The Nature of the Kingdom
I've often wished I could hear the conversation Jesus had with His disciples on the Emaus walk after His resurrection - in which he expounded all things in the Law and in the Prophets and in the Psalms, concerning Himself.
Well today I came across three verses wherein Jesus, during His ministry, drew passages of the Old Testament from each of those three categories - the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms - and revealed how each passage spoke about Him.
When I came across these verses in Luke, I thought to myself, "I should have known that whatever Jesus said to the disciples in that conversation along the Emaus road after His resurrection would be able to be found already taught during Jesus' earlier public ministry!"
As I thought on these verses today, it felt like Jesus was allowing me to be privy to that conversation with His disciples on the Emaus walk, as I saw how Jesus expounded all things concerning Himself in the Old Testament, fulfilling my heart's desire.
What I've discovered afresh is that throughout the entirety of Scripture - including the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, the Gospels, and the Epistles - the appearing of Christ's Kingdom at the end of time appears to be the major theme.
The Old Testament pointed forward towards the promised Kingdom of God - whilst he New Testament announces that the Kingdom of God is now at hand.
In reference to the coming Kingdom, the Old Testament is called "the former days" whilst the New Testament is called "the last days".
Both the Apostles (in the Epistles) and the John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus (in the Gospels) showed how the entire Old Testament testified to the same message of the Kingdom that they were now announcing - making all of Scripture one concurrent message about the Kingdom.
The Epistles and the Gospels both explained the form that the Kingdom would take - and they proved it from the Old Testament. For example:
The Gospels and the Epistles each prove from the Old Testament Scriptures that it was necessary for Christ to die, and afterwards to enter His glory
Each category of Scripture - the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, the Gospels, and the Epistles - allude to or explain the centrality of the cross
Each section of Scripture declares that God's Kingdom is coming
The difference in the New Testament is that it declares the Kingdom as being now at hand. This is why the Old Testament is referred to as "the former days" while the New Testament is called "the last days"
All sections of Scripture declare the coming resurrection and the Judgment
Each section of Scripture implies or teaches the form the Kingdom would take, which wasn't always the form the Jews were expecting
Each taught that whilst the Kingdom was promised first to the Jews, only a remnant of Jews would "perceive" and "understand" and be saved, and the rest would be hardened. Meanwhile, many Gentiles would believe and enter into the Kingdom
And each taught that from the time of Christ onwards, the Kingdom would begin to be announced and entered into by men, even though the Final Day of His Kingdom is yet to come.
The important observation I've therefore made is that the message which was being announced by the Apostles was not a different message to that of Jesus or John - it was the same Gospel of the Kingdom. The Epistles contain the same message as the Gospels.
And the Old Testament portrayed the Kingdom exactly as it transpired - exactly as recorded in the New Testament.
The message concerning the nature of the Kingdom is consistent and concurent throughout all of Scripture - without adjustment.
This means that when the Kingdom of God first began to be announced by John, by Jesus and by the Apostles - the Kingdom did not take on some form other than that which was prophesied in the Old Testament, just because Israel stumbled because of unbelief. The promises didn't fail. An unexpted parenthesis in God's dealings with mankind wasn't all of a sudden inserted. It all happened exactly as the Old Testament said it would.
For example, when it came to pass that the Gospel was predominantly accepted by Gentiles rather than Jews, this was not a failure of prophecy. Rather, this happened in direct fulfilment of specific prophecy.
This concurrence or unity or oneness of the message concerning the Kingdom throughout the whole Bible - Old and New Testaments, the Gospels and Epistles included - is an important observation to me because it means that there wasn't, as some say, one message for the Jews (written in the Gospels), and then a totally different message for the Church (the Epistles) due to Israel's rejection of the Messiah. It was one and the same message.
This message - that the Kingdom is now at hand - began to be announced first by John the Baptist, and then by Jesus, and that very same message continued to be the Apostles' and Paul's message in the Epistles - and continues to be our message today.
There is nothing in the New Testament indicating that the message should ever change prior to the Second Coming of Christ.
The message didn't change one bit just because Israel disbelieved in Christ.
Neither did the message change after the destruction of the Temple in AD70.
Neither did the message change after the last Apostle died; nor after the New Testament writings were completed.
We belong to the same Church that Paul did. Everything that was available to the early Church is still available to us; and everything the early Church preached is still being preached by us.
The power and lifestyle of the early Church is still the power and lifestyle to which we are called today.
The Gospel is still the Gospel, right up until the Second Coming of Christ - which was and is the great theme of the Gospel and indeed of all Scripture.
The Church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles (the Episltes) and Prophets (the Old Testament), Jesus Christ Himself being the chief-cornerstone (the Gospels).
The great theme of the Prophets and of the Gospels and of the Epistles is one and the same: Christ is coming, the blessed hope.
"Christ in you, the hope of glory".
Christ in us (now) is the hope, the foretaste, the guarantee, the current inner reality of that future coming glory - for both Jew and Gentile.
This congruency of the message - between the Epistles and the Gospels and the Old Testament - is an important observation because it defines the Kingdom, defines how to enter the Kingdom, defines the Kingdom objectives and lifestyle.
Firstly, it defines the Kingdom for a Jewish audience. They expected an immediate, geo-political Kingdom. Therefore they stumbled over accepting Jesus as the Messiah. But when we see the whole message of the Kingdom throughout all of Scripture as one congruous message, we now perceive that the Prophets already predicted the virgin birth, the humility of the King riding on a donkey, and His suffering atonement - before entering His glory. The cross was foundational to the Gospel of the Kingdom.
Secondly, it defines the Kingdom for a Gentile audience. Some say that the existence of the Gentile Church is not the same program that prophets talked about, not the same program which John and Jesus came to offer. They say that the prophecies about the Kingdom had to be postponed until a future dispensation of time, because the Jews unexpectedly rejected the Gospel. Therefore they say that the message of Paul to the Gentile Church was not the same offer of the Kingdom which John and Jesus made to Israel, but that "the Church" became an unexpected new program - like a parenthesis that had to be inserted into history - until a future dispensation of time when God can resume His original Kingdom purpose for Israel. But the Bible says that "Paul went preaching the Kingdom of God". That was Paul's theme throughout His whole career, and he used the Scriptures of the Prophets to prove that even they knew it would happen this way. It shows that the Church today (made up of Jew and Gentile) is receiving the fulfilment of prophecy regarding the Kingdom. Christ in us, in a combined Jew and Gentile Church, is the hope of glory which all Scripture points to.
Thirdly, it clears-up some tangents of thought about the form of the Kingdom today. All Scripture including the Prophets, the Gospels and the Epistles point to a future judgment and coming of the Lord and of His Kingdom. Some say this great day occurred in AD70 when a new theocracy began to grow in the world after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. This view has led some preachers to shift their focus "beyond the gospel" and towards social work, politics, business, and even to the military. If that was the case though, then Paul's Epistles wouldn't apply to the Church today, because he constantly mentions the Second Coming of the Lord and he wrote all this before AD70. If Paul spent so much time preaching about something which has now already happened - that means we should now be preaching a different message, a different Gospel, to Paul. And if that's the case, where is the "third testament" to give us the precedent of what to preach now? No - than God - there aren't two Churches, there are only two testaments, you and I belong to the same Church with the same message that Paul and Jesus and John had, and which the Prophets foresaw.
While Israel did experience a "casting off" that culminated in the destruction of the Temple in AD70, their tribulations certainly didn't end there. Jerusalem has been it certainlythe Kingdom will indeed appear openly on the last day, and meanwhile the Kingdom is now being announced and entered into; the Kingdom is "within you"
. But Jesus But when we realize that thisif we see simply becae Church is an unfortunate parenthesis that had to be inserted into God's dealingsIt's not "Kingdom", they say.They say that as not the same offerJesus building His Church being built predominantly of Gentile believers - despite the "Kingdom" being promised to Israel by the Prophets, they rejected it when John and Jesus came to offer it. Therefore, some say, God inserted a completely new program which included the Gentiles, but which focused on building the "Church" instead of "the Kingdom". the message taught in the Epistles to the Gentiles is not really an offer of "the Kingdom", but the , and they sayoffering that Kingdom but when Israel rejected John's and Jesus' offer of the Kingdom The great hope of the people of God of all ages is something yet to come - the hope of sharing eternal life and glory with God in His Kingdom, having been redeemed from our sin and delivered from all our enemies, the last enemy to be destroyed being death - that's the great hope, the great promise, the great theme of the Gospel, yea of all Scripture. And through the cross, all men are now entering into it.
The term "the last days" is in contrast to what the Bible calls "the former days". The term "the last days" is not so much about the number of days remaining (even though He is coming quickly) - but it is more about the type of days they are. We are the people "upon whom the ends of the world are come". That doesn't mean that we in our lifetime will see the end of the world. Whether we will be alive to see it or not, we are still the people who are partaking of that coming Kingdom, and who are administering the Kingdom - we are the people who are about Kingdom things, final things. It makes no difference whether we die before we see it - because at the Second Coming those who have died will be there, in fact they will rise first.