CYPRESSWOOD CHURCH OF CHRIST
February 17, 2008
25424 Aldine-Westfield, Spring, TX. 77373
www.geocities.com/adon77373/cypresswoodbulletin.htm
www.cypresswoodchurchofchrist.cm
PETITIONS AND THANKSGIVING:
Our congregation Various relatives, friends, and co-workers
Peace Our nation, military and leaders
THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN ON EARTH
“Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst” (Luke 17:20-21).
Recently, a politician running for national office made the statement that he wanted to see the kingdom of heaven on earth. I think we can safely state that politics and religion will be mixed this year in the elections coming in November. Politicians will be appealing to the religious vote, right and left. So we will see phrases used that appear to be Biblical, that are most likely used to appeal to the civic or national religion of the United States. This is, among many things, using Biblical words and ideas to further political purposes.
This is not the first time the phrase, “the kingdom of heaven on earth,” has been used. It means different things at different times and with different people. Going back in history, the Roman church used this idea to muster armies that went into battle, especially the Crusades. The idea of course was to rescue the Holy Land from the Muslim invaders. Likewise, there is a connection with Islam and its desire to rule the world under Shiria law as Allah’s kingdom.
In the last half of the 19th Century, the idea that the kingdom of heaven on earth would come as the good news was spread. This was a popular theology that drew in many including preachers in churches of Christ (1). The theology became known to some extent as post-millennialism. As the gospel spread, people lived under the rule of God, the poor and sick were taken care of, then God’s kingdom would be established (2). The secular side was that because of the progress of humanity, in science and technology, the world would see a time of peace and prosperity unlike any the world has ever seen. The utopian view found that man had found the answers to many of humanity ills. Then came the ship that could not sink, The Titanic, which sank on its maiden voyage in 1912. Then came World War I, using 20th Century weapons and 18th and 19th Century tactics, to slaughter millions of troops in horrible battles. The utopian dream ended and post-millennialism faded from theological circles.
Like many things, however, these things run in cycles. Since we have a rather limited view of history, we have people who do not realize what had happened in the past. Out of the ashes of the early 20th Century came the development of the social gospel. The following text was used:
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim the good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4:18-19) (3).
Out of this text there developed the ideas that salvation meant the rescue from poverty, oppression, and anything that the social gospel advocates saw as needing salvation. Eventually, the cross and sin itself were redefined. For instance, liberal theology developed particularly in South America that saw that salvation meant freedom from capitalism to a government control of people’s lives. The further the social gospel developed, the more utopian it became until it clearly identified itself with socialism. Secularly, the ideas of more government control, the New Deal, and even the Great Society of the 1960s all appealed to the language of poverty and scripture to develop and pass into law various government programs. America’s civil religion, based on Judeo-Christian ethics, is often used in this way as well as many others.
Opposition to the social gospel came from the religious right, though that wasn’t what it was called in the early 20th Century. Those who opposed it saw that, as Christians, we do need to be concerned with the poor, the sick, and those in prison, but that government was not the best way to deal with that. Even today, this distinction between left and right continues. Arthur Brooks in his book, Who Really Cares, shows that the religious right tends to give more in both time and money to help others. The recent hurricanes in the South and the tsunami in the Indian Ocean are examples of Bible believers sending help in money, supplies, and manpower to aid the injured.
So we will be hearing about the kingdom of heaven on earth, and that past is something we need to keep in mind. But what does scripture mean when it talks about the kingdom of heaven? We in churches of Christ will need to understand that we have not defined the word “kingdom” correctly. Because of an effort to make the New Testament a rule book, someone came up with the idea that we live under a King (which is true) and that His kingdom is the church. Having accepted this definition, we have concluded that the church and the kingdom are one and the same thing. We put a couple of verses together such as the saved are in the kingdom and in the church, and then say, see! In all the articles I have read on this, those who hold this view never define the word “kingdom.” It is assumed that it means church.
The word “church” means the assembly, and for some the called out. The word “kingdom” means rule, authority, or rule, and when connected with God, the rule of God. The parables of Matthew 13 show what the kingdom of heaven is like and how we are to live under God’s rule. When both John the baptizer and Jesus came announcing that the kingdom was at hand, the people were attracted to it because they were looking for God’s rule to come and return Israel to its former glory. The above text from Luke shows that one does not see the kingdom, for it is among us or as the footnote says, in us, meaning that we have accepted the rule of God. When God’s people, the church, accept and live under the rule of God, then they are part of or included in the kingdom or realm of God and His rule (4).
When we talk about the kingdom of heaven on earth, we want to understand that we are talking about God’s rule. Of course, this is a challenge to the powers that be. Caesar does not like to share power with anyone. When Paul stated that Jesus is Lord (Philippians 2:9-11), he was directly challenging the authority of Rome. This was just a beginning of what would eventually lead to Empire persecution for the next two hundred years.
Hitler wanted to rid Germany of Christianity. He began by promoting Nazism in the churches, to which many agreed. Those opposed became known as the Confessing Church, which led to the arrest and imprisonment of a number of leaders, preachers and theologians. While some atheists, and others, argue that Hitler was a Christian, in reality, he was into German paganism and wanted to rid himself of all opposition, and he saw Christianity as a threat to his rule (5).
Today, when we hear the term “the kingdom of heaven on earth,” we need to keep in mind that there are two different definitions of this. For Christians it means the rule of God. For a politician it means a means of promoting his or her ideas under the disguise of Christian words. The politician definitely would have problems proclaiming God’s rule unless it agrees with it. Jonah Goldberg suggests in his book that socialist government sees itself as god whose rule must be accepted (6).
For us, we want to know what is involved in the proclamation of the kingdom of God. That brings us back to the text Jesus quotes in Luke 4:18-19. Poverty, oppression, prisoners, and the sick are something that involves all of us in the sense of presenting the good news. We must keep in view the cross, the reason Jesus came, or as John the baptizer said that Jesus was the Lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world (John 1:29).
How we deal with the above is what is in discussion (7). Jesus said to render unto Caesar the things that belong to him and to God the things that belong to God. Stated in a context of paying taxes, it is something we need to keep in mind. There are things that government is responsible for and things that it is not. How much involvement is what the debate is about. Unfortunately stereotypes have come to play a role in this. Just recently, Juan Williams made a comment in passing that it was nice to know that Republicans had a heart (8). That is a stereotype from one side and we too need to avoid such.
Studies have found that the people who are actively involved in helping others personally are often able to deal with these situations in a positive way. Government tends to see everyone as the same, or simply as a number. It also has been ignorant of the destructiveness that has occurred because of its aloofness to problems, such as the destruction of the inner city family. We need honest discussion in these and other areas. But as Christians, we need to realize that, according to scripture, we have a responsibility toward the downtrodden and oppressed.
We will pick up on this and look at Luke 4:18-19 at a later date.
George B. Mearns
(1) Among the preachers was David Lipscomb who also saw that government was evil.
(2) In part, this led Albert Schweitzer to leave Germany for deep Africa, and as a missionary/doctor, establish hospitals where he worked.
(3) This remains an important text and will be used by both the religious right and left this year. We certainly must study its importance in context, both from Isaiah 61 and how Jesus used it. John Mark Hicks, et al, use it throughout their book, A Gathered People (see bulletin from 1/3/08 for a review).
(4) I have often wondered why those who do word studies on baptism and singing do not do it on kingdom. While there could be any number of reasons for this, one would be tradition. They are satisfied with the church-kingdom interpretation that they do not wish to look further. Another, to acknowledge that God rules, or that Jesus is Lord, means that the authority some think they have they do not have, and that would challenge other traditions.
(5) Bruce Walker has addressed this in several articles such as The Nazis and Christianity, www.americanthinker.com
(6) Liberal Fascism, 2008.
(7) Dennis Prager sees that both sides recognize the problems but that while the right is will to discuss solutions that might or might not involve government, the left accepts only government solutions and sees the right disagreement as evil and not worthy to consider. Such is where we are today.
(8) Fox News Sunday, 1/13/08.