The Kingdom of God E-Book

• Herausgeber: Crossway
• Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 521

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012

Beschreibung

The kingdom of God is a very large biblical category indeed. Accordingly, a comprehensive understanding of the kingdom would illuminate many aspects of theology. With this in mind, Bruce Waltke, Robert Yarbrough, Gerald Bray, Clinton Arnold, Gregg Allison, Stephen Nichols, and Anthony Bradley have collaborated to articulate a full view of the kingdom of God across multiple disciplines. One of the most important books on the kingdom since G. E. Ladd, this volume offers a robust theology and is corroborated by the very series in which it stands. Fourth in the noted Theology in Community series, The Kingdom of God establishes the significance of the kingdom from the perspectives of biblical theology, systematic theology, history, pastoral application, missiology, and cultural analysis. Part of the Theology in Community series.

Leseprobe

Thank you for downloading this Crossway book.

Sign-up for the Crossway Newsletter for updates on special offers, new resources, and exciting global ministry initiatives:

Crossway Newsletter

Or, if you prefer, we would love to connect with you online:

“Jesus taught plainly and often about the kingdom—but explaining the full meaning of his words has occupied theologians for centuries. This volume captures the biblical perspective—not just Jesus’ words but the full scope of Scriptural insight—in a comprehensive, readable, and thorough fashion. God will use it to reveal insight about his kingdom and change your perspective on kingdom living.”

Jeff Iorg, President, Golden Gate Seminary

“Morgan and Peterson have put together a collection that brings clarity and precision to an often blurry discussion. Like the other volumes in the Theology in Community series, it is biblically informed, theologically incisive, and pastorally sensitive. Those looking for a guide to understanding the significance of the kingdom—past, present, and future—will do well to consult The Kingdom of God.”

Stephen T. Um, Senior Minister, Citylife Presbyterian Church, Boston, Massachusetts; Adjunct Faculty, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary

“A timely and refreshing look at an oft neglected, misunderstood, but central doctrine of the Bible—The Kingdom of God will inspire, inform, and edify pastors, students, laymen, and scholars alike. This work charts a course between the Scylla of an overspiritualized conception of the kingdom and the Charybdis of an overrealized understanding of the kingdom of God. It does so by following the contours of the Bible in its arrival at a relevant biblical understanding of the kingdom consistent with the best of the evangelical tradition. A must-have in the library of every serious student of the Bible!”

John David Massey, Associate Professor of Missions, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

“The essays within provide a fresh and helpful assessment of the multifaceted meaning of the kingdom of God—from the Old Testament and the ancient covenants, to the New Testament and today’s Christians, and on to the consummation. For those in my generation captured by George Ladd’s ‘already/not yet’ understanding of God’s kingdom, this work is a noteworthy twentyfirst-century expansion of how complex and important the kingdom theme is both for orthodoxy and for orthopraxy.”

Kendell Easley, Professor of Biblical Studies, Union University; author, Holman Illustrated Guide to Biblical History

“In this elegant volume, seven distinguished theologians wrestle with the big questions surrounding the biblical notion of kingdom—ultimately forging a path for the church where there is no inherent conflict between kingdom preaching and kingdom living, between orthodoxy and orthopraxy. As ambassadors of the king, God’s people proclaim the kingdom and embody God’s rule in every dimension of society and culture, and across the fabric of human life.”

Bruce Riley Ashford, Dean and Associate Professor of Theology and Culture, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary; editor, Theology and Practice of Mission

“At a time when scholars continue to wrangle over various interpretations of the kingdom and pastors seek to find clear, concrete ways to express kingdom living to their congregations, we have in this volume a foundational work that will assist scholars and pastors alike for years to come. It’s all here—the history of the debate, biblical theology, systematic theology, and very practical application. As I finished reading this book, I knew that my understanding of the kingdom was forever enlarged; perhaps more significantly, I knew that my heart would never again be satisfied with anything less than kingdom life.”

Michael Honeycutt, Senior Pastor, Westminster Presbyterian Church, Rock Hill, South Carolina

“Chris Morgan and Robert Peterson have done a masterful job of searching out a comprehensive construct of the concept of the kingdom of God. Through world-class scholars, they have presented, as promised, “the historical, biblical, theological, and ethical” precepts of the kingdom. What a gift of understanding they have given to the body of Christ.”

Jim Parker, Professor of Biblical Interpretation, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary

Other Books in the Theology in Community series:

The Deity of Christ (2011)

The Glory of God (2010)

Suffering and the Goodness of God (2008)

The Kingdom of God

Copyright © 2012 by Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson

Published by Crossway

1300 Crescent Street

Wheaton, Illinois 60187

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except as provided for by USA copyright law. Crossway® is a registered trademark in the United States of America.

First printing 2012

Printed in the United States of America

Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are from the ESVTM Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked at are the author’s translation.

Scripture quotations marked KJV are from the King James Version of the Bible.

Scripture references marked niv are taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.TM Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

All emphases in Scripture quotations have been added by the authors.

Hardcover ISBN: 978-1-4335-0918-6

PDF ISBN: 978-1-4335-0919-3

Mobipocket ISBN: 978-1-4335-0920-9

ePub ISBN: 978-1-4335-2358-8

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

The kingdom of God / Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson, editors.

p. cm. — (Theology in community)

Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and indexes.

ISBN 978-1-4335-0918-6 (hc)

1. Kingdom of God. 2. Kingdom of God—Biblical teaching. I. Morgan, Christopher W., 1971–      II. Peterson,

Robert A., 1948–

BT94.K49            2012

231.7'2—dc23                                               2012010785

Crossway is a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers.

To our team at Crossway with whom it is a joy to serve the Lord:

Al Fisher, Justin Taylor, Jill Carter, Lydia Brownback, and many others

Contents

List of Abbreviations

Series Preface

Acknowledgments

Contributors

Introduction

1   The Kingdoms of God: The Kingdom in Historical and Contemporary PerspectivesStephen J. Nichols

2   The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament: Definitions and StoryBruce K. Waltke

3   The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament: The CovenantsBruce K. Waltke

4   The Kingdom of God in the New Testament: Matthew and RevelationRobert W. Yarbrough

5   The Kingdom of God in the New Testament: Mark through the EpistlesRobert W. Yarbrough

6   The Kingdom, Miracles, Satan, and DemonsClinton E. Arnold

7   The Kingdom and the ChurchGregg R. Allison

8   The Kingdom and EschatologyGerald Bray

9   The Kingdom TodayAnthony B. Bradley

Selected Bibliography

List of Abbreviations

BBR

Bulletin for Biblical Research

BDAG

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature

BECNT

Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament

Bib

Biblica

DCG

Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels

DLNTD

Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments

DNTB

Dictionary of New Testament Background

DTIB

Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible

HALOT

The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament

HvTSt

Hervormde teologiese studies

Int

Interpretation

JETS

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JPT

Journal of Pentecostal Theology

JPTSS

Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series

NAC

New American Commentary

NIDB

New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible

NIDNTT

New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

NIGTC

New International Greek Testament Commentary

NovT

Novum Testamentum

PNTC

Pelican New Testament Commentaries

SBLDS

Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series

SBT

Studies in Biblical Theology

SR

Studies in Religion

TB

Theologische Bücherei

TBei

Theologishe Beiträge

TJ

Trinity Journal

TZ

Theologische Zeitschrift

WBC

Word Biblical Commentary

WTJ

Westminster Theological Journal

WUNT

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament

ZEC

Zondervan Exegetical Commentary

Series Preface

As the series name, Theology in Community, indicates, theology in community aims to promote clear thinking on and godly responses to historic and contemporary theological issues. The series examines issues central to the Christian faith, including traditional topics such as sin, the atonement, the church, and heaven, but also some which are more focused or contemporary, such as suffering and the goodness of God, the glory of God, the deity of Christ, and the kingdom of God. The series strives not only to follow a sound theological method but also to display it.

Chapters addressing the Old and New Testaments on the book’s subject form the heart of each volume. Subsequent chapters synthesize the biblical teaching and link it to historical, philosophical, systematic, and pastoral concerns. Far from being mere collections of essays, the volumes are carefully crafted so that the voices of the various experts combine to proclaim a unified message.

Again, as the name suggests, theology in community also seeks to demonstrate that theology should be done in teams. The teachings of the Bible were forged in real-life situations by leaders in God’s covenant communities. The biblical teachings addressed concerns of real people who needed the truth to guide their lives. Theology was formulated by the church and for the church. This series seeks to recapture that biblical reality. The volumes are written by scholars, from a variety of denominational backgrounds and life experiences with academic credentials and significant expertise across the spectrum of theological disciplines, who collaborate with each other. They write from a high view of Scripture with robust evangelical conviction and in a gracious manner. They are not detached academics but are personally involved in ministry, serving as teachers, pastors, and missionaries. The contributors to these volumes stand in continuity with the historic church, care about the global church, share life together with other believers in local churches, and aim to write for the good of the church to strengthen its leaders, particularly pastors, teachers, missionaries, lay leaders, students, and professors.

For the glory of God and the good of the church, Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Lord for giving us this opportunity to serve him. Among his faithful servants, we thank:

Beth Ann Brown, Lydia Brownback, Allan Sholes, and Rick Matt, for expert editing. Special thanks are due Elliott Pinegar, Robert’s teaching assistant, for editing the entire manuscript and compiling the bibliography.

Tony Chute, Jeff Mooney, and Mike Honeycutt, for reading and making suggestions.

Our librarians, James Pakala and Steve Jamieson at Covenant Theological Seminary, and Barry Parker at California Baptist University, for professional, timely, and courteous assistance.

Contributors

Gregg R. Allison (PhD, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School), Professor of Christian Theology, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

Clinton E. Arnold (PhD, University of Aberdeen), Professor of New Testament Language and Literature, Talbot School of Theology

Anthony B. Bradley (PhD, Westminster Theological Seminary), Associate Professor of Theology and Ethics, The King’s College (New York)

Gerald Bray (DLitt, University of Paris-Sorbonne), Research Professor of Divinity, Beeson Divinity School

Christopher W. Morgan (PhD, Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary), Professor of Theology and Dean, School of Christian Ministries, California Baptist University

Stephen J. Nichols (PhD, Westminster Theological Seminary), Research Professor of Christianity and Culture, Lancaster Bible College and Graduate School

Robert A. Peterson (PhD, Drew University), Professor of Systematic Theology, Covenant Theological Seminary

Bruce K. Waltke (PhD, Harvard University), Distinguished Professor of Old Testament, Knox Theological Seminary

Robert W. Yarbrough (PhD, University of Aberdeen), Professor of New Testament, Covenant Theological Seminary

Introduction

It is clear that no view of Christ’s person and work which is separated from the context of the Kingdom [of God] can claim to reflect a biblical mode of thought.1

David Wells is right. A good grasp of the kingdom of God is indispensable for a proper understanding of Christ and the redemption that he accomplished. The kingdom of God is a very large biblical category indeed. Accordingly, a comprehensive understanding of the kingdom would illuminate many aspects of theology. But to obtain such an understanding is not so easy! In fact, to attempt to gain a comprehensive understanding of the kingdom of God is to invite many problems. We begin by considering one of those problems.

Jesus’ Statements about the Kingdom Appear to Be Contradictory At first glance Christ’s statements concerning the kingdom appear contradictory.

Is the kingdom present or future? But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. (Matt. 12:28)

I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom. (Matt. 26:29)

Does the kingdom concern salvation or judgment? Then the King will say to those on his right, “Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” (Matt. 25:34)

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and gathered fish of every kind. When it was full, men drew it ashore and sat down and sorted the good into containers but threw away the bad. So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matt. 13:47–50)

Does the kingdom mean that God rules, or is it the place where he rules? And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end. (Luke 1:31–33)

You are those who have stayed with me in my trials, and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Luke 22:28–30)

Of course, these questions provide false choices, and a deeper look at Jesus’ words reveals that he views the kingdom as multifaceted. He speaks of the kingdom as both present and future, as including both salvation and judgment, as encompassing both rule and locus. In addition, the kingdom pertains to human beings, angels, and the heavens and earth.

Jesus Emphasizes the Kingdom From first to last, Jesus’ message underscores the kingdom of God. Matthew summarizes Jesus’ early Galilean ministry: “And he went throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction among the people” (Matt. 4:23). Toward the middle of his ministry, Jesus defends himself against the wicked accusation that he casts out demons by Satan: “But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you” (Luke 11:20). And in the presence of Pilate before Jesus’ crucifixion, he declares, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world” (John 18:36).

Widely Divergent Views of the Kingdom When Jesus speaks of the kingdom, he emphasizes God’s action. R. S. Barbour correctly states, “Because this theme of God’s action was so central to Jesus, the Kingdom of God has tended to become a cover-phrase for varied understandings of that action in the world.”2 This is an understatement, as quotations from representatives of five kingdom perspectives show: classic liberalism, the “social gospel,” liberation theology, Christian reconstructionism, and postmodern evangelicalism.

First, the classic liberal theologian, Adolf von Harnack:

The kingdom of God comes by coming to the individual, by entering into his soul and laying hold of it. True, the kingdom of God is the rule of God; but it is the rule of the holy God in the hearts of individuals; it is God himself in his power. From this point of view everything that is dramatic in the external and historical sense has vanished; and gone, too, are all the external hopes for the future. Take whatever parable you will, the parable of the sower, the pearl of great price, of the treasure buried in the field—the word of God, God himself, is the kingdom. It is not a question of angels and devils, thrones and principalities, but of God and the soul, the soul and its God.3

Second, the “father of the social gospel,” Walter Rauschenbusch:

The social gospel . . . plainly concentrates religious interest on the great ethical problems of social life. It scorns the tithing of mint, anise, and cummin, at which the Pharisees are still busy, and insists on getting down to the weightier matters of God’s law, to justice and mercy. . . . The non-ethical practices and beliefs in historical Christianity nearly all centre on the winning of heaven and immortality. On the other hand, the Kingdom of God can be established by nothing except righteous life and action. There is nothing in social Christianity which is likely to breed or reinforce superstition. The more the social gospel engages and inspires theological thought, the more will religion be concentrated on ethical righteousness.4

Third, the most famous liberation theologian, Gustavo Gutiérrez:

If we believe that the Kingdom of God is a gift which is received in history, and if we believe, as the eschatological promises—so charged with human and historical content—indicate to us, that the Kingdom of God necessarily implies the reestablishment of justice in this world, then we must believe that Christ says the poor are blessed because the Kingdom of God has begun: “The time has come; the Kingdom of God is upon you” (Mark 1:15). In other words, the elimination of the exploitation and poverty that prevent the poor from being fully human has begun; a Kingdom of justice which goes even beyond what they could have hoped for has begun. They are blessed because the coming of the Kingdom will put an end to their poverty by creating a world of fellowship.5

Fourth, the original Christian reconstructionist, R. J. Rushdoony:

To ensure the continuity of Christ’s kingdom on earth, the church was established to extend over all the earth the crown rights of the Lord of Glory, and to make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:18–20). So great is the supernatural power of Christ’s true and faithful church that the very gates of hell cannot prevail or hold out against it (Matt. 16:18). . . . The New Testament tells us that Jesus Christ is this Lord of Glory. It is thus the duty of the modern state to let Him in and to submit to Him, not to control Him. . . . In Scripture, the state has a specific ministry, the ministry of justice (Rom. 13:1). Its place in the plan of God is a real if limited one. The state must be the servant of the Messiah.6

Fifth, an influential evangelical postmodernist, Brian McLaren:

According to him, the good news of the kingdom is a story of heaven invading earth and transforming it, saving it, healing it. . . . An ecclesia [a church] is a gathering of people who identify themselves as citizens of the kingdom of God, living by a higher calling—the way of Jesus and his message of the kingdom. . . . The kingdom of God, Jesus said, was “good news for the poor.” There is a personal dimension to the kingdom of God, to be sure, in which we have a personal relationship with the King. But there is also a social dimension to the kingdom of God, a dimension that challenges normal human (and religious) assumptions about peace, war, prosperity, poverty, privilege, responsibility, religion, and God.7

Our Goal Here are five very different conceptions of the kingdom of God—each containing at least elements of truth. But each also fails to capture the full biblical message of the kingdom. It seems that doing so is a difficult task, as Howard Marshall explains:

Although the phrase [the Kingdom of God] has been the subject of much biblical research in recent years, and although it is banded about with great frequency in discussions of Christian social action, it is unfortunately often the case that it is used in a very vague manner and that there is a lack of clear biblical exposition in the churches on the meaning of the term.8

The purpose of this book is to remedy this situation. It seeks to capture a fuller understanding of the kingdom of God than any one of the five conceptions above. How? By adopting historical, biblical, theological, and ethical perspectives, it attempts to move closer to a comprehensive exposition of the kingdom.

A Road Map A road map will guide readers. Stephen J. Nichols leads off with “The Kingdoms of God: The Kingdom in Historical and Contemporary Perspectives,” in which he demonstrates the differences and similarities of varying ideas of the kingdom throughout history and their implications for theology and life today. Four chapters on the kingdom in Scripture anchor this volume. Bruce K. Waltke lays underpinnings by treating “The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament: Definitions and Story” and “The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament: The Covenants.” Robert W. Yarbrough builds upon them in chapters that continue the biblical story in “The Kingdom of God in the New Testament: Matthew and Revelation” and “The Kingdom of God in the New Testament: Mark through the Epistles.”

A biblical foundation is essential, but to construct a theological building we need a superstructure. The next four chapters are just that. Clinton E. Arnold deals with “The Kingdom, Miracles, Satan, and Demons” in the “already” and the “not yet.” Gregg R. Allison explores the complex relationship of “The Kingdom and the Church” and its ramifications for the church’s mission. Gerald Bray considers the present and the future, and time and eternity, in “The Kingdom and Eschatology.” And Anthony B. Bradley concludes by applying the theology of the kingdom to eight principles of orthopraxis and justice in “The Kingdom Today.”

Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson

1 David F. Wells, The Person of Christ: A Biblical and Historical Analysis of the Incarnation (Westchester, IL: Crossway, 1984), 23.

2 The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought, ed. Adrian Hastings et al. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 370.

3 Adolf von Harnack, What Is Christianity? (New York: Harper, 1956), 56, italics original.

4 Walter Rauschenbusch, A Theology for the Social Gospel (New York: Macmillan, 1917), 15.

5 Gustavo Gutiérrez, A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1988), 170–71, italics original.

6 R. J. Rushdoony, Christianity and the State (Vallecito, CA: Ross House, 1986), 33, 72, 74.

7 Brian McLaren, http://pomomusings.com/2008/01/14/brian-mclaren-on-the-kingdom-of-god/.

8 I. Howard Marshall, Jesus the Saviour: Studies in New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1990), 213.

1

The Kingdoms of God

The Kingdom in Historical and Contemporary Perspectives

STEPHEN J . N ICHOLS

And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.—Matthew 24:14

For what other end do we propose to ourselves than to attain the kingdom of which there is no end?—Augustine, The City of God

Leo Tolstoy, author of such classic novels as War and Peace and Anna Karenina, also tried his hand at nonfiction. In 1894 he penned one such piece, entitled The Kingdom of God Is Within You. The novelist went looking for a solution to the socio-political challenges his native Russia faced as the new century loomed. In most parts of the globe, optimism reigned as the new millennium approached. Such optimism especially ran high throughout most of Europe and in North America. But Tolstoy saw the roadblocks and hurdles in the path when it came to his homeland. He saw the hindrances that lay between his fellow countrymen and the safe and sound arrival of what many were hailing as “The Christian Century.” Tolstoy went looking for a way into the utopian “Christian Century.” He found what he believed to be the answer in Christ’s words from Luke 17:21 (kjv), the words that he used to title his book. Tolstoy found the kingdom of God. Or, more accurately, he found what he thought was the kingdom of God.

The phrase, “the kingdom of God,” not only captivated this Russian novelist; it has also captivated theologians, biblical scholars, churchmen, and laity through the centuries. Some have claimed the kingdom to be the central message of Jesus’ teachings. In fact many have. And there are about as many interpretations of the kingdom as there are theologians addressing it. This essay lays out the history, the long and curious history, of interpreting the phrase the “kingdom of God,” and its variants such as the “kingdom of heaven,” throughout the Christian tradition. Looking deeply at this phrase reveals a number of things, chiefly the differences within the Christian tradition regarding understanding the kingdom and, more importantly, the far-reaching implications of understanding the kingdom for the rest of one’s theology. Like the tentacles of an octopus, how one understands the kingdom of God reaches and stretches out to all other areas of doctrine.

The church can little afford to neglect theological consideration of the kingdom of God. As perplexing as it might be, and as much of a source of disagreement the kingdom and eschatology might be, the church must grapple with it. Such an understanding of the kingdom is first and foremost informed by the pages of Scripture. But we will also be aided by the work of those who have gone on before. In the pages of church history we will see wisdom, perhaps also a share of folly. Even such folly, however, can be good for us for it can alert us to our own folly—or at the very least our own limitation—in interpretation. To set the stage for this journey into the Christian tradition, consider the decades around the turn of the twentieth century, from the 1880s through the 1920s, the time period in which Tolstoy wrote his book, a time period in which the kingdom received a great deal of attention.

The Coming of the Twentieth Century and the Coming of the Kingdom of God: Setting the Stage for a History of the Kingdom Returning to Tolstoy, what the Russian novelist found in this deceptively simple little phrase—“The kingdom of God is within you”—set him off articulating a strange, but not so foreign, concept in the modern age, that of pitting the Jesus of history against the Jesus of faith or the Jesus of Christianity. The Jesus of some parts of the four Gospels, the “historical Jesus,” was a far cry, Tolstoy and a long train of others argued, from the Jesus of Christianity, the Jesus of the creeds. In his book, Tolstoy seems to have particularly the Nicene Creed in his sights. And, to Tolstoy, understanding what Jesus meant by the seven words of this Luke 17:21 phrase held the key to opening the door to understanding Jesus properly. In Tolstoy’s hands, capable writer that he was, the phrase “The kingdom of God is within you” meant that Jesus was all about human life, human flourishing, in the here and now. He was not some God-man who died on the cross as a substitute, rose again bodily from the grave, and will come again visibly to bring swift justice and sweep all of humanity and creation into the long-awaited eschaton—all the dogma of the creeds. No, Tolstoy thunders on in his prose. Such theological platitudes had precious little to do with improving the plight of the peasant. The kingdom that Jesus spoke of, as Tolstoy understood it, is here and now:

The Sermon on the Mount, or the Creed. One cannot believe in both. And Churchmen have chosen the latter. . . . People who believe in a wicked and senseless God—who has cursed the human race and devoted his own Son to sacrifice, and a part of mankind to eternal torment—cannot believe in the God of love. The man who believes in a God, in a Christ coming again in glory to judge and to punish the quick and the dead, cannot believe in the Christ who bade us turn the left cheek, judge not, forgive these that wrong us, and love our enemies. . . . The man who believes in the Church’s doctrine of the compatibility of warfare and capital punishment with Christianity cannot believe in the brotherhood of all men.

And what is most important of all—the man who believes in salvation through faith in the redemption or the sacraments, cannot devote all his powers to realizing Christ’s moral teaching in his life.1

Tolstoy ironically becomes like one of the false prophets Jesus warned about. Jesus told his disciples that there would be those to come who would point and say, “There’s the kingdom.” Jesus told his disciples not to believe in such a message and not to follow such a messenger. When Tolstoy says, in effect, “Look here, at this ethical system, this is the kingdom of God,” he could not be more off target.

At about the same time Tolstoy was writing in Russia, theologians and biblical scholars in Germany were striking similar keys on their typewriters, promulgating what has come to be called “realized eschatology.” Tolstoy was not alone. In 1892 Johannes Weiss published Jesus’ Proclamation of the Kingdom of God. This book marks a watershed in the so-called “quest for the historical Jesus” movement that occupied so much of German theologizing in the nineteenth century (and would continue into the twentieth century as well). As Benedict Viviano explains, “[Weiss’s] book was so offensive because liberal theology had a bad conscience about its suppression of Jesus’ eschatology. It was not ignorant of it. It simply hoped to keep it a dirty little secret. Thanks to Weiss, the liberal emperor was seen to have no clothes.”2 Weiss put eschatology and Jesus’ message of the kingdom at the center of the quest. The twentieth century would be the century of the kingdom, as far as theological discussions were concerned.

Though Weiss himself held to a future realization of Jesus’ kingdom message and eschatology, other theologians followed the trajectory he set out and left the future behind. In the hands of such English theologians in the Anglican tradition as Charles Dodd, J. A. T. Robertson, and G. B. Caird, the kingdom of God was understood to be entirely for the present and not for the future. There would be no physical, visible second coming. There would be no apocalyptic kingdom. Eschatology consequently became not a matter of the sweet by and by, but entirely a matter of the gritty here and now. Just as some of Jesus’ early disciples missed the point, thinking he was speaking of a kingdom to come, so also centuries’ worth of theologians had done the same as they speculated and theorized about some cataclysmic future event that would set in motion the end times. When Jesus spoke of the kingdom of God as being in the midst of his contemporary audiences, Dodd and his fellow adherents of realized eschatology argued, Jesus meant it.3

In this teaching of “realized eschatology,” the kingdom is entirely here and now. Eschatology—and all that this subject of theology concerns, including the meaning of the kingdom, the second coming, the events of the end times, the future judgments, even heaven and hell—is fully realized now. All that is bound up in eschatology is made real and experienced in this life, in this world.

And concurrent with Tolstoy and Weiss and the Germans, American theologians were also getting in on the act. Among the more liberal strands of American theology, realized eschatology appeared to win the day. In the hands of Baptist German-American Walter Rauschenbusch, realized eschatology would result in the Social Gospel movement. The gospel, Rauschenbusch argued in the early years of the 1900s, has nothing to do with sinners in need of salvation, but instead has everything to do with the socially oppressed and marginalized realizing justice.4 Realized eschatology became the central driving force in his theology. For Rauschenbusch, the idea that the kingdom is now means that salvation is now, that judgment is now, that heaven and hell are now. Of course, for such things to be now requires that one take the New Testament teaching on these subjects as mere poetry, myth, and metaphor. And, from its proponents Tolstoy, Weiss, and Dodd, this realized eschatology also requires an uneasiness—if not flat-out rejection—of the Jesus of the creeds. There is an unbroken, almost necessary, linkage between how one defines the kingdom message of Jesus, how one understands the overall thrust of the ministry and message of Jesus, and what one believes about his person. If the definition of the kingdom is off, so is the rest. Once that false move is made, all the central and defining tenets of Christianity fall like dominoes.

But the social gospel liberals were not the only American theologians transfixed with deciphering the meaning of the kingdom of God. The dispensationalists, also getting started in this same time frame of the 1880s to the early 1900s, stand at the opposite end from the realized eschatology movement. This movement began with the writings of the churchman John Nelson Darby. Born in London, Darby went on to study at Trinity College, Dublin. Upon completing his degree, he became ordained in the Anglican Church of Ireland. Darby soon found his own thinking at odds with Anglicanism, from which he departed and began, along with others, the Plymouth Brethren movement. Through his writings, and his focus on biblical prophecy, Darby gave expression to dispensationalism, a view that holds a deep and wide distinction between Israel and the church and emphasizes a literal interpretation of biblical prophecy. Dispensationalism was nurtured in North American soil at prophecy conferences in such places as Niagara Falls; Winona Lake, Indiana; and Philadelphia. And it was brought to fruition with the 1917 publication o The Scofield Reference Bible (named after C. I. Scofield).

Dispensationalism stresses the future and apocalyptic piece to eschatology. Christ will come again. Actually, his second coming will have two parts. The first part will be the rapture, a secret coming in which Christ takes the church to heaven to be with him. Christ will then come again physically at the conclusion of the literal, seven-year tribulation. This will be followed by the thousand-year reign of Christ on the earth (the millennium), which will be followed by the final judgment, the damned to an eternity in hell, and the righteous to an eternity in the new heavens and the new earth. In the meantime, the kingdom of God has been put on hold. Instead of seeing the kingdom (or even seeing any part of the kingdom) as present, these early dispensationalists saw the church as a “parenthesis” in God’s program, interrupting God’s direct dealing with Israel. Someday in the future, God would return to deal with Israel, and the kingdom in all of its literal manifestation would come. For now, however, God is working through and in the church, and the kingdom is postponed. Contrary to the “realized eschatology” of the liberal theologians, dispensationalists proclaimed a wholly future eschatology.5

And so from Russian novelists to German theologians to American prophecy conference speakers, the kingdom of God received a boatload of attention. Four things can be gleaned from this brief foray into the eschatological conversation of the 1880s through the 1920s. First, consider the overwhelming emphasis on eschatology in the theologizing of this time period. The sheer volume of books published on the subject nearly outweighs books on eschatology from all previous centuries of the church’s life combined. Further, this was not just an emphasis among academic theologians. Such masses of conference goers flocked to Winona Lake in the summertime that the Chicago Railroad built a designated line running from the city to the middle of the farm plains of Indiana. Prophecy and the kingdom of God were topics that had captivated the hearts and minds of the public as well.

The rest of the twentieth century evidences similar fascination. Hal Lindsey’s Late Great Planet Earth dominated the New York Times bestseller lists in the 1970s. And its sales but shadow the Left Behind novels from the pens of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. In 1996, while at the Christian Booksellers’ Convention in Anaheim, California, I could not even make my way through the lines to get into the auditorium for that evening’s main event, a prophecy conference. In the end I gave my prized ticket to a most grateful student of prophecy—the telltale sign being the particular study Bible firmly clutched in his hands—waiting with all the fervor of eschatological hope in the standby line. The meaning of the kingdom was crucial in this 1880s–1920s time period, and it remains crucial, if not central, to many to the present day.

The second thing to be learned from this eschatological discussion concerns how eschatology touches other areas of theology. One’s view of eschatology has implications for how one views the person of Christ, the gospel, and the nature and mission of the church. One’s view of eschatology informs and is also informed by—this is a theological version of the chicken and the egg conundrum—one’s hermeneutics, one’s understanding of the Old Testament, the Gospels, prophetic books, apocalyptic literature, and the relationship between the Testaments. Simply consider understanding the Gospel of Matthew. How you define the kingdom will govern how you read and interpret the first Gospel. In other words, how we view the kingdom of God is not an isolated piece of theology. The same is true of the rest of the biblical teaching on the kingdom. Our view of the kingdom of God stretches out to nearly every part of our hermeneutic, biblical understanding, and theology.

Third, we learn from this eschatological discussion of the 1880s–1920s of the broad and vast differences within the Christian tradition. This period reveals what will become the wide terrain of the Christian tradition on eschatology. There are myriad interpretations of the kingdom of God. Tony Campolo, in his inimitable way, once even defined the kingdom of God as, yes, a party.6 It is far more accurate to speak of kingdoms (plural) of God. To put the matter another way: of the making of eschatologies there seems to be no end. What are we to make of all of these differences? This is a significant piece of the discussion, to which we will return in the conclusion of this essay.

Fourth and finally, this eschatological conversation of the 1880s–1920s reveals a center point to the discussion. Eschatology is vast, touching on all matters of biblical interpretation and views of the end times. When facing such broad horizons a center point can help bring focus, which in turn can promote understanding. To switch metaphors, we need a handle on the far-reaching subject of eschatology. And we find that handle in the center point of the discussion—the phrase “the kingdom of God.”

In the pages to follow of this essay, we will explore the route this phrase has taken through the history of the Christian tradition in order to shed some light on what the phrase and its implications mean for the church today. We will look at the historical perspectives on this phrase in these successive eras: the early church, the medieval age, the Reformation and Puritan eras, and the modern age. To get a handle on the contemporary perspectives on this phrase we will look at both the twentieth century and the early years of the twenty-first. As with all surveys, what follows is more a summary of the high points than a comprehensive treatment. Nevertheless, we stand to be informed significantly by the distant and immediate past as we seek our own understanding of the kingdom of God.

“The Days Shall Come in Which Vines Shall Grow”: The Kingdom of God in the Early Church Papias, as tradition has it, was taught by the very elders who themselves had been taught by the apostle John. Sadly, though, our connection to Papias is mostly indirect, coming to us through the writings of Irenaeus—himself, as tradition holds, taught by the aged apostle John as well. Papias envisioned a future time of blessing, a future entrance into the fullness of God’s promise. He writes with a fervor not unlike John the apostle:

The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each true twig ten thousand shoots, and each one of the shoots ten thousand clusters, and on every one of the clusters ten thousand grapes, and every grape when pressed will give five and twenty metretes of wine.7

If you do the math—Papias’s calculations have each grape yielding about 260 gallons—that’s a lot of wine. He follows with a discussion of an equally impressive amount of grain. Though Papias uses earthly language to describe the bounties of this future, he, like his fellow church fathers, stressed that this was a future kingdom not contiguous with the present world. The present world, overrun by wickedness and under the spell of Rome, will come to an end. The present world will literally crash and burn. And then God’s kingdom, not of this world and filled to the brim and beyond with wine, shall come.

Justin Martyr argued from this very position in his apologetics. As Charles Hill explains, “[Justin Martyr] castigates the Romans for assuming, when they hear that the Christians look for a kingdom, that this kingdom is a human one.”8 On the contrary, Justin argued that the kingdom of God was a kingdom not of this world. But Papias, Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr all saw this future kingdom of God as a physical kingdom, with material blessings. When they spoke of grapes and wine and grain and bread, they were talking about grapes and wine and grain and bread.

Tertullian follows suit, even adding a sharpness to an idea present in his fellow pre-Nicene church fathers, that of chiliasm or millennialism. This view, which later theologians would call “historic premillennialism,” holds to a two-stage future, consisting first of a literal thousand-year reign of God on earth and then, second, of the eternal state. Here we begin to see the linking of the kingdom of God with a future cataclysmic event and the end times, opening the door to the millennium (viewed as a literal thousand-year time period; see Rev. 20:1–6), which then leads to the eternal state. The connection of the kingdom of God to millennial or chiliastic thinking was a crucial step in the historical development of the theology of the kingdom. Equally important to the discussion of the kingdom in the early church were the resurrection of the dead and the intermediate state. To pursue this, however, lies beyond the scope of this essay.9

The idea of chiliasm or millennialism merits attention. Previous studies have argued for a consensus view of these pre-Nicene early church fathers, claiming they were nearly all of the historic premillennial persuasion and singling out Origen as the proverbial exception proving the rule. Charles Hill has documented, however, that this was not the only view of the early church fathers up until 325 and that Origen did not stand alone. Against Papias, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and a cast of others, Charles Hill lines up Clement, Polycarp, Hippolytus, and another cast of others, not to mention Origen, who do not share this premillennialism. Some figures on this other side of the millennial fence even explicitly reject it.10

The standout figure here is Origen with his spiritual view of the kingdom. No doubt (overly) influenced by Neoplatonic thought, Origen was quite troubled by the physicality—like that of Papias’s wildly fruitful grape clusters—and literalness—like that of Tertullian’s hermeneutic—afoot. In his Hexapla, he lays forth the threefold sense of his hermeneutic, comprised of the literal, the moral, and the allegorical. He was captivated by the latter, applying his allegorical method with abandon to the biblical teaching of the kingdom, especially to the earthy descriptions of the kingdom in the scrolls of the Old Testament Prophets. When these prophets talk about grapes and wine and grain and bread, Origen argued, they were certainlynot talking about grapes and wine and grain and bread. They were using the physical to point to the true, deeper, spiritual meaning. The kingdom of God is, according to Origen, spiritual. All of those prophesied blessings speak of the glories of the soul’s union with God.11 Benedict Viviano speaks of Origen’s “interiorization” of the kingdom, citing as evidence his repeated reference to the kingdom of God “in us.”12

Hill sets forth a nuanced view of the kingdom of God in the first few centuries of the church’s life, seeing both millennialist views (historic premillennialism) and non-millennialist views. The upshot of this means that, when it comes to thinking on the kingdom of God from 100 through the 300s, there is one line of interpretation that stresses the future, literal, and physical kingdom of God to come and another line of interpretation that sees the kingdom of God as spiritual, realized in the soul’s union with God now, and to be consummated in the future.

As we move out of the 300s and into the 400s we encounter one of the most significant stages of the historical development of the theology of the kingdom of God—that of Augustine and his work. He seems to follow in the train of Origen, and there are indeed similarities. But Augustine’s view, in the end, is all his own. His view is worth understanding because it almost exclusively dominated the field for centuries and continues to be deeply felt.

Though Augustine discusses quite a few subjects in his monumental City of God (written on and off from 413–427), the kingdom of God takes center stage. Augustine prefers the term city, from Psalm 87:3, though he does not mean a geographical place. He writes, “These we also mystically call the two cities, or the two communities of men, of which one is predestined to reign eternally with God, and the other to suffer eternal punishment with the devil.”13

Though Augustine was an ardent opponent of Neoplatonism, platonic ideas nevertheless do influence his thoughts on the kingdom. The physical descriptions of blessings, which Papias took literally, point Augustine past the shadow, the real, and on to the substance, the ideal. The abundance of physical blessings, in other words, served as the vehicle the biblical authors used to deliver their message of the real essence of the kingdom of God, which is the unadulterated union with the Triune God and the future absolute reign of God over all things. Augustine declares, “How great shall be that felicity, which shall be tainted with no evil, which shall lack no good, and which shall afford leisure for the praises of God, who shall be all in all.”14 Augustine’s view of the kingdom, as that of Papias and Tertullian and the other literalists, involves a future kingdom, one that came once this life passed. So he writes with a faraway look in his eye of the kingdom to come, “whilst on our pilgrimage we sigh for its beauty.”15

Augustine then stresses a figurative kingdom, derived from an allegorical or figurative hermeneutic, which will be consummated in the future. And in Augustine’s philosophy of history, the kingdom is not only the end chronologically; it is also the end teleologically. So he writes, “For what other end do we propose to ourselves than to attain the kingdom of which there is no end?”16 The civitas terrena (City of Man) will pass away and only the civitas Dei (City of God) will remain.

Two things emerge from this brief look into the early church’s perspective on the kingdom of God. One concerns the variegated nature of the perspectives. It is an oversimplification to speak of the early church’s understanding of the kingdom as monolithic. We should recognize that there are differences.

The second thing that emerges concerns the influence of the sociological or cultural situation on theologizing. That is to say, the various views of the kingdom of God put forth by the church fathers were influenced by their respective contexts. Martyrs and those facing persecution (including mostly, but not exclusively, figures from the pre-Nicene era) looked for a time when the tables would be reversed. The kingdom was to be a time of rich blessing for the poor, the outcast, those we would call today the socially marginalized. In another vein, Augustine developed a hermeneutic and a theology, specifically a theology of the kingdom, both impacted by his platonic tendencies and by the immediate circumstances of the fall of Rome. The earthly cities, no matter how glorious, have their limits and their final ends. What may be said of this dynamic of the cultural influence on theologizing about the kingdom of God applies equally to theologians and biblical scholars working in the centuries since and right up to the twenty-first century.

The End of the World: The Kingdom of God in the Medieval Church As mentioned, Augustine’s understanding of the kingdom of God and, consequently, his eschatology, dominated the medieval period. One notable exception, however, was the thinking of Joachim of Fiore (c. 1135–1202). Joachim’s work sparked an apocalyptic frenzy among followers on the one hand and received an anathema from the Fourth Lateran Council in 1213 on the other hand.

Joachim, taking his cue from certain verses of the book of Revelation and texts elsewhere in Scripture, uncovered a secret code outlining the three successive status, or states, of God’s dealings with humanity. The third status was the time in which he lived and, as he saw things, which would come to an end at 1260, at which time the Antichrist would be revealed in a time of conflict, ushering in the end times.17 Joachim reintroduced millennial thinking and linked such thinking to the political moves of the day, mixing temporal causes with the eternal cause of the reign of righteousness. This was the era of the Crusades. His followers, the Joachimites, ranged the spectrum from the tame to the fanatic. And his views, once they trickled down, were quite popular among the masses, and even among kings, like the famed Richard the Lionhearted. Joachim placed a focus on Revelation, a book sometimes obscured due to its complexity. The careful study of the last book of the New Testament, he argued, revealed hidden clues to understanding the climax of God’s dealing with humanity. The pages of Revelation held the key to understanding all things.

Joachimism was met theologically by Thomas Aquinas, who preferred more of an Augustinian hermeneutic and, consequently, understanding of the kingdom of God. Aquinas lacked any such millennialist approach in his understanding of the kingdom, seeing it instead as meaning both “Christ himself dwelling in us through grace” and the future realization of the kingdom in heaven.18

The vision-filled Joachiamite tradition, though, proved to be a formidable match for the theological sophistication of the Thomist tradition. This can be seen in no less a person than Christopher Columbus and in no less an event than the fabled “discovery of the New World” in 1492. In addition to making four voyages across the untamed Atlantic, Columbus also wrote a book, The Book of Prophecies, offered to his beloved patrons, Ferdinand and Isabella, king and queen of Spain. It is a book of quotations that Columbus garnered from the pages of Scripture, the patristic period, and the medieval era, including, of course, Joachim himself. This work, as well as his “The Account of the Fourth Voyage,” leads Bernard McGinn to hang Columbus out on the same line as apocalyptic-obsessed medieval theologians. McGinn admits, “To those accustomed to see the discovery of America as the work of a hard-headed practical seaman flouting the traditions of the past, the picture of Columbus as a religious visionary strongly influenced by centuries of apocalyptic hopes may seem strange.” Then McGinn adds, “But the existence of this element in the great explorer’s complex personality is undeniable, and its force became stronger as he neared the end of his adventurous life.”19 A few lines from Columbus’s “The Account of the Fourth Voyage” show McGinn’s estimation not to be wide of the mark:

Jerusalem and Mount Sion are to be rebuilt by the hands of Christians, as God has declared by the mouths of his prophet in the fourteenth Psalm (vv. 7Ex.8). The Abbott Joachim said that he who should do this was to come from Spain. . . . Who will offer himself for this work? Should anyone do so, I pledge myself, in the name of God, to convey him safely hither, provided the Lord permits me.20

Leaving the medieval era, we see two main strands of thinking on the kingdom of God. The first, following Augustine, stresses the allegorical understanding of the kingdom, closely identifying the kingdom with the soul’s union with God individually and collectively. The elect being in union with the triune God is the end, both teleologically and chronologically. The kingdom, in Aquinas’s thought for example, is the beatification of the saints with God in heaven. Here he echoes the work of Augustine. The other strand of thinking on the kingdom of God in the medieval era is in the apocalyptic tradition. This view links global evangelism (understood in terms of baptism and membership in the Roman Catholic Church) of the heathen with the coming kingdom, stresses cataclysmic events as inaugurating the kingdom, and reads current events through the lens of biblical prophecies. This strand is marked by visionaries, chief among them Joachim of Fiore, who both interpret the times and lend their own predictions concerning the times.

“Christ Is the King”: The Kingdom of God in the Reformation Martin Luther’s thoughts on the kingdom of God look, like the rest of his theology, quite different from that of the medieval churchmen and theologians. Bernard Lohse argues that Luther links his understanding of the kingdom of God—the two kingdoms, actually, that of God and that of the world—to his understanding of the difference between law and gospel, which amounts to, in Lohse’s estimation, “help[ing] secure gospel purity and faith.”21 Simplifying these connections would not suffice because, for Luther, the stakes could not be higher when it came to rightly understanding the kingdom of God. Luther preferred to speak of two kingdoms rather than Augustine’s two cities, seeing all of humanity as citizens of either the kingdom of God or the kingdom of the world. As for the former, Luther declares, “Those who belong to the kingdom of God are all the true believers who are in Christ and under Christ, for Christ is King and Lord in the kingdom of God, as Psalm 2 and all of Scripture says.”22 But then Luther, striking a different chord on the kingdom from Augustine’s, adds, “For this reason [Christ] came into this world, that he might begin God’s kingdom and establish it in this world.”23

Lohse sees significant differences in Luther’s thinking from that of Augustine.24 Whereas Augustine preferred more of a dialectical relationship between this world and the next, between the spiritual (the civitas Dei, City of God) and the temporal (the civitas terrena, City of Man), Luther had a larger place for God to be at work in the world and, consequently, for the church to be at work in the world. This dynamic drives Luther’s ethics, not to mention his politics.25 Lohse further notes how Luther’s and Augustine’s differences stop when it comes to the eschatological perspective on the kingdom. Concerning the future consummation of the kingdom of God, the two were agreed. According to both, the ultimate realization of the kingdom would not be of this world.

Luther’s more radical colleagues, who would soon break off from him altogether, dissented from his perspective on the kingdom of God. Chief among them is Thomas Muntzer, the Reformation’s own version of Joachim of Fiore. By 1520, Muntzer had become rather fanatical. By the mid-1520s he took to interpreting dreams. For him, the kingdom of God would come to earth, rather violently, as God’s people took to the battlefield in the name of righteousness. Muntzer attached apocalyptic significance to the Peasants’ War, assuring the peasants that God was on their side against the godless nobles. It all ended rather badly for the peasants. Muntzer fared no better, eventually being captured and beheaded.26

Muntzer was associated with the Anabaptist movement, the majority of which renounced such violence. In fact, the Anabaptists came to be marked by a significant disinterest in the political affairs of the civitas terrena. The perspective of the Anabaptists may be summarized in the letter that Michael Saddler, an early Anabaptist leader and primary author of the Schleitheim Confession, wrote just before his martyrdom. “Flee the shadow of this world,” he exhorted his congregation.27 Far from taking up arms, the Anabaptist view of the kingdom that emerged consisted of championing the cause of the oppressed. John Howard Yoder’s The Politics of Jesus (1972) and Donald B. Kraybill’s The Upside-Down Kingdom (1978) reflect this Anabaptist understanding of the meaning of the kingdom of God to the present day.

Returning to the magisterial Reformers, John Calvin argued that the kingdom of God, as Christ proclaimed it, is the gospel and all that it conveys to believers. Calvin writes, “By the kingdom of God, which [Christ] taught was at hand, he meant the forgiveness of sins, salvation, life, and utterly everything that we obtain in Christ.”28 Elsewhere, Calvin says, “God reigns where men, both by denial of themselves and by contempt of the world and of earthly life, pledge themselves to his righteousness in order to aspire to a heavenly life.”29

It is notable that neither Luther nor Calvin made interpreting the book of Revelation a priority. As Benedict Viviano points out, Calvin did not “worry much about apocalyptic eschatology.”30 The same may be said of Luther. Both Reformers were far more interested in connecting their understanding of the kingdom to the gospel, both to proclaiming and living it. They had a future eschatology, but certainly not a detailed one.

Interlude

“Look! Here’s the Kingdom”: The Kingdom of God in the Modern Age It might be helpful to set the stage for the twentieth century by looking outside of theology and for a brief moment looking at the work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel’s ideas significantly shaped the modern world, introducing his idea of progress. Progress comes through the dialectic, which Hegel used to explain the history of ideas. The dialectic starts with the thesis (the accepted idea), which is then met by the antithesis (an opposing idea), which then eventually emerges into a synthesis (a composite idea), which then becomes the new thesis. And so ideas march on, and humanity and history always progress to the newer, the better, and the higher. What is noteworthy here is how Hegel baptized this idea in an attempt to give it religious significance. God himself, the Zeitgeist (Time Spirit), is that which progresses, that which is newer, better, higher. The trickle-down effect of Hegel’s thinking is enormous, especially on more liberal theologies. This philosophical perspective underlies realized eschatology, which comes to dominate liberal theology from the end of the nineteenth through the twentieth century. This philosophical perspective also underlies the politicization of the kingdom that also marks the modern age. The kingdom of God becomes politicized when it gets identified with or attached to an ideological agenda.

Lesslie Newbigin offers a healthy corrective to this modernist tendency to politicize the kingdom and co-opt God’s agenda for one’s own. He writes of the necessity

to insist that the fulfillment of Christ’s commission must include the call to a total allegiance to Jesus, and to commitment to the company of His people, the company that bears his name, the church. Without this, talk about the Kingdom is too easily co-opted into a utopianism which owes more to the nineteenth-century doctrine of progress than to the essentially apocalyptic teaching of the New Testament about the kingdom.31