More Blatant PFAL Errors

[Mark Clarke]

I agree with you. It has come in a limited sense, or a "seed" form, as a foretaste, but not fully consummated yet.

I just wanted to qualify that statement. The phrase "Kingdom of God" is used in a few passages to refer to a preliminary, or preparatory stage of God's Kingdom plan. This preliminary phase includes the announcement of the Kingdom, the identification of Jesus as the King, the demonstration of Kingdom power as a foretaste, the suffering and death of Jesus to ratify the New Covenant, and the offering of that Covenant afterward, and the preaching of the Kingdom and preparation of disciples for their part in ruling in the coming Kingdom. But in the vast majority of passages, the Kingdom itself is most often referred to and defined as a future, end-time related event.

[Cynic]

I am trying to stay away from posting at Grease Spot (in part to concentrate on developing content at my website), but I recommend that anyone interested in some convincing commentary concerning the age to come -- and whether Jesus inaugurated the Kingdom of God or whether the Kingdom of God is yet to come -- read the following short articles:

http://two-age.org/beliefs_index/eschatology.htm

http://two-age.org/beliefs_index/two-age.htm

The first coming of Christ was an eschatological event (1 Cor. 10:11). Christ inaugurated the Kingdom of God and presently reigns as King. The Kingdom has been established spiritually, and the redemptive benefits of Christ’s work transmitted by the person of the Holy Spirit to those who are Christ’s. This kingdom will be established visibly on Earth, however, at a future eschatological event.

Those who have been redeemed by Christ are in the kingdom -- NOW (Colossians 1:13)

Edited March 5, 2009 by Cynic

[Cynic]

(deleted -- double post)

Edited March 5, 2009 by Cynic

[Cynic]

I notice what I posted seems much the same as John Piper's view (posted by Geisha), though the www.two-age.org folks possibly give more emphasis to the present kingdom reality.

[geisha779]

I am trying to stay away from posting at Grease Spot (in part to concentrate on developing content at my website), but I recommend that anyone interested in some convincing commentary concerning the age to come -- and whether Jesus inaugurated the Kingdom of God or whether the Kingdom of God is yet to come -- read the following short articles:

http://two-age.org/beliefs_index/eschatology.htm

http://two-age.org/beliefs_index/two-age.htm

The first coming of Christ was an eschatological event (1 Cor. 10:11). Christ inaugurated the Kingdom of God and presently reigns as King. The Kingdom has been established spiritually, and the redemptive benefits of Christ's work transmitted by the person of the Holy Spirit to those who are Christ's. This kingdom will be established visibly on Earth, however, at a future eschatological event.

Those who have been redeemed by Christ are in the kingdom -- NOW (Colossians 1:13)

Cynic,

Those are excellent articles and a great site. When you have some time please do come back, I have a few questions and bet you could help me out. One of the articles mentioned the thousand year reign. Maybe you could clarify this for me from the reformed perspective.

We are servants of the king and in the kingdom NOW. Those who have been redeemed, thanks for pointing this out.

Just curious, have you read any AW Tozer. I am reading The Knowledge of the Holy, for the second time. Really amazing book. If you haven't read it, I bet you would enjoy it.

[Mark Clarke]

While there are references to a foretaste of the Kingdom's power, and the announcement, or heralding, or preaching, of the Good News about the Kingdom, I don't know if it's correct to say that the Kingdom was inaugurated at the time of Christ. He and the disciples said it was near, not here. Jesus taught us to pray "thy kingdom come" - which wouldn't make sense if it had come. Joseph of Arimathaea was still "waiting for" the kingdom at the time that Jesus was crucified (Mark 15:43). And the cataclysmic signs that will precede Jesus' coming in glory are said to also be signs that "the Kingdom of God is near" (Luke 21:31) - that is, it still won't be here at that time, but about to appear. The vast amount of Scripture clearly refers to the Kingdom of God as the event which will take place at the end of this age, with the return of Christ and the resurrection of the just.

Only a few verses even seem to say that it is present, and they are referring to a previously unforeseen phase of the Kingdom plan, in which the Gospel of the Kingdom is preached, the children of the Kingdom live among the children of the evil one, and the spirit and power of the Kingdom are experienced as a token or pledge, a "down-payment" of the inheritance that is to come in the future. I think any reference to the Kingdom of God being present now must be understood in this way.

See "Kingdom of God: Present or Future?" -

http://focusonthekingdom.org/articles/kingdom.htm

Edited March 6, 2009 by Mark Clarke

[Cynic]

For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then shall he render unto every man according to his deeds. Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. – Matthew 16:27-28 (ASV)

Mark,

From the present historical vantage point, some fundamental assumptions, and a broad consideration of other scriptural passages, some of us infer that the Lord is speaking both of something that was temporally distant and something that was temporally rather near.

I do not think you can identify any people who heard Jesus speak, and who are now more than 1900 years old. I do not think, furthermore, you would consider those who sleep in Christ to qualify as people who have not tasted of death in any wise. I also do not think you can offer a plausible notion of what the Lord is saying in a way that is really consistent with your apparent assumptions.

While Matthew 16:27-28 is a passage that might be initially difficult for all, interaction with it and/or similar passages seems to be something that reveals the teachings and theology of some to be shipwrecked.

Full preterists, for instance, wildly maintain that Christ returned, that all biblical prophesy was fulfilled, and that the resurrection of the dead occurred in 70 A.D.

John Schoenheit and some others (e.g. Albert Schweitzer), on the other hand, have engaged in commentary that ostensibly portrays Jesus as possessing false expectations about the timing of eschatological events, and erring in some eschatological statements.

The kingdom of God both has come and is yet to come.

Citing scriptures that indicate the kingdom of God to be future does not carry your argument. Doing so supports a non-controversial point (i.e. that the kingdom of God is scripturally referred to as a future eschatological event). Your challenge is to interact with scriptures that indicate the kingdom of God is a present reality.

Edited March 6, 2009 by Cynic

[Cynic]

Cynic,

Those are excellent articles and a great site. When you have some time please do come back, I have a few questions and bet you could help me out. One of the articles mentioned the thousand year reign. Maybe you could clarify this for me from the reformed perspective.

We are servants of the king and in the kingdom NOW. Those who have been redeemed, thanks for pointing this out.

Just curious, have you read any AW Tozer. I am reading The Knowledge of the Holy, for the second time. Really amazing book. If you haven't read it, I bet you would enjoy it.

Geisha,

I cannot really give you a definitively “Reformed perspective” on the thousand-year reign. To begin with, Reformed folks vary in their eschatological views, though they seem (presently at least) predominately to be amillennialists or postmillennialists. Secondly, although I lean very heavily towards amillennialism, there are a number of unconsidered and undefined elements in my own eschatological views.

I don’t mind trying to answer some of your questions, but you might try posting a question to the website of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church at http://opc.org/contact_handler.php?contact...estion=theology . The one question I posted there was assigned to a professor of systematic theology, who answered the substance of the question correctly. and who was even quite candid in comments questioning the breadth of acquaintance with the issue among the Reformed ministerial community.

The http://www.two-age.org site is amillennial. Amillennialism is characterized, of course, by the belief that there will not be a future literal 1000-year reign of Christ on earth, maintaining rather that Christ is now reigning from heaven. I came across something by Vern Poythress indicating amillennialsts have had varying emphases and views across history, but some recent amillennial theologians whom I think are serious Christian believers and biblical scholars who have enlightened the eschatological conversation are Geerhardus Vos, Meredith Kline, and Richard Gaffin – though I reject a number of things (e.g. the “framework hypothesis”) maintained by Kline.

Edited March 7, 2009 by Cynic

[Mark Clarke]

For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then shall he render unto every man according to his deeds. Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. – Matthew 16:27-28 (ASV)

Mark,

From the present historical vantage point, some fundamental assumptions, and a broad consideration of other scriptural passages, some of us infer that the Lord is speaking both of something that was temporally distant and something that was temporally rather near.

I agree, to a point. I think when you examine the (relatively few) passages in which he speaks of something temporally near, you find that it is in the sense of an unforeseen interim period between his first coming and the second coming at which he will inaugurate the Kingdom of God. The nature of this interim period is one of preparation for the coming future kingdom, during which the power of the Kingdom is seen in a token, a foretaste. Also during this period the Word of the Kingdom is implanted in us, and it grows and bears fruit, provided we are the right kind of soil.

This period was unforeseen because it involves what Jesus accomplished on the cross, in contrast to the expectation of the immediate appearing of the Kingdom. The "mysteries" of the Kingdom describe all this. The thing is, none of the passages that talk about that say that the Kingdom has "come" in anything but a preliminary, or preview sense. They speak of the announcement of the Kingdom, the demonstration of its power, the recruiting of disciples, and their growth and preparation for entering into the Kingdom.

I do not think you can identify any people who heard Jesus speak, and who are now more than 1900 years old. I do not think, furthermore, you would consider those who sleep in Christ to qualify as people who have not tasted of death in any wise. I also do not think you can offer a plausible notion of what the Lord is saying in a way that is really consistent with your apparent assumptions.

While Matthew 16:27-28 is a passage that might be initially difficult for all, interaction with it and/or similar passages seems to be something that reveals the teachings and theology of some to be shipwrecked.

There is really no problem with that passage when it is read in context. Ignoring the chapter break, the very next verse tells of Jesus taking them up the mountain and seeing the Transfiguration. The same statement is immediately followed by the Transfiguration in Mark 9 as well. The Transfiguraton was a preview of the future glory that Jesus will have when he returns. Peter speaks in his epistle of being an eyewitness of the majesty of Jesus associated with his power and coming.

II Peter 1:

16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming [parousia] of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

Full preterists, for instance, wildly maintain that Christ returned, that all biblical prophesy was fulfilled, and that the resurrection of the dead occurred in 70 A.D.

John Schoenheit and some others (e.g. Albert Schweitzer), on the other hand, have engaged in commentary that ostensibly portrays Jesus as possessing false expectations about the timing of eschatological events, and erring in some eschatological statements.

The kingdom of God both has come and is yet to come.

I think there is another possible understanding. While "The Kingdom of God" is most often used in its eschatological sense, the term is sometimes used to refer to a preliminary and preparatory stage of God's plan, as I described above. It is not necessary to conclude that the Kingdom has arrived in an invisible form. It all comes down to getting our definition of the Kingdom of God straight, for which we must understand the Hebrew Scriptures (i.e. Old Testament).

Citing scriptures that indicate the kingdom of God to be future does not carry your argument. Doing so supports a non-controversial point (i.e. that the kingdom of God is scripturally referred to as a future eschatological event). Your challenge is to interact with scriptures that indicate the kingdom of God is a present reality.

It's interesting that this has come up at this time, because I am in the process of rewriting some things about this very subject for my web site, which I hope to have completed soon. I don't have time to go into all of the verses, but there are some scholars who see the few Scriptures that speak of the Kingdom as being present in some sense as referring to its anticipation and a preview or foretaste of the Kingdom to come, rather than its arrival in part.

[geisha779]

Geisha,

I cannot really give you a definitively "Reformed perspective" on the thousand-year reign. To begin with, Reformed folks vary in their eschatological views, though they seem (presently at least) predominately to be amillennialists or postmillennialists. Secondly, although I lean very heavily towards amillennialism, there are a number of unconsidered and undefined elements in my own eschatological views.

I don't mind trying to answer some of your questions, but you might try posting a question to the website of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church at http://opc.org/contact_handler.php?contact...estion=theology . The one question I posted there was assigned to a professor of systematic theology, who answered the substance of the question correctly. and who was even quite candid in comments questioning the breadth of acquaintance with the issue among the Reformed ministerial community.

The http://www.two-age.org site is amillennial. Amillennialism is characterized, of course, by the belief that there will not be a future literal 1000-year reign of Christ on earth, maintaining rather that Christ is now reigning from heaven. I came across something by Vern Poythress indicating amillennialsts have had varying emphases and views across history, but some recent amillennial theologians whom I think are serious Christian believers and biblical scholars who have enlightened the eschatological conversation are Geerhardus Vos, Meredith Kline, and Richard Gaffin – though I reject a number of things (e.g. the "framework hypothesis") maintained by Kline.

Cynic,

What an amazing site and reference to have . . . as you know. . . I am interested in reformed systematic theology. I bet that professor who answered you was never even in a cult! So, thank-you!

The question I had was something the article mentioned about Amillennialism. Gerrhardus Vos wrote the article and it now makes sense he would say what he did. I was just a bit curious. I am also familar with Meredith Kline. In part because you had mentioned him on another post and I started to look him up. :)

Sabbatarian, British-Israel, Certain Messianic groups, Resoration theology, STIF(or any ex-twi splinter) http://www.michaelroodministries.com/cal_art6.htm Sacred Name, most former COG, Israeli Identity, and especially the Christian Identity movement, are things I do not find credible sources for understanding God. Other obviously disagree.

Thanks Cynic, it is nice when you pop in here and share some sound resources with us.

Edited March 7, 2009 by geisha779

[Mark Clarke]

Here's an interesting link. It gives a historical overview of the different views on the Kingdom of God.

http://www.luthersem.edu/word&world/Ar.../2-2_Duling.pdf

I was particularly interested in its summary of Johannes Weiss and what he wrote.

In 1892, before the heyday of the social gospel movement in the United States, theGerman Johannes Weiss not only questioned any attempt to coordinate the Kingdom with thechurch; he opposed the views of Ritschl and thereby placed a question mark on the liberalinterpretation of the Kingdom as religious experience and ethical action. Indeed, he challenged virtually every conclusion of the liberals in their quest for the historical Jesus! As a New Testament scholar, Weiss accepted a modified Two SourceTheory, but he argued that the few synoptic sayings of Jesus about the Kingdom aspresent—those held most dear by the liberal interpreters—could be best understood in line withthe more prevalent apocalyptic eschatological sayings. Thus, the Kingdom “in the midst of you”(Luke 17:21, for Renan and Harnack, “within you”) was an expression of “propheticenthusiasm”; being “in the Kingdom” (Matthew 11:11) was Jesus’ hypothetical way of speakingabout the reversal of rank in the future Kingdom; “entering the Kingdom” (Matt 21:31) merelymeant that the tax collectors and prostitutes had a head start over the leaders of the people; andthe only real possibility for thinking of the Kingdom as already present, “the Kingdom of Godhas come upon [ephthasen] you [plural]” (Matt 12:28; Luke 11:20), was said in the context of theexorcist’s eschatological battle with Satan; that is, it was an apocalyptic saying. Indeed, Weissargued that ephthasen should be interpreted like engiken (“has drawn near” or “is at hand”) inLuke 10:9 (“The Kingdom of God has come near to you”), and Luke 10:9 (cf. Matt 10:7) is oneof a group of sayings most like Jesus’ most typical utterance, “Repent; for the Kingdom of God isat hand” (the original form of Mark 1:15; cf. Luke 10:11). Thus, Weiss argued, the role of Jesusin establishing the Kingdom was merely preparatory, and the precise time of its future comingwas unknown. He opposed any attempt to establish the Kingdom, especially by revolutionary“men of violence” who “take it by force” (Matt 11:12). Weiss stressed that Jesus in no way leftbehind a Kingdom with a group of disciples; rather, he prayed for its coming to earth in thefuture (Matt 6:10) when he would again drink the fruit of the vine (Luke 22:18). Likewise, Weissargued that in Jesus’ view judgment would not conclude the progressively developing Kingdom,but precede the apocalyptic one, typified by cosmic catastrophes (Mark 13:24-25). Moreover,Jesus believed that he would judge as the exalted Son of man. Salvation, then, is future,unwordly, spiritual; it includes the joys of a messianic banquet, and glory. Ethics are not ethics ofthe Kingdom, but the ethics of preparation, said Weiss, and righteousness is the condition forentrance.

Here is another quote from Weiss on a blog, dealing with Jesus' statement "But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you":

http://kingdomready.org/blog/2007/11/21/je...satans-kingdom/

Edited March 10, 2009 by Mark Clarke

[geisha779]

Cynic,

Here is a link to the book I mentioned, The Knowledge of the Holy. Like John Piper, AW Tozer writes about the attributes of God and it is great stuff to ponder. Anyone can read the book online.

http://www.geocities.com/johncw7000/tozerk...eoftheholy.html

[spectrum49]

edited for deletion...post not intended after all

Edited March 10, 2009 by spectrum49

[spectrum49]

edited for deletion...post not intended after all

Edited March 10, 2009 by spectrum49

[Cynic]

Cynic,

Here is a link to the book I mentioned, The Knowledge of the Holy. Like John Piper, AW Tozer writes about the attributes of God and it is great stuff to ponder. Anyone can read the book online.

http://www.geocities.com/johncw7000/tozerk...eoftheholy.html

Thanks, Geisha!

I have heard of Tozer somewhere along the line, but know nothing about him. I saved the link, and plan to give his work a look.