would the nations be judged? When would David's Son overthrow Caesar and
rule as universal king? Why did Jesus not allow the crowd to take him by
popular acclaim and declare him to be king (John 6.15)? Had the kingdom really
come? John the Baptist himself struggled with this mystery (Matthew 11.3). And
yet there was dramatic, exciting evidence that the kingdom had finally dawned.

How should we understand what happened in Jesus Christ? How does his
coming relate to the coming of the kingdom? We will need to examine the
mystery of the kingdom in more detail.

THE MYSTERY OF THE

KINGDOM
Jesus often prefaced his teaching about the kingdom with the statement: "He
who has ears to hear, let him hear!" He said that the parables of the kingdom
were closed to the minds of some, but opened to others. The kingdom was
wrapped in a cloak of mystery. Jesus explained some of the secrets of the
kingdom to his disciples (Matthew 13.11-13), but its nature was not obvious.
Understanding it required special insight.
The summary statements now begin to make more sense. As noted, if the Old
Testament view of the kingdom can be summarized in two statements:

The Lord is King.

The Lord will become King.

The New Testament view can be summarized in four statements:

The kingdom will come.

The kingdom has come.
The kingdom is coming immediately.
The kingdom will be delayed.

These statements seem contradictory. How can an event be simultaneously

future and present? Yet, this is precisely where part of the mystery lies.

Wherever there are truths in Scripture that are in creative tension with each
other, the danger exists that people will try to explain away one side of the
tension in favour of the other. This is especially true of the kingdom. Many have
wanted to choose certain texts about the kingdom and use them to explain away
others. It is important to understand that the four strands of teaching we have
identified cannot be dealt with in this way. Let us consider how they can all be
true at the same time.

The Kingdom Will Come

Jesus thought in terms of two ages or two worlds: the present and the future
(Mark 10.30). Like Daniel, he saw this future kingdom in terms of the coming of
the Son of Man. This means that the kingdom is eschatological - of the end
times.
Towards the end of his life, Jesus and his disciples sat on the Mount of Olives.
They asked him about the sign of the end of the age. His answer is one of the
lengthiest of his teachings recorded in the Gospels (Matthew 21-25 and the
synoptic parallels). This teaching falls into three sections:

the build up to the tribulation and the beginning of sufferings (24.1-14),

the time of great tribulation (24.15-28),and
the coming of the Son of Man after the tribulation (24.29-25.46).

The Jews believed that a time of crisis would precede the coming of the
Messiah. These were to be the birth pangs of the future age. His teaching fits
into this context. The Son of Man comes in the last period.

The glorious coming of the Son of Man will be like lightning that "comes from
the east" and "is visible even to the west" (24.27). He will come on the clouds of
heaven to gather his people (24.30-44). The faithful are warned to be ready at all
times (24.45-25.13). Jesus explained that unbelievers will be taken by surprise at
the sudden judgement, but believers should read the sign of the times, the
budding of the fig tree (24.32-35), and be ready to share the glorious destiny of
the Son of Man. He will sit on the throne and judge all the nations (25.31-32).
He will appoint a kingdom for his disciples, and they will judge the twelve tribes
of Israel (Luke 22.29-30). The passages in Matthew, Mark, and Luke about the
gathering of God's chosen and the judgement of the wicked at the coming of the
Son of Man are repeated in similar statements in Paul's letters, especially 1
Thessalonians 4.13-5.11 and 2 Thessalonians 1.3-12. The Lord will come with a
loud command, the voice of the archangel, and the sound of the trumpet of God
(1 Thessalonians 4.16). He will be "revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his
powerful angels" (2 Thessalonians 1.7-8). These passages are clearly about the
future, final coming of Christ at the end of the world.
Revelation follows a similar pattern. The time of great world tribulation will
precede the coming of the Messianic kingdom. The power figures of this world
will want to hide away from the "wrath of the Lamb" (Revelation 6.15-17). The
rider on the white horse will come with eyes like "a flame of fire" and destroy
the enemies of God (19.11-16). This will be the climax of the coming of the
kingdom. Heaven will begin to sing: "The kingdom of the world has become the
kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will reign forever and ever!"
(11.15).

The idea that the kingdom is a joyous feast (Luke 22.29-30) is developed more
fully in the context of the marriage supper of the Lamb (Revelation 19). This
will be followed by the future order, a new heaven and a new earth, with the
bride of Christ as the New Jerusalem (20-21). The prophecies of Isaiah find their
fulfilment in this future kingdom.
A whole school of thought developed that attempted to "explain" or even remove
these passages, creating the impression that Jesus spoke only of the present
kingdom and not of a future kingdom. But the evidence is overwhelming. Jesus
and all the apostles believed in a future, final, dramatic intervention of God,
which will end this world and inaugurate the next.

The Kingdom Has Come

The emphasis in the New Testament on the futurity of the kingdom is balanced,
in almost equal proportion, by the emphasis on the presence of the kingdom as
the fulfilment of the Old Testament promises. We have seen that the Old
Testament prophets spoke of the "day of the Lord," the future breakthrough of
the kingdom. The whole Jewish nation waited for hundreds of years for this
promise to be fulfilled. Many Messianic pretenders had claimed to fulfil the
promise (Acts 5.35-36), but not until Jesus said, "The kingdom of God is among
you" (Luke 17.20-21) had the Messianic age finally arrived.
The fact that a future kingdom can suddenly be present is unexpected and
strange. It breaks through like the stone in Daniel 2. The most probable
translation of Matthew 11.12 is, "the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully
advancing," or, "the kingdom of heaven has been coming violently." This
unsettling nature of the kingdom is felt especially by the demonic powers. Isaiah
promised the release of the captives. In fulfilment of this, Jesus violently invaded
the dominion of the strong man and plundered his goods (Mark 3.21-27). The
casting out of demons is a sign of the presence of the kingdom (Matthew 12.28).
They cry out in confusion because this event has begun "before the time" (8.29).

Matthew 11.11-15 and Luke 16.16-17

The New Testament is saturated with "fulfilment" statements. Matthew 11.11-15

and Luke 16.16-17 describe the dramatic moment when John the Baptist handed
on the burden of his ministry to Jesus. The voice of God had been silent for
centuries. Suddenly, John appeared, with a power and anointing equal to that of
any Old Testament prophet. Jesus captured the sense of drama in this event:

What did you go out into the desert to see? A reed swayed by the wind? If
not, what did you go out to see? A man dressed in fine clothes? … A
prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet … Among those born of
women there is not a greater prophet than John (Luke 7.21-28).

Equally dramatically, John announced the coming of the Messiah and pointed to
Jesus: "Look! The lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" (John
1.29). Then, quite suddenly, John was beheaded and the power and authority the
people had seen in John resided in Jesus. Some even thought John had come to
life again in the person of Jesus.

This transition enacted the classic Jewish expectation of the messenger followed
by the Messiah and is the reason why Jesus" explanation of this turning point is
so crucial. Jesus said of John the Baptist: "He is Elijah who was to come"
(Matthew 11.14), explaining that the messenger predicted by Malachi had come.
It was widely accepted in Jewish belief that this messenger would be Elijah. He
was taken up from the earth in a fiery chariot and therefore never really died.
The Jews believed that he would return to complete his ministry just before the
coming of the Messiah.
The words is and was to come indicate that the presence of the kingdom does not
in any way deny the futurity of the kingdom. The turning point from the old to
the new came with the ministry of John the Baptist. John is Elijah, yet Elijah is
still to come. In other words, a future kingdom reality is now present in
fulfilment. How the kingdom can be both future and present is a mystery, hence
the statements, "if you are willing to accept it," and, "He who has ears, let him
hear" (11.11-15).
According to Luke 16.16, "The law and the prophets were proclaimed until John.
Since that time the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached." The
words until and since that time indicated that the great transition had taken place
from promise to fulfilment. No longer was the kingdom a future hope. It had
become a present reality. The whole Old Testament dispensation is summarized
as the time of "the law and the prophets." That time was over. A new time had
arrived: the presence of the kingdom. As John announced the coming of the
kingdom, redemptive history changed dramatically from the era of promise to
the era of fulfilment. This transition is the basis of the concept ofbefore Christ
(B.C.) and after Christ (A.D.).

The traditional point of transition is the death and resurrection of Jesus, but there
are a number of turning points between the old age and the new: the birth of
Christ, the ministry of John the Baptist that was passed on to Jesus, the death and
resurrection of Christ, and the ascension of Christ leading to the outpouring of
the Spirit. We have looked at the ministry of John. A few comments about the
other three points will explain what is meant.
As one reads the accounts of the birth of Jesus, one cannot escape the repeated
emphasis on fulfilment: "Today in the town of David a Saviour has been born to
you; he is Christ the Lord" (Luke 2.11). This brings "good news of great joy."
God has remembered his holy covenant (1.72). Simeon can die in peace because
his eyes have seen the salvation of God (2.29-32). Anna gives thanks in the
temple for the child Jesus who is an answer for all those who have been looking
for the "redemption of Jerusalem,", recalling the promises in Isaiah (2.38). The
hope of the coming of the kingdom, which these two old people had lived for,
had finally arrived.

The cross is the traditional point of transition. Jesus spoke of it as the hour of
world judgement (John 12.31). As he died he announced, "It is finished!"
(19.30).

The ascension of Christ and the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost
marks a fourth turning point. Isaiah and Joel promised the coming of the Spirit
as phenomena of the end. Peter could say that Pentecost was what Joel had
prophesied (Acts 2.16). We will examine these turning points in greater detail in
the next chapter.

The Kingdom Is Coming Immediately

The fact that the kingdom has come and yet will come in the future, is a mystery.
These two points seem to be contradictory and represent the two "extremes" of
New Testament teaching on the subject. They stand in creative tension with one
another. To say that the kingdom is coming immediately goes almost as far as
saying that it has arrived; to say that the kingdom is delayed does not go as far as
saying that it will only arrive in the distant future. These two statements
therefore lie somewhere between the statements about the kingdom being totally
future or totally present.
Jesus said that the kingdom was imminent. It was about to come at any minute,
but so close, that its immediacy touched the present. Radical decisions must be
made because the kingdom was about to come. The phrase the kingdom of God
is at hand (Mk.1.15) has been translated the kingdom of God is “upon you,” “at
hand,” or “near” (NIV). The New International Version is probably the best
translation. The kingdom of God has not yet arrived but it is so near that “the
time is fulfilled.”[15]

Jesus told his disciples that the kingdom would come in their generation, before
they had finished going through the cities of Israel (Matt.10.23). Luke 21.32
says: “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all
things are fulfilled.” The promise in Mark 9.1 falls into the same category. Given
the explicit nature of these statements, it is not surprising that some writers have
maintained that this was the essential belief of Jesus and that statements about
the kingdom being present are a misunderstanding of what he really meant.[16]

The Mystery of the Kingdom

Jesus stated categorically that no one but the Father knew the exact timetable of
the kingdom, not even he. How should we then understand the four different
strands of biblical teaching?

We saw that the Old Testament prophets often held together events of the
immediate and the distant future in one prediction. For instance, the promise of
liberation in Isaiah 40.26 was fulfilled both in the return from exile and in the
ministry of Jesus. The essence of the prophetic view of history is to grasp God's
dealings with man. The exact chronological distance is not particularly
important. Jesus was a prophet and could therefore see the kingdom as both
immediate and distant without any sense of contradiction.

We must hold on to each strand of Jesus" teaching. The kingdom of God is

future, immediate, present, and delayed. Only when we hold these
"contradictory" strands together can we really understand the glory and power of
the kingdom of God in Jesus Christ. Perhaps it is only the prophetic vision that
can begin to see things through the eyes of God with whom a thousand years are
as one day. Armed with this prophetic view of history, we can come to terms
with the mysterious nature of the kingdom:
it breaks through, from the future into the present, in successive interventions of
God.

The event that took place in Jesus Christ burst the confines of ordinary human
thinking and expectations. No Old Testament prophet could have conceived of
something like this happening. It completely transcended the expectations of
Jesus" generation. Biblical scholars and theologians have written numbers of
books to explain what happened, but even those explanations that do full justice
to every strand of New Testament witness only provide a human model to
explain the inexplicable. That which is of the future, of the end itself, is about to
come immediately. In fact, its power is already present in an unexpected
intervention of God so that we can say that it is actually present, but its presence
is not exhaustive. The mysterious nature of the kingdom consists of the fact that
it is always here, almost here, delayed, and future.

The fact that the kingdom has come, and yet is still to come, creates an
unexpected period of delay in which this world continues while the next world is
already present. The Old Testament prophets expected that the arrival of the age
to come would coincide with the termination of this present age. But because of
what happened in Jesus, we are forced to conclude that the age to come began, in
some mysterious way, prior to the termination of the present age. An interim
period exists between the coming and consummation of the kingdom. The
kingdom is "already" here, but "not yet" here. Two ages coexist. The age to
come is present, but the present age has not ended.

It is a mistake to divide the promise of the kingdom into fragments and say this
promise was fulfilled in his first coming and that promise will be fulfilled at his
second coming, like someone who cuts a slice of cake and leaves the rest. This
cake cannot be divided. Everything that is still to happen at the second coming
has already happened in Jesus Christ. It has not taken place in complete finality,
but in a real, anticipatory sense.
Oscar Cullmann provides one of the most helpful illustrations of this truth. The
final “push” of the Allied invasion of Europe was called D-Day. As later history
has shown, this was the decisive battle of the Second World War. Once the
Allies had successfully set up a military position within Europe, it was only a
matter of time before Hitler’s armies were defeated. However, D-Day was not
the end of the war. It took months before all the Axis powers were mopped up
and Hitler finally surrendered. This was V-Day, the moment of final victory. The
time in between was a period of delay when the war was won, but not yet won.
The army that invaded on D-Day was precisely the same army that took the final
surrender. The same generals, divisions, and troops that invaded on D-Day
pushed forward and took the war to V-Day.
The kingdom that will break through in the future is the kingdom that broke
through in Jesus Christ. In his death and resurrection, the victory has been won.
The end of the world has already taken place. Yet, we still find opposition troops
all around us. From where we are, a French town behind enemy lines, it often
seems as though the enemy still has the upper hand, but we know that we are on
the winning side. What took place in Jesus was the "last days" in every sense.
We cannot divide the last days into the beginning of the end, the end before the
very end, and the very end. The "last days" came with Jesus and ever since, we
have been living in the last days. The second coming will just bring the last days
to final consummation.

Fulfilment Without Consummation

The expectations of Daniel and Isaiah must be viewed as one indivisible whole.
While the full revelation of the kingdom as described in Isaiah will come only at
the second coming, in Jesus every element of that kingdom broke into this
present world, in fulfilment yet not in consummation. In Jesus, God came to save
and comfort his people and to reveal his glory. The King came to establish
justice, restore the covenant and minister as God's Servant. With Jesus, the Spirit
came to bring forth life in the wilderness. Men received the salvation of God, the
forgiveness of sins, the liberation of the captives, the Messianic peace, the
resurrection of the dead and the joy of the kingdom. As a result of his coming,
there is a New Jerusalem populated by Jews and Gentiles from every nation. The
Day of Judgement took place and a new order was brought into being.

In a word, Jesus is the eschatos, the end of this age and the full revelation of the
age to come. This, in turn, is the full revelation of God. Therefore, since Jesus is
that revelation, Jesus is God. Those who receive Jesus are taken out of this age
and partake of the powers of the age to come.

"Fulfilment without consummation" is the phrase Ladd used. There are now a
number of catch phrases used by theologians. A well-known one is the title of
Ladd's book, The Presence of the Future. The most popular is probably
"inaugurated eschatology". Another phrase is "living in the interim" or "living
between the times".
The mystery of the kingdom is the key to understanding the New Testament and
the Christian life.

It is the only perspective from which one can understand why healing
occurs sometimes but not at other times.
It is the basis of the experience of the Christian in this world. We are
simultaneously "new creatures" in Christ, with new natures, and those who
have to struggle with the "old man" and its continual reasserting of its
influence in our lives. We are glorious contradictions, at the same time
victorious in Christ and beset with weaknesses.
This is also true of the church. The church is militant and frail. There is the
continual struggle between the city of God and the city of man. Yet at every
point the powers of the age to come are overcoming the powers of this
present age. The new man in us is taking over the old man. The church
militant will rise above the church divided. Jerusalem will defeat Babylon.

All these implications of the kingdom will be worked out in later chapters. Once
we have understood the kingdom in this light, it becomes the plumb line for
evaluating all sorts of doctrinal and practical issues and extremes. There are very
few excesses in church teaching and practice that cannot be either corrected or
clarified once we have understood the measuring rod of the kingdom.

THE CENTRALITY OF CHRIST

The phrase the presence of the future sums up the point we have made in the
previous chapter. This means understanding the life and ministry of Jesus
eschatologically. In other words, the whole of Christ's ministry, from beginning
to end, was an "end of the world" event. We mentioned four moments that stand
out as turning points between B.C. and A.D. We now examine in greater detail
the

breakthrough of the kingdom in the ministry of Jesus,

the Day of Judgement in the cross,
the resurrection, and
the coming of the Spirit.

The Ministry of Christ

Once we have understood how the future kingdom is present in Jesus, we can
see almost every aspect of his ministry in the same light. All the expectations of
Isaiah were fulfilled in him.
One of the most illuminating moments in the life of Jesus was when he opened
the scroll of Isaiah in the synagogue (Luke 4.16-19), deliberately explaining
what he understood his ministry to be. He selected a passage that refers not only
to the liberation motif in Isaiah, but ends with a statement about "the acceptable
year of the Lord." This refers to the Year of Jubilee in the Law of Moses, a
special time of universal liberation. Jesus described his entire future ministry in
terms of this season of liberation. In his answer to John the Baptist's question:
"Are you the Coming One?" he deliberately alluded to the promises in Isaiah and
pointed to the events taking place in his ministry. "The blind receive sight, the
lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised,
and the good news is preached to the poor" (Matthew 11.2-6).
Jesus came to set people free from every kind of bondage, true to the all-
embracing understanding of salvation that Isaiah had outlined. This made it good
news. The Gospel writers show that Jesus was the embodiment of good news,
long before he announced it in the synagogue in Galilee. In the account of his
birth, special mention is made of the "good news.". The angels brought "good
news of great joy" (Luke 2.10), the good news that God had come to live among
his people. In fulfilment of Isaiah, Jesus was called Immanuel, "God with us"
(Matthew 1.23). Jesus" first sermon about the kingdom exhorted people to
"believe in the gospel" (Mark 1.14-15).

The good news causes people to rejoice. The joy of the end time is qualitatively
different from any other joy. It is the joy of the future world. Peter speaks of "an
inexpressible and glorious joy" (1 Peter 1.8). The New Testament writers find
this element from the very beginning of the breakthrough of the kingdom. John
the Baptist, the prophet to announce the end time, leapt for joy while still in the
womb (Luke 1.44). The good news of the birth of Jesus brought "great joy"
(2.10). Those who met the risen Christ were filled with "joy and amazement"
(24.41). Jesus promised his disciples a special kind of joy that would be
complete and fulfilled (John 17.13). Paul defined the kingdom of God as
"righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Romans 14.17).

Isaiah said that the good news of the kingdom would comfort God's people. To
say that comfort or consolation had come in Jesus is to say that the Messianic era
was present in him. Simeon and Anna recognised that Jesus was the promised
One who had come to "comfort" or redeem God's people (Luke 2.25-29,38).
Isaiah's announcement of comfort was closely associated with the concept of
peace, the shalom of the Davidic monarchy. This theme can also be traced in the
life of Jesus. At his birth, the angels proclaimed peace on earth and good will
towards men (2.14). We noted how shalom and salvation, in Isaiah, were both
holistic concepts, touching the whole of life. Jesus brought healing to people.
The Greek word for healing is soteria, which is also translated as 'salvation."
Jesus saved people, and told them to "Go in peace" (7.50)and bring peace into
the lives of others (10.5).The crowds understood that Jesus was ushering in the
Messianic rule when they cried, "Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!"
(19.38). When Jesus showed the disciples the wounds in his hands and feet, the
symbols of their forgiveness, he said, "Peace to you" (24.36).

We saw in Isaiah that the future coming of God would be his final self-
revelation, when his glory would outshine the sun. Jesus" life and ministry was
filled with glory. At his conception, we are told that the "power of the Most
High" overshadowed Mary (1.35). This is a way of describing the glory of God.
The shepherds experienced the glory of the Lord all around them (2.9). John tells
us that the Word dwelt amongst us and we saw his glory (John 1.14). John's
Gospel describes the whole life of Jesus in these terms. Each successive sign
reveals the glory of God, until it is finally revealed in the cross. While John sees
the cross as the culmination of the glorification of Jesus, Luke sees this in the
ascension. Christ's journey to Jerusalem is the beginning of his ultimate
glorification through death, burial and resurrection. This process began when his
glory was revealed on the mount of transfiguration.
The restoration of the Davidic monarchy in one greater than David is a common
New Testament theme. Matthew's genealogy shows that Jesus came from
David's line (Matthew 1.1-17). This is why he was born in Bethlehem of Judah
(2.1-6). During his ministry, people called Jesus the Son of David. His official
crime was that he claimed to be the King of the Jews (27.37).

An integral part of the Davidic monarchy was the administration of justice to the
people of God once oppressive rulers had been overthrown. The justice of God
can be seen in Jesus. His ethical teaching exposed the motives of the human
heart. In his denunciation of materialism and his merciless exposure of
hypocrisy, Jesus reflected the great tradition of social justice revealed in the Old
Testament. He provided a better righteousness in his teaching on grace, later
fulfilled in his substitutionary death, which revealed the righteousness we
receive, by faith. Those who accepted his offer of grace were called to a standard
of ethics that exceeded that of the scribes and Pharisees.
As a result of the coming of the day of salvation, Isaiah expected a new order
incorporating a new people of God, made up from Israel, augmented by people
from every nation. This new order would be inaugurated on the Day of
Judgement and would culminate in a new heaven and a new earth. How does this
find its fulfilment in Jesus? The New Jerusalem that John saw (Revelation 21)
was the New Jerusalem expected by Isaiah. This future city has already arrived
in Jesus. The writer to the Hebrews says that believers have "come to Mount
Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God" (Hebrews 12.22-24).
Paul speaks of the future City of God as a present reality. "The heavenly
Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother" (Galatians 4.26). The
trumpet will summon the scattered people of Israel to the city of God at the end
time. The day of Pentecost was just such a moment. Jews had gathered for the
feast from the "Diaspora" throughout the ancient world and were represented in
the Pentecostal experience. The scattering of Babylon was reversed in the
gathering at Pentecost. Peter addresses the believers in Asia Minor as "the
pilgrims of the Dispersion" (I Peter 1.1).

This theme merges with that of the ingathering of the nations. The gospel must
reach all nations as the witness of the church goes to the ends of the earth. Luke
has a deliberate progression in mind as the gospel goes from one circle to the
next and spreads around the Mediterranean basin from Jerusalem to Rome (Acts
1.8). Paul works out, in some detail, the doctrine of the new people of God,
comprising both Jews and Gentiles in one new man (Ephesians 3.1-6). The
interesting thing about this fulfilment of Old Testament expectation is that
instead of nations being gathered to Zion, Zion is spread among the nations. The
new world also gains reality in the personal experience of every Christian. In
Christ, we are new creations. The old has gone, the new has come (2 Corinthians
5.17).

The Cross
The day of the Lord is a day of judgement. Isaiah predicted universal judgement
with the coming of the kingdom. This is also the expectation of the New
Testament. When Jesus went to the cross, he said, "Now is the judgement of this
world" (John 12.31). He understood the cross to be the Day of Judgement. This
explains why the heavens were darkened and the earth was shaken as Christ was
crucified. Such cosmic events are the pangs of the end times. In Jesus, the end
has occurred.
This is the basis of the substitutionary death of Christ. All men will be judged at
the end, but in his death, Jesus has already been judged by God for our sin and
borne our future judgement. Someone who chooses to identify with the cross
"has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to
life" (John 5.24). You cannot be tried, found guilty, and executed for your crime
twice. Once you have been executed, your punishment has been settled. In Jesus,
we were tried, found guilty, and executed. We no longer have to look forward to
the moment when our lives will be judged. We look back to what Christ has
already done for us. That is why it is absolutely essential for us to acknowledge
our sin and accept that God dealt with it on the cross. The Christian who has
been judged in the cross can face the future with confidence.

Existentialist thinkers were preoccupied with being "open to the future," but the
gloom of the twentieth century meant that people lived with a sense of
foreboding. Aspects of modern life such as the atomic threat, ecological
disasters, Aids, and the pollution of our environment combine to make people
feel that there is no future. A spate of apocalyptic motion pictures has given
graphic detail to this gloomy picture. The kingdom understanding of the cross
gives the Christian testimony a unique edge. Of all people, kingdom believers
can be open to the future because its foreboding aspects have already been
settled in the cross.

The Resurrection
In biblical thinking, the resurrection of the dead is something that will happen
universally at the end of the world. Death itself will be abolished. When Jesus
was raised from the dead, he entered the eternal life of the age to come. What
will happen to all men at the end, happened to one man in the present. His
resurrection is therefore the beginning of the universal resurrection and abolition
of death occurring before the time. It is the first-fruits of the final harvest. Death
will be swallowed up then, but in Christ death has already been vanquished.

Jesus explained this to Martha when Lazarus died. Martha believed in the
resurrection at the last day (John 11.24). Jesus said, "I am the resurrection and
the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives
and believes in me will never die (11.25-26). For those in Christ, the transition
from death to life has already occurred. A future event is present for us. We have
eternal life because we have already crossed over from death to life. The phrase
eternal life in the Greek is literally, "life of the ages," that is, life of the future
ages.

This is the basis of Paul's teaching on our identification with Christ. We were
dead in trespasses and sins, but we have been "made alive with Christ"
(Ephesians 2.5).Through our union with Christ, we have passed through the
barrier between this life and the next. We have entered the eternal life of the age
to come. It is possible, because the next life has broken through into this life, in
Jesus.

Pentecost
Joel and Isaiah expected the outpouring of the Spirit in the last days as an
integral part of end of world events. Many Christians know Joel's prophecy by
heart but fail to notice that the statements about the sons and daughters
prophesying and old men dreaming dreams are followed by statements about
blood, fire and smoke, the sun turning to darkness, and the moon to blood (Joel
2.28-32). The context of Joel's statement is thoroughly eschatological: the
cosmic signs are events of the end. Matthew 25-29 and Revelation 6.12-17 make
this clear, as does the parallel to Joel 3.13-15, in Revelation 14.14-20. Yet Peter,
on the day of Pentecost, could say, "this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel"
(Acts 2.16). This means that the end of the world broke through in the coming of
the Spirit at Pentecost.
An old Pentecostal preacher is said to have put it like this: "Peter said that this is
that. If this is not that, then what is this? But if this is that, then that's that."
He probably did not understand his comment in terms of the kingdom, but it
states the position very well. Those who receive the Spirit experience the powers
of the age to come. The baptism of the Spirit is a taste now of what we will
experience then. Paul explains that the seal of the Spirit is the down payment or
first instalment, the guarantee of our future inheritance (Ephesians 1.13-14). This
inheritance includes the future redemption of our bodies - the total
transformation of the human body by the Holy Spirit. That is why the
Pentecostal work of the Spirit often affects us in a physical sense. People
become lame and unable to walk or are overwhelmed by joy. They experience
various tangible phenomena of the Spirit (Acts 2.13-15; 8.39).

In Isaiah's promise of the kingdom, the outpouring of the Spirit in the last days is
associated with the joy of the eschatos.Joy was one of the manifestations of the
outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. Such joy is not of this age. It is the joy of
the age to come breaking in on us from the future.
This understanding of Pentecost makes one realize just how profound the
baptism in the Holy Spirit really Isaiah It is an empowering for service, enabling
believers to witness to the ends of the earth. But it is far more. It is an experience
of a future age. This is why the theology of the kingdom is the true basis for
understanding phenomena that take place during times of renewal or revival. The
experience of the Spirit is a kingdom experience.
The day of Pentecost was the result of the ascension of Christ. The coming of the
King in Isaiah and the dominion of the Son of Man in Daniel are events of the
end. We know that Jesus will reign when the end finally comes, but by virtue of
his ascension, he already reigns at the right hand of God. The future Messianic
reign has begun in the present through the ascension.

Conclusion
We can conclude that Jesus and the writers of the New Testament were
profoundly influenced by the kingdom expectation of Isaiah. Their language
repeatedly draws on the major kingdom themes in Isaiah. There is, in fact, no
single element in Isaiah's expectation that one cannot find fulfilled in the
ministry of Jesus.
This means that the life and ministry of Jesus did not have to find an
interpretation because the interpretation had already been provided by the
expectation. His pre-history in the Old Testament provided a ready-made
interpretative framework. In terms of its universalism, comprehensiveness, and
sheer breadth of vision, there is nothing in the Old Testament to exceed Isaiah.
The life and ministry of Jesus takes as its starting point, the highest peak of Old
Testament expectation. It is not surprising, therefore, that Jesus" contemporaries
found it difficult to grasp his understanding of Messiahship.

We have also learned that even the highest point of Old Testament expectation
was insufficient to express what really occurred in Jesus. The breakthrough of
the future kingdom into the present world, before the present world had
terminated, was beyond even Isaiah's anticipation. We find that the vision of the
kingdom developed progressively through redemptive history, with each new
picture transcending the previous one. The Exodus event moves to the Davidic
monarchy, which then develops into the "day of the Lord" expectation in the
prophets, reaching its highest point in Isaiah. But, the coming of Jesus burst
beyond everything that had preceded it, and what happened in Jesus is now the
basis of what will happen when he comes again. It is not necessary to stress that
the next breakthrough of the kingdom will radically transcend everything we
have expected. Yet with each development, there is a remarkable continuity with
what has gone before. This is what makes redemptive history so magnificent.
Our only fitting response is to concur with Paul at the end of his survey of
redemptive history:

Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How
unsearchable his judgements, And his paths beyond tracing out! (Romans
11.33).

THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE

KINGDOM
The implications of the kingdom have already been touched on. They are the test
of our understanding and require fuller consideration. At this point, we edge
towards systematic, rather than biblical theology.
1. The end has occurred in Jesus. Only God himself can be the end
(eschatos). Therefore Jesus is God.

In the revelation of John, Jesus names himself, "the Alpha and the Omega" (1.8),
"the First and the Last" (2.8). The Greek for last is eschatos. As a biblical term,
eschatos refers to the end of this world through the final judgement of God. Only
God himself, the ultimate judge, can bring about this final intervention. The "day
of the Lord" can only be just that, the day of the LORD. Jesus is not just one
who brought elements of final judgement into history. He is the end. To meet
Jesus is to meet the end of the world. Once we grasp this, two related
implications follow:
 The divinity of Christ is most profoundly based on eschatology. There are
many ways in which we can argue for the divinity of Christ. The method
usually used by apologists of the Christian faith is to link his absolute
claims about his identity to his prediction of future resurrection. If the latter
was fulfilled, then surely the former were as well. Actually, all of Christ's
claims are related to the end (eschatos). If he is the echatos, then he has to
be God himself, the final judge;[17]
To have an encounter with Jesus Christ is to meet one's ultimate destiny.
When radical events occur on planet earth, creating apocalyptic fear, you
can honestly tell your friends, "I know about the end of the world. I have
encountered it (actually him)." To know Jesus is to know one's eternal
destiny.

2. The last days began with Jesus and in Pentecost. Since then, we have been
living in the last days.

One hears Christians quoting texts about the special conditions that apply during
the last days as though they only refer to the last seven years of world history, or
perhaps to our times. This is to miss the point completely. The last days began
with the coming of Jesus. Since then, they have just been edging closer and
closer to the ultimate "last" day. When Jesus came, it was already the end.
Perhaps we can speak of the end, the end of the end, and the end of the end of
the end. New Testament texts are absolutely clear on thIsaiah Hebrews 1 can
say, "in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son" (1.2). Peter can say,
concerning Jesus, "He was chosen before the foundation of the world, but was
revealed in these last times for your sake" (1 Peter 1. 20).
This has crucial implications:

The last days are one, unbroken continuum, from the first coming of Christ,
to the second coming of Christ, coexisting in tension with this present
 world. There is no period of church history that has not been a time of the
last days. The last few minutes before the second coming will not be some
different time, only the climax of the same mysterious dimension Christians
have experienced since Jesus first came. This is not to say that history
cannot "hot up" or become more dramatic. Revelations shows that it will,
but there is no other dispensation waiting to arrive, other than the very end
of the end.
To grasp this is to understand that all dispensational and cessationist
theories and schemes have no substance. Cessationists want to tear the time
of the apostles away from the remainder of church history, and
dispensationalists want to do the same with the last seven years. But there is
only one, continued, dispensation of the last days. The Bible knows of only
two dispensations, or ages, this age and the age to come. The age to come
arrived when Jesus came.

3. Every intervention of God since the end came is a breakthrough of the

powers of the future age, or eschatological.

This point is actually an implication of the previous points. If the powers of the
coming age have been present since Jesus came, and are inherent in Pentecost;
and if the dimension of the Christian life for the whole history of the church is to
live "between the times," or in the interim; it follows that every intervention of
God is eschatological. To grasp this, is to re-orientate our perspective. Christians
tend to look back to the apostolic age. However, Jesus and the apostles lived
with a completely future orientation, in the immediacy of the future breaking in
on the present. Every Christian is supposed to live like this, from that time, to the
second coming.

The implications of this are as follows:

Every revival is an intervention of God. Therefore, every revival is

 eschatological. This helps one understand many of the phenomena that
occur during revivals.
They often heighten the sense of expectation about the second coming.
People sense that it is very near. This is because the powers of the future are
coming upon them. They are entering into the end. In fact, one should doubt
the genuineness of a revival that does not include this dimension.
Just as with Pentecost, revivals produce startling physical phenomena,
affecting the bodily experience of participants. Phenomena such as ecstasy,
tongues, prophecy, healing, shaking, falling, weeping, and so forth are
evidence that our mortal frame cannot absorb the power capable of
transforming our bodies into immortality. We are having a foretaste of the
final resurrection and the redemption of our bodies.
Revivals heighten the sense of church unity. This is because the spiritual
sense of the New Jerusalem is coming upon people.

4. Every element of the end is present, or available, in every breakthrough

of the kingdom.

We have learnt that the end is present in fulfilment, but not in consummation.
All the promises of Isaiah and Daniel were fulfilled in Jesus and are yet to be
fulfilled in Jesus. Jesus is risen, but the resurrection is still to occur at the end.
The Day of Judgement occurred in the cross, but will still occur. To experience
the powers of the kingdom is to partake of the down-payment of our future
redemption. It is important that we do not have a fragmented view of the
kingdom, picking off this element fulfilled in the first coming of Christ and that
element to be fulfilled at the second coming. First coming and second coming is
not actually biblical language. There is only one kingdom, undivided, that has
come, is coming, and will come. Think of one big chocolate cake, which you eat
in stages. Do not think of two different cakes, or of different ingredients.
This has the following implications:

Every element is present every time the kingdom draws near. To use the
language of Isaiah, the revelation of the glory of God, the presence of the
Messianic king, the outpouring of the Spirit, the coming salvation, the
forgiveness of sins, the healing of the sick, the resurrection of the dead,
eternal joy, the liberation of the captives, the judgement of sin, and the new
people of God in a new Jerusalem, are all present with every in-breaking of
the kingdom.
Understanding the kingdom has to change our sense of expectation.
Therefore, whenever revival is in the air, comprehensive kingdom
expectation must fill our hearts. Of course, by virtue of the sovereign rule
of God, we never know the day nor the hour, nor the extent to which a
given revival partakes of the powers of the age to come. Nevertheless, we
know what can happen, at any moment, in every revival. We live with great
expectations!
We learn that every foretaste we have is just that, a foretaste. The future
will be more, much, much more of the same. The joy you have experienced
now is like the joy you will experience, but you will have much more.
Everything we experience in Christ has over it the word more .

5. The age to come and this age are now separated by a thin veil, in fact a
veil that has been torn from top to bottom.

Through Jesus, and in Pentecost, the powers of the future age have broken into
the present, and remain, co-existing with this present age. Christians live
permanently caught between the two. We live in a truly mysterious dimension.
The kingdom is always here, almost here, delayed, and future. The barrier
between two time zones has been ruptured for us. The event that occurred as
Jesus said, "It is finished!" gives graphic representation to this reality. The Greek
word used for "finished" is tetelestai (John 19.30), from teleios, the end,
fulfilment, full realization, ultimate destiny, full accomplishment, to
consummate. One could paraphrase Jesus as saying, "This is the final end," or,
"The end is here." As he died on the cross, he announced the presence of the end
of the world, the final eschaton.

At that moment, the veil was rent from top to bottom. The significance of the
position of the veil is implied in the language of Hebrews 9.8-9. The RSV
translation gives the sense utilized here. Speaking of the outer tent (holy place)
and the inner tent (holy of holies), it reads, "By this the Holy Spirit indicates that
the way into the sanctuary [inner] is not yet opened as long as the outer tent is
still standing (which is symbolic for the present age)." If the outer tent
symbolizes the present age, then the inner tent symbolizes the future age. The
symbolism is not difficult to follow. It was in the inner sanctuary that Moses
spoke with God face to face. In the outer tent, priests worshipped through
symbols as intermediaries: the bread on the table, the incense to signify worship,
and the candle to signify God's presence, much as we break bread "till he comes"
in foretaste of the marriage supper of the lamb.

The tearing of this veil, therefore, has the following implications:

The barrier between this age and the future age is now torn. People
worshipping through outward symbols will find themselves carried by the
Holy Spirit into an immediacy of God's presence that will be true of the age
to come. The manifest presence of God in the future age pours out of the
inner sanctuary and covers those who still live in this age. It is a permeable
membrane. Christians who understand the kingdom, live hovering between
two worlds, never knowing when a very ordinary, this worldly church
service will be transformed into an ultimate encounter, or when a private
devotional moment will be injected by the powers of the future resurrection.
Understanding the kingdom, therefore, becomes a world-view, a permanent
 orientation, a moment-by-moment expectation. Literally, every moment has
within it the potential of being the last moment. The kingdom world-view
makes us continually open to signs and wonders and overwhelming
interventions of God.
Understanding the kingdom also makes us patient with what fails to
happen. It is always here, almost here, delayed, and future. Every promise
of God, every prophetic word, every calling, every ministry we engage in,
has the mysterious sense of being continually delayed by God and yet just
around the corner. We live tasting, yet with our mouth watering; filled and
yet hungry; satisfied and yet longing; having all, yet needing all. Get used
to it! It will not go away until the very end.

6. The kingdom of God is the proper framework for one's view of church
history, which bears witness to an accelerating phenomenon of kingdom
interventions.

If the end was already present in Jesus and in Pentecost, then as we move
forward in church history, we move more and more into the end of the end, the
end of the end of the end. Instead of a graph that peaks during the times of Jesus
and the apostles, then bottoms out, and then climbs suddenly at the second
coming, we should conceive of a graph that rises sharply at the apostolic period,
then undulates on an upward curve. Understanding the kingdom creates in us a
new perspective, which views the future as breaking in upon us in ever
increasing waves of intensity.
If one examines church history, one notices that the gaps between great
movements of revival are becoming narrower and narrower. This will become
evident if we simply mention some of the well-known cases and figures:

Assisi
 The Reformation

The awakening with Wesley, Whitfield, and Edwards

The awakening with Moody and Finney

The Pentecostal Revival

The Jesus People Revival

The Charismatic Renewal

The Renewal of 1994 onwards

Where before, centuries came between revivals, only decades seem to come
between them now. Further, if one examines missions statistics of world
populations and the numbers affected each time, the upward curve of the graph
is substantiated.

7. The kingdom is the proper framework for understanding world missions.

The church lives between victory and triumph. The resurrection of Jesus
signified a major breakthrough of the kingdom. The disciples, therefore, asked if
this was the time for its complete manifestation (Acts 1.6). Jesus" reply sets the
context for world missions. Pentecost would bring the power of the Spirit onto
the church, and the church would proclaim the coming of the kingdom in
Jerusalem and Judea (indigenous missions), in Samaria (neighbour-culture
missions), and to the ends of the earth (cross-culture missions). Their question
was about the coming of the kingdom. His answer is about the coming of the
kingdom. It came through his ministry and Pentecost. It would continue to come
through the mission of the church, and it will come at the very end. The interim
period in which the church engages in world missions is the interim of the
kingdom being present, yet not consummated, with all the realities of the
previous points. To use the metaphor of World War II once more, world
missions take place between D-Day and V-Day. By proclaiming the kingdom,
we bring in its presence and speed the day of the ultimate end. We live between
the ascension and the return of Christ. By virtue of the ascension, he is Lord and
Christ, with full authority over every power. By virtue of his return, he will be
King of kings and Lord of lords, manifesting what he already Isaiah
This has the following implications:

The proclamation of the kingdom moves from a position of strength and

absolute confidence. We have bowed to him, and we proclaim him in the
knowledge that every knee will finally bow. We may appear to be subject to
politicians, dictators, and world powers, but we have access to one who is
already over them.
What we preach has an inherent power to transform communities, nations,
and societies. The total renewal of the planet is here, almost here, delayed,
and future. Cosmic events took place while Jesus died. Our mission
continues to have cosmic significance. The kingdom we preach
incorporates a new people, in a new city, in a new heaven, and a new earth.
We must never reduce the ability of the gospel to transform society.

8. The Christian life is truly understood in this context.

The kingdom is something mysterious - here, almost here, delayed, and future.
Not only is the Christian life placed within this context, but the very nature of
the Christian life finds its meaning within this context. We are here, almost here,
delayed, future people. We are saved, being saved, and will be saved. We are
holy, being made holy, and will be holy. We live between the times. We are
already, not yet people. Two ages co-exist within us, and we live simultaneously
in two ages. The world around us lives in one age, one dimension. We are much
more mysterious. We live in two ages. We are becoming what we already are.
We are born out of the powers of the future age. We have eternal life, the life of
the future ages.
This is not simply a theological construct, but a lived experience.

The Christian is aware of an inner contradiction. The "old man" and the "new
man" oppose one another from within. The flesh and the spirit work against each
other. We are not schizophrenic people, just kingdom people. We do not need
counselling; we just need to understand the kingdom. We are victorious and
broken; winners and losers; dead and yet, alive. Sometimes, we feel a sense of
victory and despair on the same day.

Understanding this has implications:

The dimension of the interim is not a passing phase for the Christian. It is
always with us. We live permanently in the already and the not yet. This is
the air we breathe and the context of our lives. Trying to escape this
eschatological tension is like trying to jump out of one's skin. This is it, for
the Christian life.
If we overstate the present reality of the kingdom (realized eschatology), we
run the danger of triumphalism and conceive of the Christian life as an
experience with no suffering, no pain, and no failure.
If we overstate the future reality of the kingdom (consistent eschatology),
we run the danger of defeatism. It can take many shapes: escaping from
society and waiting for the rapture, social resignation, "remnantitis," and
defeatism. People in such a state do not believe in healing, expect few to be
saved, and settle for defeat against sin.

9. The kingdom is the proper context for the ministry of healing.

Why are some healed, while others are not? Why does healing happen some of
the time, but not all the time? Those who lack the kingdom as a model for
healing will tend to lack the sense of the mysterious. They will place too much
emphasis on the role of the believing or unbelieving subject, or on the role of the
believing or unbelieving prayer. The truth is that whenever someone is healed, it
bears witness to the fact that the kingdom is here. Whenever someone is not
healed, it bears witness to the fact that the kingdom is not yet here. Sure, we can
grow in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, in faith, in expectation, and in availability to
God. Some are more used than others. But ultimately, the only way to explain
what does and does not happen is to understand the already and not yet of the
kingdom.

This means the following:

Every time you pray for the sick, you should be full of expectation. The veil
has been rent. Anything is possible at any moment, including the freedom
of the captives, the healing of the sick, and the raising of the dead.
Every time you pray for the sick you should "hang loose" in the mystery.
When nothing happens, do not be "fazed" at all. After all, this is the "not
yet" dimension in which we live. Delayed answers to prayer, and things that
are not yet here, are all part of the kingdom.

10. This is the perspective for understanding the relationship between the
church and society.

If we fail to grasp the tension between the already and the not yet, we will drift
off into withdrawal or idealism. Because the kingdom is here, God has given us
a mission to transform individuals, families, communities, and nations. Because
the kingdom is not yet here, no society prior to the return of Christ will ever
become totally just, free, and godly. Jerusalem and Babylon will struggle against
each other continually. The bride and the harlot will win the affections of men's"
hearts. We have no doubt of the final outcome, but we must hold the tension.
This has the following implications:

No "this-worldly" cause, movement, philosophy, or ideology can ever

capture us. We have a healthy sense of scepticism about all idealistic
endeavours, be they an overly 'social gospel," liberation theology, or
reconstructionism.
We can never give up on the world and withdraw into an evangelical ghetto
where we cluster together into our saved remnant and wait for the rapture,
because it will all burn anyway. The enormity of knowing that the kingdom
is here makes us the most optimistic, prophetic, visionary people on earth.
This must transform our attitude towards social issues.

These implications are so significant that we will need to explore some of them
in much more detail in subsequent chapters.

BRINGING IN THE KINGDOM

The nature of the kingdom, as the breakthrough of the future into the present and
the implications we have just examined in the last chapter, leads to the
fundamental question: What unleashes those future age powers into this present
age? Is there a trigger mechanism? Granted that while ultimately, it remains in
the sovereignty of God, is there nevertheless a way of seeking the kingdom that
will make its appearance more likely? Can we penetrate the mystery?

A second question emerges from these questions. We have seen that the coming
of the kingdom took place in Jesus and in Pentecost. To say Jesus is present is to
say, The kingdom is here. How does this relate to the proclamation of the
kingdom by the church? Do the same trigger mechanisms apply when Jesus is
physically present and when he is present through the Holy Spirit?
 Jesus, the Personification of the Kingdom
The coming of the kingdom is the "becoming present" of the rule of God. God's
ultimate rule, which will take place at the end of the age, breaks through into this
present age. The witness of the New Testament is that Jesus is the
personification of that coming. That is why Jesus is God with us. To say
kingdom come is to say, Come Lord Jesus. He is the epicentre, the focus, and the
essence of the coming kingdom. He is the eschaton!
The witness of the New Testament to Jesus as the essence of the kingdom is
twofold.

Jesus the Messiah

The term Messiah or Christ is the Jewish title for king. Much has been written
about the so-called "Messianic consciousness" of Jesus, and many scholars have
attempted to deny that Jesus saw himself as the Messiah. This view cannot be
supported from the New Testament. It is true that Jesus rejected the political
Messianism of his day and therefore seldom identified with the title, but this
does not mean that he rejected the Messianic role. The two greatest kings of
Israel were David and Solomon. Jesus knew that he was greater than either of
them (Mark 12.35-37; Matthew 12.42).

Jesus entered Jerusalem as the triumphant king. Each Gospel highlights a

particular aspect of this event (Matthew 21.1-11; Mark 11.1-10; Luke 19.28-44;
John 12.12-19). Matthew makes the fullest use of the Old Testament passage:
'see, your king comes to you." Mark records the Messianic content of the public
acclamation: "Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David." Luke records
Jesus" comment when the Pharisees wanted him to stop the disciples" praise: "I
tell you, if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out." This was Jerusalem's hour of
divine "visitation." John quotes the public acclamation: "Blessed is he who
comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the king of Israel!" He mentions how
"the world has gone after him."

Jesus was tried for his Messianic claims. Caiaphas adjured him to confess
whether he was the Christ or not (Matthew 26.63). His reply was: "Yes, it is as
you said" (26.64). Mark records Jesus" reply as a clear affirmative (Mark 14.62).
Clearly Jesus accepted the Messianic title. However, he immediately connected
this title with that of the 'son of Man," which suited his understanding of his role
far better than the current political expectations of the Messiah. As we learned
from Daniel, it represented an even greater claim. The Son of Man is the one
who is seated at the right hand of God who will come on the clouds of heaven to
judge the world.
When Jesus was taken to Pilate, he was asked basically the same question: "Are
you the King of the Jews?" Again, he gave an affirmative reply (Matthew 27.11).
John adds that Jesus explained the nature of his kingdom to Pilate (John 18.37).
When Jesus was eventually brought before the people, Pilate tried to have him
released. He had been disturbed by a dream his wife had, had the night before.
From all accounts, Pilate was not a forceful character. The Jews put political
pressure on him to condemn Jesus on the charge of treason (19.12). His claim to
be the Messiah was a direct confrontation with Caesar's claim.

It was customary to place a notice above those who were publicly executed
stating what crime they had committed. Accordingly, Pilate had a notice placed
above Jesus" cross: "JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS." It
was written in Aramaic, Latin, and Greek (19.19-20). The Jews resented this, but
Pilate would not reverse his decision. This determination by a weak pagan ruler
reveals God's sovereign will. Jesus is the King of the nations, even as he hangs
on the cross.

Jesus, the Announcer of the Kingdom

In Israel, kings were elected by public announcement. The people would shout,
"Long live the king!" (1 Samuel 10.24). In the New Testament, one also finds a
connection between kingship and public announcement. The word kerygma,
translated "proclamation," comes from kerysso, which means "to announce."
The Roman Empire did not have a television network to announce Imperial
edicts to the population. They employed special heralds to do thIsaiah The keryx
(herald or announcer) was a man commissioned by his ruler or the state to call
out with a clear voice an item of news and so to make it known. Heralds carried
important news items from town to town. They would enter each town, find a
prominent public venue, make their proclamation, and pass on to the next town.
The keryx was always under the authority of someone else, whose spokesman he
was. He himself was immune. He conveyed the message and intention of his
master. His office had an official character and he was therefore the announcer
of judicial verdicts. As the official edict or verdict was spoken, it became
binding. The word became an event.

The New Testament writers used this word to describe what occurred in the
ministry of Jesus. He heralded in the powers of the age to come by a clear,
public proclamation. In fact, it was his word or announcement that caused things
to happen. When he spoke, eschatological events began to take place. The very
announcement of the nearness of the kingdom resulted in its powers being
unleashed. The answer to our question: "How do the powers of the age to come
break into this age?" is therefore: "By the proclaimed word of Jesus."

Jesus began his ministry with the announcement of the nearness of the kingdom
(Mark 1.14-15). This was immediately followed by an act demonstrating that the
announcement was actually in effect. A demonised man was set free by the
authoritative word of Jesus (1.27). Like a herald, Jesus had an urgent
commission to preach in all the towns (1.38-39). As he did so, proclamation
became synonymous with healing and deliverance: the leper was healed because
Jesus said, "I am willing" (1.41). The lame man walked because he said, "arise"
(2.11). The centurion knew that Jesus had only to 'speak a word" (Matthew 8.8).
When Jesus said, "Go," the demons went (8.32). One can view the entire public
ministry of Jesus in two ways: the words of Jesus and the works of Jesus. The
works were always the result of the words, and the works were always
proclaiming a word. They announced the kingdom.

The scary thing for the disciples, and for us, is that Jesus expected the disciples
to make the same announcement. Herein lies the connection between the coming
of the kingdom then and now. The trigger mechanism, of announcement,
remains the same.

The Great Announcement

One normally speaks of the "Great Commission." We now learn that the essence
of the commission is announcement, or heralding the kerygma.

The breakthrough of the kingdom occurred through the coming of Jesus and
through Pentecost. Pentecost occurred because Jesus ascended. It is therefore, in
a sense, an aspect of the coming of Jesus. Jesus" words and works were the
trigger mechanism of the kingdom. Jesus" works had their climax in his death,
burial, resurrection and ascension. All these works unleashed the breakthrough
of the powers of the age to come. The astonishing reality for the church is that
Jesus expected the coming of the kingdom to continue, after this departure,
through Pentecostal power and the "great announcement" of the church.
This is such an important subject that we need to delve a little deeper.

Perhaps I should digress into some personal reflection. Since I am a Vineyard

pastor, it will be helpful to contextualise what we are talking about. This really is
a major issue for the Vineyard. I had been a pastor for about five years, in a
Pentecostal denomination. I had witnessed Pentecostal phenomena for some
time. The university where I studied theology happened to be the context for the
beginning of the charismatic renewal amongst Anglicans in South Africa. Then,
in the late seventies, I encountered the ministry of Vineyard leaders for the first
time and in particular, the prayer, "Come Holy Spirit." After worship, or
preaching, or both, there was always a time of "waiting to see what God will
do," or "waiting on the Holy Spirit." I recall how John Wimber would pray a
prayer, often using language about the kingdom of God in his prayer, then fold
his arms and stand there, eyes open, literally looking to see what would happen.
Invariably, a great deal would happen, with manifestations of Pentecostal
phenomena more intense than I had ever seen in my pastoral experience to that
time. It fascinated, intimidated, and frustrated me. I would go back to my church
and try the same thing, to no effect. They seemed to have some kind of secret, or
key. Could I ever move in the same dimension? I now realize that what looked
so easy, to an observer, and so simple, was the result of a much wider context,
which included the kingdom theology of George Ladd, who had influenced
Wimber, the experience of the Jesus people revival, and the particular move of
the Holy Spirit that launched the Vineyard movement. [18] I should add that
although I grasped the theological basis of what was happening during that
period, it was only when the 1994 renewal occurred in our church that I was
privileged to experience, in my own ministry, the dynamics of the kingdom we
are examining in this chapter. What follows therefore, is my theological and
experiential reflection looking back over about twenty-five years.

The key to bringing in the kingdom is to engage in the "Great Announcement."

The announcement takes place in the context of two other vital components. The
three components are expectation, prayer, and announcement. The kingdom
announcement must be made after the prayer of the kingdom. The prayer of the
kingdom must take place within the framework of kingdom expectation.

1. Kingdom Expectation

If the announcement of the kingdom is the "Great Announcement," then the

expectation of the kingdom amounts to "Great Expectations!"
Jesus taught his disciples to pray: "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your
name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven"
(Matthew 6.9-10). When Jesus taught on such prayer, his language was
expressing the total vision of the kingdom. It is not just about prayer, but about a
certain kind of prayer, a prayer that is focused on a great expectation. The
greater our expectation, or the more "kingdom" our expectation, the more
"kingdom" will be our prayer. There are two things that can inspire such prayer:
biblical revelation and experience.

Biblical Revelation

We need to saturate our minds in the prophetic promise of scripture regarding

the kingdom. The coming of the kingdom in the exodus event, the Davidic
monarchy, and the promises of Isaiah, Daniel, and other prophets amounts to a
massive expectation, all of which was in mind when Jesus told us to pray, "your
kingdom come." "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name," reminds us of
the profound connection between the name of God and the coming of the
kingdom. Moses first encountered the "I Am Who I Am," then announced the
kingdom to Pharaoh, and then saw the spiritual and military manifestation of the
kingdom. David exalted in the name of Yahweh as he responded to Nathan's
prophetic word and then saw the victory manifest. When Jesus spoke of his
Father, he did so in the context of his relationship with the Father, which John's
gospel describes and reflects on. To know the name of God is to have the
expectation of his becoming present.

Such a total kingdom expectation must be placed in contrast to various forms of

reductionism that have plagued the church. Dispensationalism and cessationism
combine to reduce what people expect today when they pray, "Your kingdom
come." If signs and wonders ceased with the apostles, then we do not expect
them to happen in answer to this prayer. If the church is going to escape from the
world, then we have a reduced expectation of world evangelism when we pray
that prayer. We need to allow the full revelation of scripture to enlarge our
expectation until it is a truly kingdom expectation.
Holy Spirit Experiences

Until one has witnessed what happens during great moves of the Holy Spirit, one
does not know what to expect. The more you see, the more you expect when you
pray the kingdom prayer. If fact, once you have seen it, you can never settle for
less. If not much was happening in his meetings, John Wesley used to pray,
"Lord, where are the tokens and signs?"[19] As I reflect on the last decades of
pastoral ministry, I look back over a gradual enlargement of expectation. The
journey is marked by seasons of special enlargement of expectation: my
conversion experience, the beginnings of the charismatic renewal in South
Africa and my first encounter with Pentecostals, the Jesus People movement in
Cape Town, the early visits of Lonnie Frisbee and John Wimber to South Africa,
the 1994 renewal, and the years that have followed. Each Christian can review
his experience of encounter with God. I have found that such seasons have been
linked to periods of intense interest in church history and the stories of similar
phenomena. The more we see, the more we expect to see.

2. Kingdom Prayer

It is not just about prayer per se, or about how much we pray. It is about a certain
kind of praying, a specific prayer: "Your kingdom come." The theology of the
kingdom should be required for groups of intercessors. Once they have been
equipped with the full kingdom expectation, intercessors can be informed
prayers.

The kingdom prayer occurs in the secret place. The kingdom announcement
occurs in the public place. What happens in the secret place is the foundation of
what occurs in the public place. Even here, there is a sense of mystery. It is
certainly not the case that the amount of praying we do is proportional to the
amount of breakthrough we see. There are times when one has prayed very little,
but after announcing the kingdom, more takes place than other times when one
has prayed much more. It is really about a certain dynamic that takes place in a
certain kind of prayer. When our minds and hearts are enlarged with the
expectation of the kingdom, the way we pray changes. The early church entered
into this dimension when they prayed, "Now Lord … Stretch out your hand to
heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy
servant Jesus" (Acts 4.29-30). The more we expect, the more we pray with
expectation. Such prayer then works on our expectation. It quickens it, enlarges
it, and sharpens it. Prayer and expectation are reciprocal with one another. The
Holy Spirit becomes present and one becomes more and more expansive in what
one prays for. One begins to feel that it is a small thing for God to act. The long
history of his mighty acts in biblical times and through church history, the great
revivals one has read about, and the things one has seen all fuse into a focal
point as one considers the immediate situation: the meeting ahead, the mission at
hand, the time and place. One walks out of such a prayer meeting believing
anything can happen.

3. Kingdom Announcement

The commission to the disciples mirrors the prior activity of Jesus. Having
watched him role-model kingdom ministry through words and deeds, Jesus told
the disciples to go and do the same. They were to announce the presence of the
kingdom and to demonstrate its powers. "As you go, preach, saying this
message: "The kingdom of heaven is near." Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse
those who have leprosy, drive out demons" (10.7-8). Notice the connection
between word and event. The word or announcement ("the kingdom is near")
creates, or unleashes, the events that demonstrate it (heal, raise, cleanse, drive
out). Word leads to deed. Announcement, or proclamation, leads to
demonstration. The power of the demonstration lay in the announcement. A
modern paraphrase of Jesus" words would be,
announce that the personal, ultimate reign of God at the end of the world history
has broken into this present world.

The significant texts for the commissions are as follows:

Mark 1.14-15 and Luke 4.16-21 record the inaugural words of Jesus,
announcing the nature of his future ministry.
Matthew 10.1-10 and Luke 9.1-6 record Jesus placing the same ministry on
the twelve. Two key terms used here are power andauthority . Power
(dunamis) refers to the ability or empowering to make the announcement,
what we, today, call anointing. Authority (exousia) refers to delegated
authority to act in the name of Jesus. When we know under whose authority
we act, we have authority. It relates to our sense of confidence and
affirmation by God.
Luke 10.1-9 records the giving of the commission to the seventy (or
seventy-two). The fact that there is no difference between the two
commissions shows that it was not meant to be restricted to the twelve
apostles.
Matthew 28.16-20 and Luke 24.45-49 with Acts 1.1-11 and John 20.19-23
record the reiteration of the commission to the disciples after the crucifixion
and resurrection.

This is still the commission of the church.

How does this work in practice? We return to some personal reflections and
lessons from the dynamics of Vineyard ministry. Expectation leads to prayer,
and prayer leads to announcement. How exactly does one make the
announcement? Do we go into the streets shouting, "The end is nigh!" and find
ourselves institutionalised?
I believe the gifts of the Holy Spirit have been given specifically to operate as
the means of making the announcement. The word of knowledge, prophecy, and
healing are particularly helpful. During the time of prayer prior to a given
meeting, the Holy Spirit will often give some indication of what the Father
intends to do. Particulars of conditions, needs, names, and life situations may
come to mind. There may be a prophetic sense that God wants to move in a
particular way.

Once one is in a meeting, one should become sensitive to the sense of God's
arrival. Here is where we draw a distinction between the omnipresence of God
and his manifest presence. This point should be clear by now. There are church
meetings where we "do church" in a very normal, this-worldly manner, giving
worship, teaching the word, and having fellowship. Then there are times when,
often without warning, an intangible change takes place. Previous experiences of
great moves of the Spirit can help us pick up the change more easily. Though
intangible to many, some people have physical sensations indicating the shift. It
is time to stop whatever we were doing, "doing church," and to wait on God.
The worship or the preaching may heighten the sense of God "becoming
present." Certain kinds of preaching draw closer to the pure act of kingdom
announcement than others. Certain ministry gifts have the same effect. Those
with the gift of evangelism or prophetic ministry tend to move in a dimension of
announcement. Sometimes, words of knowledge will come, not during the
prayer beforehand, but there and then, at a particular point in the meeting.

Whatever the exact nature of the "trigger mechanism," announcement means that
declaration whereby the people are told that God is about to intervene,
manifestly. If a word of knowledge is accurate, the recipient cannot but believe
that God knows about their private cry, cares about them, and has made this
known at this very moment for a purpose. It heightens the sense of expectation.
Preaching that carries a sense of penetration into the heart of man has the same
effect. Intimate worship can bring people to a state of prostration and
transparency before God and will have the same result.

There is ample precedent in church history for this dynamic. The revival that
broke out under the leadership of Andrew Murray in Wellington, South Africa,
occurred when a young woman read a certain verse from the Psalms after a
youth meeting had been in prayer. Suddenly, the Holy Spirit fell on the whole
group, and Andrew Murray was summoned to observe the seeming chaos that
followed. The Holy Spirit can use all sorts of moments and mechanisms to
release the sense of God's manifest presence.
The moment critique comes in the interface between announcement, prayer, and
waiting. The announcement has to be made before anything actually happens,
even though it may be in response to a subjective sense of God drawing near.
Quite often, the announcement, "God is about to move in this meeting, right now
…" will be linked to a prayer for God to do so. This is what we call the "Come
Holy Spirit" prayer. Critics often ask for biblical references for such a prayer.
However, the kingdom prayer, "Let your kingdom come," understood against the
background of Pentecost as a moment of kingdom intervention, should reveal the
ineptitude of such questions. To pray, "Let your kingdom come," or to pray,
"Come Holy Spirit," amounts to exactly the same thing.

All of this is done through obedience to the commission of Jesus. We are to do it

because he said so, not because we claim any particular results for ourselves. To
pray such a prayer or to make such an announcement is therefore to place all the
pressure on God and to take all the pressure off us. He told us to do it to the end
of time. He is sovereign. It is his business to either endorse our obedience or not.
What does one do after that? The temptation is to try to make something happen.
Failure to understand the nature of the kingdom will lead to manipulation. We
are not called to press certain emotional buttons and manipulate people into
responses. If God is sovereign, it is better to "dial down" into quietness and hang
suspended on the raw obedience to the commission. It is time to wait, and if
necessary, to wait and wait. Sometimes, such times of waiting lead to nothing
and it is time to drink coffee. Other times, the longer one waits, the greater the
sense of pregnant expectation and the greater the sense of intervention by God.
For those up front, the time following the announcement and prior to the
intervention of God is rather like the experience of a bungee jumper in free fall.
At this point faith is spelt r-i-s-k.
Those who are called to preach the gospel are called to live in this dimension,
from Pentecost to the very end. This leads us to the next chapter. Such
proclamation is to be the focus of the church, for the entire age of the church,
"between the times."

ACTS OF INTERVENTION
The Old Testament promised that the kingdom would come. The New Testament
records the fulfilment of this promise in Jesus and the expectation of the final
culmination of the promise in the return of Christ. The church lives between the
coming and the consummation of the kingdom, between the times. This does not
mean that the church lives in a vacuum, caught between memory and
expectation. The Pentecostal outpouring of the Holy Spirit fills the church
period. The ministry of the Spirit links what began in Jesus with what continues
in the church as one extended event, undivided, and yet manifest in repeated
waves of divine intervention. No portion of Scripture explains this better than
the book of Acts.

Acts
The Act of God

We have seen that the kingdom is not a static truth or a universal principle, but a
dynamic event. God breaks into human history and interrupts it. The Word
becomes flesh. God's rule collides with the powers of this age. There is
confrontation, invasion, warfare, and power. The stone falls from heaven and
pulverises the image. Satan is vanquished. Death is defeated. People are
transformed by God. Society is revolutionised. All this is the act of God. The act
of God, which is the intervention of his kingdom, is expressed and embodied in
his Son, Jesus Christ. To speak of the act of God is therefore to speak of the
coming of Jesus Christ. Acts helps us to follow the way in which the act of God
is the event of the kingdom in Jesus. It is manifest in the acts of the Holy Spirit
and becomes, in turn, the acts of the apostles, which in practice become the acts
of the church.

The Acts of Jesus Christ

Luke introduces the book of Acts as the record of the continued acts of Jesus. He
reminds Theophilus that his Gospel was the record of what "Jesus began to do
and to teach" (Acts 1.1). His second volume is the record of what Jesus
continued to do and teach, how "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy
Spirit and power, and how he went about doing good and healing all who were
under the power of the devil" (10.38). Jesus is God's anointed king. The presence
of the kingdom is personified and manifested in him. This means that the coming
of the kingdom is the act of Jesus Christ. This is illustrated time and again.

Pentecost happened because Jesus ascended and poured out the gift of the Holy
Spirit. The lame man was healed through faith in Jesus" name. The early church
prayed for signs and wonders to be done through the name of Jesus, and this is
exactly what happened. Crowds gathered as people were healed. While Stephen
was being stoned, he saw the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God. Paul
was converted because Jesus appeared to him in blinding light and called him to
his service. The Spirit of Jesus guided Paul in his missionary strategy. Acts is
therefore a record of the continued presence of the risen Lord in his church.
The Acts of the Holy Spirit

In reply to the disciples" question about when the kingdom would be restored to
Israel, Jesus said that they would receive power when the Holy Spirit came (1.6-
8). Henceforth, the kingdom would come through the Holy Spirit. When Jesus
sat down at the right hand of God, the Holy Spirit brought his kingly rule to
earth. Henceforth, he would be present through the Holy Spirit. The book of
Acts is therefore filled with references to the acts of the Holy Spirit.
The Spirit came upon the disciples and they spoke with tongues. The apostles
preached and testified in the power of the Spirit. The Holy Spirit was poured out
on the Samaritans, on Paul, on the Gentiles, and on the Ephesians. It was the
Spirit who directed Peter to preach to Cornelius. As he did, the Spirit came on
the household, taking Peter by surprise and forcing him to accept them into the
family of God. The Spirit directed the church at Antioch to launch its mission to
the Gentiles. So closely is the presence of the Spirit associated with the rule of
Jesus, that Paul's leading by the Spirit of Jesus is the same as being led by the
Holy Spirit.

The Acts of the Apostles

We can also say that this book records the acts of the Apostles. The Spirit works
through anointed individuals. Jesus promised: "But you will receive power when
the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in
all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" (1.8). From the moment that
they were filled with the Spirit at Pentecost, everything God had done through
Jesus continued through the apostles. The result was that when they preached
Jesus as King, they turned the world upside down. Wherever they went, they
caused a social upheaval. Cities like Ephesus were drastically altered. They
could no longer obey the Sanhedrin because of their obedience to a higher
power. They no longer feared the Roman authorities but called these authorities
to account for their administration of justice. Just as Jesus" proclamation of the
kingdom caused it to break through, when the apostles proclaimed the kingship
of Jesus, the kingdom came.

The Acts of the Church

The book of Acts also records the acts of the church. The apostles were the
leaders and representatives of a kingdom people. Believers filled Jerusalem with
the teaching of Jesus and went to Antioch to preach the gospel when they were
scattered from Judea. Widows like Tabitha and young women like Philip's
daughters prophesied. Prophets like Agabus and evangelists like Philip testified
to the kingdom, bringing the powers of the kingdom to villages, towns, and
cities. Young men saw visions and old men dreamed dreams, all of them
together receiving the prophetic anointing of the Spirit.
The church announces the kingdom in the continual expectation that it will
come, finally, at any time. God has fixed a day when he will judge the world
through Jesus Christ. The church does not announce a probable hope but an
accomplished fact: Jesus is King. The kingdom has come, Satan is defeated and
Jesus is Lord of all. Because all this has already been accomplished, the church
can heal the sick and drive out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Wherever the Holy Spirit moves, the kingdom breaks through. This is no
vacuum or waiting period. It is a period of Spirit-filled kingdom intervention
when the Word is made flesh in countless individuals.
The spreading of the gospel in this period of history takes place through the
missionary strategy of the church. The kingdom is not a vague universal
principle. It breaks through as believers proclaim Jesus as King. Jesus gave a
clear set of priorities:

Jerusalem,
Judea and Samaria,
 the ends of the earth.

The book of Acts records the fulfilment of this strategy. One can describe the
latter part of Acts as the biography of the apostle Paul. The destiny of the gospel
is tied up with his destiny in arrest, betrayal, mistrial, and retrial. Particular cities
experience the coming of the kingdom: Cyprus, Pisidian, Antioch, Iconium,
Lystra and Derbe, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth, and so forth.
The record of the coming of the kingdom becomes a travel narrative. Where the
apostles go, the kingdom comes.
Because the kingdom is an event, not a principle or a social system, it can only
be followed as a series of acts. Kingdom events are acts of the Holy Spirit, in
and through the acts of apostolic testimony, in and through an apostolic church.

The nature of the kingdom has not changed; therefore, the breakthrough of the
kingdom cannot change. Where the word is proclaimed, light collides with
darkness, people bow to Jesus the King, their lives are transformed, cities and
villages are turned upside down, communities of kingdom people are born,
bodies are healed, and demons are put to flight, and world rulers are disturbed by
the competing claim of the kingdom. The breakthrough has many implications:
social, philosophical, economic, and political, but the implications are not in
themselves the event. The coming of the kingdom has to be a record of acts.
Study the history of missions and revivals, and you will be studying the
continuation of Acts.
Luke's story is deliberately unfinished. The last verse of Acts says of Paul,
"Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught
about the Lord Jesus Christ" (28.31). Acts 29 and beyond was to be written by
other believers, chapter after chapter of the one, indivisible breakthrough of the
kingdom from city to city, from nation to nation, and from continent to
continent, merging into the history of revivals.
 PART THREE
THE THEOLOGY OF THE
KINGDOM
The title of part three is a little inaccurate because we have been dealing with
the theology of the kingdom from the very beginning.

However, we must now move from tracing the overall theme of the kingdom in
scripture to proving more of its details and working out more of its implications.

THE PARABLES OF THE

KINGDOM
Perhaps the most characteristic element in the teaching of Jesus was his parables.
Again we find that the kingdom of God is central. Christ often began his
explanation of the kingdom with "To what shall we liken the kingdom of God?
Or with what parable shall we picture it?" (Mark 4:30). A number of themes
emerge from the parables that give us a clear picture of how Jesus understood
the kingdom.[20]
The overriding theme is the relationship between the present and the future,
between the kingdom now and the kingdom to come. In the present the kingdom
comes near to men through the preaching of the Word. In the future the kingdom
will confront men in final judgment or mercy. This tension brings men to the
crisis of response. How they react now to the kingdom will determine how they
stand in the future coming of the kingdom. Because the future of the kingdom
hovers over men with such nearness, their decision cannot be postponed. They
cannot afford the luxury of taking their time to decide. Yet we must not think
that men can determine their status in the future kingdom by their behaviour. We
enter the kingdom by grace - it breaks through to people who do not deserve it.
Our response is merely the receiving of a gift.

We usually speak of "the present and the future" because we orientate ourselves
in the present and look towards the future. But Jesus speaks of the present from
the future. He stands with God in the ultimate future of his kingly reign and
speaks into the present. This is one of the reasons for saying that Jesus addresses
men as God. Only God can speak from the future.

The Kingdom Comes in the Future

The future orientation appears repeatedly in the parables.

The sower looks to the future harvest (Matthew 13:1-23). Weeds and wheat
grow together "until the harvest" (13:30) at the end of the age, when men will
either shine like the sun or be burned in the fire (13:40-42). The mustard seed
must not be underestimated because of its future as a great shrub (13:31-32). The
catch of fish awaits the final moment, when good and bad are separated (13:47-
52). It is no use hiding the light in a jar because in the future everything will be
disclosed (Luke 8:16-18). One must build on rock, not sand, because the future
brings a storm of judgment that will destroy whatever has no foundation (6:46-
49). The rich fool was caught because he thought he could live out his days with
ease, but the future came upon him unexpectedly (12:13-21).
This theme of the tension between the present and the future is dramatized in
two events: the great feast and the return of the Lord. The day will come when
God will invite people to a great banquet (14:15-24). The different ways in
which men respond is an indication of their position at the Messianic banquet:
men are either received or thrown into outer darkness. They find either judgment
or mercy.
This future dispensation is initiated by the return of the master. He returns from
a wedding banquet (12:35-48). The bad manager is placed in crisis because he is
called to account and has little time to find the means to pay. The future has
caught him unawares (16:1-13). The servants who were given ten minas face the
day when the nobleman will return (19:11-27). Other servants who have been
given different talents await the return of their master from his journey (Matthew
25:14-30). In the same way, the tenants of the vineyard face the day of the
landowner's return and the virgins face the return of the bridegroom (21:33-46;
25:1-13).
The most dramatic picture of the future is presented in the story of Lazarus and
the rich man. The point it makes is that once the future arrives, it is too late to
change. He has crossed the river and there is no turning back (Luke 16:19-31).

The Future Impinges on the Present

This future impinges on the present with such force that the "now" is filled with
significance. Right now the Son of Man is preaching the word of the kingdom
(Matthew 13:37); good and bad seed are sown together; the mustard seed looks
insignificant; the fish are encircled by the great net, and seed is being scattered
abroad (Mark 4:26-29). We are to decide now, in the light of the future, not to
hide the lamp in the jar, to build on rock, not on sand. The fool, who lives only
for the present age, makes a choice to build a bigger barn but will never be able
to complete it. We have to be ready at all times because we do not know when
the thief will come (Luke 12:35-40).

We cannot be idle about the present. Already invitations are being sent out for
the great banquet and the bad manager is being given notice to draw up his
accounts. Those who received money from the master must be making it work
for them. The owner of the vineyard is sending out his representatives prior to
his coming. The oil in the virgin's lamps is burning down.
We should be aware that we live in a pregnant present overshadowed by an
ultimate future. The danger is that we will be mystified by the hidden way in
which the future is being manifest now and miss its overpowering significance.
How does the little bit of leaven affect all the meal (Matthew 13:33)? How can
the mustard seed become a great shrub? How can a Galilean carpenter be the
Messiah of the age to come? Why is there a delay before the bridegroom
appears? If we conclude that the urgency has passed, we are seriously mistaken.
There is no time to allow a tree to fail to bear fruit. If it does not bear within one
more season, chop it down (Luke 13:6-9)!
Becoming snagged on the exact relationship between the present and the future
will do us no good. We have to accept that it is a mystery. The farmer scatters
the seed and goes to sleep. Suddenly, one thing has become another. The
seemingly indiscriminate scattering of seed has become a great harvest while he
was asleep. He was actually blind to the way in which the one became the other.

The Kingdom Creates a Crisis of Decision

The way the future impinges on the present has already revealed the priority of
decision. The future kingdom has become present in Jesus. A choice is therefore
forced upon men and women. Their reactions, attitudes and responses come
under the spotlight. Some cannot even understand the message. Others do, but
their interest is shallow. Then there are those who respond but allow the
pressures of this age to choke the word. Some respond with depth (Matthew
13:18-23). If people could see how their response to the presence of the kingdom
determines their ultimate position, they would be like the man who sold all his
possessions to buy just one pearl of great value (13:45-46). They would not be
so foolish as to make excuses about attending the banquet (Luke 14:15-24).
They would rush around putting things right, like the bad but shrewd manager
(16:1-13). They would not live in ease and luxury like the rich man and ignore
the Lazarus at the gate.
The response to the present challenge of the kingdom must be deeper than mere
words. In the parable of the two sons, the one son who said yes to the kingdom
actually meant no, while the one who said no actually meant yes. It is the reality
of our response that counts (Matthew 21:28-32).

We could summarize the mood of Jesus" parables in the words of Paul:

We implore you … be reconciled to God … We urge you not to receive

God's grace in vain. For he says: "In the time of favour I heard you, and in
the day of salvation I helped you." I tell you, now is the time of God's
favour; now is the day of salvation. (2 Corinthians 5:20-6:2)

Rudolf Bultmann was a European biblical scholar who had difficulty with the
'supernatural" elements in the New Testament. He believed we should strip away
the "mythological" husk that covered the inner kernel of biblical truth. This
made him rather unpopular with evangelical believers. Yet despite this he did
provide an insight that made a valid contribution. He was strongly influenced by
a European philosophy called existentialism which sharpened his perception of
how the kingdom message of Jesus brought about a "crisis of response" in those
who heard it. The kingdom preaching of Jesus includes the idea of an event that
can take place at any moment. In fact, the event is so near that it is actually here.
This event is nothing less than the end of the world. What would you do right
now if you knew that this world would end tomorrow? Your priorities would
change immediately. Nonessentials would be dropped. Essentials would take
their rightful place as you prepared to meet your God. The preaching of Jesus
brought about just such a crisis of decision. This note is evident in statements
such as: "Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead" (Matthew 8:22).
Don"t wait for ordinary life to take its course. You don"t have the time. Make up
your mind now!
But, you may ask, did the end of the world actually take place? Surely the sense
of urgency was misplaced? Wrong, says the New Testament. Everything we
have looked at so far confirms that the end of the world came in Jesus Christ.
Whenever the powers of the age to come break into this world, we experience
the end of the world. When you accept Jesus, you encounter the end of the world
because he is the end of the world. This is why a confrontation with Jesus is the
ultimate confrontation. Once this has happened death or the end of the world, are
no longer foreboding prospects. You have broken through already because the
end of the age has come upon you. Since that breakthrough occurred in Jesus
Christ, we have continued to live in this mysterious situation where the present
world coexists with the last days. In this age of grace any moment can be the last
and, for every individual, each moment has the potential to be the breakthrough
of that last moment. An oft-quoted sentence from Bultmann is that "Every
instant has the possibility of being an eschatological instant and in Christian faith
this possibility is realized." [21]

As we have seen, this has profound implications for an understanding of signs

and wonders, an implication Bultmann certainly did not entertain.

Vehicles of Grace
Our response to the breakthrough of the kingdom is not what brings us
acceptance. We do not share in that future glory because of anything we have
done. In this sense we cannot work for our future place. There was no logical
connection between how long the labourers worked and what they were paid
(Matthew 20:1-16). The farmer paid what he wanted to pay. Those who obtained
entrance to the Messianic banquet were those who had no merit in society. All
they did was to accept the invitation (22:1-14). They were clothed by the king.
Those who are secure in their place in the kingdom are the lost sheep who have
been found by the shepherd (Luke 15:1-7). They did not find the kingdom. The
kingdom found them, like the woman who searched through her house for one
lost coin (15:8-10). The lost son must decide to return to his Father's house, but
his acceptance is the result of the forgiving love and mercy of his Father (15:11-
32). The crisis of response may be vital, but grace is ultimately significant in our
discovering the kingdom.

Parables of Jesus
Here is a list of Jesus" parables. It is included for use in group discussion.

Description Matthew Mark Luke John

Candle and candlestick 5:14-16

House on Rock/Sand 7:24-27
New piece/old cloth 9:16 2:21 5:36
New wine/old bottles 9:17 2:22 5:37-39
Evil Spirit/Empty house
Loving because forgiven 7:36-50
The sower 13:1-23 4:1-20 8:4-15
How seed grows 4:26-29
Tares among the wheat 13:24-30,36-43
The mustard seed 13:31-32 4:30-32 13:18-19
The leaven 13:33
Treasure in the field 13:44
The pearl of great price 13:45-46
The net 13:47-50
The wicket servant 18:21-35
The good Samaritan 10:25-37
The importunate friend 11:5-8
The rich fool 12:16-21
Watchful servants 12.35-40
The unfaithful servant 24:45-51 12:41-48
The unfruitful fig tree 13:6-9
The narrow gate 7:13-14,21-23 13:22-30
Taking the humble place 14:7-11
The great supper 14:15-24
Counting the cost 14:25-33
The lost sheep 18:10-14 15:1-7
The lost coin 15:8-10
The lost son 15:11-32
The shrewd steward 16:1-13
The rich man & Lazarus 16:19-31
Attitude in service 17:7-10
The unjust judge 8:1-8
The Pharisee and sinner 18:9-14
Workers in the Vineyard 2:1-16
Investing wisely 19:11-27
The good shepherd 10:1-16
The two sons 21:28-32
The Vineyard 21:33-46 12:1-12 20:9-19
The wedding of the Son 22:1-14
The sign of the fig tree 24:32-35 13:28-31 21:29-33
The ten virgins 25:1-13
The talents 25:14-30
The sheep and the goats 25:31-46
The vine and branches 15:1-8

KINGDOM LIFESTYLE
We may describe those who have discovered the kingdom as citizens of the
kingdom. Jesus referred to the 'sons of the kingdom" (Matthew 13:38). Being a
son of the kingdom involves entering the kingdom and living a kingdom
lifestyle. Before we discuss entering the kingdom, we need to make three
introductory statements.

Firstly, being in the kingdom is synonymous with being saved or having eternal
life. A rich young man asked Jesus what he had to do to find eternal life (19:16).
Having answered the man's question, Jesus promptly told his disciples: "I tell
you"re the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven"
(19:23). The disciples were amazed at this statement and asked: "Who then can
be saved?" (19:25). The terms are used interchangeably.
Secondly, the phrase "kingdom of heaven" is synonymous with "kingdom of
God". Matthew tends to use the former while the other Gospel writers tend to
use the latter. In Jewish speech "heaven" was a customary circumlocution for
God. Since Matthew wrote in and for a Jewish environment, he used the Jewish
idiom. A comparison between Matthew and the other two synoptic Gospels will
show that parallel passages say "kingdom of heaven" in Matthew and "kingdom
of God" in the others.
Thirdly, in terms of New Testament teaching, one is either in the kingdom or
not. Certain people will inherit the kingdom while others will be consigned to
eternal punishment (25:46). Christ's words about eternal punishment are usually
found in texts that describe eternal life. The duration of hell is therefore as
eternal as that of heaven. As most of the statements in the New Testament about
hell come from Jesus himself, we are in no position to question this awful reality
if we wish to submit to his teaching.

Entering the Kingdom

As we look at our entrance into the kingdom, we come to an issue that has led to
a great deal of disagreement amongst Christians, and especially theologians,
namely the relationship between divine grace and human responsibility. This
issue will certainly not be solved in this book, but the message of the kingdom
brings a certain clarity to bear.

The kingdom of God or New Testament eschatology is the true context of most
New Testament doctrines. Because Jesus had his focus primarily on the
kingdom, and because the kingdom is firstly about eschatology, every major
New Testament doctrine has to take eschatology as its starting point. This must
include issues of divine initiative and human responsibility. If we take the issue
back to its foundations, we may find that the problem loses some of its intensity.

The crucial statement in this regard is found in Christ's first proclamation: the
kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel" (Mark 1:15).
Matthew says: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matthew 4:17).
The nearness or presence of the kingdom is a proclamation of divine grace.
Repentance is a human responsibility. Should stress be laid on divine grace or on
human responsibility? The answer should be obvious. Both statements move
logically from the intervention of the kingdom to the response of repentance and
faith. Even in Matthew, where repentance is mentioned first, the reason for
repentance is stated: "for the kingdom of heaven is at hand".
This leads to one of the most fundamental principles in kingdom theology. The
call to repentance is uttered in the context of kingdom intervention. The
kingdom is here, therefore repent! Repentance is part of our response to the good
news that the kingdom is near. The presence of the kingdom must initiate
repentance and not vice versa. Only when the powers of the age to come are
present in the announcement of the gospel can one anticipate true repentance. To
say "the kingdom is near" or "present" is to announce the fulfilment of Isaiah's
expectations:

God has come to save his people, to set the captives free, to forgive sinners, raise
the dead, pour out the Spirit, renew the covenant, reveal his glory, etc. In
response to this wonderful fact, man must turn around and believe the good
news.

In this sense Jesus" understanding of repentance and kingdom presence is

radically different from the understanding of Rabbinical Judaism. In the latter
repentance — obedience to the requirements of the law and the traditions of the
rabbis — was the condition that had to be fulfilled by the nation before the
Messiah could come. The Rabbinical concept of repentance placed the initiative
with man and his responsibility to repent. Jesus placed the initiative with God
and the dynamic intervention of his reign. When Jesus preached repentance, the
offer of grace was no mere verbal promise. When Jesus spoke things happened.
His words were events. When he announced liberty, people were set free. It was
in this context, with the power of the Holy Spirit evident amongst the people,
that Jesus demanded the most uncompromising repentance. This suggests that
the greater the evidence of the power of God, the greater the possibility of deep
repentance. When God's power is not evident, a powerful call to repentance only
produces legalism.
The Rabbinical idea that repentance should initiate kingdom presence has often
reappeared in the history of the church. The theology of Charles Finney and his
concept of man's role in initiating revival comes close to the Rabbinical view.
Some traditions within Evangelicalism have also been deeply influenced by this
idea. The following remarks are admittedly generalizations, but it seems to me
that many Evangelicals and Pentecostals preach repentance in a manner that
places the initiative primarily in the hands of man. In some churches this idea is
one of the only subjects that is ever preached. And as one would expect, it does
not lead to revival or usher in the presence of the kingdom. It is most gratifying
to notice how the emphasis in the Renewal movement is clearly on divine
initiative. Renewal preachers are usually preoccupied with what God is doing or
what they believe he wants to do in his church. While they do not always
conceive of their preaching as an announcement of the kingdom, the content of
their preaching often makes this clear. The teaching of Jesus strongly
emphasizes divine grace and, as a result, human responsibility. This is evident in
the parables.

Divine Grace

Christ's teaching in the parables on those who are fit for the kingdom amounted
to a complete reversal of current expectations. Tax collectors and harlots entered
the kingdom before the Pharisees (Matthew 21:31). To the question: "Who then
is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" Jesus answered: "…whoever humbles
himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven" (18:1-4). He
stated repeatedly that the first would be last, and the last first (19:30; 20:16). The
rich, who are first in this world, are the last to be included in the kingdom
(19:23-24). The poor, who are last in this world, are the beneficiaries of the
kingdom (Luke 6:20). The sinner who beat upon his breast went home justified
rather than the Pharisee who fasted twice a week and performed many ritual
duties (18:9-14). Jesus said to the Pharisees: "You are those who justify
yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly esteemed
among men is an abomination in the sight of God" (16:15).
Jesus came not to call the righteous, but sinners (Mark 2:17). When the
Pharisees complained that Jesus received sinners and ate with them, Jesus told
them the three parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and the lost son (Luke
15:1-32). The very people who were generally believed to be beyond help were
the ones singled out by Jesus as candidates for the kingdom of God, while those
who believed themselves to be acceptable to God had a rude awakening. This
radically different choice of people is based on an understanding of grace instead
of merit. The only appropriate way to respond to divine grace is like a little
child. A child knows how to receive in simple trust (Matthew 18:1-5). A child
symbolizes humility and receptivity. Human effort and accomplishments are
certainly not appropriate in the presence of divine grace. Those who respond like
children become the little flock to whom the Father gives the kingdom (Luke
12:32). The contrast between religious pride and childlike humility indicates the
radical change of attitude that needs to take place in the heart of man before he
can enter the kingdom. Even this change occurs by a work of divine grace. Man
must be born again of the Spirit in order to enter the kingdom (John 3:3-6).
Notice the emphasis on the sovereignty of the Spirit, blowing where he wills
(John 3:8). This is an emphasis on divine grace.

Repentance and Faith

We have emphasized divine grace because Christ's understanding of repentance

must be seen in the context of kingdom proclamation. However, precisely
because Jesus ushered in the powers of the kingdom and all the wonders of that
saving event, he demanded the most uncompromising form of repentance. No
one has ever demanded of men what Jesus does. His demands are so radical that
later church history has usually witnessed a watering down of these elements in
his teaching.
The need for repentance is usually stated in terms of self-denial and allegiance to
Jesus as Lord. On the negative side is self-denial, on the positive is following
Jesus. To repent is to leave home, brothers, sisters, mother, father, children and
lands for the sake of the kingdom of God (Luke 18:29). Jesus expected men to
deny or renounce themselves and take up the cross (14:25-33). The cross was no
mere symbol of Christianity: it meant death at the gallows. The man going to the
cross was bidding farewell to his future, career, position in society, family, and
wealth — his very life. Christ's disciples must be prepared to "hate" the dearest
things in their lives. Failure to do this will result in a complete inability to follow
him. Accordingly, men were advised to count the cost before they decided to
follow Jesus. If some part of their lives holds them from the kingdom, they are to
"cut it off" (Mark 9:43-48).

Yet the call of Jesus to "follow" me" is not a decision men can spend time on. If
they want time, they must forget about following him (Luke 9:57-62). Once the
commitment has been made, there can be no looking back. It involves total
obedience to Jesus as Lord. Those who say "Lord, Lord" but do not obey, will
not be received into the kingdom (Matthew 7:21-23). Those who serve Jesus as
Lord obey the will of the Father. Obedience results in a true righteousness that
must exceed that of the scribes and the Pharisees (5:20). Those who have fed the
hungry, welcomed the stranger, clothed the naked and cared for the prisoner will
inherit the kingdom (25:34-36). Such people are prepared to suffer for
righteousness" sake (5:10).
This section brings us face to face with the intervention of the kingdom in our
lives. Have we heard the announcement of the kingdom in such a way that we
know and hear for ourselves the gracious offer and invitation of God? If this is
the case, have we heard and faced the uncompromising claim of Jesus the king?
Have we come to terms with the uncompromising call to discipleship?

Living in the Kingdom

The teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount were not given in the context
of entering the kingdom for the first time. They focus on the quality of life
demonstrated by those who have entered the kingdom, responded to the gracious
intervention of God and experienced the new birth. The beatitudes are usually
regarded as the most significant part of this teaching (Matthew 5:1-12; Luke
6:20-23). It is vital to understand that the essence of Christ's teaching relates to
the kingdom. The beatitudes summarize in single, pithy statements fundamental
truths that appear in many varied contexts in the remainder of Jesus" teaching.
They are really a key that opens the door to his wider teaching.

We have seen how the coming of the kingdom has brought a new age that
transcends the age of the law and the prophets. The radical difference between
the old era and the new is emphasized in Matthew 5:17-48. The refrain in this
passage is: "You have heard that it was said … But I say to you …" Jesus takes
upon himself an authority greater than that of Moses.

Jesus lived and taught a revolutionary concept of ethics because he embodied a

totally new age. Those who are in the kingdom do such unheard of things as
turning the other cheek, going the second mile and loving their enemies. This
new standard does not allow men to harbour anger, lust or insincerity in their
hearts (5:21-37). This is not an abolition of the law and the prophets, but an
elevation of these to a level beyond the capability of man. The kingdom
transcends the law. The new age is so much more glorious than the old that the
glory of the old seems to fade by comparison (2 Corinthians 3:7-11).

The new age has come, transcending the old, and yet the old is still here,
standing in radical contrast to the new. The beatitudes are placed in the context
of "now" and "then". Those who hunger now will be filled then (Luke 6:21).
Those who are full now will hunger then (6:25). Those who weep now will
laugh then (6:21). Those who laugh now will mourn and weep then (6:25). The
contrast is between the present evil age and the glory of the age to come when
the standards of this world will be inverted. Those who have entered the
kingdom already live by these radical standards.

The beatitudes can only be understood against the background of the presence of
the future. Christians are people who have met Jesus, and to meet Jesus is to
meet the end. We have been taken out of this present world and already live by
the powers of the age to come. Yet at the same time we live in this world. We
are caught in the tension between two worlds, but the power, reality and values
of the kingdom determine our lives rather than the standards of this world.

Central to the world we live in is the emphasis on public respectability and

accomplishment. Men practise their piety before men: they like to be seen when
they give to the poor, to be heard when they pray, and to be noticed when they
fast (Matthew 6:1-8). Those who have entered the world to come know that the
real emphasis is the condition of the heart before God. The former are taken up
with material things or the cares of this life. The latter trust in the provision of
their heavenly Father (6:19-34; 7:7-12).

If the Sermon on the Mount were taken as the moral standard men have to attain,
no one could ever hope to enter the kingdom of God. Jesus is not prescribing a
new set of rules. He is describing what happens to those who pass out of this age
and begin to live in the age to come. A revolutionary change takes place in our
lives when we are overtaken by the powers of the age to come. Jesus does not
say "Do this and don"t do that and you will enter the kingdom." He refers to
those who are the salt of the earth and the light of the world (5:13-14). These are
the sons of the kingdom, the last who have become the first, the little children
who have been given the kingdom, and the regenerate who have repented and
followed Jesus. It is a description of the lifestyle of the new man in Christ, the
new creature for whom the old has passed away and everything has become new
(2 Corinthians 5:17).

The Beatitudes
A beatitude is a supreme blessedness or happiness. The actual word means "to be
happy" or "to be congratulated". To the Hebrew mind, blessedness involved far
more than just feeling happy. It included total wellbeing. The Hebrew concepts
of shalom and salvation can be summed up in blessedness.

The concept of the blessedness of the age to come developed in the

eschatological and apocalyptic writings. References in the Old Testament reflect
the beginning of what had developed by the time of Jesus. For Jesus
"blessedness" was specifically linked to the life of the age to come, the bliss of
the Messianic era. This is also reflected in the way the term is used in the
Revelation of John (Revelation 19:9). In the beatitudes Jesus describes the kind
of people who will share in this bliss. Each beatitude could be translated "Oh the
bliss of …". We should remember Isaiah's concept of a special kind of joy that is
only to be found in the future age (Matthew 5:1-12; Luke 6:20-23).

The Poor in Spirit

In the Psalms a number of Hebrew words are used with similar connotations to
"the poor in spirit". These include the needy, the weak, the humble, the
oppressed and the impoverished. Israel was "poor" when God delivered her from
bondage. Being poor also meant trusting in God and fearing him. Hence the poor
were also the godly and the righteous.

While being poor could mean being materially poor, this was never the total
concept. The Hebrew concept is holistic, inclusive, the poor in the widest sense
including socio-political oppression. The concept in Liberation Theology tends
to be reductionistic. It selects one element in the biblical definition and elevates
it to the whole. Material poverty is never regarded as a blessing from God. His
blessing causes people to prosper. The idea here is that the materially poor and
needy have no power and influence of their own. They are often downtrodden by
the oppressor. This causes them to trust completely in God rather than in their
own resources so that God takes their side against the oppressor.
The context of Christ's pronouncement is eschatological: the poor are blessed
when the kingdom comes. In Isaiah the Messianic age meant the salvation of the
poor and contrite in heart. In Christ's teaching the abundance of the final banquet
must be offered to the poor (Luke 14:13,21). This is why the good news is
preached to them.

If the age to come will bring salvation to the poor, it will also bring devastation
to those who are rich and ungodly in their wealth. It will completely overturn the
value system of this age. The pronouncement of blessing on the poor is balanced
by the pronouncement of woe upon the rich (6:24). God is not against wealth -
his blessing brings prosperity and wealth - but against those who are rich at the
expense of the poor and who trust in their wealth.

The "poor" and the "rich" in the beatitudes are therefore those in circumstances
which usually apply to the materially poor and rich. However, because poor
people can be proud and rich people can be rich through the blessing of God, it
refers to an attitude to life. The "poor in spirit" are those who know that they
need God. Without him they are destitute, weak and impoverished. They do not
trust in the righteousness of works but in the grace of God. The most graphic
illustration of such a person is given in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax
collector (18:9-14). Ironically, this man must have been wealthy as most tax
collectors were masters of embezzlement. Though materially wealthy, he was
poor in spirit.
When Jesus says "For yours is the kingdom of God" (6:20), he means that
everything promised in Isaiah is theirs. The poor in spirit have the bliss,
happiness and abundance of the kingdom of God and all that it entails.
In Church Growth terminology one encounters the idea of "redemption and lift".
There is evidence to suggest that the power of the gospel often has more effect in
the long-term upward mobility of social groups than state and social welfare
programmes. The same can be said for the evidence that is provided through
church history. The history of the expansion of Christianity shows time and time
again how the church has leavened society. Similar factors emerge from the
analysis of the relationship between evangelical Christianity and industrialized
nations. The gospel therefore provides real hope for the poor of this world.
Nations that are stagnating in poverty are offered more than future bliss when
they are evangelized. The kingdom can radically influence the very fabric of
society.

We can say then that while this bliss will surely come in the future age, it
already works now. While the world thinks that the rich are happy and the poor
have no hope, Jesus makes an authoritative pronouncement to the contrary. The
poor are blessed both in the future kingdom and in the present. The rich may
seem to be blessed, but the day of reckoning can come at any moment and the
wealth they trust in will fail them. This beatitude is a profound promise to the
poor and a serious warning to the rich.

Those Who Mourn

The mourning referred to here is the special kind of mourning which the godly
experience when they see the devastation of God's people and the horror of
human rebellion and its consequences. The man who mourns is either the sinner
who is deeply convicted of his own sin or the believer who is deeply disturbed
by the depravity of the world he lives in and especially by the bondage of God's
people when they turn their backs on him. This mourning amounts to a cry to
God for deliverance and redemption. These will be comforted. The kingdom of
God will overturn the value system of this present evil age.

The Meek

The meek man trusts in God for his cause and does not struggle in his own
strength. Moses is the classic example of meekness (Numbers 12:3). David
possessed the same quality. Psalm 37 is the clearest exposition of meekness in
the Old Testament. Jesus quoted verse 11 in this beatitude: "But the meek shall
inherit the earth." Parallel to this is the statement: "But those who wait on the
Lord, They shall inherit the earth" (37:9). To be meek is to wait for God to
vindicate you, not to fret because of the wicked (37:1,5,7).
As with the other beatitudes, the promises to the meek are Messianic and come
basically from Isaiah. The idea of inheriting the land is a prominent biblical
theme. The basic idea originated from the way in which the Promised Land was
subdivided by lot among the families in Israel. In the New Testament the "land"
became the symbol of far more than physical Israel. Now God's people inherit
eternal life in the kingdom (Matthew 25:34). To say that the meek will inherit
the land is another way of saying that the meek will inherit the kingdom. Those
who have nothing in this world but who trust completely in God will have
everything in the age to come. As the age to come breaks into this age, the
children of the kingdom enter into their inheritance.

Those Who Hunger and Thirst

While Matthew speaks of those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, Luke
places the beatitude in the context of material poverty and hunger. As with the
poor, the basic idea begins in the Psalms. The abundance given to the poor and
hungry is very much part of the Messianic promise that will be fulfilled in the
coming kingdom, particularly in the Messianic banquet (Luke 22:16, 30). Jesus
demonstrated the presence of the kingdom when he fed the poor and hungry
(9:17). Now the rich are sated with food (6:25), but when God comes to his
people, the hungry are filled with good things and the rich are sent away empty
(1:53). The account of the rich man and Lazarus tells the story in graphic detail
(16:19-31).
The fact that Matthew adds the phrase "for righteousness" (Matthew 5:6) is
proof of the fact that the kingdom of God is not mere food and drink but
righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Hungry people can be
absolutely closed to God while rich people are sometimes deeply hungry for the
things of God. The material situation is a powerful symbol of the spiritual values
of men and it may be regarded as more than symbolic because more frequently
materially hungry people are spiritually hungry as well, while those who never
experience material want feel no need for God in their lives.

The righteousness for which men hunger is far more than the external
righteousness sought by the Pharisees. True righteousness revolves around
relationshiPsalm John the Baptist came "in the way of righteousness" (21:32).
This way involved the ethics of human relationships (Luke 3:10-14). The
standard of righteousness that Christ will apply when he judges the world will
involve human relationships (Matthew 25:37). Sanctification is not a list of
external laws about food and clothing but a way of relating to God and man.
This hunger for righteousness includes the deep desire of men to be acquitted by
God.

This beatitude is both a promise of acquittal to those who long for it and a
promise of reversal to the poor of the earth whose hope is in the coming of God's
kingdom. In the Messianic banquet they shall be filled.

The Merciful

Mercy was closely linked to steadfast love, covenant love, or divine faithfulness.
The Messianic promise concerning God's covenant and the revelation of his love
includes the promise of mercy. Luke shows how the dawning of the new age was
regarded as a fulfilment of God's promises of mercy to his covenant people
(Luke 1:50, 54, 72, 78). The fulfilment of this promise is apparent in Christ's
healing ministry. The 'son of David" was often called on for mercy.
Only those who are prepared to show mercy can expect to receive the mercy
promised in the kingdom of God. If we forgive, the Father will forgive us
(Matthew 6:14-15). With the measure we judge, we will be judged (7:2). The
man who was forgiven his debt and yet refused to forgive others their debt was
cast into jail (18:23-35). The rich man who cried out in hell for mercy had shown
no mercy in his life (Luke 16:24). Jesus judged the Pharisees as having
misinterpreted the law because they neglected the weightier matters of the law:
justice and mercy and faith (Matthew 23:23).

It has often been noted by commentators that this beatitude would come
naturally to one who has come to terms with the previous ones. Someone who
acknowledges his poverty before God, weeps for his sin and the sins of mankind,
does not fret for his own vindication and hungers for God's fullness, will be
unlikely to look down on the needy. Such a man will not find it difficult to
forgive. A true estimation of ourselves before God ensures a right attitude
towards the needs and failures of others.

The Pure in Heart

This beatitude can only be understood against the religious background of

Rabbinic Judaism and the traditions of the Pharisees. In the holiness laws of the
Old Testament most objects were categorized as clean or unclean: clothes,
animals, food, plants, days. people, etc. By the time of Jesus this tradition had
been taken to ridiculous lengths. The Pharisees regarded themselves as defiled if
they sat on the clothes of one of the "people of the land". Elaborate methods of
hand washing were developed. The Essenes had to bathe every day to maintain
their ritual purity. The emphasis was on externals. The Pharisees would have
agreed with the statement: "Blessed are the ritually pure, for they shall see God".

Jesus taught something that was diametrically opposed to the teaching of the
Pharisees:
 Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, hypocrites! You clean the
outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-
indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and
then the outside also will be clean. (Matthew 23:25-26)

It is not what goes into a man that renders him unclean but what comes out of his
heart (15:10-20). By saying this, Jesus declared all food clean (Mark 7:14-23).
Jesus not only taught internal purity but also demonstrated by his actions that he
could see through facades. He scandalized the Pharisees by eating with tax
collectors and sinners (2:13-17). He ministered to "unclean" Gentiles and even
touched lepers. Accordingly, the writers of the New Testament emphasize the
purity of the conscience rather than ritual cleansing. This beatitude inverts the
value system of the religious world. The kingdom of God brings a spiritual
revolution. Purity is a matter of the heart and Jesus pronounces the bliss of the
age to come on those who have a pure heart.

The promise that "they shall see God" is made in the context of eschatological
bliss. One may see the face of God in the experience of worship, but this
experience will finally be manifest in the world to come. Isaiah saw the future
age bringing a revelation of the full glory of God. Luke records that the dawning
of the new age was marked by the shepherds and Simeon seeing the salvation of
God (Luke 2:20,30). Jesus told the disciples that many prophets had desired to
see the things that they saw.

The Peacemakers

We have looked at the Jewish concept of peace as manifested in the kingdom

under David and Solomon. While peace denoted the absence of war to the Greek
mind, in Hebrew thinking it denoted wholeness, well-being, perfection and
prosperity. To have all this was another way of saying that you were
experiencing salvation as an all-embracing reality. Blessedness, peace and
salvation were all closely linked as the experience of the Messianic age. Peace,
defined in this way, is of the very essence of the kingdom.
Who then are the peacemakers and how does this relate to the coming of the
kingdom? A peacemaker is one who has within him the peace or wholeness of
the kingdom and imparts it to others. While the thought of bringing peace
between estranged parties is not absent, the emphasis is on the ability to bring
this peace into the lives of others, to impart something that you have
experienced. As the disciples entered a house they could let their peace come to
it (Matthew 10:12-13). They carried within themselves the distinctive presence
of the kingdom. Jesus said: "And if a son of peace is there, your peace will rest
on it" (Luke 10:6). This peace actually comes upon people through the in-
breaking of the kingdom. It is like the presence and outpouring of the Holy
Spirit. When others receive the kingdom, they receive its peace and
consequently begin to live at peace with each other. Blessed are those who, as
sons of God, both contain and impart the Messianic peace.

In the Western world people are accustomed to concepts rather than practice. To
the Hebrew mind, thinking, doing and being are part of one indivisible whole.
Words are deeds and teachings are practices. Jesus taught within the framework
of rabbinical techniques of discipleship. In this context understanding,
experiencing and transmitting peace into the lives of others was all part of one
reality. When the beatitudes are approached in this way, involvement with the
principle must lead to the transformation of our lives.

The Persecuted

Few human needs are as deep as the need for acceptance. Our egotism causes us
to place popularity and prestige as one of the highest goals. In Classical thought,
fame was regarded as one of the noblest values in life. In Rabbinic Judaism,
those who were considered holy were given much acclaim. They took the best
places in the synagogues (Luke 20:46-47). Those who were rejected or cast out
of the synagogues — tax collectors and harlots — were regarded as the scum of
the earth. They certainly had no chance of being touched by God. No Pharisee
could have regarded such a state as being blessed, but Jesus inverts the value
system of men. What is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of
God (16:15).
The language of the beatitude has links with a passage in Isaiah about socially
rejected people becoming God's accepted people. The wording is so similar to
the beatitude that it is difficult not to assume that Jesus saw this as being fulfilled
in his disciples. The sons of the kingdom become a counterculture to this world,
an alternative people where social popularity has no value but where identity
with the Son of Man and his heavenly rule is paramount. When the world rejects
such people, they should greatly rejoice: the world rejected the prophets and the
Son of Man himself (John 15:18).

Changing Values
Each beatitude has revealed, in different ways, one recurring theme: the values
of the kingdom invert the value system of this present world. The kingdom of
God brings a revolution. In the words of the Thessalonians: "These who have
turned the world upside down have come here too, acting contrary to the decrees
of Caesar, saying that there is another king - Jesus" (Acts 17:6-7). This is no
ordinary revolution based on a temporary political cause. It is brought about by
the intervention of the age to come. And because the age to come is so radically
different from this age, its intervention can do nothing other than overturn this
age. The transition from this age to the age to come can never be evolutionary or
tame. While the parables show a secretive, almost invisible presence of the
kingdom, the beatitudes show that it is certainly not docile. Nothing less than a
total transformation is involved.
Another element in the beatitudes is the total absence of a split between material
and spiritual realities. With almost every term, be it the poor, the hungry, those
who mourn or the rich, their state is both material and spiritual. This is always
the Hebrew way of seeing reality. The split between spiritual and material things
is part of the Greek, Western mind set. The coming of the kingdom affects the
whole of life: socially, individually, materially, spiritually, in terms of social
justice and personal morality. There will be a new heaven and a new earth.

There is something completely sovereign about the breakthrough of the kingdom

and its effects. Every attempt to tie the beatitudes down to a list of do's and
don"ts will miss the mark. The lifestyle that is being described is beyond our
grasp. The moment we think we have finally got it, we are sure to have missed
it. We can no more live the beatitudes in our own strength than fly to the moon.
They delve so deeply into our inner motives that they can only continually
disturb us. If we could escape from this world and live completely in the
kingdom, it would be great. If we could forget about the kingdom and live only
in this world, things would be safe. But neither is possible. We will continue to
be part of both kingdoms at the same time. Our lives are disturbed in a most
wonderfully upsetting way so that we can never see anything in quite the same
way again.

THE MESSIANIC BANQUET

The parables teach us that we have a crisis of decision. The entrance into the
kingdom is by divine grace. Once we are in the kingdom we live by its
revolutionary values. This has been the subject matter of the last chapter. In the
next chapter will we examine the relationship between the kingdom and the
church. Before we do that it will be helpful to examine a theme that runs like a
thread through much of the biblical teaching on the kingdom and lays the
foundation for understanding the church as the community of the kingdom. The
Messianic banquet is a predominant concept of the kingdom in Judaism. The
theme will emerge as we review the territory we have covered.
The first picture of the kingdom was the exodus event. The land of Egypt had
been under plagues of divine judgement, probably for weeks. The devastation
was serious enough for Pharaoh to allow a large proportion of his labour force to
leave the country. The Israelites were about to embark on a dangerous and
frightening journey of escape. What do they do the night before they leave?
They have a feast of lamb, bread and salads! Each family is required to have this
feast. They are never to forget it for the remainder of their history. It must be
celebrated every year for seven days. What would they remember in the
generations that followed? Within the text of Exodus 12 is the announcement of
Yahweh's judgement on the gods of Egypt (verse 12) and the climax of the final
plague (verse 29). This feast would forever be interwoven with the coming of the
kingdom.

The next significant moment is the covenant at Mount Sinai, where Israel
became "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:6). The climax of
the covenant event was the moment when Moses read from the book of the
covenant, the people made a confession of obedience, and the sacrificial blood
was sprinkled on the people while Moses spoke the dramatic words, "This is the
blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all
these words" (24:8). The next three verses return us to our theme.

Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went
up and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement
made of sapphire, clear as the sky itself. But God did not raise his hand
against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank
(24:9-11).

Three elements and found in this text.

 Moses had erected twelve stones on Mount Sinai to represent the twelve
tribes (24:4). The number seventy shows that the elders were the
representatives of the whole kingdom community. The numbers twelve and
seventy[22] were to be used again by Jesus as he commissioned his
disciples to announce the kingdom. Through their representatives the whole
nation was involved in this covenant moment.
The language used describes a theophany, a direct manifestation of the
glory of God. Similar language would be used again and again as prophets
and apostles were taken up into the glory of God.[23] The naked presence
of God should consume humanity. Yet because of the profound covenantal
moment the leaders of Israel are not consumed. John would describe the
whole incarnate presence of the Christ as God being present with man in
glory (John 1:14,18).
The sign of this great moment was that they "ate and drank". No ordinary or
simple meal can be imagined here. Where did the food come from?
Yahweh was the host. He had invited the leaders into his awesome
presence. They were at his table! Once again, the kingdom event was
interwoven with a feast.

The next picture of the kingdom was the Davidic monarchy, reaching its climax
in Solomon's table. Between the covenant on Sinai and the table of Solomon was
the history of a nation required by the covenant to hold feasts of various kinds,
filling the annual calendar with moments of table fellowship between Yahweh
and his people (Exodus 23:14-19; Lev.23). The annual calendar of feasts was
closely related to the various harvests. A feast was a way of celebrating
Yahweh's blessing on the produce of the land given by covenant promise. Living
in the kingdom meant that every man could live under his own vine and fig tree
and live in abundance. The blessing of obedience to the covenant created
abundance and the curse of disobedience created famine. To keep the feast was
to celebrate the kingdom and the covenant. The calendar was arranged into
feasts of seven days, seven weeks, seven years and seventy-year cycles
(Lev.23:15,23,39; 25:4,8). The year of Jubilee was therefore the crowning
example of the whole festive relationship between Yahweh and his people. He
was the sovereign and they were his vassal nation. This sovereign demanded
continual celebration of the relationship and provided continual blessing to make
such celebration possible. At least that was the intention of the relationship.

Solomon's table exemplified the golden age of Israel where, under the Davidic
monarchy, the nation actually lived for a season in the good of the kingdom. The
king's table and the table of every citizen exemplified the presence of the rule of
God and all that it entailed. The continual feast of Solomon's table bore witness
of the kingdom to the world outside Israel. It was when the queen of Sheba saw
the "all the wisdom of Solomon and the palace he had built, the food on his
table, the seating of his officials, the attending servants and their robes, his
cupbearers, and the burnt offerings he made at the temple of the Lord, she was
overwhelmed" (1 Kings 10:4-5). The image of the kingdom, or of shalom, was
expressed in food and drink at the royal table. With the collapse of the kingdom
and the long night of exile one can imagine that the vision of Solomon's table
grew in the minds of the people. The return of the kingdom would be
synonymous with the restoration of the feast.
Once the linkage between kingdom and feast was established it became the
epitome of the prophetic vision. Two prophetic visions of the coming kingdom
place the feast in contexts of final triumph, namely Isaiah 24-27 and Zechariah
9.

The Lord's Feast in Isaiah

The context of Isaiah 25:6-9 shows how the feast is the expression or symbol of
the coming kingdom. It comes in a narrative unit 24:1-27:13, which has the
theme of God's final triumph.[24] This unit in turn follows a longer section
where Yahweh's triumph over all the nations is revealed (chapters 13-23). Now,
instead of particular nations the whole earth comes into view. [25] The "city"
earth (24:10) comes under Yahweh's devastating judgement, where the party is
over (verse 11). This elicits a song of rejoicing from God's people (24:14-16a),
which is followed in turn by another description of divine judgement upon all
the kings of the earth (16b-22). The climax of the chapter is the announcement
of the coming kingdom, where God's glory will outshine the sun and moon and
"the LORD Almighty will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem and before its
elders, gloriously" (verse 23). The language is reminiscent of the Sinai
experience. The announcement of the coming rule of God is followed by another
song of praise (25:1-5). Then comes the feast of the kingdom, where the party
truly begins. Yahweh will host the feast (25:6-9). It will have the best meat and
the best, matured wine. The feast takes place in the context of the banishing of
death, the end to all tears and the confession of salvation by his people (verse 9).
Another prediction of divine judgement (10-12) is then followed by another song
of the redeemed (chapter 26) in which the resurrection of the dead is
againanticipated (26:19). Chapter 27 builds to the final climax by repeated
references to "that day" (27:1,2,6,12), the final eschatological day of the Lord.
The two verses that conclude the narrative speak of the great trumpet that will
gather God's people from all nations (12-13).

As the expectation of the kingdom developed the feast in the middle of such a
narrative became a way of referring to the whole complex of ideas: the final day,
the coming of God, judgement, glory, salvation, resurrection, and praise.

The Messiah's Feast in Zechariah

Jesus deliberately drew attention to Zechariah 9 by his staged entry into
Jerusalem on an ass (Matthew 21:1-11, 5). My own attention was drawn to this
passage during the renewal of the Holy Spirit in 1994-5. We were witnessing
remarkable manifestations of the Holy Spirit in our church meetings in a manner
I had never witnessed before. Such times lead one to examine church history for
a point of reference. I was particularly helped by the works of Jonathan
Edwards. I was fascinated to see how he used Ephesians 5:18 ("do not be drunk
with wine, but be filled with the Spirit") with Zechariah 9:15-17 to defend the
'strong affections" occurring during the New England revival.[26] Edwards was
not simply "proof-texting". He placed the passage in its broader context, which
led me to explore the larger narrative.

Zechariah has four sections, relating to the 2nd and 4th Years of Darius (1:1-6:15
& 7:1-8:23) and two oracles (9:1-11:17 & 12:1-14:21). The section immediately
previous to chapter nine deals with the time of restoration when fasting will be
replaced by feasting. Already in that section the theme of restoration from exile
is expanded into eschatological proportions where people from all nations will
be included in Zion's festivities (8:18-23). Zechariah has a repeated emphasis on
the coming of God to Zion (2:10; 8:3; 9:9). The epitome of the coming of God to
Zion is the time when the festive calendar is restored and there will be "joyful
and glad occasions and happy festivals for Judah" (8:19).

This prepares us for the oracle that begins with 9:1-10:1, the triumphal entry of
the king. After marching triumphantly from the north (9:1-8) the king arrives in
Zion (9:9). His arrival brings peace to the nations, the extension of his rule, and
the liberation of the captives (10-13). This causes his people to greet him with
ecstatic joy. The "daughter of Zion" theme introduces us to the relationship of
father to daughter and bridegroom to bride (Zephaniah 3:14; Zechariah 2:10;
8:19). Continued language about the warrior God then leads to the description
Edwards referred to where the joy of God's people in festive celebration is
compared to the drink offerings at the altar being filled to the brim. Using this
picture Zechariah describes the people roaring as with wine (9:15). Edwards
pointed out that far from God being offended by such behaviour, he finds it
"attractive and beautiful", like "jewels in a crown" when his people are
overcome with festivity because the Messianic king has visited them (9:16-17).
[27]
The Old Testament theme of kingdom festivity is not to be understood as a crass
preoccupation with full bellies and the drinking of wine. Descriptions of
drunkenness and excess are reserved for pagan festivity. The feast is a vehicle to
express the celebration of God the king being present with his people. Neither is
the Old Testament emphasis to be understood as a spiritual metaphor alone, as
though feasting had no literal dimension. For the Old Testament writers the
physical and the spiritual were inseparable. Literal eating and drinking and
spiritual celebration were one and the same thing.

Jesus the Bridegroom

Although John is not the one to use the language of the kingdom, he is certainly
the writer to portray the Messianic age as a time of festivity. The whole gospel is
structured around Jesus attending various feasts,[28] doing a series of signs, [29]
and teaching through a series of discourses. The first Passover he attended was
immediately preceded by a family feast, where he did his first sign and revealed
his glory (2:11). Feasts and signs are therefore woven together from the
beginning of his ministry. The feast/sign of the marriage in Cana inaugurates his
ministry on earth just as Revelation shows his heavenly reign beginning with the
marriage feast (Revelation 19:6-10). The whole of his ministry is therefore
encapsulated in Johannine literature within kingdom feasts. The future becomes
present as the ultimate bridegroom brings joy to a village wedding. Just as John
introduces Jesus with the marriage feast the synoptics introduce the ministry of
Jesus with the announcement of the year of Jubilee (Luke 4:18-19) and the
saying about the inappropriateness of fasting because the bridegroom is present
(Mk:2:18-20).

We should not miss the note of extravagance struck with the wedding in Cana.
"Twenty to thirty gallons" (John 2:6) equates to about 75-115 litres, or about
twelve cases of wine by today's standard. It was the best wine, and Jesus
produced it after the guests had already finished the wine supplied by the host.
One wonders how many people attended village weddings of that nature. The
text seems to indicate that Jesus created a great supply! One also wonders
whether contemporary evangelical piety would have ever described such an act
as the first and vital revelation of the glory of God? The Jewish lack of a dualism
of spiritual and physical festivity continues. The eternal word, being present
amongst men, chooses to begin the revelation of the future kingdom in a very
normal, human, romantic context.

Kingdom Meals with Jesus

The way Jesus" ministry is introduced is then followed in the synoptics by the
theme of kingdom meals in the company of Jesus. There are three ways in which
Jesus relates festivity to the kingdom.

He gives table fellowship to sinners and thereby invites them to the

Messianic banquet.
He miraculously multiplies food and thereby reveals that the Messianic age
is present.
He dedicates his last meal to the memory of his sacrificial body and blood
and then fills that memory with his risen presence.

Table fellowship with Jesus

The saying about the suitability of fasting or feasting in Mark's gospel is

immediately preceded by Jesus eating with Levi the tax collector, an event
loaded with significance. Apart from the fact that tax collectors were social
outcasts, they were also regarded as ritually unclean, because they did not abide
by the ceremonial acts of purification. Not only does Jesus eat with Levi but he
feasts with him.
The expression used in Ch.2:15, "they reclined at table together with Jesus,"
suggests that Jesus - the Messiah - and not Levi, was the host at this festive meal
… the entire pericope centers on the significance of Messiah eating with sinners.
The specific reference in verse 17 to Jesus" call of sinners to the Kingdom
suggests that the basis of table-fellowship was messianic forgiveness, and the
meal itself was an anticipation of the messianic banquet. When Jesus broke
bread with the outcasts, Messiah ate with them at his table and extended to them
fellowship with God." [30]
Luke catches the same idea when he says that Levi "held a great banquet for
Jesus at his home" (Luke 5:29). The teaching of Jesus matches his actions. While
dining at a Pharisees house he describes the kind of people who should be
invited to banquets, "the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind." The banquet we
give in this age will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous (14:13-14).
Feasts in this age provide a foretaste, or determine the nature of ones place, at
feasts in the age to come. This prompts a guest to exclaim about the blessedness
of the feast in the kingdom of God. This prompts Jesus to tell the parable of the
great feast and the socially acceptable guests who ignore or refuse the invitation
to the feast. Street people are invited and welcomed to the feast, but those who
turned down the invitation are excluded from "my banquet" (14:16-24). The
climax of the words of Jesus on the Messianic banquet must surely be the
parable of the prodigal son. The epitome of the homecoming of the lost son is
the fact that the Father throws a banquet for him. For Jesus, to experience the
salvation of the kingdom is to feast.

"Bring the fatted calf and kill it. Let's have a feast and celebrate. For this
son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found." So they
began to celebrate. (15.23-24)
Clearly Jesus used meals as vehicles of kingdom nearness, where the Messianic
banquet could be experienced in advance by those to whom Jesus extended
grace.

Miracle feasts with Jesus

The breakthrough of the powers of the age to come into this age was focused,
embodied and personified in Jesus. When the future age becomes present
anything is possible. Everything that will occur at the end becomes available in
the present when Jesus is there. The vehicle to convey the miraculous,
overpowering nature of the future age is the extravagant multiplication of food.
Mark links two events, showing a contrast of worldly feast and kingdom feast.
Herod, a false "king of Israel" throws a banquet where he gets caught in his own
egotism and ends up beheading John the Baptist (Mark 6:14-29). This is
immediately followed by Jesus throwing a banquet in the wilderness, where a
few loaves and fish feed five thousand. Later four thousand are similarly fed.
The story is rich in symbolism. The green grass indicates that the wilderness is
beginning to blossom and the groups of hundreds and fifties recalls the time
when Moses led Israel through the wilderness and they were miraculously
sustained. There is similarity and contrast. As John would teach, when Moses
fed them they would hunger again. When Jesus feeds you, you will never hunger
again. There are three gripping images, Moses leading Israel out of bondage,
Herod at his worldly banquet, beheading the prophet of God, and Jesus the
Messiah bringing the eschatological banquet to the masses. Both comparisons
point to the profound presence of the kingdom in Jesus.

The ordaining of the kingdom meal

Once one has understood the previous practice and teaching of Jesus the last
supper has been interpreted beforehand. Here there is a cluster of saying about
eating and drinking in the kingdom. While the Passover meal looked back to the
coming of the kingdom in the Exodus event, Jesus transformed its meaning in
two ways. He replaced the Passover sacrifice with the giving of his own body
and blood, thereby instituting a New Covenant, and he linked the wine they
shared in their Passover with the next time he would drink it with them in the
kingdom of God (Mark 14:25). Luke's language links the "kingdom now" to the
"kingdom coming" more explicitly. Jesus will not partake again "until it finds
fulfilment in the kingdom of God" (Luke 22:16). The future feast is the time
when "Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God"
will be gathered with God's people from all quarters of the earth "at the feast in
the kingdom of God" (13:28-30). In the mind of Jesus future kingdom and future
feast were synonymous.

The mysterious nature of the kingdom is particularly evident from the festive
theme. The fact that Jesus saw the kingdom as present in his ministry is revealed
by the fellowship meals extended to sinners and the miraculous multiplication of
food. The fact that Jesus saw the kingdom as still coming is evident from the last
supper which he sets up as a provisional meal "until the kingdom of God comes"
(22:18). His behaviour during the forty days of his resurrection appearances
shows that the kingdom has now come, fulfilling the "until" articulated at the last
supper, and yet still to come, as he continues to point to a future fulfilment. It is
here, not yet here, then again here and not yet here.
There is a deliberate theme of eating and drinking during the resurrection
presence of Jesus. It is while Jesus is breaking bread with the two in Emmaus
that they suddenly recognise him. He then appears to the disciples in Jerusalem
and demonstrates by sharing in their meal that he is not a ghost. John records the
encounter between Peter and his fishing friends on the Sea of Galilee where
Jesus has prepared a meal beforehand. In Acts his instructions about the coming
Holy Spirit were given "while they were eating with him" (Acts 1:4-5). In fact
the apostolic witness to the resurrection is given a generic description. The
"witnesses whom God has already chosen" are "us who ate and drank with him
after he rose from the dead" (10:41). The cryptic "ate and drank" here carries the
same connotations as the "ate and drank" of the seventy elders on Mount Sinai. It
is in the shared meal that the whole meaning of the kingdom event is epitomized
and expressed.

In the shared meals of the risen Christ the expectation of the coming kingdom is
fulfilled, but not exhaustively. Once again the future has become present but
awaits a future fulfillment. There is fulfillment on the way to fulfillment.

Now we must consider two implications.

The fresh understanding of the kingdom has had a profound affect on some
sections of the evangelical Christian community. The Vineyard is one part
of the wider community particularly influenced by kingdom theology. We
have adopted new models of the healing ministry and have sought to create
an environment where the breakthrough of the kingdom in power is
expected and endorsed. Have we thought through the implications for our
practice of breaking bread, or having communion, to the same extent? It
seems to me that the "eucharist" is one area of church practice that remains
peculiarly resistant to reform. How did we get from the feast of the
kingdom to the "nip and sip" of the church today? How did we get from the
meal where sinners have the grace of the kingdom extended to them to the
exclusive sacramental ceremony that only those within the community can
ever comprehend? One wonders if any contemporary evangelical church
would ever require an apostolic warning to not get drunk or eat too much at
the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians 11:21). An examination of the practice of
the early church will show that the eucharist remained a full meal, usually
shared in a house church, until well after the New Testament documents
were written. My attempt to reform our practice is reflected in the appendix
on "The way we break bread".
How does the kingdom relate to the church? The festive theme teaches us
 that the coming of the kingdom creates a celebrating community. The
people of the kingdom are therefore those who are living in the good of the
coming God. The obedience placed on Israel through the covenant is to be a
joyful obedience, where the annual calendar is filled with times of
celebration. Each celebration is to reflect with gratitude on the blessing of
living under Yahweh as king. In the New Testament koinonia is the life of
the kingdom community who "broke bread in their homes and ate together
with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favour of all the
people" (Acts 2:46). The favour of the people and the overwhelmed Queen
of Sheba describe the witness communicated by a celebrating community.
When we stop celebrating we show that we have lost the sense of visitation
inherent in the kingdom. Before any kind of mission or service to the world,
the church is the celebrating community.

THE KINGDOM AND THE

CHURCH
We saw in chapter five that the Old Testament expectation was that the arrival of
the age to come would terminate this present age. The mystery proclaimed by
Jesus was that the end of the world could break through before this world
actually ended. This intervention of the age to come occurred primarily in the
birth of Christ, his ministry, death, resurrection, ascension and the outpouring of
the Holy Spirit. The last major event in the breakthrough of the age to come, the
ascension of Christ and the outpouring of the Spirit, established the nature of the
period of delay in which the age to come and this age coexist in tension.
When Jesus was about to ascend, the disciples asked: "Lord, will you at this time
restore the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6). One could paraphrase their question:
"Lord, will you now overthrow the Roman Empire?" They believed that the
kingdom of this world would be destroyed and replaced by the kingdom of God.
In this kingdom, with Israel as the capital of the world, the Messiah would be the
universal king.

Christ's answer affirms that there will be a delay and explains what we ought to
be doing in the interim: "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has
come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea
and Samaria, and to the end of the earth" (1:8). The interim period is therefore
the time of the Holy Spirit in the church. Believers are those who must be
faithful to the end, preaching the kingdom until the close of the age.

This leads to a closer examination of the relationship between the kingdom and
the church.

Which is Which?
Two extremes must be noted in the way the relationship between the kingdom
and the church has been viewed. The traditional view, associated with both
Roman and Protestant traditions, is to identify the church with the kingdom. This
error is very easy to make because there are so many points of continuity
between the two. The more recent view, associated with dispensationalism, is to
make a radical separation between the church and the kingdom. This view is
usually based on the assumption that the kingdom refers to the Davidic
monarchy and applies to the nation of Israel, while the church is the body of
Christ and has a completely separate destiny to the nation of Israel. In terms of
biblical support, it has less excuse and is not usually taken seriously by reputable
biblical scholars.

In following chapters there will be further references to dispensationalism. This

is a theory of particular segments of time, qualitatively different from one
another, imposed on biblical revelation. The different forms of the theory share
the fundamental problem that they fail to grasp the biblical understanding of two
ages. Each kind will be explained in greater detail.
We can summarize the biblical view of the relationship between the kingdom
and the church in a number of statements. [31]

The church is not the kingdom. By most definitions, the church is a people
or gathering of those who serve Jesus as Lord. The kingdom is the personal,
dynamic reign of God. God reigns over his people. They might reign with
him in the sense that they share his triumph, but the dominion and the
Lordship belong to God. Furthermore, God's reign is over all: the whole
universe, the stars, angels and the redeemed of the earth. The kingdom is
therefore much wider than the church.
The kingdom creates the church. The inseparable link between the church
and the kingdom is shown in Matthew 18:18-20. The building of the church
is discussed in terms of the keys of the kingdom of God. Those who enter
the kingdom automatically enter the church. As the reign of God breaks
into this world, men are confronted with the demands of God the king.
They are called to give their allegiance to Jesus. The moment they accept
his Lordship, they become part of the company that has already accepted
his Lordship, the church.
The church is a structure of human relationships: brothers and sisters,
shepherds and sheep, teachers and pupils, servants, exhorters, leaders and
followers. This structure is created wherever the kingdom breaks into
society. The life of the kingdom brings the church into being; the resulting
network of human relationships must seek to contain, express and transmit
the presence of the kingdom. However, sometimes the structure impedes
and even resists the power of the kingdom.

The kingdom is illustrated by the analogy of the snail and its shell. The
secretions of the snail create the shell that the snail inhabits. Many shells lie
empty and lifeless. As church history has progressed, God has given successive
interventions of his kingdom. Each time a shell has been created appropriate to
the life of the church. But church history is strewn with empty shells where the
structure remains but the life has disappeared. The kingdom perspective should
cure us from a preoccupation with shells. Different outpourings of God's
presence take on various modes of expression. Our eye should be fixed on the
event of the kingdom. Where is God intervening? Where are his mighty deeds
being performed? Where can we see the power of the age to come? Our interest
in the shells should be functional. The shell is holy while the snail is there. The
shape of the shell is not holy and neither is the shell once the snail has
disappeared.

The church has been entrusted with the proclamation of the kingdom. One
of the most dangerous doctrines found in dispensationalism is the
separation of the gospel of the kingdom from the gospel of the church. The
result is that the gospel of the church becomes something less than the
gospel of the kingdom. The former is usually limited to the Pauline concept
of justification while the latter includes the miraculous powers of the
kingdom. We must stress that the New Testament knows only one gospel.
The gospel of the church is the gospel of the kingdom.

According to the Great Commission, the gospel — the message of the cross and
the resurrection, the offer of forgiveness and the call to discipleship — will be
preached to all nations by the power of the Holy Spirit, with signs and wonders.
All these elements constitute different parts of one commission which is
effective for the entire period of church history. Discipleship must involve
conveying all that Jesus taught and commanded throughout the entire course of
his ministry: the message of the kingdom. The church is to preach the full
kingdom message right to the end.
Jesus chose twelve disciples. Most commentators agree that this figure was
deliberately chosen to indicate that the new people of God supersedes the twelve
tribes of Israel. Christ's disciples are now the "Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16).
Jesus also chose seventy men to proclaim the kingdom. In Jewish tradition the
number seventy represented all the nations of the world. This figure therefore
symbolizes the universal scope of the proclamation of the kingdom. Some details
are limited to the situation, for instance, the reference to the bag and sandals —
modern preachers drive cars and may carry credit cards — but the principles
have permanent application. The fundamental commission of Jesus to the twelve
and to the seventy is the same as the commission given to the church of all ages.

The church has been entrusted with certain powers and prerogatives as the
proclaimer of the kingdom. The church has the following powers: the right
of representation; the keys of proclamation and revelation; the power of
excommunication and reconciliation and the impartation of peace or
judgment.
The church must demonstrate the presence of the kingdom. The church is
the people who live simultaneously in two ages, experiencing the age to
come, yet living out that experience in this age. In the age to come God will
have his way in all things. It will therefore be an age of total order,
wholeness and peace. The church's witness is that the age to come has
become real here and now. The church must therefore demonstrate now the
quality of life that will be expressed in the future kingdom. The world must
be able to look at the church and see something of God's eternal future. This
is why Jesus said that we must be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect.
When the church rejoices, men must catch a glimpse of the eschatological
banquet. As disciples love one another, the world must see what eternal
relationships are like. The inclusiveness of the church must express
something of that great multitude from every nation, tribe, people and
tongue. The order of a disciple's life as Christ reigns over every part of it
must express the wholeness of the world to come, where faith, hope and
 love will abide.

Caught Between the Times

The age to come and this age coexist in tension. This is the environment into
which the church is born. Paul's teaching in Galatians shows how this reality is
worked out in the Christian life. The old age/new age tension is manifest at
various levels where similar tensions are experienced in the Christian life. The
various levels are as follows.

Two Ages
Old age (1:4; 5:21 New age (5:21)
Law (5:18; 2:21; 5:4) Grace
Bondage (4:22,23,25-26; 5:1) Freedom
Works (2:16) Faith
Condemnation (3:8-10) Acquittal
Death (5:24-25) Life (5:25)
Old man (Ephesians 4:22-24) New man
Flesh (5:16-23) Spirit

Let us look at each of these oppositions.

Paul uses both "age", aion, and "world", kosmos, to express the fundamental
opposition of the old age and the new. Most of the references are to this present
evil world which stands in contrast to the age to come. The experience of the
believer in Christ is to be taken out of this present evil age.
Whereas Jesus spoke of the law and the prophets being transcended by the
kingdom of God, Paul uses the terminology of law and grace. The basic idea is
the same. The one breaks through and supersedes the other. Grace abounds over
law, yet the law still has an influence, like a divorced person and a previous
partner. We live in the tension between the wonder of grace and the legalistic
bondage of the law. For Paul the law brings the knowledge of sin, God's wrath
and the curse. In Christ we are not under law but under grace. The old has gone
and the new has come. The grace of God is often mentioned in conjunction with
peace. By grace we are justified and brought into the era of salvation.

It is not difficult to relate the opposition between bondage and freedom to the
kingdom if we remember Isaiah's promise of freedom and the liberating ministry
of Jesus. The most important element of freedom for Paul is the freedom from
sin. To live in the new age is to experience freedom from sin; to live in this age
is to be a slave to sin.
The concepts of faith versus works and acquittal versus condemnation are an
outworking of being either under grace or under law. The only way to receive
the grace of God is by faith; the law demands a system of works or righteousness
based on human merit. Those who exercise faith in Jesus Christ are immediately
justified or acquitted, while those who continue to trust in works or the law
remain under condemnation.

The ultimate difference between the old age and the new age is in life or death.
For the Christian the transition from this age to the age to come is through death
and resurrection. The believer has already been buried and raised with Christ. He
looks back at the grave. The sting of death is past. Believers do not die; they
only sleep.

It is common to find the opposition between the old man and the new man being
understood in psychological terms, as if the old man were a part of the human
personality and the new man a better part of the same personality. Paul's
language is not psychological but eschatological. The old man is the past life of
the Christian before he experienced death and resurrection with Christ. It
includes anything that still ties him to this present age. The old man was
crucified in Christ because he was sentenced to death under the law. The new
man is the life of the believer in the new age.

The Christian is someone who is caught between two ages. Two ages compete
within us for supremacy: the lifestyle of the old man seeks to re-establish itself
through the works of the flesh; the Spirit draws us into the lifestyle of the new
man. Our assurance that the new man will triumph over the old man does not lie
in a subjective, psychological experience, but in the fact that the new age has
invaded the old in Christ and the power of the age to come now influences our
life. Even though much about us is weak, we may be sure that the new world
will triumph over the old and the new person Christ has made us will prevail
over the person we used to be.
The flesh/Spirit opposition is closely associated with the old man/new man
opposition. The word "flesh" is used in a number of different ways, none of
which involves a rejection of the human body. The flesh applies to fallen human
nature which continues to be present in the believer. The "flesh" in this sense
will only cease to exist when Jesus comes again. While sinless perfection is not
possible until then, the Spirit brings the believer the powers of the age to come.
This means that we can never settle into this present evil age. A proper
understanding of the flesh/Spirit opposition will prevent us from falling prey to
perfectionist doctrines or defeatist resignation. Both triumphalism, as it is
usually termed, and defeatism can only exist if one loses the sense of
eschatological tension.

Christians are mysterious contradictions. We are living in a new world while we

exist in the present world. We are new people, transformed by grace, yet we
wrestle with the flesh and have to beware that our old nature does not reassert
itself. We are victorious failures and broken winners. We do not merely
understand the mystery of the kingdom in theory; we experience the mystery
within ourselves. The next chapter will examine this subject in more detail.
 "ALREADY" "NOT YET"
PEOPLE"
Inherent in understanding the relationship between the kingdom and the church
is an understanding of the Christian life. The end of the last chapter began to
work towards the implications for the Christian life. This is the area where the
theology of the kingdom affects us all personally and where our understanding
or lack of understanding will have a profound effect on the every day Christian
experience. Many pastoral and counseling problems are the result of a distortion
of the kingdom of an ignorance of the kingdom.
Two kinds of texts express the "already" "not yet" Christian experience.

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone; the
new has come! (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Now thanks be to God who always leads us in triumphal procession in

Christ (2 Corinthians 2:14).

Such statements underline the completeness and the triumph of God's work in
us. These are "kingdom now" statements. Regenerate Christians already live in
the kingdom. In Jesus we have eternal life. We have already passed from death
to life. To become a Christian is to become a new person, with a new nature,
living a new life.

Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling.

For while we are in this tent we groan and are burdened (2 Corinthians 5:2,
4).

Conflicts on the outside, fears within (2 Corinthians 7:5).

 We despaired even of life (2 Corinthians 1:8).

For we are always being given over to death for Jesus" sake (2 Corinthians
4:11).

Put to death whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality,

impurity, lust, evil desires and greed (Colossians 3:5).

From these and many other texts we can conclude that the kingdom event has
only taken place in the Christian in an anticipatory sense. Much still needs to be
done. We are still linked to this present world, with its frailty, sin and defeat.

Do these texts contradict one another? Is the man who lives with conflict outside
and fear within the man who always walks in triumph wherever he goes? Why
do "new creations" require warnings about lust and greed? If we look a little
closer, we find that these texts often appear in the same context. Many passages
deliberately place both realities side by side. Listen to the triumphant defeat or
the defeated triumph of these statements:

We are hard pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but
not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed
(2 Corinthians 4:8-9).

… by honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report; as deceivers,

and yet true; as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold we
live; as chastened, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as
poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all
things. (2 Corinthians 6:8-10).

What a contradiction! These are possibly the most eloquent expressions of the
mystery of the kingdom in the Christian life that have ever been written.
The same tension is found in passages about how perfect or imperfect a
Christian can be. If we want to find a text about sinless perfection we turn to 1
John 3:6: "Whoever abides in him does not sin". Yet if we want a text that totally
denies sinless perfection, we turn to 1 John 1:8: "If we say that we have no sin,
we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us".

At the point of repentance and faith, the moment of justification, God imputes
his righteousness to us. This is followed by sanctification. We are transformed
from one degree of glory to another as we are moulded into the image of God's
Son. Justification and sanctification must not be confused. Being born again
does not transform us instantaneously into sinless individuals. The history of the
Christian church is full of confusion resulting from the failure to understand
these issues.

The tension between the "already" and the "not yet" does not apply just to
history or to the mystery of healing. It exists within us. It is not only the church
as a corporate body that lives between the times. The individual Christian
experiences this too. The texts we have referred to bear witness to the fact that
the Christian life has a duality about it. We live with an inner contradiction. It is
important to understand what this does and does not mean.

The duality we experience is eschatological. Two ages co-exist within us at

the same time. It is not a dualism of different inner parts. The spirit/flesh
language of Paul is expressing the "already" and "not yet" of the kingdom,
not a division of the human person into inherently holy and sinful inner
parts. The "flesh" is about the continuity one still has with ones old life. The
'spirit" is about the continuity one has with ones new life. In the wisdom of
God this is the environment into which we were born as Christians. We
cannot extricate ourselves from this environment any more than we can
jump out of our skin. It is the air we breathe and the reality we live. It is the
experience of all Christians. There has never been a Christian who has not
been frustrated and troubled by the duality they experience. Sometimes we
experience it on the same day. We walk out of a worship service where God
was present and we feel a sense of total victory and pleasure. We are truly a
part of the celebrating community. Later the same day we get into a family
quarrel and we manifest attitudes that make us feel ashamed. Is this the
same person? We do not need to see a counselor about this experience and
we do not need to go on a journey of inner exploration. We are just
ordinary, typical Christians.
We should get used to it. It will not go away. The entire age of grace, from
the coming of the kingdom to the final consummation of the kingdom is
lived "between the times". That means the expanse of your entire life is
incorporated. Not only should we not be surprised by it, but we should not
panic either. As a pastor I know that most Christians live with feelings of
lack of self worth more than a sense of arrogance and triumph. In fact the
closer we get to God and the more we experience the in breaking of the
kingdom, the more disturbed we become by the "not yet" within us. In a
strange, contradictory way the more we get from God the more we groan.
We should settle for the reality. This experiential dimension is just the way
it Isaiah
There is no doubt about the final outcome. In the metaphor of Daniel, the
stone falls from heaven and pulverizes the image. The age to come will
utterly triumph over the present evil age. The new man in you is beating up
the old man in you. As you apply yourself to the means of grace, to bible
study, prayer, worship, fellowship, witness and service you will continue to
partake of the powers of the coming age. Inherent in such power is the
ability to say no to sin. That is why the New Testament has statements
about final triumph. "He who began the good work in you will carry it on to
completion" (Phil.1:6). God will "present you before his glorious presence
without fault and with great joy" (Jude 24).
As with so many of these truths, people who lose sight of the mystery of the
kingdom emphasize one side of the tension to the exclusion of the other. There
are those who choose all the "new creature", "walking in triumph" texts, while
others choose all the "groaning" and "despairing" texts, and then each group
develops a doctrine or lifestyle based on a one-sided understanding of Scripture.

The "Groaning" Tradition

An emphasis on poverty, chastity and humility developed in the monastic
movement. While Scripture is clear about God's love for the poor, this tradition
conveys the idea that poverty has a positive spiritual value. Poverty is a curse.
God loves the poor because his mercy is towards them as they suffer under this
curse. His will is to deliver them. The tradition suggests that one gains a special
sanctity by deliberately embracing poverty. Humility is a profound biblical
emphasis, but when people lose the biblical balance they begin to glorify a
humiliated creeping of the individual. This is the tradition that has included, at
different stages, various forms of asceticism to curb the "flesh", including
flagellation. Linked to this is the tendency to want to escape from society to
avoid the power of the world and its many temptations. The underlying
assumption is that the Christian is too weak to stand up to real temptations in a
real world. Protestants are in no position to blame the Roman tradition for all
thIsaiah One finds in Protestant circles an approach to spirituality that focuses on
introspection, denial, mortification and legalism. This is also true of many
Pentecostal traditions. If one takes the dispensational denial of the miraculous
and a morbid emphasis on sanctification and combines this with "remnantitis",
one arrives at defeatism. Defeatist Christianity sees the kingdom as a future
event; in this world we suffer and are defeated.
Remnantitis is a way of rationalizing the failure of the church to evangelize the
world. One can take texts about all those who will fall away at the end and those
about the few that will be saved and develop a whole theory about the church as
a small remnant of faithful believers holding on until the rapture. Link this to an
approach to worship that denies all emotion or exuberance and has no place for
physical expression, add the belief that no instruments should be used in
worship, and the result is a scene from "Babette's Feast". It is almost as if God
has run out of blessing and has adopted "austerity measures" to prevent the
heavenly resources from going bankrupt. The resultant Christian expression is
not glorifying to God. It is not surprising that other traditions have reacted in the
opposite direction. How widespread is this belief? If the standard portrayal of
Christians in the secular media is anything to judge by, this is the concept most
of the secular world has of the Christian church.

The Perfection Tradition

We will discuss three of the more visible traditions that still influence the
evangelical church at various points: Methodist, Pentecostal and Baptist. But no
single tradition within the church can be labeled with the problem.

Methodist Triumphalism

John Wesley wrote A Plain Account of Christian Perfection.[32] Subsequent

church leaders have questioned whether Wesley's account was either "plain" or
totally biblical. Wesley explained that the sanctifying experience of the Holy
Spirit so fills the Christian with God's love that he never really sins thereafter.
He may make mistakes, because he remains a finite human being, but the true
intentions of his heart will remain pure. This teaching flourished in various
"holiness" movements. Elements of Wesley's teaching can be found in the
Keswick Movement and in the "holiness" tradition within Pentecostalism.

Pentecostal Triumphalism

The early Pentecostal movement gave rise to a novel doctrine called "manifest
sons of God", an idea that has surfaced in various places at different times. One
of the more extreme cases was the Church of the Living Word led by John
Robert Stevens in California. The early Pentecostals who initiated the doctrine
misconstrued the text of Romans 8:18-25 where Paul describes the moment
when the sons of God will be revealed. At present we have the "first-fruits of the
Spirit", but one day we will be adopted as sons and obtain the redemption of our
bodies. Paul is clearly describing the final resurrection of the saints at the second
coming when our mortal bodies will be transformed into immortality. This
teaching takes Paul's words to refer to a special generation of believers who will
be manifested or revealed before the Second Coming. This will be part of the
"latter rain" outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The generation that immediately
precedes the Second Coming will receive a special anointing, and those who
respond to this will become "manifested sons".

One can understand that if someone is convinced that he is living just before the
Second Coming and has some valid charismatic experiences, he can imagine
himself as about to be "manifest". Stevens predicted that he would not die but
would obtain a "manifest" body. He is now deceased.

More recently there is some indication of a special emphasis on a "prophetic" or

"Elijah generation" that will emerge out of the church during the final
outpouring. This is taken from the passage in Revelation about the return of the
two witnesses for the last three and a half years of world history (11:1-13). Just
as Elijah returned in 'spirit and power" through John the Baptist to inaugurate the
first coming of Christ, so a special generation of Christians will emerge to
inaugurate the Second Coming.
This idea is sometimes explained by a novel dispensational theory that divides
church history since Luther into ten ages. Luther is said to represent the time of
the pastor, Wesley the time of the evangelist and so on until we emerge in the
time of the prophet. Apart from the arbitrary way in which church history is
interpreted, all attempts to subdivide the age of grace collide with the
fundamentals of kingdom thinking. Dispensational thinking and kingdom
theology are not compatible.
The way this idea is articulated is clearly elitist. Only those who are "into" this
insight will have the privilege of the Elijah anointing. A special class of
Christians, a type of charismatic illuminati distinct from the ecumenical body, is
said to exist. The truth is that the whole church will operate in this Elijah-
dimension during the tribulation. All regenerate Christians have equal value
before the Father - the value of the blood shed on our behalf. The experiences
the church will endure during the tribulation will be universal because the anti-
Christ system will persecute the entire people of God. Any special grace of the
Holy Spirit given during this time will be equally universal to the people of God.
Further, this grace has been operating in the history of the church whenever there
has been persecution. It does not have to be understood as a distinct
dispensation.

Baptist Triumphalism

The third kind of triumphalism is found in the writings of E.W. Kenyon. His
views have been associated with the "faith" teachers of the American Bible Belt
because they have drawn heavily on his theology. However, Kenyon was not a
Pentecostal. He was actually an independent Baptist. This is not the place to
examine whether his views are the result of metaphysics or not, the subject of
McConnel's A Different Gospel. [33] What is relevant to our discussion is
Kenyon's emphasis on the "new creation" texts without the balance of the
"groaning" texts to produce a concept of some special breed of 'super"
Christians. For Kenyon the Christian has it all "already"; there is no need to
balance this with the "not yet".

"We have never realized," says Kenyon, "that the tenses are often ruled by the
senses. Most of our popular hymns are in the future or in the past tense."[34]
This, he says, is a mistaken reading of the Bible. "When I read it, it is His
present tense message to my heart, for the Word is always Now. The Father is
always Now."[35] What the believer has now is the new creation. "We have seen
that an actual New Creation takes place within his spirit when he receives Jesus
Christ as Saviour and Lord. Spiritual death is eradicated from his spirit, and he is
taken completely out of Satan's dominion of death." [36]For Kenyon the old
nature is eradicated and replaced with God's nature to such an extent that the
believer knows only victory. "The new creation man is a partaker of God's
nature. He is really an Incarnation. He has received the nature and life of God …
If this doesn"t constitute a superman, then I don"t know what a superman Isaiah
" [37]"This righteousness makes a man actually one with Christ. It has given to
man a creative ability, a dominating spirit. He is an overcomer. He is a master …
He has become an actual Jesus man. He takes Jesus" place on earth." [38]
Like the manifest sons of God teachers, Kenyon says that a special generation
will arise to claim this "new creation" victorious waLuke He teaches that "the
hour is coming before the Lord's return in which a remnant of the body will rise
and walk before God the Father in the fullness of the New Creation Life. Disease
will not be able to lay hold upon us."[39]

Kenyon's writings are repetitive and many more examples could be given of
such statements. A novel idea he links to this, is that only the Anglo-Saxon
races, who have had the gospel for generations, have produced new inventions
because the 'super-race" is amongst them. [40]This breed of Christian knows
nothing of pain and defeat. "There need be no more struggles with sin, no more
battles with the Adversary, just an acting upon the Word of God"[41] "The old
things of weakness and failure, of doubt and fear, have passed into forgetfulness.
We take our place and enjoy our rights … I have no sense of guilt or sin."[42]
It is significant that triumphalist excesses have arisen during times of revival.
When the sense of the immediacy of the kingdom is accentuated, people easily
misread this as an indication that the "not yet" has been superseded. On the other
hand, times of spiritual dryness tend to emphasize the "groaning" texts. Men
always want to read their own experience into the Scriptures. Sadly these
emphases in the history of the church represent a truth that is being overstated
because of a previous extreme where this truth was denied. Kenyon was reacting
to the deadness he saw in the church around him. Wesley led a revival when
moral conditions in England were at an all-time low. If we sift out the
overstatement, we find an important truth. But overstating a truth instead of
establishing it merely brings it into disrepute. Others react to the triumphalists
and embrace introspective monastic tendencies.

The Kingdom Perspective

The New Testament teaches that there is both "kingdom now" and kingdom "not
yet". Our Christian experience takes place within this tension. The Christian is a
glorious contradiction. We are simultaneously triumphant and groaning. We are
new creatures, with new natures, yet we war against the flesh. God always leads
us in triumph, yet our lives seem to be one long battle. As we look within
ourselves we sometimes feel victorious, joyful and free, yet these moments are
quickly replaced by feelings of great weakness, fear and "groaning" from which
we long to escape.
We do know that the new age is triumphant over the old. The stone falls from
heaven and pulverizes the image. What we are becoming in Jesus will prevail
utterly over what we were. There is every reason to be filled with hope - the
confidant expectation that we move from the victory Christ has "already"
obtained, to the victory of Christ still to be obtained.
Understanding the tension of the kingdom is essential to measure truth. Any
teaching that tries to evade either the "already" or the "not yet" runs counter to
the balance of Scripture. And doctrine always has an outworking in life. A
defeatist emphasis will produce defeated Christians. A triumphalist approach
will produce unreal people who live in a spiritual bubble, or worse, an arrogance
and fanaticism that brings the name of Jesus into disrepute.

THE END OF CESSATIONISM

"Signs and wonders" is a biblical term for the demonstration of the kingdom in
the ministry of Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus evidenced this
in healing the sick, casting out demons, raising the dead, multiplying food,
knowledge of the secret thoughts of people and control over natural forces.
These signs and wonders continued in the experience of the early church. Acts
records healings, people raised from the dead, the casting out of demons,
prophetic gifts, dreams and visions, divinely arranged earthquakes and sudden
deaths.

Those who are sceptical about the Christian faith have often doubted these
things, especially since the rise of modern rationalism, but those who believe in
the authenticity of the New Testament accept that they occurred. Yet the
moment one begins to speak about the continued manifestation of signs and
wonders in the church today, serious obstacles are raised by those who believe
the miraculous was confined to the apostolic age. The age of the church is said to
be a different or distinct "dispensation" from the age of the apostles. This belief
is called cessationism.

What is Cessationism?
In the following chapter we will deal with a form of dispensationalism that arose
during the 1860s in Scotland. It separates the last seven years of history from the
destiny of the church. In this chapter we will look at an older form of
dispensationalism, namely cessationism, which denies the possibility of signs
and wonders occurring after the Apostolic age. The two views are similar in the
sense that both divide the age of the church into isolated segments. The later
form of dispensationalism arose in a circle that was not especially equipped in
the area of theological training. The older type, however, was propounded by
such renowned theologians as Benjamin Warfield.[43] It was closely associated
with certain forms of Reformed theology. The body of Christ needs to be forever
grateful to the Pentecostal movement for challenging this doctrine.
The early Pentecostals experienced the miraculous in no uncertain terms. Any
reading of their early history makes this plain. The church environment into
which Pentecostalism was born was deeply influenced by cessationist teaching,
linked to the generally materialistic worldview of the Western world. Historical
church leaders ruled the Pentecostal experiences out of court and concluded that
whatever was taking place had to be either demonic or imaginary because they
knew that miracles no longer occurred in this dispensation.
The Pentecostals lacked the theological background to tackle the roots of
cessationist teaching, so they fought back with true grit instead. They simply
continued to testify - adamantly - that God was moving powerfully in their
midst. The proof was there for all to see. After some decades Pentecostalism had
become one of the fastest growing movements that the Christian church had ever
seen. One prominent church historian has described it as the "third force" in
Christendom, comparable with the great traditions of Catholicism and
Protestantism. The Pentecostal conviction won through sheer weight of numbers
so that today, with the Charismatic Movement taking the "charismatic
experience" back into the historical churches, fewer and fewer cessationists
remain.
What the Pentecostals did not realize was that a true understanding of kingdom
teaching completely destroys cessationism. If they had known this they could
have fought the battle with a two-edged sword: the Word and the Spirit. It is
important for us to develop this theme because cessationist hard-liners still exist
and we need to ground our openness to the supernatural on clear biblical
foundations.

Cessationism probably arose as an explanation for the dearth of signs and

wonders in the dryer periods of church history, aided by fanatics who brought
signs and wonders into disrepute during and after the Reformation. This caused
more sober Reformed leaders to react in the opposite direction: knowledge of the
Word and faith in Jesus Christ was said to be all a Christian must desire. Added
to this was an emphasis on the dangers of 'subjectivism". People were told to be
careful about becoming too subjective about their faith as this could lead to all
sorts of fanaticism: we must base our faith on the Word, which is objective, not
on subjective experiences. Countless wild-eyed believers, fresh from the
"charismatic experience", have run into the solid, unmoving conviction of a
Reformed pastor that all such phenomena are impossible. Such pastoral
interviews end with the believer's morale shattered and doubts about his sanity.
Behind the emphasis against the 'subjective" lies a conviction about
dispensations. The argument is as follows. The reason the miraculous no longer
occurs is that God has ordained it so. When the early church was being formed
and the foundation of the apostles and prophets was being laid, God gave the
witness of signs and wonders. They testified to the ministry of Jesus and the
authority of the apostles. Then the apostles wrote the books of the New
Testament. The foundation they themselves represented was replaced by the
foundation they left with the church, the canon of the New Testament. Once this
was completed, there was no further need of the testimony of the miraculous. It
was replaced by the testimony of Scripture and the inner testimony of the Spirit
authenticating the message of Scripture. The passing of the apostles and the
formation of the New Testament canon therefore marks a transition between two
dispensations: the apostolic and the post-apostolic.
Some developed an intricate theory about multiple dispensations in redemptive
history based on the idea of a number of different covenants between God and
his people: Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Ezra/Nehemiah. Based on
all these covenants, there were found to be ages with miraculous events and ages
with no miraculous events. For instance, the Mosaic era was filled with the
miraculous, while the time of Ezra and Nehemiah was not. So, we were told, one
cannot assume that every age is destined to include the miraculous.

The Old Testament situation was carried into the New Testament. Dispensations
were demarcated within the New Testament era too: the time of Jesus, the time
of the apostles and the time of the post-apostolic church. The first two were
times of the miraculous while the third is a time without the miraculous because
it has the authority of Scriptures. In fact, if we want miracles today we show
great arrogance because we think that we should have the same testimony to our
confession as Jesus Christ himself. How dare we demand such a thing?

Strange implications have been drawn from this theory. Some portions of the
New Testament are said to be doctrinal while others are experiential. The book
of Acts is experiential, while Paul's letters are clearly doctrinal. If we attempt to
build doctrine on the book of Acts, we are using the experiences of the early
church as our foundation. We must only build doctrine on clearly doctrinal
sections such as Romans and Ephesians. This was used to circumvent the
testimony of Acts to the "charismatic" dimension. Underlying the rejection of
Acts is the idea that apostolic charismatic experiences are not relevant to later
church history. John MacArthur argues for the "uniqueness" of the charismatic
experiences in the book of Acts. They occurred during the period when the
gospel was first preached to Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles. These unique events
cannot be applied to us today. [44]

The apostolic writings contain a number of references to the laying of a

foundation. The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets.
Paul has laid a foundation. The foundation is Jesus Christ. Each man must take
care how he builds on that foundation. At the end of the New Testament we read
about the twelve apostles as the foundation of the New Jerusalem. After the
apostolic foundation no more must be added or else the plagues described in the
book of Revelation will occur.

Essential to the ability to lay the foundation was the apostolic dimension of
revelation through the Holy Spirit. If someone in the post-apostolic era claims
supernatural revelation, he therefore claims something reserved for the apostles
and the same curse must come upon him. The ministry of apostles and prophets
has been discontinued. This means that prophecies today compete with the
Scriptures. A person who claims a prophecy is adding to Scripture and
undermining the New Testament canon. Did Paul not make it clear that
prophecies will cease when perfection comes? This "perfection" can be found in
the fully inspired, authoritative New Testament canon. Since it was established,
prophecy and tongues have passed away.

Another novel idea is that there are actually two gospels: the gospel of the
kingdom preached by Jesus, which included the miraculous, and the gospel
preached by the church as expounded by Paul in Romans 1-8. This is about
justification through faith and makes no reference to signs and wonders. The
gospel preached by the church cannot include the miraculous because it applies
to a later dispensation.

The conclusion is that all Pentecostals and Charismatics are fanatical,

disrespectful of biblical authority, subjectivistic, arrogant and misguided.

Kingdom Teaching
A proper understanding of the kingdom destroys the entire theory so that none of
its parts retains any viability. I believe that the continued teaching of this theory,
even if it is in part, undermines the faith and expectation of the church as to the
readiness of God to break through into the affairs of men. It is an extremely
unhealthy doctrine. Cessationism, rationalism and materialism have all had their
share in devastating the health of the Christian church. Cessationism needs to be
rooted out. We will begin with those implications of kingdom teaching that
collide with the theory.

The Last Days

The actual word "dispensation" does not occur in the New Testament. One can
relate Paul's comments about the "ministry of death" and the "ministry of the
Spirit" in 2 Corinthians 3:7-18 to the word "dispensation", but his argument will
not allow for what cessationists infer. Paul is contrasting the Old Testamental,
Mosaic covenant with the new covenant in Jesus Christ. There are just two
dispensations in God's dealings with man, represented by the Old and the New
Covenants. The New Testament has very definite language to express this: the
age of promise has been replaced by the time of fulfilment; the law came
through Moses, grace and truth through Jesus Christ; the law and the prophets
were until John, since then the kingdom of God has been forcefully advancing.
The new covenant time of fulfilment is known throughout the New Testament as
the "last days". The last days came with Jesus. From the coming of Christ to the
Second Coming, no further subdivision into dispensations is permissible. There
are no more than two dispensations.

Hebrews contrasts the time of the Old Testament prophets with "these last days"
when God has spoken through his Son. Peter is clear that the outpouring of the
Spirit on the day of Pentecost fulfils the promise of Joel about the "last days". If
the last days began with Jesus and the day of Pentecost, we have been living in
the last days ever since. The "last days" cannot get more "last" than they are. The
period in which the early church lived is the same period or dispensation as the
one in which we live. Scripture references could be multiplied. The church is
that company "on whom the ends of the ages have come" (1 Corinthians 10:11).
John can say that his day was already the "last hour" (1 John 2:18).
Such statements reflect the underlying kingdom theology of the New Testament
as a whole. In Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Spirit, the powers of the age to
come have broken into this age. The result is the unexpected coincidence of this
age and the age to come. When Paul points to things that are still to happen in
"later times" or the "last days", he is not pointing to some distant time separate
from his own. He is speaking of things that occur in his own time - he also lives
in the last days. There is a delay in the last days, but this in no way constitutes a
division. Since Jesus came, the two ages exist side by side. When he comes
again, this age will cease, and the age to come, which is already present, will be
finally manifest. This is the framework for the entire New Testament. To grasp
this truth is to understand that there can be no further subdivisions within the
New Testament era. It destroys the entire dispensational and cessationist theory.

Preaching the Gospel

We can be even more specific.

The book of Acts is prefixed with and ends with two key statements about the
kingdom. The giving of the Great Commission is recorded in Matthew 28, Mark
16, Luke 24 and Acts 1. This places Matthew 28 and Acts 1 in the same context.
In Matthew 28:18 Jesus reveals that he has all authority in heaven and on earth.
He commissions his disciples to preach the good news of the kingdom to all
nations before the end can come. The commission was first given to the disciples
during the ministry of Jesus. The same commission was given to the seventy.
Both are inextricably bound to signs and wonders: he gave them authority to
preach the kingdom, drive out demons, heal the sick, raise the dead and cleanse
those who have leprosy.
Jesus not only demonstrated the kingdom, he explained it in the parables and the
beatitudes. His teaching included forgiveness by grace or, as Paul explained it,
justification through faith. As Jesus re-issued the commission to preach the
kingdom to all nations, he specified that it should include "teaching them to
observe all things that I have commanded you". This must therefore include the
full spectrum of kingdom teaching given during the course of his ministry,
including the commission to perform signs and wonders. The disciples were to
wait for the power of the Spirit, but before he left them, Jesus spent forty days
speaking about the kingdom of God.
Jesus" proclamation of the kingdom included signs and wonders. He
commissioned the twelve and the seventy to preach the same message. After his
resurrection he intensified this commission over forty days. The whole message
of the kingdom was to be preached to the end of the age. This sets the stage for
the book of Acts. There is no doubt that the dimension of signs and wonders is
part of the gospel.
The last verse in Acts tells us that Paul boldly preached the kingdom of God.
There was no diminishing of the commission nor is there a change from the
kingdom message to the message of the church. Any talk about "another gospel"
is heresy. Far from the proclamation of signs and wonders throughout the church
age bringing forth the curses of the book of Revelation, it is the reduction of the
gospel that is anathema. There is one gospel, the full gospel of the kingdom —
including signs and wonders to the very end.

Expectation

Understanding the kingdom means that we understand the nearness of the

powers of the age to come. Jesus himself is the end, the first and the last. To
encounter him is to encounter the end. When someone experiences the gift of the
Holy Spirit, he partakes of the powers of the coming age. Whenever someone is
healed, a kingdom event has taken place, and the age to come has broken
through. Jesus described the casting out of demons as a sign of the presence of
the kingdom. The demons complained that this was happening before the time -
they understood that an end of the world event was happening in this world.
When people speak in tongues, they speak in the language of men and of angels
- a foretaste of the communication that will only really make sense in the age to
come.
When the end finally arrives, our bodies will be transformed into glorified,
heavenly bodies, no longer bound by space or time but like Jesus" resurrected
body. He could pass through walls and appear and disappear; yet he was a real,
tangible person. He had flesh and bones, and could eat and be touched. This
remarkable body was the firstfruit of the future harvest. Even now, when people
come under the power of God, their bodies are often overcome. The Pentecostal
disciples appeared to be drunk. Philip was taken up and found himself miles
from where he had been. These phenomena demonstrate that the barrier between
this age and the age to come has been ruptured. We do not know exactly when
the end will come, but the breakthrough of the end hangs over us as an ever-
present cloud of glorious promise.
The term 'supernatural" is not a biblical one, and strictly speaking it should be
avoided. It conveys the idea of two kinds of reality, the natural and the
supernatural. This idea is more Greek than Hebrew. The biblical understanding
is of two ages, one of bondage and one of deliverance. In Jesus and through the
Holy Spirit, the age to come is continually available, immediate, and often
present. The book of Hebrews gives a helpful illustration.
The Old Testament tabernacle is a picture of man's relationship with God. The
barrier between the sanctuary and the Holy Place represents the barrier between
God and man. When Jesus died, the veil in the temple was rent from top to
bottom, indicating that his atoning blood had removed the dividing wall of
hostility between God and man. The other barrier in the temple was between Jew
and Gentile. The blood of Jesus tore down this dividing wall too. Both vertical
and the horizontal relationships were reversed through the cross.

This is fairly well-known symbolism, but Hebrews adds another factor. The
distinction between the sanctuary and the Holy Place is not only symbolic of the
barrier between man and God but of the separation between this age and the age
to come. The outer tent was symbolic of the present age, implying that the inner
tent is symbolic of the future age. Other biblical statements explain this
symbolism. In this present age we worship God through symbols. The seven-
branched candelabrum or menorah, the table of showbread and the various
offerings speak of indirect contact with God. Even in the New Testament the
symbolism of bread and wine in the context of congregational worship is a form
of indirect contact with God. In this age we see in a mirror, "dimly"; in the age to
come when we are united to Jesus, we will see "face to face" (1 Corinthians
13:12) as Moses saw God in the inner tent. If the outer tent represents the
indirect presence of God through symbols and the inner tent represents the direct
presence of God appropriate to the age to come, the tearing of the veil means
that the barrier between this age and the age to come has been removed.

Since the coming of Jesus, people worshipping God find themselves carried by
the Holy Spirit into experiences that really belong to the next world. The
immediacy of God's presence that we will know in the world to come breaks into
this age in mysterious and unpredictable ways, disregarding the normal
distinctions between this age and the next. The wind blows back and forth
between the two chambers, now drawing someone in this chamber into the next,
now revealing the glory of the inner tent to the outer tent. This perception makes
kingdom theology, with its understanding of the breakthrough of the ages, the
basis for an understanding of signs and wonders.

Refutation
What then of the various cessationist arguments? The neat subdivision of the Old
Testament into a multiplicity of covenants and dispensations is almost as
problematic as such subdivisions within the New Testament. There is good
reason to argue that the Old Testament knows of only one covenant. Prior to the
beginning of redemptive history with Abraham, God's relationship with man
cannot really be described as covenantal - one can only find anticipations. Sin
had broken contact between God and man. With Abraham God initiated the
relationship of grace, and this is where covenant truly begins. The covenant with
Abraham has its first outworking in the Exodus: God promised the Patriarchs
that he would deliver Israel from bondage. Moses knew that he was dealing with
the fulfilment of promises made by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The
Mosaic covenant was a covenant of grace and the whole Exodus event was an
act of grace. The conquest was similarly a fulfilment of God's promises to
Abraham. David's ministry was to restore the land conquered by Joshua but
subsequently lost to Israel. The covenant with David was a reiteration of the
covenant with Abraham and Moses. So was the renewal of the covenant under
Ezra and Nehemiah. All these covenant events go back to God's promise to
Abraham. The rise and fall of the miraculous was a measure of Israel's faith or
unbelief, covenant faithfulness or covenant disloyalty. When good kings ruled,
the covenant was renewed. When evil kings ruled, the covenant was threatened.
The miraculous was usually associated with the prophets: prophets meant God
was speaking. The absence of prophets meant God was silent because the nation
was under judgment. This had nothing to do with special periods when signs and
wonders were in the plan of God and everything to do with revival or
backsliding.

The neat division between apostolic and sub-apostolic is not supported by the
New Testament, despite the confident tradition to the contrary. Traditionally it
was believed that when Judas was replaced, although the apostles chose
Matthias, God actually chose Paul. This places Paul amongst the twelve, after
which all apostleship was terminated. This argument does not hold water. Apart
from the fact that there is absolutely no support in the New Testament for the
idea that Paul replaced Judas, a number of references make it clear that the
twelve were not the only apostles. Paul indicates that he was not an apostle like
the twelve. He was not with Jesus from the baptism of John until the ascension
(Acts 1:21-22). He describes himself as one "born out of due time" (1
Corinthians 15:8). But neither can he be placed on the same level as subsequent
apostles. He did have an experience of Christ which was so unique that it could
almost be placed alongside the meeting of the twelve with the resurrected Christ
(15:6-7). This places him in a unique category.

A number of individuals were called apostles although they were not one of the
twelve: Barnabas, James the Lord's brother, Timothy, Andronicus and Junias. No
amount of explaining the use of the word apostello, "messenger", can remove
the apostolic ministry from these individuals. Apart from James, the others were
part of the apostolic ministry alongside Paul. If their apostleship is that of some
vague messenger, so was Paul's, which is palpably false.

Paul places apostles and prophets alongside evangelists and pastor/teachers

without any indication that these ministries are divided between different
dispensations. These, along with the charismatic gifts, are what God has
appointed in the church. As long as the body is required to function in its many
parts and the church needs to be brought to full maturity, these ministries will be
required. The church certainly did not reach full maturity during the first
century. Finalizing the canon is one thing. The church attaining the "measure of
the stature of the fullness of Christ" is another. Apostolic and prophetic
ministries will be necessary "till we all come to the unity of the faith and the
knowledge of the Son of God" (Ephesians 4:13). "Till" settles the time for the
termination of these gifts, not the formulation of the canon. The perfection
described in 1 Corinthians 13 is the perfection of the age to come, when we see
God face to face. Rather than an argument for the cessation of the charismatic
gifts, this chapter shows quite clearly that tongues and prophecies will only
cease when we see God face to face and understand all things fully.
The New Testament does make a distinction between two levels of apostleship.
The twelve, who were witnesses to the historical Christ are an unrepeatable and
unique company. Those who Paul describes as having their commission in the
Ascension of Christ, which led to Pentecost, do not have that unique distinction.
They were not the authors of the New Testament canonical writings. However,
the New Testament never formulates this distinction as a distinction of
dispensations, but as a distinction of testimony to the historical Christ.

The attempts to evade the testimony of Acts to the charismatic element are
examples of confused thinking. The whole biblical revelation is grounded in
history. Throughout the Bible the deeds of God in history are interpreted by
prophetic and apostolic writers. The Judaeo-Christian faith is unique precisely
because it records God's revelation of himself in history. The Gospels are both
history and interpretation. They are not merely chronicles of Jesus" life but
inspired interpretations of his life, death and resurrection. The fact that they are
Gospels means that they are evangelistic books, written to proclaim faith in
Jesus Christ. Acts is the second volume of a two volume work by Luke. If Acts
is not a basis for doctrine, then neither is Luke. Acts is both history and inspired
interpretation in exactly the same way as Luke. Historical narrative is as much
doctrinal material as any New Testament letter. Luke is about the acts of Jesus.
Acts is about the acts of Jesus through the Holy Spirit. Both are the basis of New
Testament doctrine about salvation.

The subdivision of each stage of the in-breaking of the kingdom of God cannot
be supported from the New Testament. The explanation that each record of
people being filled with the Spirit is unique and cannot be applied to the
Christian church merely evades the evidence. The kingdom of God began to
break through from before the birth of Jesus. From that moment, event after
event was evidence that the age to come was breaking through into this age. This
is true of the birth and baptism of Jesus, the ministry of John, the preaching and
miraculous ministry of Jesus, his death and resurrection, Pentecost, and the signs
and wonders recorded in Acts. Since that time the history of revivals through the
centuries is all part of one dispensation, the dispensation of the future age.

Having accepted this fundamental truth, one can look at details. Were the
disciples Spirit-filled before Pentecost in the same way that they were after
Pentecost? Certainly the cross and resurrection was a decisive turning point. Yet
even here the ministry of Jesus prior to his death placed his disciples within the
framework of the kingdom. They had already experienced the new age. There is
no neat division of periods into distinct dispensations. The overriding impression
of the New Testament is that the new age has dawned.
What about the danger of fanatical prophets claiming equal authority with
Scripture? This problem was dealt with in the New Testament. They had an
established canon of inspired books in the Old Testament and a clear sense of the
difference between the words of Jesus during his earthly ministry and the
subsequent words of New Testament prophets. The apostles gave numerous
guidelines about testing prophecy and subjecting it to the foundation of apostolic
teaching. When a prophetic word was disturbing the Thessalonians, Paul merely
reminded them of his previous teaching, because apostolic teaching was
considered to be authoritative over individual prophecy. Paul's command to the
very church that was in danger of taking a particular spirit or word too seriously
was: "Do not despise prophecies" (I Thessalonians 5:20).

The so-called dichotomy between scriptural authority and prophetic ministry

finds no support in the New Testament. Christians who prophesy in no way
undermine the prohibition on adding to the Scriptures. Prophecy must be
subjected to the examination of Scripture and given its rightful place in the
ongoing life of the church.

The message of the kingdom destroys the cessationist theory. It is the best
foundation for faith in the continued manifestation of signs and wonders
throughout the history of the Christian church. It is therefore not surprising that
John Winter, one of today's leading specialists on signs and wonders, has
grounded his approach to the subject on the theology of the kingdom. His
thorough research has shown that signs and wonders never died out.[45] They
did not cease after the death of the apostles or after the formation of the canon.
One has to bury one's head in the sand to evade all traces of the miraculous in
the annals of church history. This brings us to the vital contribution made by
kingdom teaching to the understanding of healing.

HEALING
Someone well known for his healing ministry comes to town. A Christian who is
overflowing with faith and expectation attends his meetings, but no healing takes
place. At the same time someone who is deeply sceptical about healing is prayed
for by a few Sunday School children and a remarkable healing takes place.

Why are some people not healed? Is it because the faith of the sick person is
insufficient? Is it because the person who prays is not anointed or gifted at the
time? Is there sin or unforgivenes in his life? These are some of the questions
that are raised when one attempts to grapple with the evident fact that there is no
logical relationship between the actual occurrence of healing and the amount of
faith, anointing or gifting. In praying for healing, the batting average of some is
better than others. Certainly faith is a vital factor. Jesus made this plain. We
know that there are gifts of healing. We also know that there are moments when
we sense a moving of the Holy Spirit and are not surprised when a healing takes
place. The problem is that so many real healings have an unlikely combination
of factors, and so many likely combinations do not produce healing. The mystery
of the kingdom is the only biblical explanation that fits the facts. Having
understood this, we will see why insisting on other explanations is cruel and
shows a lack of spiritual perception.
Let us return to the statement we have made over and over again. In Jesus Christ
and through the Pentecostal outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the end broke into the
present. The powers of the age to come — the future, universal rule of God —
invaded our world. The result is that the church now lives between the times in a
unique dimension where the fallenness of this world and the glory of the future
kingdom coexist. The implications of this can best be understood if we work
from the future towards the present. In the final consummation of the kingdom
all sickness will be banished. This was the promise of Isaiah. God will wipe
away every tear and there will be no more death or mourning, crying or pain
(Revelation 21:3-4). Nothing impure or shameful will be allowed in his
kingdom. God will rule supreme and unchallenged, and the devil will be cast
into the lake of fire. This settles a question that sick people often agonize over: Is
it God's will to heal me? The answer is that when God rules supreme, there will
be no sickness. Sickness can never be part of his will. To suggest that it is to
dishonour the character of God. The devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. God
comes to give life.

In Jesus the future rule of God broke into the present. The presence of Jesus
brought the presence of God's perfect will. When people said to Jesus: "If you
are willing, you can make me clean", Jesus replied: "I am willing; be cleansed"
(Mark 1:41). Wherever Jesus went, healing followed, because wherever Jesus
went, God's will broke through. Jesus is what God has to say about himself.
Watch the deeds of Jesus and see the will of God!

When the Holy Spirit was poured out, the powers of the age to come broke
through. The result was that gifts of healing were seen. The presence of the Holy
Spirit is synonymous with the perfect rule of God, which is synonymous with
healing. When a person is healed it means that the power of the future kingdom
has broken through into the present. Every healing is a kingdom breakthrough.

Why are some people not healed? This is because the kingdom has broken
through but has not yet taken over. It is here, but in a provisional sense. The final
takeover of the kingdom will occur at the Second Coming. Until then the present
world continues. This means that we live in a world that is filled with sin,
disease, violence, depravity and sickness. God does not apply his perfect will at
all times and in all places. In fact, many other evil powers have their way: Satan,
demonic powers, and fallen human beings.

In this world power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. When an
oppressive ruler violates his people, he does it, not God. One day God will judge
him for it. When a rapist violates a woman, he does it. God will judge him for it.
Sickness is part and parcel of this fallen world. The kingdom breaks through in
an anticipatory sense. If the total power of the kingdom touched any particular
human being, he would immediately be transformed into a glorified, immortal
body. Being born again would involve instantaneous resurrection. But this is not
what happens. When we receive Christ the kingdom is "now" and also "not yet",
which is why the Bible uses the word 'salvation" in three tenses. We are saved;
we are being saved, and we will be saved. If every Christian who was ever sick
got healed, it would mean that the Second Coming had arrived.

Think of it like thIsaiah God loves his children. He does not want any harm to
come to them. There are testimonies of Christians suddenly being driven to
prayer for someone, only to find later that at that exact time the other person was
very nearly involved in a fatal accident. The sudden intercession averted the
accident. God's Spirit led the intercessor to pray at that moment, and God
intervened and prevented the accident. But if every time a Christian was about to
have an accident, God intervened so that Christians never required motor
insurance policies, it would involve a total takeover by God of this present world
in every detail. God has decided to postpone this until the Second Coming to
give mankind a chance to repent. The special interventions of God are moments
when his future total rule over all things breaks through into a particular
situation. It does not happen all the time simply because the Second Coming has
not yet arrived.
All healing doctrines that proclaim an exact formula about healing occurring
totally every time we pray in real faith reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of
the nature of the present kingdom. They confuse the "already" with the "not yet".
Equally, all doctrines that remove the continual, any moment likelihood of
healing reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of the kingdom. They confuse
the "not yet" with the "already". They deny the "already" by a total
postponement into the "not yet". The truth is that the kingdom is near all the
time. We live in the last days when the powers of the age to come are
continually breaking through. The end hovers over us like a rain cloud that is
ready to burst at any moment. Our Christian experience is regularly interrupted
by thunder, flashes of lightning and torrential downpours. This is the history of
revivals - times when the powers of the age to come break through in special
intensity.

Is there a formula by which we can predict or explain the how, or why or when
of the breakthrough of the kingdom into this present world? Jesus" answer about
the timing of the end must apply to all such questions: "No one knows about that
day or hour, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father"
(Matthew 24:36). During his earthly ministry Jesus was totally dependent on his
Father for doing the works of the kingdom. Signs and wonders took place by the
moving of the Holy Spirit, who blows when and how he chooses. We can say
categorically that healing occurs because the kingdom of God breaks through.
We can say equally categorically that healing does not always occur because the
kingdom of God has not broken through finally. No one can say what determines
how frequently and on what basis this intervention of the powers of the age to
come takes place. This is the mystery of the kingdom.
There are many factors that seem to play a part. Prayer certainly plays a major
role in the history of revivals. Healing ministries are often praying ministries.
Expectation is a factor. When people do not expect God to move, he seems to
move less. Gifting is another factor. When someone has a gift of the Spirit for
healing, the batting average is higher. But none of these factors can explain what
happens. The only explanation is the nature of the kingdom. This is why
watertight doctrines are misleading and cruel. They remove healing from the
context of mystery and place all the responsibility on the shoulders of a person,
either the one who prays or the one being prayed for. How can we burden a
finite human being with such a profound responsibility?

ISRAEL
There seem to be two kinds of attitude towards Israel today. The most common
attitude is one of general sympathy and concern expressed in the following
ideas. Anti-Semitism is a bad thing. The holocaust was one of the most
gruesome events in human history. The Jewish people deserve a place of their
own in Israel. When Jews become Christians, they are usually a great blessing
because they rediscover so much that Gentile Christians do not have. The
restoration of Hebrew thought and culture to the church is a very positive
development, be it in dance, music, or holistic Hebrew thought. Christians
should witness to Jews sensitively and lovingly, and the emergence of the
Messianic Christian movement is an exciting development.

This group does not place too much weight on every political development in
Israel as a sign of the end times, wants to have equal sympathy for the cause of
Palestinian Arabs who have suffered as a result of the Middle East conflict and
believes that Jewish Christians are merely part of the church of Jesus Christ.
They do not constitute another people of God.

The other less common but usually highly motivated group consists of those who
believe that Israel is key to the purposes of God in the world and in the church.
They believe that the return to Israel in 1948 was the sign of the last generation
before the Second Coming. They believe that it is a serious error to teach that the
church has replaced Israel as the people of God. In a given domestic situation
they will organize special prayer meetings for Israel, hold Feast of Tabernacles
celebrations and motivate tours to the Holy Land. They tend to think that the
former group is a little blind and needs to be helped to see how important these
things really are. It is this second group that tends to use the term "replacement
theology". Those who cannot see the things they see have been blinded by the
Reformers who established replacement theology. This group sometimes stoops
to a rather negative estimation of the motives of the former and makes
accusations, the insinuation being that whoever supports replacement theology is
likely to be guilty of an underlying anti-Semitism. They sometimes come across
with the attitude that those who have understood the place of Israel in the last
days are the elite. This tends to irritate the former group, and so "feelings" have
built up.

The general shift towards kingdom theology in the church has led to a reaction
against the "Israel message" and one condescending attitude has been replaced
with another. All this does not contribute towards Christian unity. It is therefore
vital to deal with the issue on a theological basis, to search the Scriptures and
take the debate out of the environment of innuendoes, hidden motives and
elitism.

It should be understood at the outset that the general unhappiness with "Israel
theology" is not based on anti-Semitism. To use the anti-Semitism lever is
manipulative: "don"t rethink your theology; it will make you guilty of anti-
Semitism." Surely our attitude towards the Jewish people should not be founded
on guilt but on the truth of God's Word. The real problem is that the whole
superstructure of "Israel theology" has been built on dispensationalism, and
dispensationalism is a shaky foundation, to say the least. David Stern, one of the
most theologically competent Messianic Jews to have written on the subject,
says that dispensationalism "in its more extreme form, says that the Jewish
people have promises only on earth, while the Church has promises in heaven".
[46] As we shall see in the next chapter, this is the problem with Dave Hunt's
dispensationalism.

What is Dispensationalism?
The origins of modern dispensationalism go back to the Charismatic Movement
that took place in Scotland led by Edward Irving, founder of the Catholic
Apostolic Church. Margaret MacDonald, who was sick at the time, had a special
"revelation" one evening. She was later filled with the Holy Spirit, spoke in
tongues and was healed. Her revelation was that Christ was to come secretly
before the Second Coming to rapture to heaven a special group of believers who
had been 'sealed". This is known as the "partial rapture theory".

News of her revelation and subsequent charismatic experience spread and began
to influence the founders of the Plymouth Brethren. J.N. Darby, founding father
of the movement, "borrowed from her, modified her views, and then popularized
them under his own name without giving her credit". [47]

Darby dropped the partial rapture theory but took over the pre-tribulation rapture
idea which he spread through various "prophetic" conferences held at the time.
According to MacPherson, "Darby introduced into discussion … the ideas of a
secret rapture of the church and of a parenthesis in prophetic fulfilment between
the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel. These two concepts constituted
the basic tenets of the system of theology since referred to as dispensationalism".
[48] The dispensational idea is that God deals with man through the dispensation
of Israel (up to the first coming), the dispensation of the church (between the
first coming and the last seven years) and the dispensation of Israel (the last
seven years). Dispensationalism and the secret rapture theory are therefore
inextricably bound. Darby's views were further popularized through the Scofield
Reference Bible. They became so popular that some denominations in the United
States require ministerial candidates to sign a confession of faith that includes
dispensational "truths".
There are two significant facts about this theory. First, despite frequent attempts
at denial, it was never heard of in church history before Margaret MacDonald. It
was not part of historic premillennial faith. Second, the majority of reputable
evangelical biblical scholars has never embraced it. As Robert Gundry has
shown with devastating clarity in The Church and the Tribulation, there are
numerous holes in this theory. [49]
The whole system stands or falls on 2 Thessalonians 2. A casual reading of this
chapter, based on any reliable translation, will reveal the following. Paul is
correcting a false alarm in the Thessalonian church that the coming of the Lord
(a sudden secret rapture idea) had arrived. He says that the believers should not
be deceived, because the day of the Lord (the rapture) cannot occur until certain
events have taken place. There must be a "rebellion" and the "man of
lawlessness" (the anti-Christ) must be revealed first. Although the secret power
of the anti-Christ system is already at work, someone or something is holding it
back until the proper time. When the restraining factor is removed, the anti-
Christ will be revealed and deceive many with counterfeit signs and wonders.
The believers are encouraged that they will not be deceived because they have
been chosen by God and will stand firm in the faith.

Dispensational interpreters invert the plain meaning of the text with a

mistranslation. Instead of "gathering together to him" they insert "catching
away" (2:1), a translation which cannot be substantiated. Instead of the text
saying that the church cannot be gathered to Jesus until the anti-Christ has been
revealed, they make it say that the anti-Christ cannot be revealed until the church
has been lifted to Jesus. They suppose that the restraining factor that is removed
is the church. Support for this interpretation is totally lacking because
comparative expressions tend to suggest an angelic power restraining the final
emergence of evil. The text shows that the rapture occurs at the same time as the
Second Coming, the moment when Christ judges the world system. The moment
of the church's rescue or "rest" coincides with the world's demise or "everlasting
destruction" (1:7, 9). The former will happen when the latter happens. This text
alone destroys the dispensational system.

Some of the mental gymnastics that dispensationalists have undertaken are quite
bizarre. The church is said to be absent from the scene after Revelation 4:1,
which makes almost the whole book, written by a Christian to encourage other
Christians, irrelevant to Christians. Christ's extensive description of events
leading up to the end (Matthew 24-25) is also said to be relevant only to the
Jewish elect, not to the church, a remarkable distortion given the fact that the
twelve apostles, who founded the church, were the ones he was addressing! It is
not surprising that people with a minimum of theological training are unwilling
to accept this system. Dispensational interpreters have done such violence to so
many passages that one can sympathize with those who overreact and want to
deny any eschatological role for ethnic Israel. However, the answer is not
another swing of the pendulum to the other extreme. We will need to examine
the one systematic treatment of the place and eschatological role of Israel in
relation to the church, Romans 9-11. Before we do this, we must understand how
dispensationalism forms the basis of Israel theology.

Israel and Dispensationalism

Based on the idea of neat dispensations, the theory says that the last seven years
of world history will focus on Israel and that the church will be absent during
this time. It follows that God has two different people, the church and Israel, and
that the destiny of the two is distinct.
The restoration of Israel to Jerusalem is for a time when the dispensation of the
Gentiles is fulfilled and the church has been removed (Luke 21:24). For
dispensationalists, Israel repossessing Jerusalem is therefore a key event. Since
this can only occur with Israel back in Palestine, 1948 is absolutely central. In
fact, the whole destiny of the church and of mankind hinges on Israel in
Jerusalem during the last seven years. Without this special dispensation there can
be no Second Coming. This is why every political development in Israel is so
important and why no Christian should ever side with the political grievances of
the Palestinians.
What happens to this theory when the dispensational base is removed"?

Israel Without Dispensationalism

We said in chapter twelve that there is no support for the idea of dispensations
within the age of the church. The "last days" are the last days, from the birth of
Christ to the Second Coming, with no subdivision. Further, if God dealt with
Israel and the church in an overlapping period of some seventy years before the
fall of Jerusalem, the obvious conclusion is that whatever role Israel plays before
the Second Coming will again take place alongside God's dealings with the
church.

What then of the special significance attached to 1948? The fall of Jerusalem (70
AD) brought about a permanent change in its status. Prior to that, everything
about the coming of Christ was focused on Jerusalem. Christ's journey to the
cross was to Jerusalem. He died in Jerusalem. The gospel went from Jerusalem
to the world. Paul took a special offering to the saints in Jerusalem. The early
council of the church took place in Jerusalem. The city represented the birth of
the gospel and of the church. However, Jesus predicted that it would fall, and
even before it did, the church emerged out of the confines of Judaism.
What then is the importance of Jerusalem (post 70 AD) in the New Testament?
Are there any references to suggest a future, long-term role for Jerusalem as the
holy city? If we read Luke 21:24 without a dispensational assumption it becomes
much less complicated. It simply says that the destruction of Jerusalem as the
holy city will continue until the Second Coming. The times of the Gentiles are
fulfilled when everything else is fulfilled, at the Second Coming. The warning
about Jerusalem being surrounded by armies was fulfilled in 70 AD by the
Roman general Titus. The fall of Jerusalem is seen as a symbol of what will
occur when the final anti-Christ system is revealed. This in no way implies that
the second fulfilment has to occur in the same place. The earthly Jerusalem can
never again be a holy city. It has been replaced by a heavenly Jerusalem. The
present city of Jerusalem is in slavery to the law. The "Jerusalem above is free,
which is the mother of us all" (Galatians 4:25-26). This is the Jerusalem that
believers experience in worship.

Apart from the statements of Jesus about the fall of Jerusalem in the Gospels,
there are few other references in the New Testament to a future role or a
theological significance for the physical city. John 4:19-24 repudiates any
locality having special significance. Jerusalem will no longer be a special holy
place. Believers will worship anywhere, in spirit and in truth. Revelation 11:8
describes the city where Christ was crucified as 'sodom and Egypt", scarcely a
reference to a holy city. This implies that whatever may occur in physical
Jerusalem in the last moments of human history will not be occurring in a holy
city. Jesus gives the impression that the population of the earthly city of
Jerusalem will remain in a spiritually "desolate" environment until the very
moment of his return, when they will eventually say: "Blessed is he who comes
in the name of the Lord!" (Matthew 23:39). As we shall see, Romans 9-11
makes no reference to Jerusalem or Palestine.

All this leads to a rather startling conclusion for dispensationalists. There is

actually no New Testament emphasis or clear teaching on the importance of
Israel being physically present once more in Jerusalem. One may be able to
argue that a few verses assume by implication that Israel will have populated the
physical city once more when Jesus comes, but none of these verses can be made
into a special emphasis about events that must take place in Jerusalem before
Jesus can return. 1948 and the Seven Day War may be of very little significance.

Israel in New Testament Perspective

How does a Christian interpret the Old Testament? The age-old answer is,
through the eyes of the New Testament. We are not at liberty to take our own
independent line and claim to submit to the New Testament. A Rabbinical
scholar can do this because he is not bound by New Testament authority. The
way in which Jesus and the apostles looked at the Old Testament is authoritative
for us.

This means that the way in which the New Testament interprets Old Testament
passages about Israel, the land, Jerusalem, the elect, etc., is normative for us. If
an Old Testament passage is never used in a certain way by New Testament
writers, we cannot assume that we can use it in that way. The mere accumulation
of Old Testament texts to prove an "Israel theology" point will not do. Many Old
Testament texts speak of the people returning to the land and Jerusalem being
the centre of the earth, but the crucial question is: how does the New Testament
view such texts?

Paul is adamant that all the promises of the Old Testament have found their
fulfilment in the person of Jesus Christ. He is the seed of Abraham. Everything
about the Old Testament people of God narrows down into one person. From
that one person comes the new people of God, the new man in Christ. Paul saw
something that no Old Testament prophet ever saw, that Jews and Gentiles who
are in Christ together make up the people of God. Gentile Christians are now
included in the "commonwealth of Israel" (Ephesians 2:12), and this gathered
people from both sides of the wall are now the temple of God. There is "one new
man from the two" (2:15).

Peter writes to the church as if he were writing to Israel. He addresses himself to

"the elect", the "Dispersion" (1 Peter 1:1-2), in language that would have been
used for Israel. This diaspora of the elect is the very group that once was not a
people but is now "a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His
own special people" (2:9-10). This is not "replacement" theology but "addition"
theology. Jews who have accepted the Messiah have been added to by Gentiles
who have accepted the Messiah. These two together are the true heirs of every
Old Testament promise.
The definition of what it means to be a "Jew" has therefore changed. A real Jew
is someone who has experienced a circumcision of the heart. The way to be a
child of Abraham is the same for Jews and Gentiles: repentance and faith. Born-
again Gentiles are now more Jews than unbelieving Israelites. The "Israel after
the flesh" (1 Corinthians 10:18) stands in contrast to the "Israel of God"
(Galatians 6:16). Despite all to the contrary, Paul's "Israel of God" means the
people for whom circumcision no longer matters. All that matters is being a new
creation. This could never be said of Israel "after the flesh".
This new Israel does inherit the Holy Land, but even the land has become new.
Just as Joshua led Israel into the land of Canaan, the new Joshua, Jesus, leads his
people into the Sabbath rest (Hebrews 4:1-11). The blessing of Abraham, which
included the land of Canaan for the Old Testament believers, is now the gift of
the Holy Spirit (Galatians 3:14). Where they inherited Canaan, New Testament
believers inherit the whole world (Romans 4:13). All nations and all families can
now be blessed with Abraham's blessing. David, the king of Israel, is king of all
nations. The gathering of God's people to Jerusalem is fulfilled in a great
company from every nation, tribe, people and language that will inhabit the
heavenly Jerusalem. All the Old Testament prophecies about Israel and the Holy
Land are fulfilled in a way that eclipses Palestine. The universalizing thrust of
Isaiah has been completed and taken to its final form. We must conclude that the
New Testament writers laid down very clearly what our understanding of the
Old Testament promises should be. There are no gray areas.

How Many People of God Are There?

Can anyone speak of two people of God? Paul speaks of one olive tree with
natural branches and wild engrafted branches. Gentiles who have been justified
by faith are now children of Abraham and members of the commonwealth of
Israel, not a new Israel but the historic Israel of the Old Testament. They are
now as "Jewish" as any Jew. Paul also speaks of the "new man" which carries
the idea of a totally new species. In this sense we do have to speak of a new
Israel, because we are no longer living in the time of expectation but in the time
of fulfilment. The kingdom of God has broken through and there is a new
covenant that is much more than a prolonging of the old one.

To return to the olive tree metaphor. The one olive tree, signifying one people of
God and one new man in Jesus Christ, has its roots in the Old Testament people
of God. It will include many who at present are Israelite branches that lie dead
and cut off from the tree. They can only live as true members of the people of
God by being a part of the one olive tree. The moment any Jew is justified by
faith, he becomes a member of the one church of Jesus Christ. Before this
happens he is not a part of the olive tree and therefore not a member of the
people of God.
Jewish believers are supposed to be members of local churches that include
every type of Christian in that area, Gentiles included. In the early church the
membership of most local churches consisted of ex-synagogue members and
Gentile converts. Purely Jewish congregations existed when the gospel was
confined to Judea amongst a predominantly Jewish population, but in the Gentile
cities there was only one local church that included all believers. The idea of
separate Jewish Christian congregations around the world today has no biblical
foundation. All the arguments in favour of such a practice will be the same
arguments that have been used to support apartheid. They will tend to elevate
ethnicity and ethnic distinctions. It may be true that from a missiological
perspective one can reach people better in homogeneous units — people do feel
more comfortable in their own culture — but we should be clear about when we
are using sociological arguments and when we are using biblical arguments.
If there is now only one people of God, any arguments about a right to the land
of Palestine today would have to apply equally to every member of the church,
Jew or Gentile, anywhere in the world. "Israel, here I come to claim my plot of
ground. I would prefer a site overlooking the Sea of Galilee, please! I am of
Arab descent!" The moment we say that ethnic Israel still has Old Testament
promises that apply to her and not to the church, we have moved back to a two
people idea, and this flatly contradicts Paul's teaching.

This theological issue should be clearly distinguished from matters of political

ethics. The fact that Israel deserves a state in Palestine is due to the horrifying
way she has been treated by the nations of the world, not because of the validity
of a special "Israel" theology. It may well be that God has ordered the course of
human history by determining this particular ethic but we must not imagine that
we can deduce this directly from the New Testament.

Israel's Future
Is there no special role then for ethnic Israel, the Israel "after the flesh"?

We come to Romans 9-11. The theme of Romans is the righteousness of God.

Having shown that God is righteous in condemning and forgiving sin (Romans
1-8). Paul argues that God is righteous in choosing Israel and rejecting Israel, in
rejecting the Gentiles and choosing the Gentiles. In all his dealings with man, he
is perfectly righteous. This section was prompted by the fact that Israel as a
whole had not accepted Christ. It raised difficult questions. Had the Word of
God failed? Is there injustice on God's part? Has God rejected his people?
Paul's opening statement makes it plain that he is dealing with Israel, his
"kinsmen according to the flesh" (9:3), whom he loves and to whom God gave
all the promises. He argues that Israel has not rejected Jesus, and in that sense
the gospel has not failed for Israel, because a remnant, the true Israel, has
accepted Jesus. The real Israelites are not simply the physical descendants of
Abraham but a smaller group who are the descendants of IsaActs Paul shows
how the principle of election occurred again and again, and how no one has a
right to question God in his ordering of this process (9:6-23). Real Israel is
therefore not made up of every living physical descendant of Abraham, but of a
special group elected by God. This group of true Israelites includes those "whom
he called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles" (9:24).

This raises an uncomfortable question. Are some Gentiles more God's people
than many Jews (9:30-31)? Paul affirms that this is the case. The Jews have
stumbled over the law while Gentiles have accepted that the only way of
justification is by faith (9:32-10:13), through believing the gospel (10:14-17).

Are there excuses for this failure of Israel as a whole to accept Christ? Perhaps
they have not all heard the gospel (10:18)? Perhaps they have not understood
and things should have been explained to them more clearly (10:19)? Both these
excuses will not do. The real problem is that they are a "disobedient and contrary
people" (10:21). Does the disobedience of the majority mean that God has
rejected his people (11:1)? There are two answers to thIsaiah In the present, the
very existence of the remnant demonstrates that God still loves Israel (11:1-10).
And in the future there will be a response to the gospel by the main body of the
nation. How will this work?

The fact that the main body of the Jewish nation rejected Jesus was the original
reason for the apostles turning to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46). The rejection of the
gospel by the Jews provided the trigger mechanism for the gospel to go to the
Gentiles. This suggests that the same trigger mechanism will occur again. When
the full number of the Gentiles has come into the kingdom, God will turn to his
ancient people. The "full inclusion" of the Jews will be the final trigger
mechanism that sets off the resurrection (11:12-15). This is consistent with God's
dealings in the past, because it has always been the Jew first, then the Gentile. If
Gentile believers have been added to a Jewish faith, Jews can be added even
more readily (11:16-24). Gentile Christians must never look down on
unbelieving Jews.
At present the main body of the Jewish nation has been hardened. During this
time the gospel is being spread to the Gentile nations. When this process is
complete, the last nation to respond to the gospel will be the main body of the
Jewish nation. This will be followed by the Second Coming and the final
resurrection. While Israel has not been faithful to God, God will remain faithful
to Israel, "For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable" (11:29). God is
wise and righteous. Jews and Gentiles have had equal opportunities to accept or
reject his ways (11:30-32). God has been totally fair. The wonder of God's
wisdom (11:33-36)!

Conclusion
Certain deductions can be drawn from this argument. Firstly, the Jewish people
have a missiological significance. The gospel must go to all nations before the
end can come. Here we learn that the last nation to be reached will be the Jewish
nation. This does not mean that Jews cannot be saved now. The remnant
principle will always be there, but there will be a final, general turning to Christ
amongst the Jews that is part of a linear development: all nations, then the Jews,
then the resurrection. If we want to hasten the Second Coming, we have to
hasten the completion of the Great Commission to all nations culminating in the
Jewish nation. We will never hasten the day of Christ's return while we leave out
the Jews. Consequently the shortest route to Jewish evangelism is through world
evangelization. This, incidentally, means reaching Arabs as well. We cannot
love Jews any more or any less than we love all people. Jesus died for all,
equally.

Secondly, the Jewish people has an eschatological significance. Their destiny is

closely linked to the Second Coming. This means that they will never disappear
as a visible national ethnic group or religious tradition, Hitler and whomsoever
notwithstanding. They remain God's people in a shadowy, waiting capacity.
They are the olive branch that lies dead on the ground. Although dead, it is
nevertheless an olive branch, and God will bring it to life again. When that
occurs it will join the existing olive tree. That is why we can never speak of two
people of God. The Jews are the people of God only in the sense that they wait
to be taken up into the church.

This is "addition" theology. The apostolic perspective is always addition,

subtraction and addition. The Gentiles never replace the Jews and the Jews never
replace the Gentiles. God simply uses the one to reach the other. Paul's
exposition never depends on a geographical location in Palestine. The final
response of the Jewish people can happen throughout the dispersion of the Jews
in every nation. It may include a particular concentration of Jewish people in
Palestine, but the event does not depend on a particular demographic situation
either. There is therefore no reason why the Jews have to return to Palestine to
fulfil end time events. There is also no reason why Palestinian Arabs have to be
thwarted from gaining a just solution to their aspirations for the sake of some
eschatological priority.

In practice, what does this view of the biblical witness mean? Firstly, it
repudiates the classic Reformed "replacement theology". Neither the Puritans
nor more recent Reformed theologians support the eradication of ethnic Israel as
the subject of Romans 11:12. The church is placed in a position of continual love
and respect for the Jewish people. No Christian can ever support the kind of
antagonism expressed by Luther with biblical justification. Secondly, it
repudiates a mindless support for the Jewish cause in the current Palestinian
conflict. The Christian attitude is one of love for all Jewish people, not support
for current Israeli political causes. Thirdly, the Christian attitude is one of equal
love for all lost people, including Arabs. Perhaps I should add that regenerate
Arab Christians are now more part of true Israel than unregenerate Jews.
Fourthly, the whole thrust of the biblical teaching on Israel aims us at world
missions.

I have a theory that illustrates the biblical approach. When Paul had the vision of
the man of Macedonia, he went west with the Gospel. If one follows the flow of
church history, it becomes apparent that the gospel spread most successfully
thereafter in Western Europe. Europe became the cradle of Christianity for
centuries. Then Christianity spread through the colonies of the European powers
into North and South America, Australia, Africa and China. More recently the
gospel has been spreading most dramatically in central Asia, Indonesia, South
Korea and Malaysia. I believe that the next area of great world mission will be
India and China. Already the story of the Chinese underground church has
become known. This flow represents the gospel gradually circumventing the
globe. Once China and India have been reached, the last land mass en route to
Israel from the east is the Arab world. The last great missionary thrust will
therefore be amongst the Arabs and once this is completed the gospel will have
circumvented the globe. Finally, ethnic Israel, in Palestine and throughout the
Diaspora, will turn to Christ and this will lead to the Second Coming and the
resurrection of the dead. The mission to Israel will only be ultimately successful
when it comes via the Arabs. If you want to win Israel, win the Arabs! God loves
mankind everywhere with the same redeeming love.

CONFUSION ABOUT THE

KINGDOM
Revelation 21 describes a millennium or thousand year period of Christ's rule to
be shared with him by victorious believers. The interpretation of this passage has
always been difficult and differing theories about it have often divided
Christians. This is true of our time too. Conflicting views on the millennium
have emerged in a debate between dispensationalists such as Dave Hunt and
"kingdom now" teachers such as Earl PauLuke [50]

The current issue came into focus in Britain during the seventies when the
present leaders of the Restoration Movement were formulating their thinking and
has now gained prominence in the United States. The debate is certainly not a
purely academic one. Our views on the millennium shape our understanding of
the relationship between the church and society, and this in turn determines our
Christian behaviour. The enemy is always pleased when the ordinary Christian is
unsettled and confused and "feelings" build up between Christians. It is therefore
important that we place this issue in perspective, seek to remove the confusion
and understand what is really happening.

The Debate
We said in the previous chapter that modern dispensationalism arose among the
Plymouth Brethren. "Kingdom now" teaching is Presbyterian. In very simple
terms, a shift is taking place from a Brethren to a Presbyterian eschatology. Both
these traditions have been accepted for a long time as valid testimonies within
the body of Christ. The relevant differences between these two traditions revolve
around the millennium. There are basically four views on the millennium.

The oldest view is that the millennium (thousand year reign of Christ) will take
place after the Second Coming. Christ will come before the millennium. This is
known as premillennialism. The second oldest view is that the present age of the
church is actually the millennium and that, rather than a literal thousand years,
the millennium is a symbolic way of speaking about the present rule of Christ
through his church. This is known as amillennialism. These two branches each
have a variant form that is more extreme than the parent idea in the sense that it
is further removed from the opposite view.
Third in time is postmillennialism. This is a development from within
amillennialism that teaches that the age of the church will culminate in a special
period of glory, a thousand years when the church will triumph in the world
before the Second Coming. Christ therefore comes after the millennium.
Last in time is a variant of premillennialism called dispensationalism. This view,
usually known as the pretribulation rapture theory, holds that the church will be
secretly "raptured" by Christ seven years before the Second Coming and the
millennium. These last seven years of world history will be a time of great
tribulation. The church will go before the tribulation and the millennium.

The four views can be pictured as follows, in order of development and in

relation to each other.

You will notice that pre-tribulationism and postmillennialism are furthest apart.
We have traced the historical development of pretribulation dispensationalism.
The Presbyterians and, in fact, most Reformed believers have traditionally been
amillennial although postmillennialism has also been popular in Reformed
circles. In recent years there has been a resurgence of postmillennialism amongst
some conservative Calvinists in America, and this movement has developed a
teaching called reconstructionism. Ordinary premillennialists and amillennialists
find it fairly easy to have a rational conversation with each other because their
views are not very far apart. On the other hand pretribulationists and
postmillennialists, who are on opposite sides of the spectrum, find it very
difficult to dialogue with one another. It is this meeting of two extremes that is
taking place in the current debate, and this is why the feelings are running so
high. Before each view is described we will examine how the kingdom teaching
we have developed so far relates to these issues.

The basic divide between the two sides revolves around the relationship between
the church and the world. Taken to an extreme, one view holds that the church
must withdraw from the world because it can never be improved and the
Christian should expect persecution and suffering. The world will not improve
until Jesus comes, destroys the anti-Christ and sets up his millennial kingdom.
The other view is that the church has both the power and the responsibility to
take over the present world for Christ. When the church, empowered by the Holy
Spirit, has been triumphant in this, Jesus will come to meet his mature,
victorious bride. The first view is world denying, the second is world
transforming. How does the New Testament message of the kingdom relate to
this?

Kingdom Now Or Then?

We have outlined how New Testament texts can be used selectively to teach
either that the kingdom is totally future or totally present. Very few would want
to deny either the ‘future kingdom’ or the ‘present kingdom’ statements of Jesus.
This led us to the understanding of the mystery of the kingdom. The future
kingdom has broken through into the present world so that this age and the age
to come coexist in a totally unexpected tension. We have called this the ‘already’
and the ‘not yet’ or the ‘presence of the future’. There is both ‘kingdom now’
and ‘kingdom not now’. Until we have grasped this, confusion about many
biblical truths will continue, especially the millennium.
Worked out in terms of the church/world relationship, these two views lead to
the following conclusions. A totally future view of the kingdom leads to
defeatism, escapism and world denial that makes people negative about this
world. A totally present view of the kingdom leads to triumphalism and
utopianism so that people confuse worldly developments with the kingdom of
God. The human tendency is to deny the validity of the texts that contradict
one’s position. Premillennialists, and especially pre-tribulationists, tend to evade
texts that speak of the present triumph and involvement of the church in the
world. Amillennialists, and especially postmillennialists, evade those texts which
state that the present world order is doomed to destruction and that the church
should live for the next world.

Both kinds of text are found in abundance in the New Testament and it will not
do to evade some texts because of our commitment to others. We must submit to
the authority of the whole Bible, rather than to those texts that we have chosen.
Let us then examine the two types of text.

World-denying Texts

The most obvious world-denying texts are found in the apocalyptic sections of
Scripture. Daniel and Revelation speak of a cataclysmic destruction of this
present world with the coming of the Son of Man. The stone from heaven will
pulverize the image of man. In Revelation the kingdom of the anti-Christ,
represented by the beast and the harlot, are powerfully destroyed by the rider on
the white horse. Linked to these two books is the teaching of Jesus in Mark 13,
Luke 21 and Matthew 24 where he describes a period of great tribulation and
suffering for the church prior to the Second Coming.

The letters of the New Testament have their share of the pessimistic view of the
present age. Paul encourages the Christians through their persecutions and
assures them that Christ will destroy the persecutors of the Church at his Second
Coming. He expects the "man of lawlessness" to deceive many, but is sure that
the believers will be able to withstand his deception (2 Thessalonians 1-2). He
warns that in later times men will abandon the faith and follow demonic
doctrines (I Timothy 4:1). The last days will bring terrible times (2 Timothy
3:1). He believes that these events are imminent and encourages Christians to
hold lightly to worldly things (I Corinthians 7:29-31).
After that glorious passage on all the men of faith who endured persecution and
yet lived for the city of God, the writer to the Hebrews tells us that God will
shake all things once more. Believers are to receive a kingdom that cannot be
shaken (Hebrews 12:26-29).
Peter feels that the end of all things is near. He warns the Christians that
judgment must begin with the family of God. The present world order is being
reserved for fire and destruction. The day of the Lord will come unexpectedly,
therefore Christians must live holy lives as they look forward to the day of God
and speed its coming (I Peter 4:7, 16; 3:7-13).

Taken in isolation, these passages create the impression that, because this world
is doomed to imminent destruction and Christians should expect persecution, we
must not bother too much about social conditions and the hopes and aspirations
of the secular world. We are not part of it and it cannot last long. We should be
urgent about preaching the gospel, rescuing people from certain damnation and
preparing them for the coming of the Lord. Our focus is not on this world but on
the coming kingdom which Jesus will bring. Only he can change it into the new
society that will follow the Second Coming. One can describe this as a "waiting
for departure" attitude.

World-transforming Texts

Jesus made a conscious connection between his ministry and the anticipations of
Isaiah. If one gathers together the various elements of Isaiah's total picture of the
kingdom one certainly has to conceive of the transformation of the entire world
into a just society ruled by the Davidic King. The only way of denying this is to
postpone the kingdom entirely to the next world and evade all the "fulfilment"
texts. Jesus commissioned his disciples to disciple the nations through the
proclamation of the gospel. The successful fulfilment of this commission would
involve the teaching of "another king, Jesus" in all the world (Acts 17:6-7). The
gospel not only transforms people inwardly but also changes their entire lives
through sanctification. This is why Christian discipleship includes teaching
about husbands and wives, parents and children, rich and poor, slaves and
masters, citizens and government, honesty at work, how to relate to those outside
the church, and how to appreciate the good things of life - a transformation of
the whole of life.
Missionary success means that a new humanity is born, one "new man" to
replace the previous divisions between Jew and Gentile, slave and free, rich and
poor, as the grace of God abounds over the power of sin (Ephesians 2:15;
Galatians 3:28). As more and more people are transformed, the gospel works
like leaven and salt in society. Disciples are like a city on a hill that cannot be
hidden (Matthew 5:13-16).

While this age is ultimately doomed to the judgment of God, he nevertheless

cares for and protects the world. God's care for the world goes back to creation.
This is God's world. He created man to be fruitful, multiply and subdue the
earth. He wanted man to have dominion over the natural order. Sin has marred
this, but redemption restores God's original intention. There are many passages
that show God's sovereign rule over history and nature. This is known as
providence. He sends his rain on the just and the unjust (Matthew 5:45). The
magistrate is the servant of God for the common good (Romans 13:1-5). Orderly
government has been ordained for the protection of mankind (Romans 13:6-7).
He controls the allotted periods and boundaries of the nations (Acts 17:26). He
raises up some rulers and disposes of others. Despite the fact that this is the
history of man outside of Christ, God has ultimate control over the power of evil.
Even in the unredeemed world he enlightens every man (John 1:1-9).
If we look at the biblical texts on creation, providence, world mission and
Christian discipleship, the net result is world transformation. Such
transformation can be denied on the basis of a total failure of world missions but
this cannot be supported from the New Testament and still less from church
history. In the last century the gospel spread more dramatically than ever before!
We can summarize the attitude that results from these passages as "aggressive
gospel takeover".

Biblical Balance

Many more biblical references could have been found. I simply wish to establish
that it is impossible to wipe out either type of text. This leaves us with a biblical
tension. On the one hand this present world is doomed to judgment and on the
other Jesus is victorious and has commissioned us to preach his triumph to all
nations. Because the kingdom is already here, the triumphal, "take over the
world" texts are true and essential. Because the kingdom is not yet here, the
"wait for departure" texts are equally true.

The Christian has an ambivalent attitude towards this world. He is in it but not of
it. He must not be conformed to the world, yet this cannot involve an escape
from it. An understanding of the "wait for departure" texts prevents the Christian
from ever being in love with this present world. They also teach us to be very
wary of all forms of utopianism. No movement, ideology or nation can ever be
the kingdom of God. The "aggressive takeover" texts prevent us from ever
becoming defeated pessimists. Even though the final stage of history may see a
rise of great evil, we should be confident that there will be, simultaneously, a
great triumph of the gospel.
Holding these two truths together gives a view of the end of history as the
climax of both the power of God and the power of Satan. The contrast between
the two will make the choice for or against Christ very clear. This is precisely
where Revelation ends. "He who is unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is
filthy, let him be filthy still; he who is righteous, let him be righteous still; he
who is holy, let him be holy still. And behold, I am coming quickly" (Revelation
22:11-12). Such a view is both realistic about fallen human nature and optimistic
about the power of the gospel.

Views of the Millennium

It has been important to look at the broader biblical teaching because there is
only one clear passage on the millennium (20:1-10) - it is always precarious to
build a whole system of interpretation on one passage. Each millennial theory
runs this danger. Any interpretation of the millennium that has to ignore or evade
a whole series of texts is likely to be wrong. Because the Bible is so
comprehensive, different emphases within the Word become especially
important to different groups within the church at different times and in different
circumstances. People select those texts that relate to their situation. A
persecuted church will appreciate the "wait for departure" texts while a church
that is experiencing growing social power will appreciate the "takeover" texts.
The problem is that the social situation of the church can blind it to the texts that
don"t seem to fit. This is exactly what occurred in church history.

Historic Premillennial Faith

Both before and after John wrote Revelation, there is ample evidence of a belief
in a 1 000 year period of Messianic rule. There were various Jewish theories
about the length of the Messiah's rule, some 1 000, some 7 000 years. Most such
expectations were based firmly on the idea that the Messiah would rule from
Jerusalem. These beliefs arose when Israel was under oppressive foreign rulers.
The same can be said for the early Church Fathers. They believed that John
spoke of a literal thousand year reign of Christ over this world after the Second
Coming. The millennium was so literal that some rather exaggerated ideas
developed.

Montanus declared himself to be a prophet of the "Third Testament" (beyond the

Old and the New), a special millennial age of the Holy Spirit. Various prophetic
individuals associated with Montanus claimed infallible inspiration. They
stressed the imminent return of Christ. Tertullian, the North African church
leader, became a Montanist. The Montanist concept of the millennium became
increasingly materialistic, an extreme that brought premillennialism into
disrepute. Premillennialism was known as chiliasm, from the Greek term for one
thousand. In later times the chiliasm of the Montanists was regarded as a
fanatical excess.

The early Church Fathers, those nearest to the writer of Revelation in time,
understood him to refer to a literal millennium after the Second Coming.
Because they lived during times of persecution, they had no difficulty believing
that only Jesus could change this world into a just society. They tended to
identify with the "wait for departure" texts. The premillennialism of the early
Church Fathers is known as historic premillennialism. This should be
distinguished from the fanatical chiliasm of the Montanists and their followers. It
is interesting to see how this exaggerated concept of the millennium developed
later into revolutionary movements that were very critical of every worldly
status quo.

Fanatical Premillennialism

In the twelfth century, Joachim of Fiore taught that there would be a third age of
the Spirit when all normal forms of government would be replaced by a
dispensation of total freedom. He was followed by the Taborites, a Hussite
movement which sought to establish the kingdom of God by force of arms.
During the Reformation Thomas Muntzer began preaching an imminent
millennial kingdom. He tried to establish the New Jerusalem in Westphalia,
assisted by the radical prophets of Zwickau. This "New Jerusalem" was ruled
with a rod of iron by the fanatical John of Leiden. During the English Civil War
in the seventeenth century, the Puritans tried to set up a "Fifth Monarchy"
through revolution. They based this on Daniel, where the fifth kingdom is the
kingdom of God that destroys the four kingdoms of man. Strangely, this type of
premillennialism is the most radical in its attempt to take over worldly power.
Postmillennialism, which is usually associated with world takeover, also
emerged within the Puritan Movement. Premillennialism taken to an extreme
can develop into its opposite.
Alongside this fanatical breed of premillennialism, the historic premillennialism
of the early Church Fathers continued in various groups such as the more
responsible Anabaptists of the Reformation and the Moravian Brethren. Many
contemporary evangelical Bible teachers hold to this historic, unfanatical type of
premillennialism.

Augustine and Amillennial Faith

We said that extremes tend to produce a reaction in the opposite direction. The
extremes of the Montanists were partly responsible for the spiritualizing teaching
of Origen, the third-century Christian leader. He reacted to the literal, this
worldly view of the millennium towards the metaphysical, spiritual presence of
the kingdom in the soul of the believer.
This set the stage for Augustine of Hippo, the fifth-century North African leader.
There was an added factor in his belief. The conversion of Constantine made
Christianity the accepted religion of the Empire. With the absence of
persecution, there was no compelling need to be pessimistic about this world.
Augustine never became optimistic about the world but he did move away from
the idea of catastrophe. No imminent dramatic intervention of the kingdom was
expected. Instead, he emphasized the present rule of Christ through his church.
The spiritual kingdom was the city of God, while the rule of earthly authorities
was the city of man. These two cities struggle against one another throughout
history, but the city of God is certain to prevail. He derived these ideas from the
descriptions of Jerusalem and Babylon in Revelation.
Augustine was the first to establish the idea that the various visions of
Revelation do not follow in chronological order but repeat the same story in
different ways, each covering the whole period from the first coming to the
Second Coming. If this is the case, Revelation 20 can be regarded as a new
section going back to the first coming of Christ when Satan was bound through
the victory of the cross. The 1 000 years is a symbolic way of speaking of the
rule of Christ through his church throughout church history. At the end of history
the devil will attempt a final rebellion against God. This will be the time of the
great tribulation. It will build up to the battle of Armageddon, also described as
Gog and Magog, but Jesus will come and destroy this rebellion and set up his
everlasting kingdom.

Augustine's view holds together the two strands of New Testament teaching. It
neither hands the world over to the devil in resignation nor imagines that it will
ever reach utopia. The Reformers tended to follow Augustine.

Postmillennial Believers

The Enlightenment was a period of reaction to the control of the medieval

church and its dogmas. It was also a time of great discovery. People became
optimistic about man's ability to build a new society on earth shaped by his
control of nature through scientific progress. Francis Bacon disagreed with
Augustine's pessimism about this world and believed that a new world could be
created through man's ability to control nature.
This is the context in which postmillennialism arose. The new thinking can be
traced back to Joseph Mead (Mede), a seventeenth century Anglican biblical
scholar. He believed that Revelation promised a literal millennium before the
Second Coming. The priority was to study history and the chronology of events
related in the book of Revelation and plot when this millennial age was likely to
begin. The discoveries of the Enlightenment meant that history did not have to
be reversed in a cataclysmic manner. The dark ages could merge gradually into
the new world of the millennium through historical progress.

Mead's idea became the dominant view in the Reformed churches in the
eighteenth century, replacing the symbolic amillennialism of Augustine. An
Anglican commentator called Daniel Whitby (1638-1726) gave strong support to
postmillennialism. His views were in turn adopted by Jonathan Edwards, the
great American revivalist (1703-58). In his History of the Word of Redemption,
he saw great significance in the settlement of the New World (America), and
believed it would usher in the millennium in about the twentieth century. This
belief fed the fires of nationalism in the United States. Samuel Cox, a
Presbyterian minister, felt that "in America, the state of society is without
parallel in universal history … I really believe that God has got America within
anchorage, and that upon that arena, He intends to display his prodigies for the
millennium." [51]
Essential to the postmillennial view is the idea that most of the prophesies of
Christ and the apostles about the beast and the anti-Christ were fulfilled in the
fall of Jerusalem. The great tribulation has already occurred. The disasters are
past, and the church awaits the Second Coming. Furthermore, what Revelation
promises is an extensive period of successful world missions culminating in a
triumphant church bringing in the kingdom of God before the Second Coming.
This is the millennium. It may take thousands of years, but the world has been
improved significantly through the gospel and will continue to improve.

While postmillennialism arose out of the Enlightenment, most of those who have
been deeply committed to it have been men of great prayer and vision. It was
this "Puritan hope" which led to one of the greatest movements in world
missions that the church has ever known. Benjamin Warfield, one of the most
respected defenders of biblical authority and inspiration, was a postmillennialist.
These men were not at all optimistic about fallen human nature, but they were
optimistic about the triumph of the gospel in human history. Although Calvin
himself was an amillennialist, postmillennialism has usually been the belief of
strong Calvinists. Calvin's actual practice in Geneva amounted to a takeover of
secular society which was more in keeping with post-millennialism. This led to
some tragic results which showed the darker side of the Reformed order. There
were numerous infringements of basic human rights inflicted on those who
would not toe the line.

The recent resurgence of postmillennialism in the United States can be traced to

two Calvinists, Cornelius van Til and Rusas Rushdoony. Van Til was a professor
at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadephia. His philosophy has been
summarized and popularized by Rushdoony, an ex-missionary to the Paiute and
Shoshone Indians and a minister of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.
Rushdoony is the founding Father of the numerous "reconstructionists" of today.
In line with Calvin, Rushdoony believes strongly that the law of Moses is still
relevant. The gospel does not displace the law. Once people have been born
again, they are to be discipled in the ethical principles of God's law. This
involves an outworking of the principles of the law in every facet of human life,
be it art, economics, ecology, geography or physics. All things must be brought
under the rule of Christ, and the whole of society must be transformed.[52]

Postmillennialists tend to favour all the "world takeover" texts, but relegate all
the "wait for departure", "doom and gloom" texts to the period before the fall the
Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Dispensational Faith
All dispensationalists are premillennialists. They appeal to the early Church
Fathers and the Anabaptists during the Reformation. They believe that this
present world can only be changed into a just society by the return of Christ.
This will be followed by the millennium. Dispenationalism not only re-
emphasized this older premillennialism but considerably adapted and
exaggerated it.
In the previous chapter we traced the origins of dispensationalism in Scotland.
Edward Irving, one of the founders of the Catholic Apostolic Church, believed
that God wanted to restore the office of the twelve apostles before the Second
Coming. Their denomination spread to various countries, but as most of the
original apostles died and the Second Coming did not take place, the movement
began to dwindle. There were no new ordinations after 1901, by which time all
the founders had died. The New Apostolic Church arose as a breakaway from
this denomination. They have replaced the idea of a last generation of restored
apostles with the idea of apostolic succession.

Dispensationalism spread rapidly in the United States during the 1830s and
1840s. It was a time of great excitement. Many believed that the millennial
kingdom was about to begin. A New York farmer, William Miller, predicted that
it would come before 1843. Many were disappointed when his prediction failed.
This caused people to drop the habit of fixing dates, but the fundamentals of
dispensationalism continued. The Niagara Bible Conferences helped to spread
dispensationalism amongst Anglicans, Baptists, Presbyterians and Dutch
Reformed believers.

The Lessons of History

The lesson of history is that all theories about the millennium have a particular
genesis in time within a particular social context. The only one that can claim to
be linked directly to the early church is historic premillennialism. This should
help us to distinguish between the authority of the Word of God and the theories
that men create to interpret the Word. None of these theories are infallible.
None of these theories are heretical either. One can find many godly, zealous,
educated believers in each camp. Each of us will find some of the theories less
appealing than others but we should realize that there are many committed
Christians who will not agree with us. We should therefore be careful not to be
arrogant and dogmatic about our own particular preference. Evangelical
Christians have always agreed to disagree on the issue of the millennium.
My own view is that both postmillennialism and dispensationalism have to do an
excessive amount of explaining of too many biblical texts. I am sceptical about
the idea that all the predictions about the great tribulation and the anti-Christ can
be explained by the fall of Jerusalem. One cannot simply evade all the apostolic
warnings about the last days. I am equally sceptical about the idea that human
society is improving. One of the disturbing things about the current
reconstructionist postmillennialism is its tendency to wave the American flag.
American society tends to be identified with the millennium, following Jonathan
Edwards. The American Republican system is to spread the light of freedom
around the world. While I have a great respect for the American political system,
I do not believe that it should be equated with the millennial kingdom of God.
Equally, the dispensational idea that the church will be raptured seven years
before the end and miss the tribulation has to resort to some amazing
manipulations of clear biblical passages to the contrary. This idea encourages a
most irresponsible attitude towards human society. Why be concerned about
issues of social justice if we are all about to disappear and leave the remainder of
the human race to suffer on through the tribulation? More and more thinking
Christians are abandoning this theory. The British Restoration Movement moved
away from dispensationalism in the 1970s.
Postmillennialism cannot be dismissed as easily as dispensationalism because it
has a great deal to teach the church about faith. One can learn from a position
without having to agree with all its details.
Both historic premillennialism and amillennialism are able to hold together the
balance of New Testament teaching. The differences between them are not as
great as most imagine. One can teach either of these views of the millennium in
a way that fails or succeeds in holding the balance between the "already" and the
"not yet". On the other hand, when postmillennialism and dispensationalism
meet, there is bound to be conflict. This is evident in the current American
debate.

Dave Hunt is not just a premillennialist, he is a dispensational pre-tribulation

rapture theorist. He is appalled by anything that looks like a Christian "world
takeover". He quotes all the "prepare for departure" texts but does not do justice
to the "world takeover" texts. He stoops to making a caricature of his opponents
and then attacking the caricature. The Calvinist reconstructionists were
unmasking the New Age cult long before any of the dispensationalists, yet Hunt
attempts to identify them with the New Age because they are optimistic. This is
a bad case of mistaken identity.

What should we make of the recent shift by Charismatic leaders such as Rick
Godwin and Earl Paulk towards reconstructionism? Hunt attempts to link this to
the Manifest Sons of God teaching of some early Pentecostals and the positive
confession teaching of E.W. Kenyon. This is a large subject. All I wish to point
out is that E.W. Kenyon was a dispensationalist.
If his own teaching did not lead him to become a postmillennialist, one wonders
why his followers have to become postmillennialists. Kenyon's teaching is
triumphalist in the sense that the new nature of the believer in Christ is said to
cause him to walk in triumph. Kenyon emphasizes this a great deal. It would not
be surprising if those who have followed Kenyon should take this positive
emphasis to its logical conclusion and embrace postmillennialism although I am
not aware of any shift in this direction to date.

Earl Paulk does not seem to have been influenced by Kenyon but by the
Presbyterian reconstructionists. It is therefore illegitimate to link him to the
Manifest Sons of God teaching. His views, on the one side of the spectrum, are
no more extreme a than those of Hunt on the opposite side.

The positive aspect of the American debate is that it seems likely to shake the
Bible Belt out of its uncritical and dogmatic commitment to dispensationalism.
Elsewhere in the world, where the Charismatic Renewal has rediscovered
kingdom teaching, it has led to a rejection of dispensationalism. It is not
surprising that this shift should also occur in the United States.

Perhaps the only way to get everyone's attention is to preach the opposite of
dispensationalism, namely postmillennialism. If the majority of believers were
thoroughly converted to the latter, we would be faced with a swing of the
pendulum to another extreme. What is more likely is that the two extremes will
cancel each other out and the evangelical church will settle down to either
historic premillennialism or amillennialism. The swing of the pendulum is
perhaps how the American church undergoes reformation.

A FINAL PERSPECTIVE
In this chapter we will present a final focus on all we have said so far.

When Paul lists the elements of Christian unity he mentions "one body and one
Spirit … one hope … one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of
all" (Ephesians 4:4-6). This is another way of saying "one kingdom". The rule of
God can have no rivals, and those that exist will perish when the kingdom is
consummated and Jesus puts all his enemies under his feet.

Kingdom or Denomination?
All those who have experienced the end of the times in Jesus have been
apprehended by the reign of God. They are subjects of one Lord. We have seen
that the church is created by the in-breaking of the kingdom of God. As the
power of the age to come breaks through into this world, it creates a community
of people who have experienced a transformation of their lives and loyalties.
This creates one body and makes nonsense of the idea of divisions and
alienations within the body of Christ. Such things can only exist if there is
disobedience and resistance to the rule of Christ. This means that if
denominations are manifestations of alienation, they have to be regarded as
testimonies of disobedience. But there is another way of looking at church
history that places denominations in proper context.

Kingdom teaching interprets the history of revivals as eschatological events.

From Pentecost to the Second Coming, every outpouring of the Holy Spirit can
be explained in the words of Peter: "This is what was spoken by the prophet
Joel", in other words, a "last days" phenomenon. Each such event, as it works
through into society and begins to take shape in relational and social structures,
produces a new movement. All such movements have leaders, circumstances,
places and times in their genesIsaiah The details are different each time, be it
Augustine or Francis of Assisi, Luther or Wesley, Jonathan Edwards or Charles
Parham. What is really significant is the event of the kingdom that took place. A
testimony now exists because the kingdom broke through at such and such a
time and at such and a place. This event is God.
The community that results, its particular shape, the personalities involved and
the emphasis that follows is part of the very human history of the church. The
new wine is contained in a wineskin. The living organism has created its own
shell. We honour the shell and we respect the wineskin because of the testimony
it bears to the quality within. We call these human historical shells movements
and traditions within the body of Christ. They are tributaries within one river,
traditions within one church, different wineskins containing the same vintage
throughout. The person who has grasped the kingdom always looks for evidence
of the event of the kingdom rather than the details of the shells - the structures
and traditions that result.

This perspective immediately desacralizes denominations, which are simply the

names given to different movements and traditions. Denominations within
Protestantism and orders within the Roman tradition mostly date back to such a
historical testimony. This perspective makes it impossible for us to give too
much loyalty or commitment to them. Our commitment is to the kingdom that
created them. This perspective also prevents disrespect for our brothers who hold
a different testimony. I may not be able to follow all the details of the now
highly developed Roman tradition but I look at Francis of Assisi, for instance,
and see him as my own. In his history there is testimony to a kingdom event. I
look at Luther and may not be able to follow various elements of the shell that
now represents the event that took place in his history, but I am totally
committed to the act of God in Jesus that took place.

No matter which denomination it is, if you examine its history you will find the
breakthrough of the kingdom. When you relate to someone in that tradition you
can drink from the fountain of life that stands at its genesIsaiah By doing this
you not only show respect for his faith, but you help recall him to the roots of his
own tradition and therefore to the kingdom. One can relate to Methodists in
terms of the days of Wesley and immediately focus on the event of the kingdom.
Pentecostals have no difficulty discussing the signs and wonders of their history.

We can say what Paul said about the apostles. "For all things are yours: whether
Paul or Apollos or Cephas, or the world or life or death, or things present or
things to come — all are yours. And you are Christ's, and Christ is God's" (1
Corinthians 3:21-23). If someone has been used to proclaim the kingdom, he
belongs to every son of the kingdom. Why claim only those who stand in our
particular tradition? Why allow only this tradition to shape our thinking?
Does this mean that we should not be concerned about theological issues of
truth? The kingdom forces its own answer on us. We are orientated on the event
of God as it broke through in Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Because Jesus is the
embodiment of the kingdom, we will be driven to see his centrality in all things.
Any teaching that does not present a clearly Christ-centred focus will fail to
testify of the kingdom. Because God's rule broke through in Jesus we have
concluded that Jesus is God. Because God's rule broke through in the Pentecostal
outpouring, we have concluded that the Holy Spirit is God. Because of these
conclusions the church has arrived at the doctrine of the Trinity. This is no
theoretical construct created by men. It arose out of the attempt to explain what
actually happened. Kingdom theology forces us to be Trinitarian.

A kingdom orientation will drive us to the supremacy of grace. This will shape
our understanding of salvation as the act of God. Because of the way in which
the kingdom creates the church, we will come to certain conclusions about the
nature of the church and its relationship to society. There are in fact no issues of
doctrinal truth that do not go back, in some way, to the plumb line of the
kingdom. Because the kingdom takes us back to the foundation of the gospel, it
lifts our vision from a sectarian preoccupation with certain traditions and places
before us the full spectrum of the testimony of the whole ecumenical church. We
are called to have the breadth of mind of Solomon. The perspective of the
kingdom will destroy our small-mindedness.

Future Expectation
Most profoundly of all, seeing the kingdom will orientate us towards future
expectation. There are two kinds of expectation about the future of the kingdom,
one fanatical and one profound. The fanatical kind is adventist. It sends us to the
top of the mountain to await the Second Coming on the day we have appointed
for ourselves from our eschatological charts. It leads us to rash predictions about
events and times and their exact correspondence with prophetic predictions
about the anti-Christ and the beast. It leads us to arrogance and fanaticism so that
we are confident that our generation is the very last, moreover that we are the
people with the final Elijah anointing. This kind of expectation always leads to a
spilling of the new wine of the kingdom, to a chaotic sowing of the seed to the
wind and to an abandonment of the real confrontation of the kingdom with the
powers of this age. It speaks more of the understanding of Shimei son of Gera,
who could not even understand the signs of the moment (2 Samuel 16:5-8), than
the men of Issachar, who understood the times and knew what Israel should do
(1 Chronicles 12:32).

It is all too easy to react to this adventism and dispense with real expectation.
We do this at our peril. There is a definite correlation between expectation and
revival. It is not the expectation of dates and charts, but of God's intervention.
The future hangs over us like a cloud. The nearness of the kingdom and the
presence of the kingdom merge into one another. It is a case of living in the
mystery.

The future breaks in on us in ever increasing waves and the course of church
history looks more like a jet fighter preparing for takeoff than an old clock
winding down. We do not look back at the golden age of the apostles, nostalgic
about what we never experienced. We face an exciting future of the gifts and
ministries of the Holy Spirit being restored to the church and world missions
moving forward at an unequalled pace. We look to a final breakthrough of the
kingdom. Whatever the symbolism of the apocalyptic and prophetic pictures
may signify, they point to something cataclysmic, cosmic and final. The Second
Coming of Jesus is always there, just over the horizon. The global village we
live in can set the stage for the final scenario more quickly than any of us could
imagine. We simply do not know the day or the hour. It could be much closer
than we expect. Or we may never live to see it. God alone knows. Whatever the
case, the power and presence of the kingdom is all around us.

Maranatha!
 STUDYING THE THEOLOGY OF
THE KINGDOM
Hopefully this book will have whet your appetite to delve more deeply into this
fascinating subject. Your question may be, "where to from here?" This has not
been a critical or academic study of the kingdom, but has sought to communicate
with the ordinary church member, not schooled in academic theological study,
by drawing on the positive results of such literature. This last chapter will
introduce some of the complex terms and ideas found in contemporary
scholarship and will make suggestions about further study. It will be relevant to
those who are beginning on the journey of theological study in academic
environments outside of conservative colleges and faculties.
At the outset it needs to be understood that evangelical writers have not
dominated theological study on the kingdom. They have often caught up with
the field rather late. They have frequently been reactionary, and the evangelical
church has in general awakened slowly to the re-emergence of the centrality of
the kingdom.

One cannot follow the history of theology on the kingdom without reading many
writers who operate with assumptions and methodologies that are unpalatable to
the evangelical. Nevertheless, the work they have done has produced a harvest
we are certainly benefiting from today. It will therefore be necessary to
introduce, albeit very simply, some of their assumptions and methodologies and
to give some general guidelines as to how one can discern the way through a
sometimes bewildering world of ideas.
The chapter will be part guided bibliography and part theological dialogue. My
aim is to point you to the important works and to briefly discuss their content.
Let me begin at the end of the process and then return to the beginning (rather
like the kingdom itself). Mark Saucy, in The Kingdom of God in The Teaching of
Jesus in 20th Century Theology[53] has written what is probably the most
comprehensive history of academic studies on the kingdom by any evangelical
writer. There are a number of ways in which he makes an excellent contribution.
First, like John Wimber, he is a Fuller man, completing his Ph.D there. Second,
he includes, with appreciation, the influence of George Ladd on John Wimber
and the focus on the kingdom of God in the Vineyard, with its emphasis on signs
and wonders.

Third, his work is comprehensive and up to date. Fourth, he provides a critique

of approaches to biblical studies of the kingdom outside of evangelicalism,
giving the evangelical student a grid through which the entire field can be
assessed. Fifth, his extensive references and his bibliography are a
comprehensive guide to further study. It was therefore disappointing to me that I
found his own views on the kingdom, which he offers at the end, less than
satisfying. He attempts to defend a watered-down version of dispensationalism,
which, to my view, is one theology that cannot survive a clear exposition of the
biblical teaching on the kingdom.[54] Nevertheless, I would start by reading
Saucy's work.

As he shows, the modern study of the kingdom has to start with Johannes Weiss
and Albert Schweitzer, who, following a cue from Reimarus, turned the previous
century of biblical studies on its head and started a revolution.[55] One should
view what followed as a case of thesis, antithesis and synthesIsaiah Schweitzer,
following Reimarus and Weiss, produced the radical thesis (itself an antithesis to
the previous century of study). C.H. Dodd produced the antithesis, and a number
of subsequent scholars produced the synthesis, particularly W.G. Kummel,
Oscar Cullmann, and Joachim Jeremias. This synthesis was then refined and
articulated into a more evangelical theological context by Hermann Ridderbos,
George Ladd and G.R. Beasley-Murray.
It is really not worth reading too many recent works until one has read these
primary sources representing the fundamental theological positions on the
kingdom. The last six scholars provide a sane and balanced view of the biblical
material and nothing has been written since their works that represents a
radically new departure. There are any number of works that attempt to evade
either the radical thesis of Schweitzer or the responsible synthesis that these
scholars articulated, but none of them have been compelling enough to establish
themselves within conservative theological circles. In addition I would
recommend one more work, actually unrelated to the study of the kingdom,
namely Karl Barth's Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century.

The Thesis
In order to understand the bombshell dropped by Schweitzer one has to review
the dominant views on the kingdom at the time. Protestant liberalism had
defined the kingdom as the fatherhood of God in the heart and the brotherhood
of man. Schweitzer, with devastating clarity, surveyed the history of New
Testament studies in his book The Quest of the Historical Jesus: A Critical Study
of Its Progress from Reimarus to Wrede. [56] He showed that the attempt,
through historical criticism, to recover the original Jesus behind the extant
gospel narratives had merely provided liberal scholars with an opportunity to
create a Jesus in their own image, a nineteenth-century liberal Christian
gentleman. Then, in his other works he showed how they had completely missed
the fundamental eschatological nature of Jesus's message. [57] Because
Schweitzer returned to the original lead given by Reimarus, and because his
work is fairly brief, one should read Reimarus at the same time.[58]
The conclusion Schweitzer came to was inevitably going to be made. During the
nineteenth century the literature of Judaism from the time of Jesus was being
discovered and explored, leading to an understanding of Jesus's environment,
which had been hidden ever since the first century. It showed how saturated
Judaism was with an expectation of the apocalyptic coming of the kingdom of
God as the final end of history. As Reimarus had noticed, Jesus never qualified
what he meant when he announced the kingdom because its meaning was
assumed and understood by his audience. A preacher announcing the imminent
end of the world was radically different from a nineteenth-century liberal
gentleman.
Barth provides another critique of Protestant liberalism, equally penetrating.
Those who have struggled to follow his long ponderous sentences inChurch
Dogmatics will be surprised by the incisive style of Protestant Theology in the
Nineteenth Century. [59] Writing later in the century and through a critique of a
different sort, Barth shows the poverty of any theology that confuses the
transcendence of God and the virtues of man. The two works of Schweitzer and
Barth will lay a solid foundation for understanding the essential issues of the
time.

The history of subsequent studies on the kingdom, and on the historical Jesus,
have shown that many have simply failed to face the issues raised by Schweitzer.
Many have tried to evade the fully or "consistently" eschatological nature of
Jesus" teaching. Any view of the kingdom that does not begin with this
fundamental reality is bound to fail. However we understand the "already" of the
kingdom, we must never view it as a diluting of the "not yet".
Since Schweitzer, one can observe three broad tendencies:

First, there is what I will call the 'synthesis" between Schweitzer and Dodd,
which is one that evangelical scholars can happily embrace.
Second, there is the 'symbolic" view, which cannot be embraced, although
some aspects are helpful.

Third, there is the still ongoing "third quest" for the historical Jesus. Here it
is too soon to derive a definitive consensus view of Jesus, but there are
 more hopeful signs that the Christ of biblical scholarship and the Christ of
the New Testament writers may find one another, in some sense.

While there have been enough voices raised in critical scholarship to keep the
eschatological kingdom before us, it has been mostly scholars in the "third
quest" who have pointed to the other evaded lesson of Schweitzer's work, a
lesson Schweitzer never intended to give. The problem is with the nature of the
critical methods used on the New Testament, or perhaps aspects and assumptions
within these methods. The methods themselves have made their contribution:
source criticism, form criticism, and more recently redaction and tradition
criticism. This is not the place to analyse such methods. Two problems have
emerged. The moment the modern scholar believes it is his responsibility to
disregard the witness of the gospel writers themselves and to deconstruct the text
so as to work backwards towards the historical Jesus, irrespective of which
discipline or method he chooses, the scholar has to use criteria of selection to
disentangle "original" or "Dominical" texts, sayings or traditions from
redactional ones. Some texts are attributed to Jesus while others are attributed to
the early church community that transmitted the traditions or the editorial
tendencies of the evangelists.[60]

The truth is that the century after Schweitzer did no better than the century
before him. Scholar after scholar created Jesus in his own image. The disciplines
that are supposed to remove the subjective selection of texts in favour of a
particular theological interest simply do not work. As Saucy has shown, this
problem continues to today. There is Jesus the existentialist philosopher making
"Being" statements and communicating through "language events", Jesus the
preacher of metaphorical tensive symbols, Jesus the linguistic philosopher, Jesus
the cynic-sage, Jesus the social revolutionary, and Jesus the political
revolutionary, to mention just a few. This introduces the dialogue between the
so-called Jesus Seminar and those who have provided the alternative or critique
of the seminar.
Generally the criteria of selection require that texts that can be explained as a
reflection of Judaism at the time, or the transmission of the tradition by the early
church, or the editorial activity of the evangelists, cannot be original to Jesus.
This involves the dubious logic of denying that Jesus was influenced by his
environment, or became a pivotal influence on his followers. While the idea is at
first to discover the irreducible minimum of texts that must come from Jesus, the
notion of methodological doubt changes on the way to become a method of
profound historical scepticism. It has to assume that in its memory of Jesus, the
early church is less qualified than the modern critic to tell us what Jesus taught.
Methodological doubt evolves into historical scepticism and then into arrogance.
But the price is high. Schweitzer's judgement on the century before him must fall
equally on the century that followed him.

The lesson for evangelical scholars is obvious. Only a method that submits to the
witness of the gospels as they stand can ever hope to grasp the teaching of Jesus
on the kingdom of God.[61] To anticipate a later section, this is where James
Dunn's Jesus Remembered is particularly helpful.[62] This does not mean that
we should hide from or evade all the critical issues. Clearly the traditions about
Jesus were shaped by the community prior to their use by the evangelists and
equally clearly, the evangelists were theologians who shaped the tradition they
received. Much of the work done on ancient contemporary documents,
contemporary Palestinian socio-political conditions and on the evolution of
translation from Aramaic and Hebrew Palestinian sources to the Hellenistic
Christian community will continue to make a rich contribution to our knowledge
of Jesus in his context. However, after we have assessed all such data, we are
still relatively far removed from Jesus in comparison to the writers of the New
Testament, no matter how much research we do. [63]

The Antithesis
Schweitzer overstated his case in various ways, believing that Jesus threw
himself on the wheel of history to precipitate the end of the world. [64]He failed
to come to terms with the texts that Dodd later used to support his position.[65]
Dodd's antithesis was that while Jesus may have used the language of
apocalyptic and futurist eschatology he changed its meaning to refer to the
realised presence of the kingdom in his ministry. Dodd was able to show that the
parables of Jesus prove that he believed the kingdom to be present.[66] However
Dodd also overstated his case, insisting that language about the kingdom's
nearness referred to the kingdom's presence.

The Synthesis - The Older Consensus

The older synthesis established by scholars such as Kummel, Cullmann and
Jeremias was therefore not a compromise but a true synthesIsaiah They showed
that Jesus taught both the future, eschatological kingdom and the present, or
"realised" kingdom. Kummel's Promise and Fulfilment places the kingdom in its
true context, namely Old Testament expectation.[67] While there have been
discussions about some aspects of Oscar Cullmann's concept of linear time, his
work is still foundational to an understanding of the kingdom. [68] Jeremias is
important for his work on the parables. Much of the debate about the future or
present nature of the kingdom has tended to hinge on scholarly interpretations of
the parables. His thorough knowledge of Rabbinical and Palestinian sources
gave authority to his work and lent weight to the synthesIsaiah [69]

While Ridderbos may be placed more within the reformed bracket than
conservative evangelical, his scholarship is generally conservative. He and
George Ladd were the first conservative scholars to dialogue with the new
synthesis and to articulate it clearly. Their work occurred at about the same time.
[70] Ladd's Theology of the New Testament was the first evangelical work to
structure New Testament theology on the new understanding of the kingdom.
[71] Also of significance for evangelicalism was Ladd's debate in various
journals with J.F.Walvoord, a leading dispensationalist, and the literature that
reflected that debate. The debate shows how a proper understanding of the
kingdom makes it impossible to defend dispensationalism. Wherever the
theology of the kingdom spreads, therefore, dispensationalism retreats.[72] Jesus
and the Kingdom of God by Beasley-Murray is important because it shows how
the consensus held over the succeeding twenty years.[73] Although he seems to
have been influenced to some extent by the symbolic consensus, he nevertheless
gives due place to an actual eschaton. [74]

The "symbolic" Kingdom - The Later Consensus

Dodd underlined a universally recognised fact. The parables are crucial to one's
understanding of Jesus's teaching. To say that the parables use the language of
symbol, or metaphor, is obvious. However, it all depends on what one means by
'symbol".

Norman Perrin is renowned for his description of the kingdom as tensive

symbol, and is normally regarded as a formative influence in developing a
school of thought in recent scholarship. His definition of symbol effectively
evacuates the kingdom of its power and reality. It is not the exposition of
metaphor and symbol in Jesus's teaching that is problematic, but what Perrin
does with it. For him the category of symbol in the parables must be understood
against the background of mythical, apocalyptic Old Testament expectations.
Myth in turn is defined from a particular world view. This becomes transparent
towards the conclusion of his seminal essay, where he draws attention to the
difference between the approaches of Bultmann and Walter Rauschenbusch. The
latter "fully accepted the ancient myth and hence was able to return to a direct
and natural use of the symbol. Using the symbol directly and naturally remains a
hermeneutical option for those for whom the myth is still valid and meaningful".
By way of contrast, for Bultmann "the myth is dead and the symbolic language,
archaic".[75] Perrin places himself more with Bultmann than Rauschenbusch.
"Myth" is earlier defined as a mixture of actual events and legends about the way
in which Israel came to believe that Yahweh fought against her enemies and
intervened in history to be enthroned as their king. The "myth" itself was
borrowed from general pagan sources. Since Jewish apocalyptic makes use of
such mythical language, Jesus's use of the myth can be viewed as a symbol
which we may find meaningful, but which Perrin cannot adopt in its "direct and
natural" sense. Put very simply, God did not really intervene in the history of
Israel and so what Jesus believed about a future, final intervention of God cannot
really be believed either.

The pervasive influence of Perrin can be seen in Bruce Chilton. His obvious
desire is to derive his theology from careful research. Using redaction and
tradition criticism he examines a minimum of texts that he believes contain
elements that are original to the historical Jesus.[76] This is the basis of a
subsequent and broader study on the kingdom. [77] However, despite the careful
and scholarly procedure, his conclusions are shaped by Perrin's concepts.[78]
Taking his lead from Perrin, he believes that a new scholarly consensus has been
established, replacing the assumptions about apocalyptic language held by Weiss
and Schweitzer.[79] With the new consensus apocalyptic language from the Old
Testament and other Jewish literature is understood as more symbolical than
cataclysmic. They stress that the term "kingdom of God" refers to God's power
to rule, or to his active presence, rather than a timetable leading to the end of the
world events. Jesus is therefore understood to have taught a fairly symbolical, or
metaphorical concept of God becoming present, without much stress on cosmic
end-time events.[80] Technically there is little doubt that Schweitzer misused his
pre-Christian sources and overstated the cosmic, cataclysmic elements in
apocalyptic language.[81] However, the attempt to strip Old Testament,
intertestamentary and New Testament texts of a clear expectation that this world
as we know it will end, dramatically, by some kind of final, climactic
intervention of God, will not endure. To overstate such language is one thing, to
replace it with a symbolical, metaphoric, or mystical idea is equally dubious.

Part of the problem is the vagueness of the notion of symbol. Chilton enlists the
support of Howard Marshall, a conservative evangelical scholar, to define the
kingdom of God as belief in the fact that "God is already at work in the world".
Then, to demonstrate the consensus that exists, he enlists the support of Marcus
Borg for a similar view. However, Borg describes the kingdom in the teaching of
Jesus as similar to another sage, Buddha. The meaning for both Jesus and
Buddha is not the "product of the age; rather, the transformation of perception is
the product of their spiritual experience", a "mystical perception" which is
beyond time. Within this framework Borg speaks of dying to the self and re-
birth. [82]

This is an obvious case of scholars seeming to hold a similar view but in fact
operating from radically different positions. While they might both use the
concept of symbol, what they mean by it is very different. For Marshall the
acceptance of the definition of the kingdom as God being present does not
evaporate a belief in a real eschaton, while for Borg the symbolic and
metaphorical nature of the kingdom can blur the differences between biblical
faith and Buddhist mysticism. Clearly when scholars talk about the term
"kingdom of God" having symbolic meaning, we must probe into what they
actually mean.[83]
This almost brings us to the subject of the "third quest" but we should pause to
look at another field of study. While New Testament scholarship has been
engaged in these endeavours, developments in systematic theology have been
equally significant. I will mention three.

Systematic Theology
Wolfhart Pannenberg was one of the first to write Christology within the
framework of the kingdom and particularly to make the resurrection, as an
eschatological event, the fulcrum of his Christology. He also shows how the
resurrection is an "already interpreted" event due to the history of Old Testament
kingdom expectation. His view of Old Testament kingdom expectation is similar
to Kummel's. [84]

Jurgen Moltmann has constructed his entire Theology of Hope on the

eschatology of the kingdom. Recommending a reading of Moltmann will raise a
number of questions for evangelicals. He belongs within the circle of radical
German theologians who are true to the post-Bultmann scepticism about the
gospel narratives. Many have wondered about an underlying commitment to
Hegelian dialectical philosophy. His influence stands behind much liberation
theology. While all this may be true, his significance lies in the way he takes the
fundamental understanding of the kingdom as realised and future eschatology
and creates a total world view. He shows how the kingdom can and should be
the paradigm for an entire theology and praxis of the Christian life. It begs for
evangelicals to do a similar work without the troublesome assumptions.[85]

Adrio König is a South African reformed theologian who has also constructed
his systematic theology on the kingdom. However, there is nothing that would
offend an evangelical reader. He does in fact represent an evangelical theological
perspective on the kingdom. His theology helped repudiate cessationism within
his own tradition. The Eclipse of Christ in Eschatology shows how the whole
ministry of Jesus must be understood within an eschatological context.[86] A
reading of his Here Am I!: a Christian reflection on God, will be equally
rewarding.[87]

There is one implication of kingdom theology that is worth special mention.

Conservative evangelical theology has generally digested the results of this
history but evangelical church life has not. Students study the kingdom, or issues
of eschatology, but few make the kingdom the primary model of their preaching.
That is why the relationship between Ladd and Wimber and the resulting focus
on the kingdom in the Vineyard is so significant. In some ways it mirrors the
manner in which the kingdom has slowly become the paradigm of major
evangelical mission conferences and structures. Saucy's section on the Lausanne
Congress and subsequent events is significant. Mission Between the Times,
Essays on the Kingdom by Rene Padilla shows how a leading evangelical has
absorbed kingdom theology and translated it into his primary language.[88]
What has occurred in the Vineyard is therefore not unique and in fact places us
within the general context of evangelical theology and practice.

The Third Quest

One cannot deal adequately with the subject of the kingdom and fail to place it
in the context of the various "quests" for the historical Jesus. The problem for
this volume is that the subject is so vast that any attempt to give a brief outline
runs the risk of reducing large subjects too much. However, anything like an
adequate treatment would make this chapter too long. What follows is highly
summarised, but the recent works that will be mentioned have excellent
summaries of the "quest" history.[89]

The three quests roughly cover the following periods:

the first quest, 1800-1900;[90]

the second quest, 1900-1980,[91] and
the third quest, 1980 to the present.

The first quest has been found wanting by so many that all we need do here is
list some of the most commonly held views. The first quest failed for the
following reasons:
It operated with a naïve, nineteenth-century view of history, normally described
as historical positivism.
Key assumptions inherent in the historical-critical method, namely the principles
of analogy and correlation, have proved to be problematic. The issue here is not
the principles themselves, but how they are defined and the world view in which
they are formulated. [92]

A century of books on Jesus was exposed by Schweitzer as a series of Jesus

figures that looked more like nineteenth-century European gentlemen than the
apocalyptic Jewish prophet of the end times found in the New Testament.

Their methodology of trying to strip away the mythical layers to get back to the
original Jesus is rather like the disappearing onion. If one peels off the layers of
an onion to get to some core inside one merely ends with the last layer and
nothing left. The embarrassing historical anomaly is that one cannot then explain
the origin of the early church or of the New Testament itself.

The second quest, properly called the "new" quest, was not an actual quest for
the historical Jesus, but rather a flight from history followed by a failed attempt
to re-engage with history. After Schweitzer, with his devastating criticism of the
first quest, New Testament scholarship, largely led by Bultmann, retreated into
existentialism. Eventually his followers realised the pendulum had swung too far
and began to attempt a return to history. This new beginning is usually credited
to Ernst Käsemann.[93] The so-called "new" quest failed for the following
reasons:

It never really broke away from the escape from history of the Bultmann
school.
The escape from history was into existentialist philosophy, which proved to
be little more than a passing fashion.
The result was a kind of "faith in faith" similar to the "word of faith"
movement of the American Bible Belt. It is interesting to note that
Bultmann emphasised Gnostic elements in the New Testament and
perpetuated Kant's dualism. The "word of faith" movement, founded on the
 writings of E.W. Kenyon, was similarly a fundamentally dualistic Gnostic
phenomenon.[94]
The retreat into a 'safe" area immune from history came at the price of
irrelevance. If Christian faith cannot be sustained in public history, then is it
credible?[95]
The problematic assumptions about historical method in the first quest were
never questioned in the "new" quest. [96]

The third quest is ongoing, but its results are far more hopeful. The third quest
has as its foil, or opposing counterpart, the so-called Jesus Seminar, the popular
self-designated term for a group of scholars who have attempted to revive the
first quest, but in novel ways, once again making much of Gnostic thought.[97]

There is a growing literature in the third quest, with a growing list of scholars.
Here my purpose is to help the prospective student begin with the most
important works.

First, as noted, is the work of the Canadian scholar Ben Meyer, who can be
credited with the first real critique of the assumptions that bedevilled the
previous quests. He laid the essential philosophical foundation by defining
critical realism for New Testament scholarship. One can observe all the major
third quest scholars referring back to this foundation.[98]

Then, building on Ben Meyer are the works of the Catholic scholar from Notre
Dame, John P. Meier. His three volumes on Jesus the Marginal Jew indicate that
he has placed Jesus firmly in the setting of second temple Judaism.[99] This
reflects the other characteristic of the third quest. E.P. Sanders is usually taken to
be the pivotal writer who brought the fruits of the growing volume of literature
from the period to its obvious conclusion, placing both Jesus and Paul in their
true context. [100] There are a number of other features in Meier's work.

First, following Meyer, is his more sensible definition of the historical

 method.[101]
Having been careful to define his method, he then examines the Jesus
tradition. He "recovers" a comprehensive framework of kingdom preaching
and teaching, and then, using fairly narrow criteria, still allows many of the
miracles and exorcisms of Jesus to stand the test of historical research.
While none of the third quest scholars come out and say that the
resurrection is clearly verified, they deal with the evidence so as to leave
the weight of proof more with those who would deny its historicity.[102]
Both Meyer and Meier deal adequately and thoroughly with the thesis of
the Jesus Seminar. Meier deals in particular with its reworking of the
primary sources (in favour of layers of Q and the Gospel of Thomas).[103]

Graham Twelftree, the Regent University scholar and past Vineyard pastor
builds further on the work of Paul Meier. True to the third quest, he carefully
defines his methodology, or criteria, and adds a thoroughly contemporary
discussion on the issues of miracles and presuppositions. [104] As with Meier,
having used fairly narrow, or hard criteria, he finds that Jesus was clearly both
an exorcist and a miracle worker.

While Meier and Twelftree work within the generally recognised criteria of New
Testament criticism, [105] N. T. Wright takes research in a fresh direction of his
own. One can describe Wright's work as massive and somewhat magisterial,
"massive" in the sense of being so comprehensive, and "magisterial" in the
confidence of his position. [106] Here are what I view as some of the strengths
and weaknesses of his work:

He takes the method of placing Jesus in the context of second temple

Judaism further than Meyer and Meier, by a fresh approach to historical
method, dealing with the "big picture" issues of world view and meta-
narrative, and using the idea of comprehensiveness and coherence as the
 test of historical hypotheses.[107]
He argues cogently for a replacement of the criteria of dissimilarity for the
double criteria of similarity and dissimilarity, something that was a long
way in coming. The result is that he can generally come to yet more
affirmative results on the Jesus tradition than Meier and Twelftree can.
[108]
As with Meier, while he does not blatantly state the historicity of the
resurrection, his exhaustive study leaves the burden of proof with those who
would find an alternative explanation.[109] I found his logic concerning the
unexpected role of the testimony of women particularly persuasive.
If Meyer, Meier and Twelftree deal adequately and thoroughly with the
Jesus Seminar, Wright's analysis deconstructs their methodology even
further. He is particularly helpful in the way he shows that the Jesus
Seminar has first decided on the Jesus they want, and has then created a
methodology to find such a Jesus.

If space permitted I could go on extolling the virtues of Wright's work. It is

therefore unfortunate that I have to discuss some weaknesses: [110]

The way he places such emphasis on the meta-narrative, or controlling

story, leads to debate, but more problematic is the way he elevates one
aspect of the controlling story to a kind of hermeneutical principle, namely
the theme of the return of Israel from exile. As one reads through his often
brilliant analysis of the Jesus tradition, one is almost ready for his
conclusion before turning the page: this story, or parable, or feature is once
again to be viewed as focusing on the return of Israel from exile. The often
forced nature of this habit tends to undermine his overall thesIsaiah (I
concur with Dunn's list of kingdom expectations.)[111]
In order to circumvent the false directions of Jesus research in the post-
 Schweitzer era, he makes much of the fact that "apocalyptic" in the second
temple period did not convey the idea of the end of the space-time world in
a final cataclysm. His basic point, on Schweitzer's misunderstanding of
apocalyptic, is probably correct. However, he then so evacuates apocalyptic
into the equivalent of theologising language for moments of great historical
transformation that one is left wondering if his great confidence is well
placed. For instance, if the events of Jesus" life are realised eschatology,
what should one make of the "cosmic" signs that accompanied the cross and
resurrection? Did the tradition invent these, and if not, can one think of the
eschaton as not somehow involving cosmic, rather than historical, or this
worldly transformation? Since the resurrection of Jesus is realised
eschatology, how can one conceive of the general resurrection of the dead,
with millions of people in trans-physical bodies, [112] as something that
does not really end history? I suspect that he would argue that these
comments are part of a general tendency to misunderstand him.

James Dunn has only produced the first in his series so far. However, the
progress of the third quest takes another step forward with his work.

Wright had already begun to suggest that New Testament research should
take a new look at oral tradition. [113] Dunn, while criticising Wright on
the issues just mentioned, tends to build on his conclusions as well. Like
Wright, he moves away from the narrow and hard use of the historical
criteria applied to the various sources (leaning too heavily on "multiple
attestation" and what Wright calls an "atomizing" approach) with his fresh
thesis on the fixed nature of the core oral tradition which explains the subtle
variations in the differing tellings (performances). This allows him to draw
together aggregates, or the general tenor of the various core traditions
instead of peeling off layers (peeling the onion).
He concludes that we can never get behind the "remembered" Jesus of the
 gospel writers to some more original Jesus. However, this should not lead
to historical scepticism about the remembered Jesus, due to the very nature
of the oral tradition.
As with the other third questers, the Jesus Seminar is thoroughly and
critically examined. Most telling is his view that the whole exercise is neo-
liberal, in the sense that Jesus is once again being re-cast, this time to look
remarkably like a 21st Century intellectual philosopher/theologian.

This then would be the recommended reading list on the third quest. Of course,
to really grasp all the issues one would need to read the counter-position of the
Jesus Seminar. A short list would include the works of Marcus Borg,[114]
Dominic Crossan,[115] Burton Mack,[116] Robert Funk,[117] J. S.
Kloppenborg,[118] and Helmut Koester.[119] Alternatively, a student beginning
on this journey may want to read a helpful summary of all of these authors by a
'safe" author. Here one should make use of Ben Witherington.[120]
My point here is not to give a full list of authors or to make adequate comments
on them, but merely to outline the architecture of a journey of study that would
equip evangelical students to further their studies by following some of the
major milestones and having some idea of the larger issues involved.

Theological literature on the kingdom will continue to be written and will

continue to be important because of the central position this theology holds for
the whole biblical narrative. There are certain criteria one needs to be aware of
when reading either biblical scholarship or systematic theology.

Important Criteria
1. One must beware of a selective use of scripture and a resulting reductionism.
The portions of scripture a particular scholar either selects or repudiates in some
way, or ignores, will work its way through into a reduced understanding of the
kingdom. For instance, there is an ongoing debate between the kingdom as reign
or realm. Those who tend to wander off into an abstract, unworldly view of the
kingdom tend to repudiate the kingdom as a concrete realm, such as the history
of national Israel and the promise of a restoration or enlargement of the same. A
selection of the Psalms as the major Old Testament paradigm of the kingdom
with an evasion of the Davidic monarchy as a primary model of the kingdom
will support such an option. Equally a selection of the Exodus event over all
other themes by liberation theologians reveals their bias. In the New Testament a
focus on the parables alone will tend to go with a symbolic, or metaphorical
view of the kingdom that evades the full-blown expectation of the end of history
and its concrete, dynamic breaking into the present. As we have already noticed,
a selection of "already" texts or "not yet" texts will represent a loss of balance in
various directions.

I have found four strands of teaching on the kingdom: future, present, near and
delayed. A gratifying result of third quest Jesus research is the almost total
agreement on the two-fold dimension (present/near and future), often described
as inaugurated eschatology. However, none of these scholars takes the delay
texts seriously. They either reinterpret the parables to place the listener near the
end [121] or attribute them to the early church. I am totally unconvinced that
these parables were created by the early church, and am not satisfied by the
alteration of the listener position approach either. Did Luke get Jesus totally
wrong, since he explicitly says that Jesus told this parable because people
supposed the kingdom was going to appear at once (Luke 19:11), or are
contemporary scholars assuming they are better placed than Luke to know what
Jesus said?

2. The way in which the environment of Palestinian Judaism and

intertestamental literature is used should also be noted. Some scholars see Jesus
as so different from his context that he could not have lived in the same century.
Others see him as a total product of his environment. One does not have to be
overly wise to realise that Jesus was a thoroughly contextualised first century
Jew, who communicated within the thought patterns of his day. At the same time
he must have stood for a radically new departure. Otherwise how did he create
such a new beginning in history or get to be crucified? Wright is particularly
forthright on these issues.

3. The way in which Jesus is believed to have influenced those who followed
him can be as obviously unreal. If an undue emphasis is laid on the creative role
of the history of transmission or on the editorial activity of the evangelists, one
arrives at an historical anomaly. Where did this remarkably creative and
transformative community come from in the first place?
It is not difficult to follow an evolution of thought within the New Testament,
from Hebrew to Greek categories and from a Palestinian to a Hellenistic
environment. The book of Acts and the epistles show how the message of the
kingdom was contextualised and reformulated. Where the primary message of
Jesus was the kingdom, the primary message of the apostles was Jesus. New
terms and concepts were used to communicate in a new environment. However,
many writers represent this as a radical departure from, or a distortion of the
original message of Jesus. Once again some fairly obvious anomalies arise. The
epistles are not a later literature to the gospels. The same general community that
handed us the epistles handed us the gospels. [122] Did they manage to recall the
original message of Jesus, or enough for scholars to deconstruct and reconstruct
the message of Jesus, only to communicate something totally different
themselves? We depend completely on their testimony as our source, yet we find
all sorts of inner contradictions and distortions in their theological reflections.
4. Such problems in New Testament studies reveal the role played by
presuppositions, particularly those present in post-enlightenment continental
Europe. Views of historical causality, of analogy, of miracles versus myth,
combined with a particular contemporary environment, make it extremely
unlikely that some scholars will ever be able to draw near to the inner world of
the New Testament. A sociological analysis of the world of the New Testament
scholar may be as significant as a sociological investigation of the first century
environment. The role played by fashions in philosophy can be significant.
There are also communities and sub-communities within the scholarly fraternity,
with groups imagining a critical consensus that cannot be questioned. Certain
entrenched positions are sustained for decades, only to collapse and be replaced
by new positions. It is therefore important to consult works that trace the overall
history of the investigation of the New Testament and not to be overly impressed
with a particular recent emphasis. [123]

5. One of the journeys taken by biblical scholarship that has not really facilitated
any fresh understanding is the so-called importance of the "delay of the
parousia". The idea is that Jesus predicted the imminent arrival of the Day of the
Lord. As time went on without this expectation being fulfilled, the New
Testament writers had to find a way to explain the delay. While earlier books
(the synoptics) view the end as imminent, later books (John) reinterpret the
imminent end as the presence of the kingdom through the Spirit. Still later books
(like the pastoral epistles) show an even later stage, where the expectation of the
end has receded and this present time predominates. Therefore subjects such as
church order and leadership reveal that the stage of "early catholicism" has set
in. Generally evangelical scholars are sceptical of this idea, as are many others.
[124] This theory tends to coincide with a failure to come to terms with both
"already" and "not yet" texts.
6. A litmus test for me is the view of the writer on the resurrection and the
eschaton. If one gains the impression that the resurrection is viewed as some sort
of symbol, or if the evolution of New Testament theology is supposed to have
developed as if the resurrection did not occur, or if the future has no real drastic
end to history, with a real final judgement and new age, then one is dealing with
unbelief. It can be dressed up in all sorts of ways and be associated with
excellent scholarly ability and prestige, but it is still unbelief. There is no way
that such a world view can lead to an understanding of the kingdom.

The stage is set for a new generation of evangelical scholars to write new
biblical and systematic theologies constructed on the kingdom, the primary
theme of scripture, and to draw the implications of such a theology into every
sphere of ministry and life.

APPENDIX I
When one comes to working out the theology of the kingdom in the life of a
local church, choices relate to the context and the people involved as well as to
the biblical teaching. What follows should be viewed as one example of how the
theology can be worked out in practice. This is the text given to members of our
church and reflects our attempt, over the last years, to return to a more biblical
way of breaking bread.

How we Break Bread

The way we break bread is probably different from what most people expect and
different from what occurs is most traditions.[125] This does not mean that we
take it less seriously. Because we have broken away from tradition, we are
taking time to learn how to do it.

The way we break bread reflects the following.

It reflects the Vineyard, a young movement able to innovate with models,

plus our commitment to relevance over tradition.
It reflects our commitment to the authority of scripture - linked to my own
journey.

Summary Statement
The norms in contemporary church life reflect traditions that have developed
long after the apostolic period - traditions which have led the church far away
from the biblical pattern and understanding of breaking bread. Some of these
traditions are harmless, others are not.

The biblical pattern and understanding of breaking bread has its roots in
Judaism, in the Passover festival and in the teaching of Jesus about the kingdom
of God. If we want to be true to scripture we must return to these roots and break
away from deeply entrenched but unbiblical traditions and models.

The Biblical Terminology

There are a number of biblical names for the same thing.

Acts 20.7 - Breaking bread

1 Corinthians 11.20 - The Lord's Supper
1 Corinthians 10.16 - Koinonia (the communion or fellowship or
participation)
1 Corinthians 10.16 - Euchariste (the thanksgiving or blessing)
Jude 12 - The love feast

Biblical Texts

Matthew 26.26-29; Mark 14.22-25; Luke 22.14-20; 24.13-49; John 21.9-15;

Acts 1.1-5; 2.46; 20.7,11; 1 Corinthians 5.7-8; 10.14-22; 11.23-26; Hebrews
13.9-14; 2 Peter 2.13; Jude 12

The Biblical Teaching

There are four contexts, or occasions in the New Testament, which are the
foundation of the breaking of bread.
We understand the breaking of bread by considering the occasion when it was
instituted - the Lord's Last Supper
It was a combination of two Jewish traditions.

It was a Passover meal

It was a haburah meal

We deduce this from the fact that the Synoptic gospels and John's gospel
probably follow two dating systems, the official and the Essene. In the one
(Synoptics) Jesus kept the Passover meal with his disciples, while in the other
(John) Jesus died during the Passover sacrifice but held a pre-festival haburah
with his disciples.

The Passover meal (a 12 step meal)

1. The Presiding Person pronounces a blessing (kiddush) over the first cup of
wine (red), which was shared by all.
2. The eating of the hors de oevres salad, bitter herbs dipped in fruit sauce
(haroseth).
3. The arrival of the main course (roast lamb).
4. The question about the meaning of the meal, posed by the youngest
member.
5. The explanation by the Presiding Person, which referred to the unleavened
bread and the bitter herbs of the Passover event.
6. The Singing of the Hallel (Psalm 113 and 114).
7. The drinking of the second cup.
8. The Presiding Person pronounced a blessing on the unleavened bread,
 saying "Blessed art Thou who bringest forth bread from the earth".
9. The Presiding Person broke the bread and handed it out, after which the
main meal was eaten.
10. After the meal the Presiding Person offered a prayer of thanksgiving over
the third cup, the cup of blessing, or thanksgiving.
11. The singing of the second part of the Hallel (Psalm 114-118).
12. The drinking of the fourth cup to celebrate God's kingdom.

To make it simple, it was

A three course meal,

Interspersed with worship,
Including a biblical teaching or homily,
In a family setting.

During the first decade or so of Christian history the church continued this
tradition by keeping a Christian version of the Jewish Passover annually.

Note: The basic format, of a family dinner, presided over by a father figure,
continued right up to the end of the NT and there is no evidence of anything less
than a full dinner.
From this we conclude that we should break bread in small groups (extended
families) at a dinner, interspersed with worship and biblical teaching about
("remembering") the meaning of Christ's saving work through death and
resurrection.

The haburah (pronounced with an "h" as in "Chutzpa")

The haburah was a pre-festival meal held by a company of close friends (up to
10) during which one would prepare oneself for the festival.
From this we deduce that the breaking of bread should be held in the intimate
context of a friendship meal.
We understand the breaking of bread by considering the meals associated with
Christ's resurrection appearances.

The two who walked to Emmaus.

The twelve who had Jesus share a post resurrection meal with them.
The disciples in Galilee when Jesus reaffirmed Peter's calling around a fish
braai (barbeque).
The following 40 days when Jesus often ate and drank with his disciples,
teaching them about the kingdom of God (Acts 10.41; 1.1-5).

From this we deduce the following.

Every breaking of bread meal assumes that Jesus is invisibly present at the
table, just as Elijah was given an empty chair at the Jewish Passover.
The fact that Jesus is invisibly present points to the future, when we will
share in the marriage supper of the lamb in the New Jerusalem.

We learn about the breaking of bread from the meals Jesus had with sinful
people and the miracles of multiplying food during his ministry.

Jesus had meals with sinners where he extended to them the grace of the
kingdom of God. His meals were not just for the sake of eating. In the OT
the coming of the Messiah would introduce the Messianic banquet, where
God would be the host for his people. When Jesus had meals with people he
was extending the Messianic banquet to them and blessing them with the
grace of the kingdom of God.
Jesus fed the 4000 and the 5000. Once again the multiplication of food in
the wilderness was showing that the second Moses, the greater than Moses,
 was present. The meal was a vehicle for the experience of the kingdom of
God.

From this we should deduce the following.

When we break bread we are receiving blessing, grace, and the coming of
the kingdom. We are that blessed community who know the visitation of
the Messiah.
This meal is for the poor in spirit and the lost who need to be healed. Every
time we participate in it we should re-experience that Jesus came to seek
and to save the lost.

We learn about the breaking of bread from the love feasts of the
early church

Paul's corrective teaching to the Corinthians shows that a full meal was still
the habit of the early church. Some ate too much and made others go
without. Some got drunk. You cannot do this on a "nip and a sip".

The teaching about discerning the body had to do with the fellowship meal. The
gathered family of God was one body because of the fellowship between them.
To have some people selfishly forgetting others (the rich forgetting the poor)
was to undermine the unity of the body. It was a koinonia, a communion, and
fellowship.

Peter and Jude gave warnings about excess amongst Gnostic Christians.
They speak of those who "revel in their pleasure" at the love feast. In other
words their behavior was that of excess.

We can deduce the following from this.

We must heed the warning to beware of excess, or having too much of a

 party, with too much food and wine and the warning about making sure that
every one is included and has enough.
We should assume that the occasion must have been a festive one to have
this excess in the early church. The whole emphasis on the Messianic
banquet and the joy of the kingdom of God was still present, as was the
excitement of knowing that Jesus, the risen Lord, was invisibly present.
Solemn, stiff, boring and austere occasions radically distort the biblical
teaching.

The Meaning of the Breaking of Bread

From the teaching given by Jesus and Paul, we can understand the meaning of
the event as follows.

"Do this in remembrance of me."

Remembrance was what Israel did at the Passover. They looked back to the
Exodus and relived the glorious act of God for their salvation, the founding
history of their nation.

We look back at the life, death, burial, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, our
savior and redeemer, who delivered us from slavery to sin and made us into his
kingdom people.

We look back over our lives and recall all the works he has done through the
Holy Spirit, our conversion, the changes he has brought, the new life he has
given, the ways we have met with God.

"This is the New Covenant in my blood"

A covenant is a deep and permanent relationship. Through his death and

resurrection we are brought into eternal relationship with God. We are secure in
him. Nothing shall separate us from the love of God. He is our God and we are
his people.

"This is my body … this is my blood"

To any Jew, the idea of literally thinking of Christ's flesh and blood as food was
repulsive. That is why Jesus says in John 6.63 that he speaks words that are
'spirit and life". The Christian church has gone on a very unfortunate journey in
its preoccupation with the literal bread and wine. What has helped this is the
reduction of a full meal to a "nip and a sip", which helps one think of a magical
ritual. It is difficult to sit at a three-course meal and think that every mouthful is
giving you magical or holy food.

There is one truth taught in this saying. Jesus replaces the sacrificial Passover
lamb. Now all OT sacrifices have been replaced by one, full, unrepeatable and
perfect sacrifice which takes away the sins of the world. "Christ, our Passover
lamb has been sacrificed" (1 Corinthians 5.7).

"The cup of thanksgiving is a participation (koinonia) in the

blood of Christ"

Paul is teaching in the context of OT sacrifices and festivals and pagan sacrifices
and festivals. The point of all such events is to participate, to enter in, to be
drawn into relationship with God and with the community of God, relationship
with God and relationship with the church.

So, participate! Get in there, enjoy it, celebrate your fellowship with one another.
"We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have
fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with the Son, Jesus
Christ. We write this to make our (your) joy complete" (1 John 1.3-4).

"As often as you do this you proclaim the Lord's death until he
comes"

We must proclaim, or lift up, or focus on, or make much of, the Lords death.
We must see the meal as an anticipation of the future kingdom of God, the
marriage supper of the lamb.

APPENDIX II: The Promise of the

Kingdom in Isaiah
The book of Isaiah has the following basic structure:

1-5 — Condemnation of Judah

6 — The call of Isaiah

7-12 — The coming of Emmanuel

13-23 — Prophecies against foreign nations

24-27 — The end of the world

28-31 — Woes upon God's people

32-35 — The coming of the King

35-39 — An historical section, parallel to 2 Kings 18.13-20.19

40-66 — The age to come

Thus apart from 1-5, 6, 13-23, 28-31, and 35-39 (twenty-five chapters), the
remainder of the book is about the coming of the kingdom, 7-12, 24-27, 32-35,
and 40-66 (forty chapters).
Isaiah is like a symphony, with a major theme tune that is interwoven with
numerous other tunes. The theme tune is the age to come. The many other
harmonies give definition to the content of the age to come. We will quote the
major statements. One ought to read these in the context to see the whole picture.

The age to come in Isaiah can be considered under six headings:

The coming of God

The coming of the King
The coming of the Spirit
The coming salvation
The new people of God
The new order

The Coming of God

One may summarize Isaiah's promises as follows:

Good news! God will come to save and comfort his people and reveal his glory.

Good News

40.9-10
9 You who bring good tidings to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring
good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be
afraid; say to the towns of Judah, "Here is your God!"
10 See, the Sovereign LORD comes with power, and his arm rules for him. See,
his reward is with him, and his recompense accompanies him.

52.7
7 How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news,
who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim salvation, who say
to Zion, "Your God reigns!"

God Will Come

35.4

4 Say to those with fearful hearts, "Be strong, do not fear; your God will come,
he will come with vengeance; with divine retribution he will come to save you."

40.9-10

9 You who bring good tidings to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring
good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be
afraid; say to the towns of Judah, "Here is your God!"

10 See, the Sovereign LORD comes with power, and his arm rules for him. See,
his reward is with him, and his recompense accompanies him.

59.16-19

16 He saw that there was no-one, he was appalled that there was no-one to
intervene; so his own arm worked salvation for him, and his own righteousness
sustained him.

17 He put on righteousness as his breastplate, and the helmet of salvation on his

head; he put on the garments of vengeance and wrapped himself in zeal as in a
cloak.
18 According to what they have done, so will he repay wrath to his enemies and
retribution to his foes; he will repay the islands their due.
19 From the west, men will fear the name of the LORD, and from the rising of
the sun, they will revere his glory. For he will come like a pent-up flood that the
breath of the LORD drives along.
To Save His People

12.1-2
1 In that day you will say: "I will praise you, O LORD. Although you were
angry with me, your anger has turned away and you have comforted me.
2 Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The LORD, the
LORD, is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation."
45.22

22 "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is
no other."

To Comfort His People

12.1

1 In that day you will say: "I will praise you, O LORD. Although you were
angry with me, your anger has turned away and you have comforted me."

40.1

1 Comfort, comfort my people, says your God.

61.1-3
1 The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed
me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the broken-
hearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the
prisoners,
2 to proclaim the year of the LORD's favour and the day of vengeance of our
God, to comfort all who mourn,
3 and provide for those who grieve in Zion - to bestow on them a crown of
beauty instead of ashes, the oil of gladness instead of mourning, and a garment
of praise instead of a spirit of despair. They will be called oaks of righteousness,
a planting of the LORD for the display of his splendour.

And Reveal His Glory

4.5-6

5 Then the LORD will create over all of Mount Zion and over those who
assemble there a cloud of smoke by day and a glow of flaming fire by night;
over all the glory will be a canopy.
6 It will be a shelter and shade from the heat of the day, and a refuge and hiding-
place from the storm and rain.

9.2

2 The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the
land of the shadow of death a light has dawned.

24.23

23 The moon will be abashed, the sun ashamed; for the LORD Almighty will
reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and before its elders, gloriously.

35.2

2 … it will burst into bloom; it will rejoice greatly and shout for joy. The glory
of Lebanon will be given to it, the splendour of Carmel and Sharon; they will see
the glory of the LORD, the splendour of our God.

40.5
5 And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see
it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.

60.1-2
1 Arise, shine, for your light has come, and the glory of the LORD rises upon
you.
2 See, darkness covers the earth and thick darkness is over the peoples, but the
LORD rises upon you and his glory appears over you.

60.19-20

19 The sun will no more be your light by day, nor will the brightness of the
moon shine on you, for the LORD will be your everlasting light, and your God
will be your glory.

20 Your sun will never set again, and your moon will wane no more; the LORD
will be your everlasting light, and your days of sorrow will end.

The Coming King

This section may be summarized as follows:

The King will come, to rule with justice, to establish the covenant, and to
minister as God's servant.

The King Will Come

4.2
2 In that day the Branch of the LORD will be beautiful and glorious, and the
fruit of the land will be the pride and glory of the survivors in Israel.
9.6-7

6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his
shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will
reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with
justice and righteousness from that time on and for ever. The zeal of the LORD
Almighty will accomplish thIsaiah

11.1-2

1 A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will
bear fruit.

2 The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him - the Spirit of wisdom and of
understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of
the fear of the LORD -

32.1

1 See, a king will reign in righteousness and rulers will rule with justice.

33.17

17 Your eyes will see the king in his beauty and view a land that stretches afar.
61.1

1 The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed
me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the broken-
hearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the
prisoners,

To Rule With Justice

9.7

7 Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will
reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with
justice and righteousness from that time on and for ever. The zeal of the LORD
Almighty will accomplish thIsaiah

11.4-5
4 … but with righteousness he will judge the needy, with justice he will give
decisions for the poor of the earth. He will strike the earth with the rod of his
mouth; with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked.
5 Righteousness will be his belt and faithfulness the sash round his waist.

32.16-17

16 Justice will dwell in the desert and righteousness live in the fertile field.
17 The fruit of righteousness will be peace; the effect of righteousness will be
quietness and confidence for ever.
33.5

5 The LORD is exalted, for he dwells on high; he will fill Zion with justice and
righteousness.

33.22
22 For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king;
it is he who will save us.

42.3-4

3 A bruised reed he will not break, and a smouldering wick he will not snuff out.
In faithfulness he will bring forth justice;

4 he will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on earth. In his

law the islands will put their hope.

61.11
11 For as the soil makes the young plant come up and a garden causes seeds to
grow, so the Sovereign LORD will make righteousness and praise spring up
before all nations.

To Establish the Covenant

42.6
6 I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I
will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for
the Gentiles.

49.8
8 This is what the LORD says: "In the time of my favour I will answer you, and
in the day of salvation I will help you; I will keep you and will make you to be a
covenant for the people, to restore the land and to reassign its desolate
inheritances …"
55.3

3 Give ear and come to me; hear me, that your soul may live. I will make an
everlasting covenant with you, my faithful love promised to David.

To Minister as God's Servant

41.8-10

8 But you, O Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of
Abraham my friend,
9 I took you from the ends of the earth, from its farthest corners I called you. I
said, "You are my servant," I have chosen you and have not rejected you.

10 So do not fear, for I am with you; do not be dismayed, for I am your God. I
will strengthen you and help you; I will uphold you with my righteous right
hand.
42.1-9
1 Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will
put my Spirit on him and he will bring justice to the nations.

2 He will not shout or cry out, or raise his voice in the streets.
3 A bruised reed he will not break, and a smouldering wick he will not snuff out.
In faithfulness he will bring forth justice;
4 he will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on earth. In his
law the islands will put their hope.
5 This is what God the LORD says- he who created the heavens and stretched
them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath
to its people, and life to those who walk on it:

6 "I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I
will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for
the Gentiles,

7 to open eyes that are blind, to free captives from prison and to release from the
dungeon those who sit in darkness.
8 I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my
praise to idols.

9 See, the former things have taken place, and new things I declare; before they
spring into being I announce them to you."
49.1-6

1 Listen to me, you islands; hear this, you distant nations: Before I was born the
LORD called me; from my birth he has made mention of my name.

2 He made my mouth like a sharpened sword, in the shadow of his hand he hid
me; he made me into a polished arrow and concealed me in his quiver.
3 He said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my
splendour."
4 But I said, "I have laboured to no purpose; I have spent my strength in vain
and for nothing. Yet what is due to me is in the LORD's hand, and my reward is
with my God."
5 And now the LORD says - he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to
bring Jacob back to him and gather Israel to himself, for I am honoured in the
eyes of the LORD and my God has been my strength -

6 he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of
Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for
the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."

50.4-11

4 The Sovereign LORD has given me an instructed tongue, to know the word
that sustains the weary. He wakens me morning by morning, wakens my ear to
listen like one being taught.

5 The Sovereign LORD has opened my ears, and I have not been rebellious; I
have not drawn back.
6 I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out
my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.

7 Because the Sovereign LORD helps me, I will not be disgraced. Therefore
have I set my face like flint, and I know I will not be put to shame.
8 He who vindicates me is near. Who then will bring charges against me? Let us
face each other! Who is my accuser? Let him confront me!
9 It is the Sovereign LORD who helps me. Who is he who will condemn me?
They will all wear out like a garment; the moths will eat them up.

10 Who among you fears the LORD and obeys the word of his servant? Let him
who walks in the dark, who has no light, trust in the name of the LORD and rely
on his God.

11 But now, all you who light fires and provide yourselves with flaming torches,
go, walk in the light of your fires and of the torches you have set ablaze. This is
what you shall receive from my hand: You will lie down in torment.
52.13-53.12

13 See, my servant will act wisely; he will be raised and lifted up and highly
exalted.

14 Just as there were many who were appalled at him - his appearance was so
disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness -

15 so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of
him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard,
they will understand.

53
1 Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been
revealed?

2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that
we should desire him.

3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with
suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we
esteemed him not.

4 Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered
him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and
the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like
a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not
open his mouth.

8 By oppression and judgement he was taken away. And who can speak of his
descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression
of my people he was stricken.
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though
the LORD makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong
his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

11 After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light [of life] and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their
iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the
spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was
numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made
intercession for the transgressors.

The Coming of the Spirit

11.1-3
1 A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will
bear fruit.

2 The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him - the Spirit of wisdom and of
understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of
the fear of the LORD -

3 and he will delight in the fear of the LORD. He will not judge by what he sees
with his eyes, or decide by what he hears with his ears;
32.15

15 till the Spirit is poured upon us from on high, and the desert becomes a fertile
field, and the fertile field seems like a forest.

35.1-2

1 The desert and the parched land will be glad; the wilderness will rejoice and
blossom. Like the crocus,

2 it will burst into bloom; it will rejoice greatly and shout for joy. The glory of
Lebanon will be given to it, the splendour of Carmel and Sharon; they will see
the glory of the LORD, the splendour of our God.
41.16-17

16 You will winnow them, the wind will pick them up, and a gale will blow
them away. But you will rejoice in the LORD and glory in the Holy One of
Israel.

17 The poor and needy search for water, but there is none; their tongues are
parched with thirst. But I the LORD will answer them; I, the God of Israel, will
not forsake them.

43.19-20
19 See, I am doing a new thing! Now it springs up; do you not perceive it? I am
making a way in the desert and streams in the wasteland.

20 The wild animals honour me, the jackals and the owls, because I provide
water in the desert and streams in the wasteland, to give drink to my people, my
chosen,

44.1-5
1 But now listen, O Jacob, my servant, Israel, whom I have chosen.
2 This is what the LORD says - he who made you, who formed you in the
womb, and who will help you: "Do not be afraid, O Jacob, my servant, Jeshurun,
whom I have chosen."
3 For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground; I will
pour out my Spirit on your offspring, and my blessing on your descendants.
4 They will spring up like grass in a meadow, like poplar trees by flowing
streams.
5 One will say, "I belong to the LORD"; another will call himself by the name of
Jacob; still another will write on his hand, "The LORD's", and will take the name
Israel."

49.9-10

9 … to say to the captives, "Come out," and to those in darkness, "Be free!"
They will feed beside the roads and find pasture on every barren hill.

10 They will neither hunger nor thirst, nor will the desert heat or the sun beat
upon them. He who has compassion on them will guide them and lead them
beside springs of water.

The Coming Salvation

As we have noted, when God comes, he will come as saviour. This salvation will
include,

Forgiveness of sins,
liberation of the captives,
peace (shalom) for God's people,
the resurrection of the dead,
and eschatological joy and praise.

Salvation
12.2-3

2 Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The LORD, the
LORD, is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation.

3 With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation.

25.9
9 In that day they will say, 'surely this is our God; we trusted in him, and he
saved us. This is the LORD, we trusted in him; let us rejoice and be glad in his
salvation."

33.6

6 He will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and
wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.

49.6

6 He says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of
Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for
the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."

51.4-6

4 Listen to me, my people; hear me, my nation: The law will go out from me;
my justice will become a light to the nations.
5 My righteousness draws near speedily, my salvation is on the way, and my arm
will bring justice to the nations. The islands will look to me and wait in hope for
my arm.
6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, look at the earth beneath; the heavens will
vanish like smoke, the earth will wear out like a garment and its inhabitants die
like flies. But my salvation will last for ever, my righteousness will never fail.
52.7-10
7 How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news,
who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim salvation, who say
to Zion, "Your God reigns!"

8 Listen! Your watchmen lift up their voices; together they shout for joy. When
the LORD returns to Zion, they will see it with their own eyes.

9 Burst into songs of joy together, you ruins of Jerusalem, for the LORD has
comforted his people, he has redeemed Jerusalem.

10 The LORD will lay bare his holy arm in the sight of all the nations, and all
the ends of the earth will see the salvation of our God.

The Forgiveness of Sins

33.24
24 No-one living in Zion will say, "I am ill"; and the sins of those who dwell
there will be forgiven.

43.25

25 I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and
remembers your sins no more.

Liberation for the Captives

29.17-19
17 In a very short time, will not Lebanon be turned into a fertile field and the
fertile field seem like a forest?
18 In that day the deaf will hear the words of the scroll, and out of gloom and
darkness the eyes of the blind will see.

19 Once more the humble will rejoice in the LORD; the needy will rejoice in the
Holy One of Israel.
35.5-6

5 Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped.

6 Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy. Water
will gush forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert.

42.6-7
6 I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I
will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for
the Gentiles,

7 to open eyes that are blind, to free captives from prison and to release from the
dungeon those who sit in darkness.

49.8-9

8 This is what the LORD says: "In the time of my favour I will answer you, and
in the day of salvation I will help you; I will keep you and will make you to be a
covenant for the people, to restore the land and to reassign its desolate
inheritances",

9 to say to the captives, "Come out," and to those in darkness, "Be free!" They
will feed beside the roads and find pasture on every barren hill.
61.1

1 The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed
me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the broken-
hearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the
prisoners …

Peace for God's People

11.6-7
6 The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the
calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them.
7 The cow will feed with the bear, their young will lie down together, and the
lion will eat straw like the ox.
32.15-19

15 … till the Spirit is poured upon us from on high, and the desert becomes a
fertile field, and the fertile field seems like a forest.

16 Justice will dwell in the desert and righteousness live in the fertile field.

17 The fruit of righteousness will be peace; the effect of righteousness will be

quietness and confidence for ever.

18 My people will live in peaceful dwelling-places, in secure homes, in

undisturbed places of rest.

19 Though hail flattens the forest and the city is levelled completely …

60.18

18 No longer will violence be heard in your land, nor ruin or destruction within
your borders, but you will call your walls Salvation and your gates Praise.

65.20-25
20 "Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old
man who does not live out his years; he who dies at a hundred will be thought a
mere youth; he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

21 They will build houses and dwell in them; they will plant vineyards and eat
their fruit.

22 No longer will they build houses and others live in them, or plant and others
eat. For as the days of a tree, so will be the days of my people; my chosen ones
will long enjoy the works of their hands.
23 They will not toil in vain or bear children doomed to misfortune; for they will
be a people blessed by the LORD, they and their descendants with them.
24 Before they call I will answer; while they are still speaking I will hear.

25 The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the
ox, but dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all
my holy mountain," says the LORD.

The Resurrection of the Dead

25.8

8 … he will swallow up death for ever. The Sovereign LORD will wipe away
the tears from all faces; he will remove the disgrace of his people from all the
earth. The LORD has spoken.
26.19

19 But your dead will live; their bodies will rise. You who dwell in the dust,
wake up and shout for joy. Your dew is like the dew of the morning; the earth
will give birth to her dead.

Eschatological Joy and Praise

12.3-6

3 With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation.
4 In that day you will say: "Give thanks to the LORD, call on his name; make
known among the nations what he has done, and proclaim that his name is
exalted.
5 Sing to the LORD, for he has done glorious things; let this be known to all the
world.
6 Shout aloud and sing for joy, people of Zion, for great is the Holy One of
Israel among you."

24.14-16

14 They raise their voices, they shout for joy; from the west they acclaim the
LORD's majesty.

15 Therefore in the east give glory to the LORD; exalt the name of the LORD,
the God of Israel, in the islands of the sea.

16 From the ends of the earth we hear singing: "Glory to the Righteous One."
But I said, "I waste away, I waste away! Woe to me! The treacherous betray!
With treachery the treacherous betray!"
25.6

6 On this mountain the LORD Almighty will prepare a feast of rich food for all
peoples, a banquet of aged wine - the best of meats and the finest of wines.

42.10-13

10 Sing to the LORD a new song, his praise from the ends of the earth, you who
go down to the sea, and all that is in it, you islands, and all who live in them.

11 Let the desert and its towns raise their voices; let the settlements where Kedar
lives rejoice. Let the people of Sela sing for joy; let them shout from the
mountaintoPsalm

12 Let them give glory to the LORD and proclaim his praise in the islands.
13 The LORD will march out like a mighty man, like a warrior he will stir up his
zeal; with a shout he will raise the battle cry and will triumph over his enemies.
49.13

13 Shout for joy, O heavens; rejoice, O earth; burst into song, O mountains! For
the LORD comforts his people and will have compassion on his afflicted ones.
51.11
11 The ransomed of the LORD will return. They will enter Zion with singing;
everlasting joy will crown their heads. Gladness and joy will overtake them, and
sorrow and sighing will flee away.

52.9
9 Burst into songs of joy together, you ruins of Jerusalem, for the LORD has
comforted his people, he has redeemed Jerusalem.
55.12

12 You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hills will
burst into song before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands.
61.10

10 I delight greatly in the LORD; my soul rejoices in my God. For he has

clothed me with garments of salvation and arrayed me in a robe of righteousness,
as a bridegroom adorns his head like a priest, and as a bride adorns herself with
her jewels.

The New People of God

All nations and peoples will be gathered to Jerusalem as the city of God. A new
people will be formed, out of every nation and out of all the tribes of Israel
scattered abroad.

Jerusalem, the City of God

2.2-4
2 In the last days the mountain of the LORD's temple will be established as chief
among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream
to it.
3 Many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the
LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we
may walk in his paths." The law will go out from Zion, the word of the LORD
from Jerusalem.

4 He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples.
They will beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning
hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war
any more.

33.20-21
20 Look upon Zion, the city of our festivals; your eyes will see Jerusalem, a
peaceful abode, a tent that will not be moved; its stakes will never be pulled up,
nor any of its ropes broken.

21 There the LORD will be our Mighty One. It will be like a place of broad
rivers and streams. No galley with oars will ride them, no mighty ship will sail
them.

62.6-7

6 I have posted watchmen on your walls, O Jerusalem; they will never be silent
day or night. You who call on the LORD, give yourselves no rest,

7 and give him no rest till he establishes Jerusalem and makes her the praise of
the earth.
66.10-14

10 Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad for her, all you who love her; rejoice
greatly with her, all you who mourn over her.
11 For you will nurse and be satisfied at her comforting breasts; you will drink
deeply and delight in her overflowing abundance.
12 For this is what the LORD says: "I will extend peace to her like a river, and
the wealth of nations like a flooding stream; you will nurse and be carried on her
arm and dandled on her knees.

13 As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you; and you will be
comforted over Jerusalem."

14 When you see this, your heart will rejoice and you will flourish like grass; the
hand of the LORD will be made known to his servants, but his fury will be
shown to his foes.

The Regathering of God's People

11.11-12

11 In that day the Lord will reach out his hand a second time to reclaim the
remnant that is left of his people from Assyria, from Lower Egypt, from Upper
Egypt, from Cush, from Elam, from Babylonia, from Hamath and from the
islands of the sea.

12 He will raise a banner for the nations and gather the exiles of Israel; he will
assemble the scattered people of Judah from the four quarters of the earth.

27.12-13
12 In that day the LORD will thresh from the flowing Euphrates to the Wadi of
Egypt, and you, O Israelites, will be gathered up one by one.

13 And in that day a great trumpet will sound. Those who were perishing in
Assyria and those who were exiled in Egypt will come and worship the LORD
on the holy mountain in Jerusalem.
43.6-9
6 I will say to the north, "Give them up!" and to the south, "Do not hold them
back." Bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the ends of the earth -

7 everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I

formed and made.
8 Lead out those who have eyes but are blind, who have ears but are deaf.

9 All the nations gather together and the peoples assemble. Which of them
foretold this and proclaimed to us the former things? Let them bring in their
witnesses to prove they were right, so that others may hear and say, "It is true."
49.12

12 See, they will come from afar- some from the north, some from the west,
some from the region of Aswan.

The Gathering of the Nations

11.10

10 In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the
nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious.

55.5

5 Surely you will summon nations you know not, and nations that do not know
you will hasten to you, because of the LORD your God, the Holy One of Israel,
for he has endowed you with splendour.

60.3-4

3 Nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawn.
4 Lift up your eyes and look about you: All assemble and come to you; your
sons come from afar, and your daughters are carried on the arm.

The New Order

The new order will be inaugurated by the day of judgement.

The Day of Judgement

2.12-18

12 The LORD Almighty has a day in store for all the proud and lofty, for all that
is exalted (and they will be humbled),

13 for all the cedars of Lebanon, tall and lofty, and all the oaks of Bashan,

14 for all the towering mountains and all the high hills,
15 for every lofty tower and every fortified wall,

16 for every trading ship and every stately vessel.

17 The arrogance of man will be brought low and the pride of men humbled; the
LORD alone will be exalted in that day,

18 and the idols will totally disappear.

24.1-13

1 See, the LORD is going to lay waste the earth and devastate it; he will ruin its
face and scatter its inhabitants-

2 it will be the same for priest as for people, for master as for servant, for
mistress as for maid, for seller as for buyer, for borrower as for lender, for debtor
as for creditor.

3 The earth will be completely laid waste and totally plundered. The LORD has
spoken this word.

4 The earth dries up and withers, the world languishes and withers, the exalted of
the earth languish.
5 The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the
statutes and broken the everlasting covenant.
6 Therefore a curse consumes the earth; its people must bear their guilt.
Therefore earth's inhabitants are burned up, and very few are left.

7 The new wine dries up and the vine withers; all the merrymakers groan.
8 The gaiety of the tambourines is stilled, the noise of the revellers has stopped,
the joyful harp is silent.

9 No longer do they drink wine with a song; the beer is bitter to its drinkers.
10 The ruined city lies desolate; the entrance to every house is barred.

11 In the streets they cry out for wine; all joy turns to gloom, all gaiety is
banished from the earth.

12 The city is left in ruins, its gate is battered to pieces.

13 So will it be on the earth and among the nations, as when an olive tree is
beaten, or as when gleanings are left after the grape harvest.

24.17-22

17 Terror and pit and snare await you, O people of the earth.

18 Whoever flees at the sound of terror will fall into a pit; whoever climbs out of
the pit will be caught in a snare. The floodgates of the heavens are opened, the
foundations of the earth shake.

19 The earth is broken up, the earth is split asunder, the earth is thoroughly
shaken.

20 The earth reels like a drunkard, it sways like a hut in the wind; so heavy upon
it is the guilt of its rebellion that it falls - never to rise again.

21 In that day the LORD will punish the powers in the heavens above and the
kings on the earth below.
22 They will be herded together like prisoners bound in a dungeon; they will be
shut up in prison and be punished after many days.
66.15-16

15 See, the LORD is coming with fire, and his chariots are like a whirlwind; he
will bring down his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For with fire and with his sword the LORD will execute judgement upon all
men, and many will be those slain by the LORD.

66.24
24 And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled
against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will
be loathsome to all mankind.

A New Heaven and a New Earth

65.17

17 Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not
be remembered, nor will they come to mind.

66.22-23

22 "As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before me,"
declares the LORD, 'so will your name and descendants endure.
23 From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all
mankind will come and bow down before me," says the LORD.

APPENDIX III: The Vineyard

Statement of Faith
We Believe that God is the Eternal King. He is an infinite, unchangeable Spirit,
perfect in holiness, wisdom, goodness, justice, power and love. From all eternity
He exists as the One Living and True God in three persons, of one substance, the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, equal in power and glory.

We Believe that God's kingdom is everlasting. From His throne, through His
Son, His eternal Word, God created, upholds and governs all that exists: the
heavenly places, the angelic hosts, the universe, the earth, every living thing and
mankind. God created all things very good.

We Believe that Satan, originally a great, good angel, rebelled against God,
taking a host of angels with him. He was cast out of God's presence and as a
usurper of God's rule established a counter-kingdom of darkness and evil on the
earth.

We Believe that God created mankind in His image, male and female, for
relationship with Himself and to govern the earth. Under the temptation of Satan,
our original parents fell from grace, bringing sin, sickness and God's judgement
of death to the earth. Through the fall, Satan and his demonic hosts gained
access to God's good creation. Creation now experiences the consequences and
affects of Adam's original sin. Human beings are born in sin, subject to God's
judgement of death and captive to Satan's kingdom of darkness.

We Believe that God did not abandon His rule over the earth which He continues
to uphold by His providence. In order to bring redemption, God established
covenants, which revealed His grace to sinful people. In the covenant with
Abraham, God bound Himself to His people Israel, promising to deliver them
from bondage to sin and Satan and to bless all the nations through them.

We Believe that as King, God later redeemed His people by His mighty acts from
bondage in Egypt and established His covenant through Moses, revealing His
perfect will and our obligation to fulfil it. The law's purpose is to order our fallen
race and to make us conscious of our moral responsibility. By the work of God's
Spirit it convicts us of our sin, God's righteous judgement against us and brings
us to Christ alone for salvation.
We Believe that when Israel rejected God's rule over her as King, God
established the monarchy in Israel and made an unconditional covenant with
David, promising that his heir would restore God's kingdom reign over His
people as Messiah forever.

We Believe that in the fullness of time, God honored His covenants with Israel
and His prophetic promises of salvation by sending His only Son, Jesus, into the
world. Conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary, as fully God
and fully man in one person, He is humanity as God intended us to be. Jesus was
anointed as God's Messiah and empowered by the Holy Spirit, inaugurating
God's kingdom reign on earth, overpowering the reign of Satan by resisting
temptation, preaching the good news of salvation, healing the sick, casting out
demons and raising the dead. Gathering His disciples, He reconstituted God's
people as His Church to be the instrument of His kingdom. After dying for the
sins of the world, Jesus was raised from the dead on the third day, fulfilling the
covenant of blessing given to Abraham.

In His sinless, perfect life Jesus met the demands of the law and in His atoning
death on the cross He took God's judgement for sin which we deserve as
law-breakers. By His death on the cross He also disarmed the demonic powers.

The covenant with David was fulfilled in Jesus" birth from David's house, His
Messianic ministry, His glorious resurrection from the dead, His ascent into
heaven and His present rule at the right hand of the Father. As God's Son and
David's heir, He is the eternal Messiah-King, advancing God's reign throughout
every generation and throughout the whole earth today.

We Believe that the Holy Spirit was poured out on the Church at Pentecost in
power, baptizing believers into the Body of Christ and releasing the gifts of the
Spirit to them. The Spirit brings the permanent indwelling presence of God to us
for spiritual worship, personal sanctification, building up the Church, gifting us
for ministry, and driving back the kingdom of Satan by the evangelization of the
world through proclaiming the word of Jesus and the works of Jesus.
We Believe that the Holy Spirit indwells every believer in Jesus Christ and that
He is our abiding Helper, Teacher, and Guide.
We Believe in the filling or empowering of the Holy Spirit, often a conscious
experience, for ministry today.
We Believe in the present ministry of the Spirit and in the exercise of all of the
biblical gifts of the Spirit. We practice the laying on of hands for the
empowering of the Spirit, for healing, and for recognition and empowering of
those whom God has ordained to lead and serve the Church.

We Believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the human authors of Holy Scripture so
that the Bible is without error in the original manuscripts. We receive the
sixty-six books of the Old and New Testament as our final, absolute authority,
the only infallible rule of faith and practice.

We Believe that the whole world is under the dominion of Satan and that all
people are sinners by nature and choice. All people are under God's just
judgement. Through the preaching of the Good News of Jesus and the Kingdom
of God and the work of the Holy Spirit, God regenerates, justifies, adopts and
sanctifies through Jesus by the Spirit all who repent of their sins and trust in
Jesus Christ as Saviour. By this they are released from Satan's domain and enter
into God's kingdom reign.
We Believe in the one, holy, universal Church. All who repent of their sins and
confess Jesus as Lord and Saviour are regenerated by the Holy Spirit and form
the living Body of Christ, of which He is the head and all are members.
We Believe that Jesus Christ committed two ordinances to the Church: water
baptism and the Lord's Supper. Both are available to all believers.

We Believe that God's kingdom has come in the ministry of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that it continues to come in the ministry of the Spirit through the Church,
and that it will be consummated in the glorious, visible and triumphant
appearing of Christ - His return to the earth as King. After Christ returns to
reign, He will bring about the final defeat of Satan and all of his minions and
works, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgement and the eternal blessing
of the righteous and eternal conscious punishment of the wicked. Finally, God
will be all in all and His kingdom, His rule and reign, will be fulfilled in the new
heavens and the new earth, recreated by His mighty power, in which
righteousness dwells and in which He will forever be worshipped.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kenneth Bailey. Through Peasant Eyes, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1890.

Kenneth Bailey. "Informal Controlled Oral Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels,"
Asia Journal of Theology, 5 (1), pp. 34-54.

Kenneth Bailey. "Middle Eastern Oral Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels,"
Expository Times 106, 1995.

Baker, H.A. Through Tribulation. Minneapolis: Calvary Books.

Baldwin, Joyce G. Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. Tyndale Old Testament

Commentaries. London: Tyndale, 1972.

Banks, Robert. Paul's Idea of Community. Peabody: Hendricksen, 1994.

Barth, K. Church Dogmatics. 1.2; 111.3. Edinburgh: T.& T.Clark, 1961.

Barth, K. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century, Its History and
Background. London: SCM, 1972.

Beasley-Murray, G.R. "New Testament Apocalyptic - A Christological

Eschatology". Review & Expositor, 72, 1975, p 1317-330.
Beasley-Murray, G.R. Jesus and the Kingdom of God, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1986.
Berkouwer, G.C. The Return of Christ. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.

Marcus Borg, Conflict, Holiness and Politics in the Teachings of Jesus,

Harrisburg: Trinity, 1998.
Marcus Borg. Jesus: A New Vision, HarperSanFrancisco: 1987.

Marcus Borg. Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship, Valley Forge: Trinity, 1994.

Marcus Borg. Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: The Historical Jesus and
the Heart of Contemporary Faith, HarperSanFrancisco: 1994.
Bright, J. The Kingdom of God. Nashville: Abingdon, 1953.

Brown, C. editor. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology.

Exeter: Paternoster, 1978.

Bruce, F.F. on C.H. Dodd in Creative Minds in Contemporary Theology. Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966.

Bultmann Rudolf. Jesus Christ and Mythology. New York: Schribner's, 1958.
Catherwood, F. The Christian in Industrialized Society. Illinois: Inter-Varsity
Press, 1980.

Chandler, R. Understanding the New Age. Dallas: Word Inc., 1988.

Chilton Bruce. God in Strength: Jesus" Announcement of the Kingdom. Studien

zum Neuen Testamentum und seiner Umvelt, Freistadt: F.Plochl, 1979.

Chilton Bruce. Pure Kingdom: Jesus" Vision of God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1996.

Chilton, Bruce & Craig A. Evans, editors. Studying the Historical Jesus:
Evaluations of the State of Current Research. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1994.
Clouse, R.G. The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views. Illinois: Inter-Varsity
Press, 1977.
Conzelmann, H. The Theology of Saint Luke. London: Macmillan, 1969.

Craigie, P.C. The Book of Deuteronomy. New International Commentary on the

Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981.
Cross, F.L. The Qxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. London: Oxford
University Press, 1958.

Dominic J. Crossan. The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish

Peasant, HarperSan-Francisco: 1991.

Dominic J. Crossan. The Birth of Christianity, HarperSanFrancisco: 1998.

Cullmann, Oscar. Christ and Time. London: SCM, 1952.

Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. London: SCM, 1971.
DeMar, G. and P. Leithart. The Reduction of Christianity: Dave Hunt's Theology
of Cultural Surrender. Atlanta: Dominion Press, 1988.

Dodd, C.H. The Parables of the Kingdom. London: Nisbet, 1935.

Dodd, C.H. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1953.

Dodd, C.H. History and the Gospel. London, Nisbet, 1952.

Dodd, C.H. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1953.

Dodd, C.H. The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments. London: Hodder,
1967.
James D.G. Dunn, Christianity in the Making, Volume I, Jesus Remembered,
Michigan, Eerdmans, 2003.
Edwards, Jonathan. The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 1, Edinburgh:
Banner of Truth, reprinted 1979.

Ellis, E.E. "Present and Future Eschatology in Luke". New Testament Studies,
12, 1965-66, p 26-41.

Erickson, M.J. Contemporary Options in Eschatology: A Study of the

Millennium. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977.
France, R.T. Jesus and the Old Testament. London: Tyndale Press, 1971.

France, R.T. Divine Government: God's Kingship in the Gospel of Mark.

London: SPCK, 1990.
Francis, F.O. "Eschatology and History in Luke-Acts". Journal of American
Academic Religion, 37, 1969, p 49-63.
Frodsham, S.H. With Signs Following: The Story of the Latter Day Pentecostal
Revival. Springfield: Gospel Publishing House, 1926.
Fuller, R.H. The Foundations of New Testament Christology. London: Collins,
1965.

Robert W. Funk, Honest to Jesus, HarperSanFrancisco: 1996.

Robert W. Funk. The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus,
HarperSanFrancisco: 1998.

Birger Gerhardsson, "If we do not cut the parables out of their frames" New
Testament Studies, 1991, 37, p 321-335.

T. Francis Glasson, "Theophany and Parousia", New Testament Studies, 1980,

34, p 259-270.

Gundry, R.H. The Church and the Tribulation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973.
Guthrie, D. et.al. New Bible Commentary. London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1967.

Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of GenesIsaiah New International Commentary on

the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.
Harrison, R.K. Introduction to the Old Testament. London: Tyndale, 1969.

Harrison, R.K. Old Testament Times. London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1970.

Hiers, R.H. "The Problem of the Delay of the Parousia in Luke-Acts". New
Testament Studies, 20, 1973-74, p 145-155.
Hill, D. New Testament Prophecy. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1979.

Hunter, A.M. The Works and Words of Jesus. London: SCM, 1950.

Hunt, D. The Seduction of Christianity: Spiritual Discernment in the Last Days.

Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 1985.

Hunt, D. and T.A. McMahon. Whatever Happened to Heaven? Oregon: Harvest

House Publishers, 1988.

Jeremias, Joachim. The Parables of Jesus. Translated S.H.Hooke, New York:

Scribner's, 1966.

Jeremias, Joachim. New Testament Theology. Translated J.Bowden, London:

SCM, 1971.

Kenyon, E.W. What Happened From the Cross To the Throne. Washington:
Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society, 1969.

Kenyon, E.W. In His Presence. Washington: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing

Society, 1969.
Kenyon, E.W. The Two Kinds of Life. Washington: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing
Society, 1969.

Kenyon, E.W. The Bible in the Light of Our Redemption. Washington: Kenyon's
Gospel Publishing Society, 1969.

Kingsbury, J.D. Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. Philadelphia:

Fortress, 1975.
Kitchen, K. "Plagues" in New Bible Dictionary. London: Inter-Varsity Press,
1962.
Kitchen, K. Ancient Orient and the Old Testament. London: Tyndale, 1965.

Kloppenborg, J.S. The Shape of Q, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994.

Kloppenborg, J.S. Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings Gospel,
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000.

Helmut Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development,

London: SCM, 1990.

König, A. The Eclipse of Christ in Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989.

König, A. Here Am I!: a Christian Reflection on God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1982.

Kummel, W.G. Promise and Fulfilment, Studies in Biblical Theology. London:

SCM, 1957.

Kummel, W.G. The New Testament. The History of the Investigation of Its
Problems. London: SCM, 1972.

Ladd, G.E. Crucial Questions About the Kingdom of God. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1952.

Ladd, G.E. The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of The Second Advent and The
Rapture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956.
Ladd, G.E. The Presence of the Future. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Ladd, G.E. A Theology of the New Testament. London: Lutterworth, 1975.

Lane, W.L. The Gospel of Mark. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1974.
Latourette, K.S. A History of the Expansion of Christianity. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1970.

Lloyd-Jones, M. Studies in the Sermon on the Mount. Leicester: Inter-Varsity

Press, 1976.
MacArthur, J.F. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1978.
Burton L. Mack, Who Wrote the New Testament? The Making of the Christian
Myth, HarperSanFrancisco: 1995.
Burton L. Mack. The Christian Myth: Origins, Logic and Legacy, New York:
Continuum, 2001.
Maddox, R. "The Sense of New Testament Eschatology". Reformed Theological
Review, 36, 1977, p 42-50.
Marshall, I. H. I Believe in the Historical Jesus. London: Hodder and Stoughton,
1977.
Marshall, I. H. Luke, Historian and Theologian. Exeter: Paternoster, 1970.

MacPherson, D. The Incredible Cover-up: The True Story of the Pre-trib

Rapture. Plainfield: Logos, 1975.
Martin, R.P. Mark, Evangelist and Theologian. Exeter: Paternoster, 1972.

McConnell, Dan R. A Different Gospel. Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers,

1987.

John P. Meier. Rethinking the Historical Jesus, The Marginal Jew, Volume I,
The Roots of the Problem and the Person, New York: Doubleday, 1991
John P. Meier. Rethinking the Historical Jesus, The Marginal Jew, Volume II,
Mentor, Message, and Miracles, New York: Doubleday, 1994;

John P. Meier. Rethinking the Historical Jesus, The Marginal Jew, Volume III,
Companions and Competitors, New York: Doubleday, 2001.

Ben F. Meyer. The Aims of Jesus, London: SCM, 1979.

Ben F. Meyer. Critical Realism, Reality and Illusion in New Testament
Scholarship: A Primer in Critical Realist Hermeneutics, Collegeville: Liturgical
Press, 1994.
Moltmann, Jurgen. Theology of Hope: On the Ground and the Implications of a
Christian Eschatology. Translated by J.W.Leitch, New York: Harper and Row,
1967.
Moltmann, Jurgen. The Crucified God: The Cross of Christ as the Foundation
and Criticism of Christian Theology, Translated by R.W.Wilson & J.Bowden,
London: SCM, 1974.

Moltmann, Jurgen. The Experiment Hope. Translated by M.D. Meeks,

Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975.

Moltmann, Jurgen. The Way of Christ: Christology in Messianic Dimensions.

Translated by M.Kohl, San Francisco, Harper, 1990.

Morphew, D.J. Ph.D thesis, A Critical Investigation of the Infancy Narratives in

the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, University of Cape Town, 1980.

Morphew, D.J. South Africa: The Powers Behind. Cape Town: Struik Christian
Books, 1989.

Morphew, D.J. Renewal Apologetics: An assessment of materials which are

critical of the "Toronto Blessing", the popular name for the current move of the
Holy Spirit. Position Paper of Vineyard Ministries Africa. Cape Town: Vineyard
Bible Institute, 1995.

See D. J. Morphew, The Spiritual Spider Web, A Study of Ancient and

Contemporary Gnosticism, Vineyard Bible Institute, Cape Town: 2000 and
Vineyard International Publishing E-Publication, www.vineyardbi.org/vip

Morris, L. Apocalyptic. London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1973.

Motyer, J.A. The Revelation of the Divine Name. Theological Students
Fellowship. London: Tyndale Press.

Mounce, R.H. The Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the

New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.

Murray, lain H. The Puritan Hope. Carlisle: Banner of Truth, 1979.

Stephen Neill, The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861-1961. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1966.
Oswalt, J.N. The Book of Isaiah, 1-39. New International Commentary on the
Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986.
Rene Padilla, Mission Between the Times, Essays on the Kingdom. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985.
Pannenberg, W. Revelation as History. New York: Macmillan, 1968.

Pannenberg, W. Jesus, God and Man. London: SCM, 1968.

Pannenberg, W. Basic Questions in Theology. Volume 1. London: SCM, 1970.

Paulk, E. Ultimate Kingdom: Lesson for Today's Christian from the Book of
Revelation. Atlanta: Dimension Publishers, 1986.

Perrin, N. The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus. London: SCM, 1963.

Perrin, N. Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom. London: SCM, 1976.
Perrin, N. "Eschatology and Hermeneutics: Reflections on Method in the
Interpretation of the New Testament". Journal of Biblical Literature, 93, 1974, p
3-14.

N.Perrin, "Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom" in The Kingdom of God:
Issues in Religion and Theology, 5, edited by Bruce Chilton, London, SPCK,
1984, p 104.

Reimarus, H.S. Fragment. Edited by Charles H. Talbert. London: SCM, 1971.

Reimarus, H.S. The Goal of Jesus and His Disciples. Translated G.W.Buchanan.
Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1970.

Ridderbos, H. The Coming of the Kingdom. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and

Reformed, 1962.

Robinson, J.M. Theology as History, New Frontiers in Theology. New York:

Harper & Row, 1967.
Rushdoony, R.J. By What Standard? An Analysis of the Philosophy of Cornelius
Van Til. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1958.

E.P. Sanders. Paul and Palestinian Judaism, London: SCM, 1977.

E.P. Sander. Jesus and Judaism, London: SCM, 1985.

J.T. Sanders, "The Criterion of Coherence and the Randomness of Charisma:
Poring through some Aporias in the Jesus Tradition," New Testament Studies,
1998, 44, p 1-25.

Schweitzer, Albert. The Quest of the Historical Jesus: A Critical Study of Its
Progress from Reimarus to Wrede. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1911.

Schweitzer, Albert. The Kingdom of God and Primitive Christianty. Edited

Ulrich Neuenschwander, translated L.A. Gerrard. New York: Seabury, 1968.

Schweitzer, Albert. The Mystery of the Kingdom of God. The Secret of Jesus"
Messiahship and Passion. Translated Walter Lowrie. New York: Schocken,
1964.

Saucy, Mark. The Kingdom of God in The Teaching of Jesus in 20th Century
Theology. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1997.

Stern, D. Restoring the Jewishness of the Gospel. Jerusalem: Jewish New

Testament Publications, 1988.
Stott, J. Baptism and Fullness: The Work of the Holy Spirit Today. Leicester:
Inter-Varsity Press, 1975.

Tatum, W.B. "The Epoch of Israel: Luke 1—2 and the Theological Plan of
Luke-Acts". New Testament Studies, 13, 1966-67, p 184-105.

P.Towner, in "The Present Age in the Eschatology of the Pastoral Epistles", New
Testament Studies, 1986, 32, p 427-448.
Graham Twelftree. Jesus the Exorcist: A Contribution to the Study of the
Historical Jesus, Tübingen: Mohr and Peabody: Hendrickson, 1993;
Graham Twelftree. A Historical and Theological Study: Jesus the Miracle
Worker, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1999.
Van Til, C. The Defence of the Faith. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed,
1955.
Wagner, C. Peter. What Are We Missing? Carol Stream: Creation House, 1979.

Walvoord, J.F. The Rapture Question. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1957.

Walvoord, J.F. The Thessalonian Epistles. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1967.

Walvoord, J.F. The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1976.

Warfield, B.B. Counterfeit Miracles. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed,

1979.

Weiss, J. The Proclamation of the Kingdom of God. London: SCM, 1971.

Wenham, David. The Parables of Jesus: Pictures of Revolution. London:

Hodder and Stoughton, 1989.

Wesley, J. A Plain Account of Christian Perfection. Kansas City: Beacon Hill

Press, 1966.

White, John. When The Spirit Comes With Power; Signs and Wonders Among
God's People. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1988.
Willis, W. The Kingdom of God in Twentieth Century Interpretation.
Massachusetts: Hendricksen, 1987.

Wimber, J. Healing Seminar. Yorba Linda: Vineyard Christian Fellowship, (no

date).

Wimber, J. & K Springer. Power Healing. London: Hodder and Stoughton,

1986.
Wimber, J. Power Evangelism. San Francisco: Harper, 1986.
Ben Witherington. The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth,
Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997.
N.T. Wright. Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume I, The New
Testament and the People of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
N.T. Wright. Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume II, Jesus and
the Victory of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996.
N.T. Wright. Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume III, The
Resurrection of the Son of God, London: SPCK, 2003.

Young, E.J. The Prophecy of Daniel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

FOOTNOTES
[1] "It is always a serious misinterpretation of the New Testament as well as of
the Old Testament, to think of discovering its content (after the manner of all
legalism) in certain principles … It is at once tragic and amusing to see the many
points of view that have arisen in the course of time, and how without fail, from
the standpoint of one of them, all the rest have been judged and discredited or
else neglected as incidental and of secondary importance, as time-conditioned or
even as later accretions. And then without fail there has come, not unneeded to
be sure, a reaction against "over-emphasis" and "one-sidednesses," one or more
of the other principles had to be played off against the one and presumably only
principle, until in turn the one-sidedness of the newly erected principle became
too obvious for it to conceal its essentially relative character … Jesus Christ is
not one element in the New Testament witness alongside of others, but as it were
the mathematical point toward which all the elements of the New Testament
witness are directed. Ultimately only the name Jesus Christ … this eternally
inexpressible name, known and still to be made known, alone represents the
object which they all signify and to which they all point." Church Dogmatics I,
2, p. 11. Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1961.
[2] One of the six possibilities scholars have explored in commenting on the
plural for God is described by Victor P. Hamilton (The Book of Genesis, New
International Commentary on the Old Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1990, 133) as the "plural of majesty." It is noteworthy that when dealing with
man in the image and likeness of God, he argues again for royal language. "Gen.
1 may be using royal language to describe simply "man". In God's eyes all
mankind is royal" (135). Later he comments, "Thus, like "image", exercise
dominion reflects royal language" (138).
[3] A helpful study on the "God who Comes," linking it to Theophany, will be
found in G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus and the Kingdom of God, Eerdmans:
Paternoster, 1986, p. 3-10. He links the theme of Theophany and the Day of the
Lord to the revelation of the divine name, 17-19.

[4] My remarks on the divine name are influenced by the work of J. A. Motyer,
The Revelation of the Divine Name, Theological Students Fellowship, London:
Tyndale.
[5] There is also information at http://www.ccpc.net/~ephraim/10_Plagues.html ,
shown below in [ ] brackets. Here are details taken from these sources:

The plague of blood was a rebuke of the god Ha"pi, the god of the Nile.
The plague of the frogs was a victory over the goddess of fertility, Heqt.
Instead of granting fertility, the goddess herself began to give birth and
multiplied out of control.
Kheper, in the form of a beetle (possibly the basis for the 'swarms of flies")
symbolizes the daily cycle of the sun across the sky. [Gnats: "This was an
attack on Geb, "the great cackler," who was "god" of the earth or
vegetation. He was the father of Osiris and husband of Nut." Flies: "This
was an attack on Khepfi, scarab, who was the "god" of insects. The plague
of beetle, a scarab, was an emblem of Re (Ra), the sun god."]
[Boils: "This was an attack on Thoth (Imhotep), who the "god" of medicine
and intelligence/wisdom. The Egyptians had several medical deities, to
whom, on special occasions, they sacrificed humans. They were burnt alive
on a high altar, and their ashes were cast into the air, that with every
scattered ash a blessing might descend upon the people. Mosheh took ashes
from the furnace and cast them into the air. The ashes were scattered by the
wind descending upon all the priests, people, and beasts as boils, thus
shaming the god Thoth."]
The plague against the livestock showed the futility of the bull-gods Apis
and Mnevis, the cow-god Hathor, and the ram-god KhNumbers
With the hail, the "heavens" (the home of Nut, the god of the sky) were out
of control. [Hail: "This was an attack on Nut, who was the sky "goddess,"
for this was harvest time, the time of plenty. Like her husband Geb,
HaShem attacked and destroyed the croPsalm She was the mother of
OsirIsaiah Also, this was an attack on Isis, goddess of life, and Seth,
protector of croPsalm "]
Serapia was thought to be the god who protected from locusts. [Locusts:
"This was an attack on Anubis, who was the "god" of the fields, especially
cemeteries. This plague finishes up the work that was done by the hail.
They devoured every herb of the land and fruit of the trees. Also, this
plague was an attack on Isis, protector of against locust, and Seth, protector
of croPsalm "]
When the sun was blotted out, the sun god Re was blotted out.
And, finally, with the death of Pharaoh's firstborn son (who, with his father,
was thought to be divine) the so-called "gods" of Egypt had all been
defeated by the true King, YHWH.
The plagues followed the agricultural cycle and therefore took place over a
series of months. This set God in the role of the one who controlled the seasons
of life. This is once again a demonstration of God's superiority over the ANE
gods, this time the gods of Egypt. The fact that God controlled the seasons
would also be a major lesson the people of Israel would need for their future. So
much would depend on their trust in God to send the rain in its seasons in the
land of Palestine.

[6] The New Testament basileia (a noun) is usually translated as "kingdom."

However, it is generally agreed that the phrase kingdom of God, which translated
the Hebrew/Aramaic malkut(a) is poorly conveyed by this phrase, since the term
refers to the act of God reigning. Scholars have made various attempts to find a
suitable English phrase. Bruce Chilton has suggested, "God in Strength," and
Beasley-Murray has suggested, "the saving sovereignty," of God. R.T. France
prefers, "divine government"" ( Divine Government: God's Kingship in the
Gospel of Mark, London: SPCK, 1990, 13).

[7] P.C. Craigie draws attention to the central significance of the Song of the
Sea. "Perhaps the most important new feature in theSong of the Sea is the
conception of Yahweh as a warrior and the related ideology of holy war" (The
Book of Deuteronomy, New International Commentary on the Old Testament,
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981, 63-64). "Closely related to the conception of
God as Warrior is the expression of the kingship of Yahweh (particularly in
Exod.15.18) … In summary, these two themes - God as Warrior and God as
King - are central in the Song of the Sea (64-65). He finds a significant
relationship between the Song and the book of Deuteronomy (62-66).
[8] The structure of the suzerainty treaty is particularly evident in the structure of
the book of Deuteronomy. For the significance of this structure and it possible
implications regarding date and authorship, see Craigie, NICOT,
(20-24).
[9] All the early leaders of Israel were "anointed ones" in the sense that they
were charismatically endowed leaders. This was true of all the Judges and
leaders up to, and including, Saul. However, David was the first to be formally
described in this way.

[10] The Holy Bible, New International Version, London: Hodder & Stoughton,
1985, vii.

[11] Some scholars see the view of the kingdom in the Psalms as determinative
for the Old Testament teaching on the kingdom. For instance, David Chilton,
Pure Kingdom, Jesus Vision of God, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996. 23-44,
146-163.

[12] There is a general consensus amongst Old Testament scholars that Isa.40-66
was written by a later person or group, in the post-exilic period. The section of
Isaiah is usually described as Deutero-Isaiah. However, the critical reasons for
this consensus have never been "bought" by conservative evangelical scholars,
who believe that presuppositions are involved in the logic. Conservative scholars
continue to defend the unity of Isaiah, as does John N. Oswalt, The Book of
Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, The New International Commentary on the Old
Testament , Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986.

[13] The traditional view of the kingdoms in question is generally accepted by

conservative evangelical scholars, but not by most Old Testament scholars.
Apart from critical and linguistic issues, differing presuppositions about
prediction feature in the various views. For evangelical scholars, see E.J. Young,
The Prophecy of Daniel, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970; also R.K. Harrison,
Introduction to the Old Testament, London: Tyndale, 1969.

[14] There is some doubt on the dating of Ethiopic Enoch. It may be post-
Christian ( New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Vol. 3,
edited by Colin Brown, Exeter, Paternoster, 1978, pp. 614-617. Scholarly
literature on the Son of Man is vast, see p. 665).
The view I have taken of Daniel is admittedly a backward look through the
"eyes" of the New Testament writers. I have begun at the end, with Paul's use of
the new man. That has informed my understanding of Jesus" use of the 'son of
Man" which in turn has informed my view of Daniel. If one were to take a
strictly historical-critical approach, then all sorts of issues would open up. Was
there a Messianic understanding of the Son of Man in second temple Judaism?
Was 'son of Man" ever viewed as applying to an individual rather than a way of
speaking of the future triumph of Israel over its enemies? Was the figure in
Ezekiel linked to the figure in Daniel? Is the direction of the arrival of the Son of
Man from earth to heaven or from heaven to earth? Both N.T. Wright and James
Dunn make much of these nuances (see the references to their works in the last
chapter). My approach to Daniel can be described as canonical rather than
historical-critical. In other words I interpret scripture with scripture and view
things from both ends of scripture at the same time. However, there is one
comment that I wish to make in relation to the historical-critical approach. The
stone that falls in Daniel 2 describes a decisive intervention of God in
judgement. The Son of Man in Daniel 7 corresponds to the stone that falls in
Daniel 2. Therefore the Son of Man becomes associated with the Day of
Judgement in Daniel itself. Further, the biblical world view normally correlates
what occurs in the invisible realm with what occurs in the earthly, visible realm.
There is no dualism, as in Greek thought, but a co-relation between the two. I
have examined this idea more fully in South Africa: The Powers Behind,
borrowing from Klaus Nurnberger, an Old Testament theologian (Powers,
Beliefs and Equity: Economic Potency Structures in South Africa and their
Intersection with Patterns of Conviction in the Light of a Christian Ethic,
Pretoria, HSRC, 1984). The point for me therefore is not really whether the Son
of Man comes from within heaven or from earth to heaven. The point is that the
coming of the Son of Man is synonymous with the decisive intervention of God
in judgement, destroying the image/beast and replacing those powers with the
kingdom of God. We may never know how developed ideas about the Son of
Man were in second temple Judaism. Had they linked the Son of Man to the
figure in Ezekiel? Did they therefore think of such a figure in quasi-divine
terms? Maybe yes, maybe no. Did Jesus have the figure in Daniel in his mind
when he used this term? Did Jesus make a synthesis of these ideas, and if so, was
he the first to do so, or to what extent did he use ideas already available to him?
New Testament scholarship will continue to probe such things, and the already
vast literature will keep growing.

[15] There is a very long scholarly debate on whether engiken means "arrival" or
"nearness," which was started by Dodd's insistence that it had to mean "arrival."
The arguments themselves almost cancel each other out, so that dogmatism is
precluded. Perhaps the best solution is to observe that the Semitic words that are
probably behind engiken themselves carry ambiguity. Imminent nearness and
actual arrival do frequently overlap. My belief is that Jesus intended to convey
such ambiguity, a nearness that is so near that it amounts to arrival. For reference
to the critical arguments see Beasley-Murray, Jesus and the Kingdom of God,.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 71-74 and Chilton, God in Strength, Jesus"
Announcement of the Kingdom, Freistadt: Plochl, 1979. 27f.

[16] R.T. France, Divine Government: God's Kingship in the Gospel of Mark,
London: SPCK, 1990, ch. 4, gives a helpful discussion of ways in which the
fulfilment of these sayings has been viewed. Some of the options include the
transfiguration, the cross, the resurrection, the ascension, Pentecost, and the fall
of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, all of which did occur within that generation. In all of
these events, the future kingdom became present. When Jesus said these things,
the kingdom was indeed "here" and "almost here."
[17] This point is articulated with great clarity by W. Pannenberg, Jesus, God
and Man, London: SCM, 1968 and Revelation as History, New York:
Macmillan, 1968.
[18] John White tells the story of the early beginnings of the Vineyard and in
particular, what occurred on a certain Mothers Day, in When The Spirit Comes
With Power; Signs and Wonders Among God's People, Part II, "Case Studies of
the Spirit's Power."

[19] I have made reference to Wesley and others and have drawn attention to the
importance of the history of revival phenomena in Renewal Apologetics: An
assessment of materials which are critical of the "Toronto Blessing", the popular
name for the current move of the Holy Spirit (Vineyard Bible Institute course,
Position Papers #5-6, 1995. www.vineyardbi.org or Position Papers, Vineyard
International Publishing, e-Books, www.vineyardbi.org/vip)

[20] For an authoritative work on the parables see David Wenham, The Parables
of Jesus: Pictures of Revolution, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989.

[21] Rudolf Bultmann, Jesus Christ and Mythology, New York, Schribner's,
1958.

[22] Or seventy-two.

[23] Isaiah 1, Ezekiel 1; Daniel 10; Matthew 17:1-13 par; Revelation 1.

[24] John S. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, The New International
Commentary on the Old Testament, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1986, p 437f.

[25] There are 17 references to the earth.

[26] Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 1, Edinburgh,
Banner of Truth, reprinted 1979, p 395.

[27] Joyce G. Baldwin places Zechariah 9 in a chiastic structure (the oracle of 9-

11). The triumphal entry of the king matches the Lord being worshipped as king
(14:16-21) in the chiastic structure of the second oracle (chapters 12-14). The
jubilation of 9:10-10:I is matched in the same chiasm by jubilation and
restoration in 10:3b-11b and the jubilation of Jerusalem in 12:1-9. Haggai,
Zechariah and Malachi, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, London,
Tyndale, 1972.
[28] Jesus attends the following feasts: Passover (2.13), Tabernacles (5.2),
Passover (6.4), Tabernacles (7.1f), Dedication (10.22-29) and Passover (11.55f).
He is viewed as the fulfillment of all the feasts, which becomes clear with the
last Passover, where he dies at the same time as the Passover sacrifice is being
offered.

[29] There are seven signs. 1. The turning of the water into wine (2:11). 2. The
healing of the officials" son (4:46-54, NB verse 54). 3. The healing of the man
who had been paralysed for 38 years (5:1-18). 4. The feeding of the multitude
(6:1-15, 26). 5. Jesus walking on the water (6:16-21, 26). 6. Jesus healing the
man who had been born blind (9:1-41, NB verse 16). 7. The raising of Lazarus
(11:1-44; NB verse 47).

[30] William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, The New London Commentary on
the New Testament, London, Marshall, 1974, p 106. Lane comments in note 49,
"This concept of the "messianic banquet" was also known to the scribes. An
early Tannaitic saying compares the Age to Come to a banquet hall: "This age is
like a vestibule before the Age to Come. Prepare yourself in the vestibule that
you may enter the banquet hall"."
[31] I follow George Ladd in The Presence of the Future (Grand Rapids,
Eerdmans, 1974) quite closely in this section.
[32] J. Wesley, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, reprinted Kansas City,
Beacon Hill Press, 1966.

[33] Dan McConnel, A Different Gospel, Massachusetts, Hendricksen, 1987.

Kenyon's theology is examined in some detail in The Spiritual Spider Web (VBI
Course).

[34] E.W. Kenyon, What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, Washington:
Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society, 1969, p. 103.
[35] E.W. Kenyon, What Happened, p. 105.
[36] E.W. Kenyon, What Happened, p. 185.

[37] E.W. Kenyon, In His Presence, Washington: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing

Society, 1969, p.61.

[38] E.W. Kenyon, What Happened, p. 15.

[39] E.W. Kenyon, In His Presence, p. 23

[40] E.W. Kenyon. The Two Kinds of Life, Washington: Kenyon's Gospel
Publishing Society, 1969, p. 7.
[41] E.W. Kenyon, The Bible in the Light of Our Redemption, Washington:
Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society, 1969 p. 233.

[42] E.W. Kenyon, What Happened, p. 129.

[43] B.B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles, Presbyterian and Reformed, Reprinted

1979.

[44] John F. MacArthur, The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective, Grand

Rapids, Zondervan, 1978. Similar arguments about the non-normative nature of
Acts are used by John Stott, Baptism and Fullness: The Work of the Holy Spirit
Today, Leicester, Inter-Varsity Press, 1975.

[45] Signs and Wonders and Church Growth, John Wimber Seminar. For this
and a full list of teaching materials by John Wimber refer to Alexander Venter,
Doing Church, Vineyard International Publishing, Cape Town, 2001, pp. 249-
250, or visit [email protected]
[46] David Stern, Restoring the Jewishness of the Gospel (Jerusalem: Jewish
New Testament Publications, 1988), p. 17.

[47] Dave MacPherson, The Incredible Cover-up: The True Story of the Pre-trib
Rapture (Plainfield: Logos, 1975), p.85.

[48] D. MacPherson, The Incredible Cover-Up, p. 20-21.

[49] R.H.Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, Grand Rapids, Zondervan,
1973.
[50] E. Paulk, Ultimate Kingdom: Lessons for Today's Christian from the Book
of Revelation, Atlanta, Dimension Publishers, 1986; Dave Hunt,Whatever
Happened to Heaven? Oregon, Harvest House Publishers, 1988; The Seduction
of Christianity: Spiritual Discernment in the Last Days, Oregon, Harvest House
Publishers, 1985.

[51] Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 12, p. 202-203.

[52] For a critique of contemporary Postmillennialism, see Mark Saucy, The
Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus in 20Th Century Theology, Dallas,
Word, 1997, p. 301-304.

[53] Mark Saucy, The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus in 20th Century
Theology, Word Publishing, Dallas, 1997.

[54] Saucy, The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus in 20th Century
Theology, see particularly note 88, page 339, where he defines his position as
"progressive dispensationalism".

[55] Johannes Weiss, originally published in 1892,Jesus's Proclamation of the

Kingdom of God, Lives of Jesus Series, edited Leander E. Keck, London, SCM,
1971.

[56] Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus: A Critical Study of Its
Progress from Reimarus to Wrede, London, Adam & Charles Black, 1911.
[57] The Kingdom of God and Primitive Christianity, edited Ulrich Neuensch-
wander, translated L.A. Gerrard, New York, Seabury, 1968 and The Mystery of
the Kingdom of God. The Secret of Jesus" Messiahship and Passion, translated
Walter Lowrie, New York, Schocken, 1964.

[58] H.S. Reimarus, Fragments, edited Charles H. Talbert, London, SCM, 1971
and The Goal of Jesus and His Disciples, translated G.W. Buchanan, Leiden,
E.J. Brill, 1970.

[59] Karl Barth, Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century, Its History and
Background, London, SCM, 1972.

[60] Two other criteria are normally added to these. First, the criterion of
coherence means that if a number of texts come through the first two criteria and
bear witness to the same message they form a coherent 'set". Second, if such sets
are found in a number of different traditions (Q, Mark, M, L, etc.) their
authenticity is strengthened still further. More have been added by the third
quest, as will be noted below. J.T. Sanders has questioned the viability of the
criterion of coherence. On the basis that Jesus was the charismatic leader of a
new religious movement, one has to assume that he would have given random,
or even contradictory teachings, as befits such a profile. One cannot therefore
expect coherence. "The Criterion of Coherence and the Randomness of
Charisma: Poring through some Aporias in the Jesus Tradition," New Testament
Studies, 1998, 44, pp. 1-25.

[61] For instance, Birger Gerhardsson believes, concerning the parables, that the
synoptic writers have not misunderstood the original teaching of Jesus and
argues that we must read them in their present narrative context to recover the
original teaching of Jesus. "If we do not cut the parables out of their frames"
New Testament Studies, 1991, 37, pp. 321-335.

[62] James D.G. Dunn, Christianity in the Making, Volume I, Jesus

Remembered, Michigan, Eerdmans, 2003.
[63] I have analysed the historical-critical method in chapter 3 of my Ph.D
thesis, A Critical Investigation of the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of
Matthew and Luke, University of Cape Town, 1980. This material will be the
basis of a Vineyard Bible Institute module. For a helpful introduction to the
Historical Jesus refer to I. Howard Marshall, I Believe in the Historical Jesus,
London, Hodder, 1977.
[64] The best critique of Schweitzer's ideas will be found in the writings of N.T.
Wright. He shows that Schweitzer misunderstood what apocalyptic meant in
second temple Judaism, exaggerating the "end of the space-time universe"
concept (N.T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume I, The
New Testament and the People of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992, pp. 280-298
and for a concise summary of his position, see Christian Origins and the
Question of God, Volume II, Jesus and the Victory of God, Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1996, p. 81). However, if Schweitzer overdid the more bizarre elements
of apocalyptic, Wright has rather overdone the antithesis to Schweitzer,
producing what Dunn describes as a definition of apocalyptic which is 'simply
cosmic sound effects" ( Jesus Remembered, p. 479).

[65] The "already-not yet" tension is similar in some ways to the "literal" versus
'symbolic" tension. Schweitzer assumed a particular understanding of Jewish
views on the eschaton and apocalyptic. Those who follow Schweitzer tend to
exaggerate apocalyptic symbols and the 'son of Man in the sky" language, which
they define as mythical. However it is not that certain that Jewish apocalyptic
was simplistically literalistic. T. Francis Glasson argues that the New Testament
language about the eschaton derives more from the Old Testament prophetic
language of theophany. He argues that both kinds of language were largely
symbolic. "Theophany and Parousia", New Testament Studies, 1980, 34, pp. 259-
270. Equally, if one overstresses the symbolic nature of such language one can
end up with a purely symbolic eschaton.
[66] C.H. Dodd, The Parables of Jesus, London, Nisbet, 1936; History and the
Gospel, London: Nisbet, 1952; The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments,
London: Hodder, 1967.
[67] W.G. Kummel, Promise and Fulfilment; Studies in Biblical Theology,
London: SCM, 1957. In The New Testament: The History of the Investigation of
Its Problems, London: SCM, 1972, he gives a comprehensive history of New
Testament investigation.
[68] Oscar Cullman, Christ and Time, London: SCM, 1952, also The
Christology of the New Testament, London, SCM, 1971.

[69] Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, translated by S.H. Hooke, New
York: Scribner's, 1966. Also New Testament Theology, translated by J. Bowden,
London: SCM, 1971.

[70] Herman Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, Philadelphia: Presbyterian

and Reformed, 1962. His work in Dutch predated the English translation,
making it coincide with Ladd's work, whose first volume is dated from 1952,
Crucial Questions About the Kingdom of God, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952.
Ladd's work was updated in The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of
Biblical Realism, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

[71] George Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, London: Lutterworth,

1975.

[72] See notes on the relevant chapters above.

[73] G.R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus and the Kingdom of God, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1986.
[74] Saucy places him in the non-eschatological camp. Although I agree that
Beasley-Murray's concluding chapter does seem to be over-conscious of
"mythical" elements in apocalyptic language, he does not go all the way with the
symbolic view.
[75] N. Perrin, "Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom" in The Kingdom of
God: Issues in Religion and Theology, 5, edited Bruce Chilton, London, SPCK,
1984, p. 104.
[76] Mark 1:14-15; 9:1; Matthew 4:12-17; 8:11-13; 16:28; Luke 4:16-21; 9:27;
12:32; 13:28-29; 16:16, in their synoptic relationship, are rigorously analysed in
God in Strength: Jesus's Announcement of the Kingdom, Studien zum Neuen
Testamentum und seiner Umvelt, Freistadt: F. Plochl, 1979.
[77] Bruce Chilton, Pure Kingdom: Jesus" Vision of God, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1996.

[78] Saucy finds that Chilton continues to be influenced by the approach of

Norman Perrin and evades the fullness of the eschatological kingdom, The
Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus, pp. 99-104.

[79] N. Perrin, The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus, London: SCM,
1963; Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom, London: SCM, 1976;
"Eschatology and Hermeneutics: Reflections on Method in the Interpretation of
the New Testament, Journal of Biblical Literature, 93, 1974, pp. 3-14.

[80] Chilton gives a good summary of recent discussion and argues for the new
consensus in "The Kingdom of God in Recent Discussion", Studying the
Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research, edited Bruce
Chilton and Craig A. Evans, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994.

[81] T. Francis Glasson, 'schweitzer's Influence: Blessing or Bane?" in The

Kingdom of God: Issues in Religion and Theology, 5, edited Bruce Chilton,
London: SPCK, 1995.

[82] Bruce Chilton, "The Kingdom of God in Recent Discussion", in Studying

the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research, edited Bruce
Chilton and Craig A. Evans, New York: E. J. Brill, 1994, pp. 265-267.

[83] A careful discussion on the subject will be found in Dunn, Jesus

Remembered, pp. 401-406 and 478-487.
[84] W. Pannenberg, Revelation as History, New York: Macmillan, 1968; Jesus,
God and Man, London: SCM, 1968; Basic Questions in Theology, Volume 1,
London: SCM, 1970.
[85] Jurgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope: On the Ground and the Implications
of a Christian Eschatology, translated J.W. Leitch, New York: Harper and Row,
1967; The Crucified God: The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism
of Christian Theology, translated R.W. Wilson & J. Bowden, London: SCM,
1974; The Experiment Hope, translated M.D. Meeks, Philadelphia: Fortress,
1975; The Way of Christ: Christology in Messianic Dimensions, translated M.
Kohl, San Francisco: Harper, 1990. For a more extensive bibliography see Mark
Saucy, pp. 375-376.

[86] Adrio König,The Eclipse of Christ in Eschatology, Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1989. We are particularly glad to be able to offer this as a course
through Vineyard Bible Institute.
[87] Adrio König, Here Am I!: A Christian reflection on God, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1982.

[88] Rene Padilla, Mission Between the Times, Essays on the Kingdom, Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985.

[89] Particularly those of Wright and Dunn.

[90] Schweitzer's "Quest" is generally believed to have destroyed the first quest.
His The Mystery of the Kingdom (1901) and The Quest of the Historical Jesus
(1910) indicate the turn of the century as a fair overall turning point.

[91] I will take the work of Ben F. Meyer on The Aims of Jesus as my genesis of
the third quest. Since he published this in 1979, the year 1980 is a good round
figure. Dunn takes Sander's work on Jesus and Judaism (1985) as the real
beginning of the third quest (Jesus Remembered, p. 89). If one views placing
Jesus back in his Jewish context as the primary factor, then this is clearly right.
However, I prefer to see the beginning in the area of presuppositions. As Wright
has noted, "Meyer, almost prophetically, provided a thought-out methodological
basis for the Third Quest which all intending writers on Jesus would do well to
study carefully" (Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 82, note 2).

[92] See my PhD Thesis, particularly the section entitled: "The historical-critical
method as defined by the "Quest" for the historical Jesus."
[93] Käsemann, Ernst. 'sentences of Holy Law in the New Testament" in New
Testament Questions of Today, London: SCM, 1969, pp. 66-81.
[94] See D. J. Morphew, The Spiritual Spider Web, A Study of Ancient and
Contemporary Gnosticism, Vineyard Bible Institute, Cape Town: 2000 and
Vineyard International Publishing E-Publication, www.vineyardbi.org/vip

[95] The works of Pannenberg are important at this point. I cover this in a
section of my Ph.D thesis entitled "The new theology of the resurrection and the
re-definition of the historical-critical method."
[96] See my thesis, the section entitled "The attitude towards the historical-
critical method in the theology of Martin Kähler and in the dialectical school."

[97] James Dunn correctly describes the Jesus Seminar as "neo-liberal."

[98] Ben F. Meyer, The Aims of Jesus, London: SCM, 1979 and Critical
Realism, Reality and Illusion in New Testament Scholarship: A Primer in
Critical Realist Hermeneutics, Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1994.

[99] John P. Meier, Rethinking the Historical Jesus, The Marginal Jew, Volume
I, The Roots of the Problem and the Person, New York: Doubleday, 1991;
Rethinking the Historical Jesus, The Marginal Jew, Volume II, Mentor,
Message, and Miracles, New York: Doubleday, 1994; Rethinking the Historical
Jesus, The Marginal Jew, Volume III, Companions and Competitors, New York:
Doubleday, 2001. For his placing of Jesus in his Jewish environment, refer
particularly to Volume III.
[100] E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, London: SCM, 1977 and
Jesus and Judaism, London: SCM, 1985.

[101] Meier, Volume I.

[102] Meier, Volume II.
[103] Meier, Volume I, pp. 123-142.
[104] Graham Twelftree, Jesus the Exorcist: A Contribution to the Study of the
Historical Jesus, Tübingen: Mohr and Peabody: Hendrickson, 1993; A
Historical and Theological Study: Jesus the Miracle Worker, Illinois:
InterVarsity Press, 1999.

[105] Twelftree has a helpful summary in Jesus the Miracle Worker, pp. 248-
249.

[106] N.T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume I, The
New Testament and the People of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992; Christian
Origins and the Question of God, Volume II, Jesus and the Victory of God,
Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996; Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume
III, The Resurrection of the Son of God, London: SPCK, 2003.

[107] Wright, Volume I.

[108] Occurring repeatedly in Volume II.

[109] Wright, Volume III.

[110] For which see James Dunn, Jesus Remembered, particularly pp. 473-477.

[111] James Dunn, Jesus Remembered, pp. 393-396.

[112] His most appropriate term, Volume III.

[113] Both Wright and Dunn make use of the work of Kenneth Bailey, Through
Peasant Eyes, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1890; "Informal Controlled Oral
Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels," Asia Journal of Theology, 5 (1), pp. 34-54;
"Middle Eastern Oral Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels," Expository Times
106, 1995. They both feel that Bailey opens up better perspectives than Birger
Gerhardsson - The Reliability of the Gospel Tradition, Peabody: Hendrickson,
2001.

[114] Marcus Borg, Conflict, Holiness and Politics in the Teachings of Jesus,
Harrisburg: Trinity, 1998, Jesus: A New Vision, HarperSanFrancisco: 1987,
Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship, Valley Forge: Trinity, 1994, Meeting Jesus
Again for the First Time: The Historical Jesus and the Heart of Contemporary
Faith, HarperSanFrancisco: 1994.

[115] Dominic J. Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean

Jewish Peasant, HarperSan-Francisco: 1991; The Birth of Christianity,
HarperSanFrancisco: 1998.

[116] Burton L. Mack, Who Wrote the New Testament? The Making of the
Christian Myth, HarperSanFrancisco: 1995; The Christian Myth: Origins, Logic
and Legacy, New York: Continuum, 2001.

[117] Robert W. Funk, Honest to Jesus, HarperSanFrancisco: 1996; The Acts of

Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus, HarperSanFrancisco: 1998.

[118] Kloppenborg, J.S. The Shape of Q, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994;

Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings Gospel, Minneapolis:
Fortress, 2000.

[119] Helmut Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and

Development, London: SCM, 1990.

[120] Ben Witherington, The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of
Nazareth, Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997.

[121] So Wright, Volume II, pp. 637-639.

[122] There were, of course, many parts to this general community in many
contexts and places.

[123] W.G. Kummel, The New Testament, The History of the Investigation of Its
Problems, London, SCM, 1972; Stephen Neill, The Interpretation of the New
Testament 1861-1961, New York, Oxford University Press, 1966.

[124] P. Towner, in "The Present Age in the Eschatology of the Pastoral

Epistles", New Testament Studies, 1986, 32, pp. 427-448, examines this
assumption by Dibelius and Conzelmann and concludes that even in this
literature the hope of the parousia is still vibrant. The "already" and "not yet"
tension is very similar to Paul's earlier epistles. The literature on the theory of
the delay is quite extensive. See Hiers, R.H. "The Problem of the Delay of the
Parousia in Luke-Acts". New Testament Studies, 20, 1973-74, pp. 145-155.

[125] A helpful study of early church life will be found in Robert Banks, Paul's
Idea of Community, Peabody, Hendricksen, 1994. He covers the breaking of
bread service on p 80-85.