The Law of Love Toward the Enemy - II

Two police recruits run through
a felony traffic stop scenario at PTI.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:43-45).

The Pharisees grew out of the movement for independence during and after the time of the Maccabean revolt. Their faction of Judaism arose out of a reaction against Hellenism (Packer & Tenney, 1980). The Pharisees wanted to protect the Jewish culture from Greek influence. They were also profoundly concerned with rightly keeping Gods law. In an effort to be sure that they did not transgress Gods law, the Pharisees superimposed a network of regulations over the top of Gods law. The idea was that, if Gods law commanded not to take the name of The Lord your God in vain, we will teach that you just can't say Gods name. After all, if you don't say Gods name, it should be pretty hard take it in vain, right? Besides, what does it mean to take Gods name in vain anyway? Better to be on the safe side and just not say it. 

In this manner did the Pharisees build a "protective hedge" around Gods law. They told themselves that they were doing it to protect Gods commandments. In reality, they were building not a hedge to protect the law, but a wall which separated them from, and thus nullified, the law. This is the same reason that we do it - so that we are not confronted with just how inadequate we are when measured according to Gods standard. 

See, St. Paul explains that the whole point of Gods law is to show us our sin. When we look into that mirror of Gods law and see how ugly we look, it isn't easy to accept. This is just as true for us as it was for the Pharisees. Rather than building a hedge of protection around the law, they were actually replacing Gods law with man-made commandments which would a) look impressive to other men and cause them to appear "godly", and b) give them rules that they would actually be able to keep. One of the problems with this plan, though, is that the laws we construct out of our own mind bear little, if any, resemblance to the kinds of things God constructs out of His mind. 

In this last section of the Sermon on the Mount Jesus addresses one of our favorite bricks that we use in constructing our wall to trap Gods law: Love for our neighbor. Jesus begins by quoting scripture. The passage he cites comes from Leviticus:

You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD (Leviticus 19:17-18).

Right off the bat we run into one of Pharisaical bricks in the wall. The "love your neighbor" part of that sentence is part of scripture; the "hate your enemy" clause was a teaching added by the Pharisees. Kretzmann explains:

The first injunction is found in the Law, Lev. 19, 18. The second part of the sentence is an addition made by the rabbis. They understood the word "neighbor" of the members of their own nation only, arguing from the many passages of the Law in which God had commanded the children of Israel to destroy the heathen nations. But in all those instances the children of Israel were merely carrying out God's penal justice. Their argument would therefore not stand, especially in view of Ex. 22, 21; 23, 9; Lev. 19, 33; Deut. 10, 18. 19; 24, 17; 27, 19. Jesus insists that all hatred is contrary to humaneness, opposed to the spirit which He was striving to foster (Kretzmann, 1921).

The problem is that we’re really good at hatred. Not only that, it feels really good when we are immersed in it. We love giving people “a piece of our mind”, or confronting that person who has done something – whether perceived or real – to hurt or offend us. Heck, we even love telling other people, those whom we “love”, all of the hateful things our enemies have done to us behind our enemies’ back. We can totally relate to what the Pharisees were getting at when they taught, “hate your enemy.” This is our default setting. We automatically feel this way. It feels natural and right to be nice to the people who are nice to us and hate the people who treat us badly. A Pharisee from Jesus’ day might even argue that, though it is not explicitly stated, the injunction to hate one’s enemies is implied. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Even the secular world understands that these instinctual reactions must, in certain circumstances, be trained out of us.

The University of Illinois Police Training Institute was established in 1955. PTI is one of the largest and longest-serving police academies in the United States (Police Training Institute). Thousands of police officers and correctional officers have received their training from retired and active law enforcement officers at PTI since its inception. In addition to the classroom work, the physical training, the self-defense training, and the weapons training, one of the most important things to which police recruits are subjected is practical, or scenario-based training. This is where recruits are dressed up in their uniforms, given a scenario, and expected to apply all the things that they have learned to bring the scenario to the appropriate conclusion. As everyone must surely know, practical application of theory never goes as smoothly as expected, especially the first time it is applied to a real-world situation.

It is for this reason that police recruits at PTI are subjected to mock traffic stops and mock 911 calls. The instructors and role-players with whom the recruits interact attempt to recreate as closely as possible the real-world situations in which the recruits will soon find themselves. These scenarios range from the mock stolen bicycle report, to the mock active school shooter situation, complete with projectile-firing weapons. Before entering the scenarios, however, instructors attempt to instill in their students one maxim above all others – If it feels good, don’t say it. You see, the role players are instructed to take their cues throughout the scenario from the police recruit. This is to make tactically wise, safe, and legal behaviors habitual with the recruit. Consequently, if a recruit leaves himself vulnerable to attack, the role player is to exploit his advantage. It is easier, however, at least at the beginning, for a recruit to remember to protect their weapon from a potentially dangerous individual, than it is to remember to avoid getting into a shouting match with a belligerent motorist to whom he is giving a citation. It is a human’s natural reaction to argue with people, especially when we are right and they are wrong. There is so much we relish saying to them just in order to “get our digs in”. It makes us feel good. A police officer on the job, however, must act contrary to his instinct when it comes to this circumstance. If it feels good, he must not say it, but remain professional and courteous lest he escalate the situation. Some officers are more successful than others. Some Christians, are more successful at this than others as well.

Christians, being aware that we have a corrupt, sinful human nature, should all be a little wary of those things that “just feel right”. More often than not, those things that just seem right and feel natural to our flesh are contrary to the spirit of Christ living inside us, if indeed we are regenerate men. When you think about it, it is easy to see how mankind could twist God’s word that tells us to love our neighbors into an excuse to hate. 

For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:46—48).

Jesus knocks down the man-made wall surrounding God’s word and reveals it to us. He tells us to love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute us; since we are his sons, we should take after our father. He tells us that God our heavenly father, in his gracious providence cares for evil people as well as good people, and that this attitude of loving only those who love you in return is a product of our sinful nature, since this is how even the hated tax collectors and Gentiles act. He commands us to be perfect.

That is, however, only part of the lesson. We know that we can’t be perfect. Jesus isn’t giving us a goal to meet so that, if we meet it, we will be “good” and therefore right with God. Quite to the contrary, he is using the law to show us our sin. He is showing us that the perfection required of us by God is impossible for us to reach. He is calling us to repent of our sin. As Martin Luther wrote regarding this, “At this point you will discover how hard it is to do the good works God commands...You will find out that you will be occupied with the practice of this work for the rest of your life” (Engelbrecht, 2009). You will also find, to finish Dr. Luther’s thought, that it is an impossible task.

We try, like the Pharisees, to set up our own moral codes to live by that we think we can keep. In the end we don’t even live up to them, so we have to keep changing our morals to fit our lives. If we do well by our own standards we pat ourselves on the back; when we fail, we console ourselves with the lie that, as long as we do the best we can, God will be happy with us. The words of Jesus, however, remain – You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

So here we are. God commands us to love our fellow man, “friend” and “enemy” alike. We fail. We are guilty of sin, guilty of missing God’s mark, and no amount of perceived good works we do will make up for that fact. Nothing we do can offset that. We are told to feed our enemies when they are hungry and to give them drink when they are thirsty but we do not[1]. We are told to forgive those who sin against us but we do not[2]. We are told to be kind and compassionate to each other and to forgive each other, just as we have been forgiven by God through Christ but we do not[3]. No subtle rewriting of God’s word will hide our sin or assuage our guilty consciences for, if we have spent any time looking into our hearts, we know that what God’s word says of us is true. We are conceived in iniquity and born in sin[4]; the thoughts of our hearts are evil from our youth[5]; our hearts are filled with evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander[6].

Left here, we would fall into despair, and rightly so. We certainly do not deserve any of God’s gifts, especially forgiveness for these sins of thought, word, and deed. Thankfully for mankind, God does not think or operate like we do. While we are sinners, God has called us to repentance and faith in Jesus through His holy word. In the Law God shows us who we are, sin and all, and we see His wrath. In the Gospel God shows us what he has done, and continues to do, for our salvation (Luther, 1991).

This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us (1 John 1:5-10). 

Because God the Father loves mankind he sent Jesus, his one and only Son, into the world to bear our sin and to be our savior. Jesus, God in human flesh, demonstrated for us the very thing he taught in the Sermon on the Mount by his willingness to be put to death on the cross. You see, we did not do anything “good” which attracted us to Jesus and compelled him to save us. He loved us, his enemies, while we were still wretched and condemned sinners. St. Paul writes in Romans:

For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation (Roman 5:6-11).

Christ went to the cross in our place. And, because he rose from the grave, we who trust in him will also rise. This is the attitude we are to strive for when dealing with our neighbors. And, because Christ has been victorious over sin, death and the devil, he enables us to do good works – including loving our neighbor – by the power of his Holy Spirit.

Works Cited

Engelbrecht, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Kretzmann, P. E. (1921). Popular Commentary of the Bible: New Testament (Vol. 1). St. Louis, MO, USA: Concordia Publishing House.

Luther, M. (1991). Luther's Small Catechism. (C. P. House, Trans.) Saint Louis, Missouri, USA: Concordia Publishing House.

Packer, J. I., & Tenney, M. C. (Eds.). (1980). Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible. Nashville, TN, USA: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Police Training Institute. (n.d.). Retrieved October 4, 2013, from Police Training Institute University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: http://www.pti.uiuc.edu/

End Notes

[1] Romans 12:20 

[2] Matthew 6:15 

[3] Ephesians 4:32 

[4] Psalm 51:5 

[5] Genesis 8:21 

[6] Matthew 15:19

The Happy Atheist...he has Issues (ETC)

Below is the text of a letter I wrote to Rev. Todd Wilken, host of Issues ETC, following the fascinating interview he conducted with P.Z. Myers, author of The Happy Atheist. To hear the interview, click on the link below. This is a great exposition of the doctrine of the "New" Atheism, in the words of one of their own:

Issues ETC Interview 

The Happy Atheist - PZ Myers

08/29/2013

Dear Pastor Wilken,

I listened to your interview with the Happy Atheist today and am thankful that you took to time to interview him. The so-called "new" atheists have attempted to cover their hostility toward God with the veneer of reason, science, "reasonableness", glued in place with the bonding agent of elitism. I believe that your straightforward conversation with Dr. P.Z. Myers exposed that, and helped to illustrate that New Atheism is nothing new. It is the same hatred for God and defiant opposition to God's moral standard written on the very fabric of human kind that it has always been since man's fall into sin.

I realize that you had a limited time with Dr. Myer and to address specific issues would have had the potential to turn the interview into debate. That being said, a few points from the interview did stick in my mind, and I would have liked to have heard Dr. Myers' answers.

At the beginning of the interview Dr. Myers asserted that there is absolutely no historical basis for the New Testament documents. I'm sure that you had to bite your tongue to let that one go by, as we know from the very best and most recent scholarship that the New Testament documents are supremely reliable as historical record. As stated numerous times on Issues ETC, archaeology continues to support the validity of the New Testament accounts.

You asked Dr. Myers how he would react to all of the positive contributions to the world which seemed to have sprung from a Christian ethos, citing abolitionism, hospitals, orphanages, universal education, etc. Dr. Meyer said (I paraphrase) that it was a revision of history to talk about Christianity/religion as a force for good in history; He specifically attacked Christianity's role in the abolition movement and the position of slavery within the Christian worldview in general. He did not, however, answer the other examples you raised. I have seen Christian, Jewish, and Muslim hospitals, schools, and orphanages. I cannot recall seeing, or ever hearing of any such charity founded by a movement of secular humanism. I'm sure humanistic charities exist. They do not, however, exist as the norm of compassionate giving and human care and relief - they are the exception. Christian, and other religious charity, however, is the rule.

Dr. Meyer also stated, echoing the position of others within New Atheism, that there is no absolute moral authority. All morality is arbitrary, and to be based on "man's interaction with man" as man must live in community to survive. He conceded that different communities would come up with different community rules and standards, and that destructive "community moralities" (my own term) should be discouraged. Who is to determine what is destructive and what is constructive? Do opposing forces inside the community battle it out until one side or the other is dominant? The National Socialist worldview was considered constructive by those people who believed and implemented it. This worldview, justly implemented by a community of people (according to the argument made by Dr. Myers), is responsible for the destruction of millions of people considered to be sub-human, and a world war was fought to bring about it's end. Is Nazism simply wrong because the Allies were stronger than the Axis and won a war (ie a higher/stronger community standard)? Without some kind of absolute moral standard, what right did the Allied powers have to deem the Nazi's worldview as destructive and impose their own will instead. This seems to revert to the axiom, "Might Makes Right".

In the most ghastly segment about human rights and abortion, Dr. Myers stated that, "...personhood emerges gradually..." This view seems to echo that of Dr. Peter Singer, professor of Bioethics at Princeton who believes that right to life is tied to a beings capability to hold preferences, and that killing a newborn baby is not equivalent to killing a person because babies lack the essential characteristics of personhood. If "personhood" does indeed emerge gradually as Dr. Myers states: 1) Who determines when someone has achieved personhood, or when someone has lost the personhood they once possessed? 2) If a newborn baby is not immediately a person at birth (as Dr. Myers implied) but rather develops into a person at some indeterminate time during it's physical growth and cognitive development, what implications does this have for so-called women's rights? Would a mother have the right to "abort" her "non-person" newborn just as she had the right to abort her "non-person" fetus when it was in the womb? 3) Do human rights apply to human beings, or only to persons? If human rights apply only to "persons" then the application of those rights depend on whether or not that human being is a person. That determination is made according to the human beings size, level of development, environment, and/or degree of dependency and is essentially arbitrary, being totally subject to the "community", which could change its standard as it desired, unless some other "community" that developed was stronger and asserted its dominance.

Fortunately, the world does not function this way. God's law is written on our hearts. There is no one righteous, not one. What's more is that we know our state, and how helpless we are. Thanks be to God that he has provided redemption, pardon, and peace to us through the death and resurrection of his Son Jesus Christ. The Happy Atheist is nothing more than a real world example of what St. Paul writes about the depravity of unregenerate humanity in Romans:

"Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them," (Romans 1:28-32).

Thank you for straightforwardly exposing Dr. Myers' beliefs and letting his words show the depravity of New Atheism. God bless you also for firmly confessing your faith to him toward the end of the program, and rightly proclaiming law and gospel to him as you did so.

God's Richest Blessings to You in Christ!

The Hodgkins Lutheran

The Law of Love Toward the Enemy - I

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you (Matthew 5:38-42).

Nearly everyone has heard the phrase, "An eye for an eye." People, however, often have a mistaken notion of what it means. Gandhi is famously, even if probably erroneously, credited with saying, "An eye for an eye will make the world blind," as an argument for pacifism. This jejune use of the phrase "an eye for an eye" demonstrates the worldly misunderstanding of what it actually means in context. This phrase "an eye for an eye" is often used by people to justify retaliation against another person to get even for some wrong that was done to them. After all, the Bible says, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But that isn't really what that phrase means at all. Jesus, in Matthew chapter five, is referring back to what is written in Exodus 21 before making his point:

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, and stripe for stripe (Exodus 21:22-25).

This passage, far from being an authorization to exact revenge on those who wrong you like some kind of Biblically sanctioned Beatrix Kiddo, comes from Israelite civil law. The government has this authority from God, through his law, to punish wrongdoing and exact retribution. In this passage from Exodus we see the guide which the civil authorities were to follow - "An eye for an eye." Or, as we might say today, "The punishment must fit the crime." The Pharisees interpreted this passage in the selfish and individualistic way common wisdom prods us all to - that each individual has the right to take revenge and to exact compensation for himself (Kretzmann, 1921). Jesus, however, brings us back to the proper perspective. It is not the duty, or even the right, of an individual to exact revenge for himself. To the contrary, Jesus' explanation of how individuals are to act toward each other provides the basis for another familiar saying - "turn the other cheek". Jesus' interpretation is supported by the Word of God as recorded in Leviticus:

You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD (Leviticus 19:17-18).

Rather than being a pronouncement of civil law dealing with how individuals relate to each other in the civil realm and mediated by the civil authorities, this passage from Leviticus governs the attitude individuals are to have toward one another as, well, individuals. God explains that he his holy and that he wants his holiness to be reflected in the lives and conduct of his people. God pays back evildoers, so thoughts of personal revenge and violence are prohibited (The Lutheran Study Bible, 2008):

The LORD is a God who avenges. O God who avenges, shine forth...The LORD is a jealous and avenging God; the LORD takes vengeance and is filled with wrath. The LORD takes vengeance on his foes and vents his wrath against his enemies (Psalm 94:1; Nahum 1:2). 

Kretzmann provides the following explanation:

There is a climax in the examples chosen by Christ; injury goes from bad to worse. There will be times and circumstances when love will be ready patiently to suffer the repetition of the same injury: the disgrace of being struck with the palm of the open hand, the humiliation of giving up the more costly mantle or toga together with the tunic or undergarment, the demand and even the compulsion, coming probably from a soldier, to accompany him for some distance and assist him with his baggage. A Christian will, so far as his person alone is concerned, render such exacted service cheerfully and do more than is asked, rather than submit to the inevitable in a sullen manner. On the other hand, of course, such passive behavior must cease as soon as it comes into conflict with the law of love. A disciple of Christ has duties toward his family, his community, his country, which will sometimes compel him to protect and defend them against injustice and insult. But for the individual it is true: he that magnanimously bears, overcomes. Rather than harbor evil, vengeful thoughts and desires, the Christian will be ready to render assistance whenever this is needed (Kretzmann, 1921).

This attitude of Christ, however, goes against every instinct we have as human beings. This should not surprise us, though, since our instincts, just like every other part of us, is corrupt and sinful. We are not supposed to retaliate against our neighbor for the wrongs committed against us, but we do. Rather than fighting with the one who would argue, we should settle out disagreements, even when that means giving up more of what is rightfully ours. When people say things about us that are not true in an attempt to hurt our reputation, or they tell us lies, it is our natural instinct to respond in kind - to "tell them off" or start airing their secret sins as well in order to hurt or embarrass them. When they are hurting the way we are hurt because of what they have done to us, then we will feel good. We will be vindicated. It feels so good, at least to our flesh - to our sinful and depraved human nature - which should be our first clue to stop and think about our reaction. This is not how Jesus reacted to those who persecuted him. St. Peter writes:

He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued trusting himself to him who judges justly (1 Peter 2:22-10-23).

If anyone has a case for retaliation because of wrong-doing, it is Jesus. The Scriptures tell us that he, Jesus - God in human flesh - committed no sin. Not only did he suffer the injustice of being falsely accused, tried, and punished by men, the sinless son of God was made to be sin so that we could escape God's wrath. Though he was mocked by his lying accusers, Jesus never responded in kind. Instead he relied on God the Father who will justly punish the wicked and reward the righteous (The Lutheran Study Bible, 2008). The sinless Jesus bore the sin of the world and suffered the punishment that rightly should belong to us sinners on the cross, as the wages of sin is death. St. Peter continues:

He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls (1 Peter 2:24-25).

No one in this sinful, fallen world is immune from suffering, and Christians especially are not. Jesus, while he was on earth, suffered unjustly; we may also face unjust suffering and death (The Lutheran Study Bible, 2008). But, "Vengeance is mine...", as the saying goes. The thing is, we must remember that it was God who said it. Contrary to exacting vengeance upon those who sin against us, we are called to repent of our sin and be forgiven by the grace of God, through faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ. We are called to love our neighbor as ourselves and, by the working of the Holy Spirit within us, turn away from sin and the works of the flesh, and produce the fruit of the Spirit:

But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit (Galatians 5:16-25).


Works Cited

Engelbrecht, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Kretzmann, P. E. (1921). Popular Commentary of the Bible: New Testament (Vol. 1). St. Louis, MO, USA: Concordia Publishing House.

The Kingdom of God - Part 3

Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man. They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot - they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all - so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed (Luke 17: 26-30).

As previously discussed, Jesus had told his hearers that the Kingdom of God was in their midst, referring to his rule as Messiah. Here Jesus explains how the physical manifestation of the Kingdom of God will come about at the end, on Judgment Day. On that day this present, corrupt world will pass away and Jesus will make everything new, bringing into existence a new heaven and a new earth[1]. The character of the kingdom's physical manifestation will not be gradual, and it will not involve rehabilitation of the kingdoms of this present world. Things are not going to get better, and better, and better in this world until, at some point, the Christian religion reigns over all the earth and we enter the golden age of the Millennium, as some Christian theologians teach[2]. The physical arrival of Christ and God's Kingdom will bring with it utter destruction as evidenced by the examples Jesus gives. The great flood at the time of Noah destroyed all life on earth, except that which was preserved by God in the Ark. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was absolute, with no trace of the cities or survivors remaining - again, with the exception of those whom God preserved out of his grace. God's kingdom will come quickly, but with plenty of warning, just as the flood came upon the world of Noah, just as the fire rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah in the time of Lot. Kretzmann writes about how the people during the time of Noah and Lot were stubborn and, despite being given plenty of time and warning about the impending judgment, refused to repent:

The distinguishing characteristic of the time just preceding the final advent of Christ, the Son of Man, will be an indifferent carelessness. The days of Noah are an example. The warning had gone out through the mouth of this preacher of righteousness that the people should repent of their foolish ways. But they gave so little heed to the warning that they continued in all the manner of complete abandon in the desires of the flesh up to the very hour of the cataclysm: they ate, they drank, they married, they were married; men and women, the entire generation, past all hope of redemption. And then, with the sudden frightfulness that has characterized the judgments of God in similar situations, came the day on which Noah entered into the ark; then came the Flood and destroyed them all. And the days of Lot are another example of the utter, blind heedlessness of the people. In Sodom and Gomorrah the inhabitants continued in the delights of the flesh as well as in all their lines of business, work, and endeavor: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built, up to the very hour of the catastrophe that overwhelmed the cities, when it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed them all. The people of the last times will not have learned their lesson from the previous calamities; when the Son of Man will be revealed before their astonished, horrified eyes on the last day, He will find them as unprepared for His coming, as deeply steeped in the foolishness of the Noachites and of the Sodomites as any generation ever was (Kretzmann, 1921).

On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back. Remember Lot's wife. Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will keep it. I tell you, in that night there will be two in one bed. One will be taken and the other left. There will be two women grinding together. One will be taken and the other left.” And they said to him, “Where, Lord?” He said to them, “Where the corpse is, there the vultures will gather” (Luke 17:31-37).

In this passage some see evidence of the rapture, the spiriting away to heaven of all Christians from the earth either before, during, or after a period known to millennialist Christians as the Tribulation. Images of the Left Behind book series by Tim LeHaye are called to mind; images of driverless cars abandoned in the roadway and pilotless airplanes auguring into mountainsides, their Christian drivers and pilots gone on to heavenly glory without any hint or warning. This is not, however, the thing to which Jesus is referring. Dispensationalism and the doctrine of the rapture are not borne out by scripture. It is of relatively new invention, in fact, being only developed over the last 200 years or so[3]. Instead, Jesus is describing the suddenness of his coming on the Day of Judgment, and the futility of all things temporal when it comes to redemption. Just as it was too late for anyone in Noah's time to escape God's judgment by the waters of the flood after he had shut Noah, his family, and the animals inside the ark, so too will it be too late to repent when Christ appears. Likewise, Lot's wife is turned to a pillar of salt when she hesitates to trust in God's redemption and turns back to see the fate of her former home (Engelbrecht, 2009). Regarding this passage, Kretzmann writes the following:

The suddenness of the breaking of Judgment Day will take every person where he just happens to be at that time. A man will be up on the flat roof of the house. He will neither have, nor should he attempt to take, time to go down and get any instruments or possessions. A man will be out in the field. He also should not turn back behind him for anything of this world's goods that he may have valued. As when an army of the enemy makes a sudden successful assault and only precipitate flight will save the inhabitants, he that turns back for money, clothes, or other goods is lost, so the person whose mind is still attached to the things of this world on the last day is beyond hope of salvation. The example of Lot's wife should be before the minds of the believers at all times. Had she not turned behind her to satisfy her curiosity, she might have saved her soul with the rest. Her hesitation proved her destruction. Cp. Matt. 16, 25; Mark 8, 35; Luke 9, 24. He that in the last emergency will have nothing in mind but the saving of this earthly life and the goods that are necessary for its preservation, will lose forever the true life in and with God; but he whose desires are free from all love for this world and what it has to offer, that has denied himself and all that this life might have given him, he will save his life, the life in God, his soul and its eternal salvation (Kretzmann, 1921).

The Disciples, needless to say, are stunned at Jesus' teaching. As discussed earlier, they still seem to expect the same type of political Messiah as the Pharisees. They ask the question, "Where, Lord?" Jesus, as he was wont to do, answers them in enigmatic fashion. His answer is unmistakably ominous: "Where the corpse is, there the vultures will gather." This may seem like a sarcastic non-answer to the disciples' question but it does give us an idea what the world will be like by the time of the end - worthless and unclean, like a dead and rotting corpse. Kretzmann explains Jesus' words this way:

In awe and fear, they [the disciples] barely breathe the question: Where, Lord? Where will all this happen? And He told them: Where the dead body is, there will the eagles gather themselves together. The world, especially in the last days, will be, and to-day is, like a decaying carcass, whose stench rises up into the heavens. And judgment and destruction will come upon the entire spiritually dead and morally rotten human race. It is a strong, but fitting figure, revealing the world as it is, in its true condition, without a redeeming feature to recommend it in the sight of God (Kretzmann, 1921).

God is purposely ambiguous when describing for us the signs of Christ's second coming and the signs of the end of this present age. He leaves no doubt, however, that Christ will come a second time to establish the eternal kingdom. If we human beings could calculate the time of Christ's return, we would live as reprobates until the last possible moment before repenting of our sin, such is the depravity of our sinful human nature (Engelbrecht, 2009). St. Paul, in fact, warns us against living in such a way. He tells us that we should put on the new self and live as the new creation of Christ that we are, not in order to earn God’s favor, but as a response to receiving God’s undeserved mercy through Christ Jesus. St. Paul writes:

I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect…If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming. In these you too once walked when you were living in them. But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth (Romans 12:1-2; Colossians 3:1-8).

To delay repentance, to turn away from God and live according to the desires of our sinful flesh, to disregard the law's revelation of our sinful state and the call of the Holy Spirit through the Gospel is to run the risk of ending up as those who ignored God in the days of Noah and Lot.

The message of Christ's teaching here is unmistakable: today is the day of salvation and repentance must not be delayed[4]. Through the suffering, death and resurrection of Christ, sin, death, and Satan have been defeated (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986). Christ died as the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world[5]; those who repent of their sin and trust in Christ have the forgiveness and eternal life he won for mankind by Christ on the cross. Furthermore, we who trust in Christ must not live as if his return is far off and we are secure among our earthly possessions, because we are not. Our wealth, possessions, our status among men and our good works will be of no avail to us when Christ returns on the Day of the Lord to judge mankind and establish his kingdom physically. The only way we can hope to stand before God on that Day of Judgment is if we have been clothed with the robe of Christ's righteousness won for us by his death and resurrection, given to us freely, by his grace[6].

Works Cited

Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod. (1989). The "End Times" - A Study on Eschatology and Millennialism. St. Louis: The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.

Engelbrecht, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Kretzmann, P. E. (1921). Popular Commentary of the Bible: New Testament (Vol. 1). St. Louis, MO, USA: Concordia Publishing House.

Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation. (1986). Saint Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House.

End Notes

[1] Revelation 21:1-8

[2] While there are numerous variations in millennialist teaching today, a fourfold categorization has been widely accepted: 1) dispensational premillennialism; (2) historic premillennialism; (3) postmillennialism, and (4) amillennialism. Of the first three categories, all of which hold to a millennium or utopian age on this earth, the most commonly held view is dispensational premillennialism…The less common postmillennial view places Christ’s second advent after (post) the millennium. Only then will the rapture, the general resurrection, the general judgment , and the eternal states occur. The millennium is not understood to involve a visible reign of Christ in the form of an earthly monarchy, nor is the millennial period to be taken literally as necessarily 1000 years long. In these respects postmillennialism corresponds closely to the amillennialist position (Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, 1989).

[3] Dispensational premillennialism, or simply dispensationalism, is a theological system having its origin among the Plymouth Brethren in Ireland and England in the early 19th century. This system’s originator was John Nelson Darby (1800-82), one of the chief founders of the Plymouth Brethren movement. Dispensationalism arose as a reaction against the Church of England and the widely held view of postmillennialism (Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, 1989).

[4] 2 Corinthians 6:2

[5] 2 Corinthians 5:15; 5:19; 5:21; Hebrews 2:17.

[6] Isaiah 61:9-11; Revelation 21:1-2

The Kingdom of God - Part 2

Luther Preaches Christ

And he said to the disciples, “The days are coming when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. And they will say to you, ‘Look, there!’ or ‘Look, here!’ Do not go out or follow them. For as lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation” (Luke 17:22-25).

Jesus, having answered the Pharisee’s question regarding the coming of God’s kingdom in a most remarkable way, he turns to his disciples. Jesus seems to be telling his disciples that one day soon they are going to want to hear the wonderful and enigmatic things he teaches them face to face as he is now doing, but this will not be possible because he will be gone. Right now he is in the midst of them, but soon he will be seated at the right hand of God the Father. He will go from the midst of them, to the cross, to the tomb, to the resurrection, to his position of power and glory at the Father's side. And, from his position at the Father’s side, he will one day return to judge the living and the dead. There is much that must happen, however, between that day and the one during which Jesus teaches his disciples. 

Jesus makes this point to the scribes and Pharisees when they ask him why his disciples did not fast, as those of John the Baptist did. "Can you make wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them" Jesus asked in reply[1]? When Jesus, the bridegroom, goes away, the disciples, who are the guests in his metaphor, will most certainly fast (Engelbrecht, 2009). Jesus explains to the disciples elsewhere, however, that he is not simply planning to abandon them when he rises from the grave and ascends to heaven. He promises to send the Comforter - the Holy Spirit - to be with them, and to clothe them with power, and to recall to their minds all that he has taught them[2]. This is so that they can, in turn, record it in the pages of what we today call the New Testament scriptures.

Jesus, in the previous verses, had been addressing the Pharisees, who were questioning him about the Kingdom of God. The Pharisees' questioning of Jesus does not seem to be legitimate, but designed to get Jesus to say something that they could use to get him in trouble, as on other occasions[3]. In keeping with his method, he spoke somewhat enigmatically to the masses, and explained those sayings and parables to his disciples[4]. The 'they' to whom Jesus seems to be referring is, in the narrow context of this conversation, the Pharisees and, more broadly, all false teachers who reject the Christ. 

What is Jesus warning the disciples about when he tells them not to go out or follow the people who say, “Look, there!” and “Look, here!”? Jesus is warning them not to abandon their faith, which he has built in them by his word. Lenski writes: 

They [false teachers] will imagine that they see plain indications and signs of Christ’s immediate coming. They will pose as prophets, even as manifestations and incarnations of Christ, and call the true disciples to flock to their standards “here” or “there”. Jesus warns, “Do not go away or pursue after,” leave not your faith in the words which Jesus has spoken, do not chase after these false leaders and the promises they make. This warning has often been disregarded, will often be so, but should not be so by us (Lenski, 1946).

For as lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day (v. 24).

When Jesus talks about the day of the Son of Man he is talking about his second coming to judge the world[5]. Lightning is a useful comparison, as Our Lord has repeatedly instructed us that his coming will be swift and sudden[6]. This is the contrast Jesus makes with the physical, political kingdom for which the Pharisees longed, and even the disciples expected the Messiah to establish. There will be no ambiguity when Christ returns. As lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. Kretzmann describes the second coming of Jesus in this way: 

In one moment He will shine, with all the glory of His splendor, from this quarter under heaven unto that; He will be visible to all people of the earth. But before this glorious consummation there will be a long time of waiting and watching for the believers, with a sore trial for their patience. First of all the great obligation rests upon the Lord to suffer in the great Passion, to be rejected by the present generation. Christ must bear His cross first, and His Church, the members of His kingdom, will become partakers of this suffering, before the great day of glory dawns (Kretzmann, 1921).

Lenski also writes: 

The Pharisees needed to be told that the kingdom is within, is spiritual; to this the Lord adds for the sake of his disciples that, after the spiritual work of this kingdom is done, it will come suddenly, like lightning, in judgment on the world…The visible glorious consummation of the kingdom must wait in toto until the spiritual work has been completed…his coming and the consummation of the kingdom will occur in such a manner that we need go nowhere – it will be instantaneously visible over the whole earth just as a lightning flash lightnings [sic] out of one part of heaven and shines to the other part and lights up the entire sky (Lenski, 1946).

But why did Jesus have to suffer and be rejected? This question must certainly have been going through the minds of the disciples who, at this point, still had a more Pharisaic understanding of God’s kingdom, and the work of the Messiah. 

For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich (2 Corinthians 8:9).

Jesus endured poverty, contempt, and persecution in his earthly life[7]. He was born in poverty[8]. The tyrant Herod tried to murder him in his infancy[9]. All throughout his earthly ministry people derided him, rejected him, tried to throw him from cliffs, and stone him[10]. Ultimately he suffered the greatest agony of body and soul under Pontius Pilate, dying on the cross[11] (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986). 

Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people (Hebrews 2:14-17).

Jesus endured suffering, humiliation, and death voluntarily for one purpose – to redeem mankind. Luther, in his explanation of the second article of the Apostle’s Creed, sums up Jesus’ purpose, and man’s relationship to him, beautifully and succinctly: 

I believe that Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, is my Lord, who has redeemed me, a lost and condemned person, purchased and won me from all sins, from death, and from the power of the devil; not with gold or silver, but with His holy, precious blood and with His innocent suffering and death, that I may be His own and live under Him in His kingdom and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness, just as He is risen from the dead, lives and reigns to all eternity. This is most certainly true (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986).

Jesus, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world[12], laid down his life voluntarily[13], in obedience to God the Father’s will[14], so that man and God could be reconciled[15]. St. Paul writes that it was through the obedience of the one man, Christ, so that the many – mankind – were made righteous[16]. In fact, scripture tells us that Christ, the sinless one, became sin for us, so that we sinners might become the righteousness of God[17]. Christ was our substitute. He took our place under God’s judgment against sin. By paying the penalty of our guilt, Christ…made satisfaction, for our sins (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986). 

He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed (1 Peter 2:24).

This is the message all mankind needs to hear, and upon which the Christian church must remain focused in this time between Christ's first and second coming. Many have gone off crying, “Look, there!” as Jesus predicted, seeking mystical experiences, secret truths, or special revelations. Jesus, the Word made flesh, directs the disciples and believers today, to the place where his promises are found – his word. Christians need to hear this word – Law and Gospel – regularly, and gather around those pledges of the forgiveness Christ has won for us – Holy Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. It is by Word and Sacrament that he works to grant us repentance[18], create faith in us, is among us, and to deliver to us the forgiveness he won for us by his death and resurrection[19].

Bibliography

Engelbrecht, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Kretzmann, P. E. (1921). Popular Commentary of the Bible (Vol. 1). St. Louis, MO, USA: Concordia Publishing House.

Lenski, R. C. (1946). The Interpretation of St. Luke's Gospel. Columbus, Ohio: The Wartburg Press.

Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation. (1986). Saint Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House.

End Notes

[1] Luke 5:33-35

[2] John 16:4-15

[3] Mark 8:11-13

[4] Matthew 13:34-36

[5] Matthew 25:31-32; 2 Corinthians 5:10

[6] Matthew 24:27; Acts 1:11; 2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 1:7

[7] 2 Cor. 8:9; Matthew 8:20; Isaiah 53:3; John 8:40

[8] Luke 2:7

[9] Matthew 2:13

[10] Luke 4:29; John 8:59

[11] John 19:16-18; Mark 15:21-41

[12] John 1:29

[13] John 10:17-18

[14] Luke 22:42; John 5:19

[15] Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:8

[16] Romans 5:19

[17] 2 Corinthians 5:21

[18] 2 Timothy 2:5

[19] John 15:5; Romans 6:3-5; Titus 3:5-7; 1 Peter 3:21

The Kingdom of God

Jesus and the Pharisees

Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or 'There!' for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you" (Luke 17:20-21). 

What do the Pharisees mean when they say, "The kingdom of God"? The Pharisees of Jesus' day are descendants of the Jewish religious leaders who led Israel during the time of the Macabean revolt (Harrison, Bromiley, & Henry, 1990). After the Israelites were taken into captivity by the Babylonians, the Persians, led by Cyrus the Great, conquered Babylon. Cyrus allowed the captive Israelites to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. Cyrus, and other Persian rulers, demonstrated an attitude of tolerance toward the Jews where religion was concerned. In 332 BC Alexander the Great took Judea from the Persians. Alexander was building a vast empire for himself which incorporated diverse lands, peoples, cultures, and languages. He attempted to unite his empire through what was later called "hellenization" (Alexander the Great). Alexander encouraged the spread of the Greek language and culture throughout his empire, "Hellenizing" them (the word for Greece in the Greek language is 'Hellas'). He did not, however, forcefully oppose the practice of Judaism. 

When Alexander died, his empire was divided up among four of his generals. The general Ptolemy ruled over Israel and Egypt. He continued Alexander's policy of hellenization. In 198 BC descendants of another of Alexander's generals, Seleucus, took control of Judea from the Ptolemys (Seleucid Empire). 

The Seleucid Empire, which ruled over Israel during the first century BC, oppressed the Jews and attempted to suppress their religious practices. When the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanies built a statue of the Greek god Zeus in the court of the temple in Jerusalem, and desecrated the temple by sacrificing a pig on the altar, faithful Jews rose against the Seleucids in revolt. The faithful Jews, lead first by a priest named Mattathias, followed by his son Judas Maccabeus, waged guerrilla warfare against their Hellenized countrymen who submitted to the Seleucid command to worship pagan gods, and against the Seleucid armies themselves. They won their independence from Seleucid rule and established an independent kingdom in 142 BC. The descendants of Mattathias, known as the Hasmonaeans, ruled the independent Israel until it was lost to the Roman general Pompey in 63 BC (Maccabean Revolt) (Engelbrecht, 2009). 

Throughout their captivity in Babylon, their return to the land and subjugation by Persia, Alexander the Great, Ptolemy, and the Seleucids, the Jews developed a nationalistic school of religious thought. From the beginning of Roman rule in 63 BC the Jews sought independence. The Pharisees were a Jewish sect that emerged in Israel during the time of Hasmonean rule. They were characterized as master interpreters of the oral traditions of the rabbis. Though they were relatively few in number, they were trusted by the masses (Packer & Tenney, 1980). In contrast to other Jewish sects of the day who espoused Greek ideas, such as the Sadducees who adopted the ideas of the Greek philosopher Epicurus, the Pharisees maintained a rigorous separation from the Hellenistic culture and fastidiously observed the Mosaic Law and the traditions of the earlier teachers (Packer & Tenney, 1980). They longed for the day when the oppressive yoke of the Romans would be cast off by the great champion of the Jews who would establish a kingdom like David's that would last forever - the Messiah (Harrison, Bromiley, & Henry, 1990). This political messiah who would establish a worldly, political kingdom was what the Pharisees were looking forward to[1]. When the Pharisees ask Jesus about when the kingdom of God would come, this is the kind of kingdom they meant. Even Jesus' own disciples were looking for a worldly kingdom to be established, as evidenced by their question to the risen Christ just prior to his ascension[2]. 

What does Jesus mean when he says that the kingdom of God is "in the midst of you"? He means something quite different than the earthly kingdom envisioned by the Pharisees, and some modern-day Christians, when he talks about the kingdom of God. Indeed, he says this quite plainly when he is on trial before Pontius Pilate. When asked by Pilate if he is a king, Jesus tells him that he is, but that his kingdom is not of this world[3]. Pilate's concern was the same as that of the Jewish leaders. Pilate was worried that, with Jesus, he was dealing with another revolutionary attempting to gain a following in order to throw off the Roman yoke through political upheaval. The Jewish leaders used this idea of Jesus as a revolutionary, since he calls himself a king, to leverage Pilate to give Jesus a death sentence. They remind Pilate, in a veiled threat, that they have no king but Ceaser and, if he sets Jesus free, Pilate would not be Caesar's friend[4]. This manipulation by the Pharisees puts Pilate between a rock and a hard place, as “former” friends of Caesar generally had a poor life expectancy, and makes his mind up for him. The kingdom Jesus speaks of, however, is not a matter of territory; it is in their midst. 

The kingdom of God can be discussed in different ways. Certainly God rules over the entire universe as Supreme King. In that way, God’s Kingdom is territorial. It encompasses everything, everywhere. People have also used the phrase “kingdom come” to describe the time after the resurrection, when God rules without opposition (Engelbrecht, 2009). At this time Scripture tells us that God will create a new heaven and a new earth, where resurrected believers will live, free from sin, death, and the devil, under God’s reign without opposition. This kingdom is not abstract, but will be established physically when Jesus returns in judgment. In the context of Luke 18:20-21, however, Jesus is speaking of God’s Kingdom as something intangible. He says, speaking to the Pharisees and his disciples, that the Kingdom of God is “in the midst of you”. This can also be translated as “within you” (as does the KJV Bible), or “within your grasp” (Engelbrecht, 2009). 

To speak of a kingdom is not simply to speak of a sovereign’s realm, but the reign of that sovereign. Thus, most completely understood, the Kingdom of God is God’s ruling (his reign) as sovereign over the whole universe, all believers on earth, and all the saints and angels in heaven. Martin Luther called these three aspects of God’s reign 1) the kingdom of power[5], 2) the kingdom of grace[6], and 3) the kingdom of glory[7] (Luther, 1991). John the Baptist called people to repent and be baptized. Jesus, after his baptism by John, also called people to repentance. His message, however, is slightly different than John’s message. Jesus proclaims, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel[8].” John was looking forward to the coming king and establishment of the kingdom[9]. Jesus announces at the beginning of his ministry that the kingdom is now established. The king, and therefore the kingdom, is at hand. That is, they are here with Jesus’ words, and in the hearts of his subjects, all those who believe. The kingdom of God’s reign was literally among them, in their midst, within their grasp. Jesus makes plain that his baptism was a coronation of sorts when he teaches in the synagogue shortly thereafter: 

And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” And he rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:16-21). 

Jesus announced to his stunned hearers that he was the Messiah, the king who was to come. He was now present among them, to bring good news and everlasting joy to the redeemed of Israel (Engelbrecht, 2009). The kingdom he came to establish, however, would not be of the same type that they had grown to expect during all those years of waiting. 

St. Paul understands the nature of the Kingdom of God rightly. In his letter to the Romans he instructs the believers there in matters of contention regarding eating unclean foods and observing holy days. St. Paul tells the Roman Christians that they are free to eat or not to eat; to observe or not to observe. They should not, however, engage in behaviors that cause their fellow believers to stumble in the faith. These tangible things and man-made observances do not constitute God’s kingdom, so they (and we also) should not let them harm God’s reign among them. 

For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding (Romans 14:15-19). 

Writing to the Colossians, St. Paul says that Christians have been rescued by Jesus from the kingdom of darkness and have been brought into his kingdom of light. The mark of our citizenship in God’s kingdom is not something physical, but rather redemption and the forgiveness of sins won for us by Christ on the cross. 

He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins (Colossians 1:13-14). 

St. Paul emphasizes that the aspect of God’s kingdom which is most important, the thing we enter into when he brings us into his kingdom through his means of grace, is justification. Through spiritual means – repentance and faith – we have access to the benefits of citizenship in God’s kingdom. 

Jesus, who had been baptized by John the Baptist, anointed by the Holy Spirit, and confirmed by the voice of God the Father, proclaims that the kingdom of God is at hand, and that he is its anointed sovereign. Jesus’ baptism is a royal coronation, of sorts. At his second coming, Jesus tells us that all things will be new again; the old heaven and earth will have passed away and been replaced by the new. Creation will be restored to its perfect condition, and sin, death, and the devil will disappear forever. In this way Christ will establish a kingdom which includes the world, newly restored[10]. 

Kretzmann explains the Kingdom of God in this way: 

To attempt to fix its definite position, its limits, its boundaries in the world by the application of the senses, by sight is foolish; for the kingdom of God is within, in the hearts of the believers. He that accepts the mercy of the King of grace is a member of the Kingdom of Grace, but by faith only, which is in the heart and cannot be seen by human beings. And all external signs of the presence of the Kingdom and its power in the hearts of the believers are not infallible, since these same signs may be feigned by such as are hypocrites (Kretzmann, 1921). 

Just as Jesus’ mission at his first coming was to redeem mankind, his primary mission at his second coming, however, will be to judge mankind, not to set up an earthly government: 

The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day…For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. (John 12:48; 2 Corinthians 5:10). 

The author of Hebrews writes: 

And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him (Hebrews 9:27-28). 

All Christian denominations may not agree on an interpretation of God’s word concerning exactly how he will establish – or has established – his kingdom, or how and when Christ will return. As Christians, however, we must always discuss these issues beginning from a position of love for our brothers and sisters in Christ, and loving concern for those who are not yet citizens of heaven[11] with us. We must remember that what binds the body of Christ, that is, the church, is not when Christ is coming, or how, but that he is coming. And that, if one is to appear before God to give account, as every man will, he needs to acknowledge his sin, repent, and cling to Christ before that day, if he hopes to stand. 

This is what we can all agree on concerning the end: Christ will return visibly and with great glory on the Last Day[12]. Christ will return to judge the world[13]. Christ will return on a specific day known only to God alone[14]. Before Christ returns, there will be increasing turmoil and distress for the church and the world[15]. 

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them. We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy places by the high priest as a sacrifice for sin are burned outside the camp. So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. Therefore let us go to him outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured. For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come. Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God (Hebrews 13:8-16). 

The return of Christ is a source of hope and joy for the Christian[16]; we are citizens of the kingdom of God by grace, through faith in Christ. Here, in this world corrupted by sin – Satan’s kingdom – we have no lasting city; we seek the city that is to come[17].

Bibliography

Alexander the Great. (n.d.). Retrieved May 23, 2013, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great

Engelbrecht, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Harrison, E. F., Bromiley, G. W., & Henry, C. F. (Eds.). (1990). Wycliffe Dictionary of Theology. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. 

Kretzmann, P. E. (1921). Popular Commentary of the Bible (Vol. 1). St. Louis, MO, USA: Concordia Publishing House. 

Luther, M. (1991). Kleine Katechismus, English. (C. P. House, Trans.) Saint Louis, Missouri, USA: Concordia Publishing House. 

Maccabean Revolt. (n.d.). Retrieved May 23, 2013, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maccabean_Revolt 

Packer, J. I., & Tenney, M. C. (Eds.). (1980). Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible. Nashville, TN, USA: Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

Seleucid Empire. (n.d.). Retrieved May 23, 2013, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seleucid_Empire

End Notes

[1] Their messianic hope finds expression in the Psalms of Solomon (cs. 50 B.C), which contrasts the pious (Pharisees) with sinners, denounces the Hasmonaeans and hails Pompey as God’s deliverer. The pharisaic Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs (ca. 120 B.C.) portrays Messiah binding Beliar, executing judgment and establishing new Jerusalem (Harrison, Bromiley, & Henry, 1990).

[2] Acts 1:6 

[3] John 18:36

[4] John 19:15; John 19:12

[5] Psalm 103:19 

[6] John 3:5

[7] 2 Timothy 4:18

[8] Mark 1:15

[9] Acts 19:4

[10] Matthew 19:28-30; Revelation 21:1

[11] Ephesians 2:19; Philippians 3:20

[12] Matthew 24:27; Luke 21:27; Acts 1:11; 2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 1:7

[13] Matthew 25:31-32

[14] Matthew 24:44; Mark 13:32; Acts 17:31

[15] Matthew 24:7, 22; 1 Timothy 4:1

[16] Luke 21:28; Hebrews 9:28; Titus 2:13; Revelation 22:20 

[17] Hebrews 13:14