Whirlaway5620
New Member
Is there anyone that can help me find what Christ really was meaning? I am doing this for a paper for my religion class and would appreciate some help with this...thank you
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
kingdom of God versus Kingdom of Heaven
- Thread starter Whirlaway5620
- Start date
You may want to download the ebook version of Horton's "The Gospel Commission." Horton has his PhD and is a Professor and recognized scholar, so he is acceptable for academic research.
In this book, he deals with some common misconceptions of this theology and explains it. There is only one chapter dealing with the issue, but I think he hits some of the major common misunderstandings. He does not address the hyper-dispensational view that these are two different kingdoms. I think most people reject that view today.
In this book, he deals with some common misconceptions of this theology and explains it. There is only one chapter dealing with the issue, but I think he hits some of the major common misunderstandings. He does not address the hyper-dispensational view that these are two different kingdoms. I think most people reject that view today.
I didn't see the versus in the subject line when I first responded. If you are looking for dispensationally academic literature that differentiates between the two, you will have to go into some archives as I don't think anything on an academic level has been produced in 20 or more years.
Most of what I find on the Internet I would not accept as academic research (which is something in upper level classes that I take into account as a part of your grade, I never accept wikipedia etc).
If you are looking for a non-dispensational critique online, William E. Cox has done some good stuff on the issue. Yet, I haven't read his material in quite some time.
I will look around and see what I can find, but you may have to find some older books that would be acceptable in academic papers.
Most of what I find on the Internet I would not accept as academic research (which is something in upper level classes that I take into account as a part of your grade, I never accept wikipedia etc).
If you are looking for a non-dispensational critique online, William E. Cox has done some good stuff on the issue. Yet, I haven't read his material in quite some time.
I will look around and see what I can find, but you may have to find some older books that would be acceptable in academic papers.
Aren't they essentially terms used in the Bible for the same thing?
Wasn't the concept of there being actual differences brought out by Scofield Bible in 1917?
That Kingdom of God referred to ethics of the Sermon on the Mount/His Ministry/ Church Age, while Kingdom of heavem more broad, referring to rule of God , that will become fully manifasted upon earth at second coming...
Kingdom of God would thus be in the person of Christ, his ministry, Church Age "here partially"
When Jesus returns, Kingom than "fully here", and will be truly on earth as it now in heaven!
Jesus,
I agree with you, they are the same. But the man is doing a research paper on this topic so I think he would need primary or very academic sources who espouse the issue.
Agreed, and probably his best hope for this subject matter would be to access the archived theologicasl journals/articles at a place like DTS!
Festus..., of Gunsmoke fame asked, "But Doc..., how do we know that those men who wrote the reading got the reading right that they wrote?" ...or words to that effect.
Festus kinda hits the nail on the head..., in a way. How do we know that some guy with a 7th Degree Black Belt in Phd got it right to begin with? Isn't some, or much of this research based on speculation? Opinion?
I mean, at one time the world was flat based on the best minds of the day.
Festus kinda hits the nail on the head..., in a way. How do we know that some guy with a 7th Degree Black Belt in Phd got it right to begin with? Isn't some, or much of this research based on speculation? Opinion?
I mean, at one time the world was flat based on the best minds of the day.
Bibliotheca sacra could be a good resource but I have never seen it on an electronic proxy service. I looked online and you can get online access for every issue with a subscription of $29.00. Which is a good deal, but when I was in school I was lucky to afford a $2.00 hot chocolate at the local coffee shop.
While people with a PhD may be wrong, their thinking is much more refined. In order to finish your PhD, you not only have to write a respected research item, but then you must defend your dissertation through a myriad of scrutiny. This is called peer reviewed... I call it peer scrutinized. As well, your PhD dissertation must address the issue from a myriad of disciplines when making the argument, not merely because this is a hobby horse. Thus, the depth and level of study is intense in comparison to what is being offered on most web pages.
A web page does not have to be well thought out and is not scrutinized to that level. The people writing on the web may have never been challenged by other experts in their field.
A PhD may be wrong, but in academic circles they have undergone a tremendous amount of study and scrutiny that most do not need to go through.
As for an illustration, do you want to take your car to a mechanic with 20 years of experience, knows how to fix cars, has gone through all the certifications in fixing cars, and is respected by his peers for his knowledge, or do you want to go to a kid who completed 2 semesters in auto mechanics at the local Vo-Tech? Hey, the kid may get something right over the experienced mechanic, but I still will take my chances with the older man.
{quote} have to always remember though that a peer reviewed work might get "inconsistent" reviews, due to the theological bias of those reviewing it!
Also, as in the case of creation scientists trying to get published/reviewed, the evolutionists will rarely even allow that to be considered, as they treat it as "bogus" science!
There are biases, I agree. But the scrutiny is still higher.
As well, creation science does have peer reviewed journals. I talked personally to Dr. John Morris from ICR about this issue. He listed four magazines/journals that are peer reviewed from a creationist point of view. So, even in this situation that while people can disagree, the level of scrutiny and academic requirements are still greater.
It's very simple.. they are the same.. but the phrase Kingdom of Heaven is found in Matthew simply because a good Jew would never take a chance of taking God's name in Vain.. so Matthew instead of saying Kingdom of God.. used the other term that was "safer".. Kingdom of Heaven.
The question though is do the "non Christian" Journals allow them to be peer reviewed/published?
As common complaint of the Evolutionists is that Christian science writers are 'bogus", as their own journals refuse to review them!
No, but I will still say that the journals by non-Christians on creationism is of a higher scholarly level thank those who are not peer reviewed. It may be wrong, but it is not unscholarly.
Right from the very beginning the two terms are used interchangeably in the NT:
17 From that time began Jesus to preach, and to say, Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Mt 4
14 Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,
15 and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe in the gospel. Mk 1
Excerpts from The Life and Times of Jesus The Messiah, Book 2, Chapter 11, by Alfred Edersheim:
“Concerning this 'Kingdom of Heaven,' which was the great message of John, and the great work of Christ Himself, [1 Keim beautifully designates it: Das Lieblingswort Jesu.] we may here say, that it is the whole Old Testament sublimated, and the whole New Testament realised. The idea of it did not lie hidden in the Old, to be opened up in the New Testament, as did the mystery of its realisation. [a Rom. xvi 25, 26; Eph. i. 9; Col. i. 26, 27.] But this rule of heaven and Kingship of Jehovah was the very substance of the Old Testament; the object of the calling and mission of Israel; the meaning of all its ordinances, whether civil or religious; [2 If, indeed, in the preliminary dispensation these two can be well separated.] the underlying idea of all its institutions. [3 I confess myself utterly unable to understand, how anyone writing a History of the Jewish Church can apparently eliminate from it what even Keim designates as the 'treibenden Gedanken des Alten Testaments', those of the Kingdom and the King. A Kingdom of God without a King; a Theocracy without the rule of God; a perpetual Davidic Kingdom without a 'Son of David', these are antinomies (to borrow the term of Kant) of which neither the Old Testament, the Apocrypha, the Pseudepigraphic writings, nor Rabbinism were guility.] It explained alike the history of the people, the dealings of God with them, and the prospects opened up by the prophets. Without it the Old Testament could not be understood; it gave perpetuity to its teaching, and dignity to its representations. This constituted alike the real contrast between Israel and the nations of antiquity, and Israel's real title to distinction. Thus the whole Old Testament was the preparatory presentation of the rule of heaven and of the Kingship of its Lord.”
“......an analysis of 119 passages in the New Testament where the expression 'Kingdom' occurs, shows that:
.........it means the rule of God; [1 In this view the expression occurs thirty-four times, viz: St. Matt. vi. 33; xii. 28; xiii. 38; xix. 24; xxi. 31; St. Mark i. 14; x. 15, 23, 24, 25; xii. 34; St. Luke i. 33; iv. 43; ix. 11; x. 9, 11; xi. 20; xii. 31; xvii. 20, 21; xviii. 17, 24, 25, 29; St. John iii. 3; Acts i. 3; viii. 12; xx. 25; xxviii. 31; Rom. xiv. 17; 1 Cor. iv. 20; Col. iv. 11; 1 Thess. ii. 12; Rev.i.9
......which was manifested in and through Christ; [2 As in the following seventeen passages, viz.: St. Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17, 23; v. 3, 10; ix. 35; x. 7; St. Mark i. 15; xi. 10; St. Luke viii. 1; ix. 2; xvi. 16; xix. 12, 15; Acts i. 3; xxviii. 23; Rev. i. 9.]
.......is apparent in 'the Church; [3 As in the following eleven passages: St. Matt. xi. 11; xiii. 41; xvi. 19; xviii. 1; xxi. 43; xxiii. 13; St. Luke vii. 28; St.John iii. 5; Acts i. 3; Col. i. 13; Rev. i. 9.]
........gradually develops amidst hindrances; [4 As in the following twenty-four passages: St. Matt. xi. 12; xiii. 11, 19, 24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47, 52; xviii. 23; xx. 1; xxii. 2; xxv. 1, 14; St. Mark iv. 11, 26, 30; St. Luke viii. 10; ix. 62; xiii. 18, 20; Acts i. 3; Rev. i. 9.]
.........is triumphant at the second coming of Christ ('the end') [5 As in the following twelve passages: St. Matthew xvi. 28; St. Mark ix. 1; St. Mark xvi. 28; St. Mark ix. 1; xv. 43; St. Luke ix. 27; xix. 11; xxi. 31; xxii. 16, 18; Acts i. 3; 2 Tim. iv. 1; Heb. xii. 28; Rev. i. 9.] ;
.........and, finally, perfected in the world to come. [6 As in the following thirty-one passages: St. Matt. v. 19, 20; vii. 21; viii. 11; xiii. 43; xviii. 3; xxv. 34; xxvi. 29; St. Mark ix. 47; x. 14; xiv. 25; St. Luke vi. 20; xii. 32; xiii. 28, 29; xiv. 15; xviii. 16; xxii. 29; Acts i. 3; xiv. 22; 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10; xv. 24, 50; Gal. v. 21; Eph. v. 5; 2 Thess. i. 5; St. James ii. 5; 2
Peter i. 11; Rev. i. 9; xii. 10.]”
Note Edersheim's reference to Mt 16:28 as 'the second coming':
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. Mt 16:28
Edersheim's comments on Mt 16:28:
“But why speak of the future and distant? 'A sign', a terrible sign of it 'from heaven,' a vindication of Christ's 'rejected' claims, a vindication of the Christ, Whom they had slain, invoking His Blood on their City and Nation, a vindication, such as alone these men could understand, of the relity of His Resurrection and Ascension, was in the near future. The flames of the City and Temple would be the light in that nation's darkness, by which to read the inscription on the Cross. All this not afar off. Some of those who stood there would not 'taste death,' [1 This is an exact translation of the phrase, which is of such very frequenct occurrence in Rabbinic writings. See our remarks on St. John viii. 52 in Book IV. ch. viii.] till in those judgments they would see that the Son of Man had come in His Kingdom. [a St. Matt. xvi. 28.]”
From the scripture references he gives for 'the world to come', it's plain that he believes the kingdom is 'now', and that it is a spiritual one.
Edersheim again:
"We have the glowing descriptions by all the prophets, but especially in the Book of Isaiah, of the time of the new covenant, with its blessings to Israel and to mankind. That these bear reference to a spiritual world-wide dispensation in the Messianic days needs scarcely argument, any more than that all the conditions of it have been fulfilled in that dispensation which was introduced under the New Testament."
"All that had been national, preparatory, symbolic, typical, would merge into the spiritual reality of fulfillment."[/QUOTE]
17 From that time began Jesus to preach, and to say, Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Mt 4
14 Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,
15 and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe in the gospel. Mk 1
Excerpts from The Life and Times of Jesus The Messiah, Book 2, Chapter 11, by Alfred Edersheim:
“Concerning this 'Kingdom of Heaven,' which was the great message of John, and the great work of Christ Himself, [1 Keim beautifully designates it: Das Lieblingswort Jesu.] we may here say, that it is the whole Old Testament sublimated, and the whole New Testament realised. The idea of it did not lie hidden in the Old, to be opened up in the New Testament, as did the mystery of its realisation. [a Rom. xvi 25, 26; Eph. i. 9; Col. i. 26, 27.] But this rule of heaven and Kingship of Jehovah was the very substance of the Old Testament; the object of the calling and mission of Israel; the meaning of all its ordinances, whether civil or religious; [2 If, indeed, in the preliminary dispensation these two can be well separated.] the underlying idea of all its institutions. [3 I confess myself utterly unable to understand, how anyone writing a History of the Jewish Church can apparently eliminate from it what even Keim designates as the 'treibenden Gedanken des Alten Testaments', those of the Kingdom and the King. A Kingdom of God without a King; a Theocracy without the rule of God; a perpetual Davidic Kingdom without a 'Son of David', these are antinomies (to borrow the term of Kant) of which neither the Old Testament, the Apocrypha, the Pseudepigraphic writings, nor Rabbinism were guility.] It explained alike the history of the people, the dealings of God with them, and the prospects opened up by the prophets. Without it the Old Testament could not be understood; it gave perpetuity to its teaching, and dignity to its representations. This constituted alike the real contrast between Israel and the nations of antiquity, and Israel's real title to distinction. Thus the whole Old Testament was the preparatory presentation of the rule of heaven and of the Kingship of its Lord.”
“......an analysis of 119 passages in the New Testament where the expression 'Kingdom' occurs, shows that:
.........it means the rule of God; [1 In this view the expression occurs thirty-four times, viz: St. Matt. vi. 33; xii. 28; xiii. 38; xix. 24; xxi. 31; St. Mark i. 14; x. 15, 23, 24, 25; xii. 34; St. Luke i. 33; iv. 43; ix. 11; x. 9, 11; xi. 20; xii. 31; xvii. 20, 21; xviii. 17, 24, 25, 29; St. John iii. 3; Acts i. 3; viii. 12; xx. 25; xxviii. 31; Rom. xiv. 17; 1 Cor. iv. 20; Col. iv. 11; 1 Thess. ii. 12; Rev.i.9
......which was manifested in and through Christ; [2 As in the following seventeen passages, viz.: St. Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17, 23; v. 3, 10; ix. 35; x. 7; St. Mark i. 15; xi. 10; St. Luke viii. 1; ix. 2; xvi. 16; xix. 12, 15; Acts i. 3; xxviii. 23; Rev. i. 9.]
.......is apparent in 'the Church; [3 As in the following eleven passages: St. Matt. xi. 11; xiii. 41; xvi. 19; xviii. 1; xxi. 43; xxiii. 13; St. Luke vii. 28; St.John iii. 5; Acts i. 3; Col. i. 13; Rev. i. 9.]
........gradually develops amidst hindrances; [4 As in the following twenty-four passages: St. Matt. xi. 12; xiii. 11, 19, 24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47, 52; xviii. 23; xx. 1; xxii. 2; xxv. 1, 14; St. Mark iv. 11, 26, 30; St. Luke viii. 10; ix. 62; xiii. 18, 20; Acts i. 3; Rev. i. 9.]
.........is triumphant at the second coming of Christ ('the end') [5 As in the following twelve passages: St. Matthew xvi. 28; St. Mark ix. 1; St. Mark xvi. 28; St. Mark ix. 1; xv. 43; St. Luke ix. 27; xix. 11; xxi. 31; xxii. 16, 18; Acts i. 3; 2 Tim. iv. 1; Heb. xii. 28; Rev. i. 9.] ;
.........and, finally, perfected in the world to come. [6 As in the following thirty-one passages: St. Matt. v. 19, 20; vii. 21; viii. 11; xiii. 43; xviii. 3; xxv. 34; xxvi. 29; St. Mark ix. 47; x. 14; xiv. 25; St. Luke vi. 20; xii. 32; xiii. 28, 29; xiv. 15; xviii. 16; xxii. 29; Acts i. 3; xiv. 22; 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10; xv. 24, 50; Gal. v. 21; Eph. v. 5; 2 Thess. i. 5; St. James ii. 5; 2
Peter i. 11; Rev. i. 9; xii. 10.]”
Note Edersheim's reference to Mt 16:28 as 'the second coming':
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. Mt 16:28
Edersheim's comments on Mt 16:28:
“But why speak of the future and distant? 'A sign', a terrible sign of it 'from heaven,' a vindication of Christ's 'rejected' claims, a vindication of the Christ, Whom they had slain, invoking His Blood on their City and Nation, a vindication, such as alone these men could understand, of the relity of His Resurrection and Ascension, was in the near future. The flames of the City and Temple would be the light in that nation's darkness, by which to read the inscription on the Cross. All this not afar off. Some of those who stood there would not 'taste death,' [1 This is an exact translation of the phrase, which is of such very frequenct occurrence in Rabbinic writings. See our remarks on St. John viii. 52 in Book IV. ch. viii.] till in those judgments they would see that the Son of Man had come in His Kingdom. [a St. Matt. xvi. 28.]”
From the scripture references he gives for 'the world to come', it's plain that he believes the kingdom is 'now', and that it is a spiritual one.
Edersheim again:
"We have the glowing descriptions by all the prophets, but especially in the Book of Isaiah, of the time of the new covenant, with its blessings to Israel and to mankind. That these bear reference to a spiritual world-wide dispensation in the Messianic days needs scarcely argument, any more than that all the conditions of it have been fulfilled in that dispensation which was introduced under the New Testament."
"All that had been national, preparatory, symbolic, typical, would merge into the spiritual reality of fulfillment."[/QUOTE]