The "coming" of the kingdom
The kingdom (reign) of God has always been an existing
reality—how could it not be? There’s no need to quote reams of texts
when a couple will do to bring into focus what the Bible everywhere
takes for granted even when it doesn’t spend a lot of time spelling it
out.
Some believers engage in this silly talk about God not reigning
over the world because there’s so much trouble and sorrow and injustice
going on in it. That’s how more than one person has put it to me,
"How can God be reigning over the world when it’s in such a mess?" That
makes sense in the mouth of a non-believer. If I were a non-believer
it’s one of the issues I’d keep harping on and it’s what non-believers
have harped on for centuries. But when you hear a believer with a Bible
in his hand agreeing with the non-believer it’s hard to take him
seriously. Especially when he urges us to pray for God to do something to change the world.
If the argument were worth anything it would mean that God hasn’t
been reigning since the rebellion in the Garden. But that won’t work. He
has always reigned and cannot cease to reign.
In 1 Chronicles 29:9 king David praised God in the presence
of assembled Israel. "Praise be to you, O Lord, God of our father
Israel, from everlasting to everlasting. Yours, O Lord is the greatness
and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for
everything in heaven and earth is yours. Yours, O Lord, is the kingdom;
you are exalted as head over all. Wealth and honor come from you; you
are the ruler of all things. In your hands are strength and power to
exalt and give strength to all. Now, our God, we give you thanks, and
praise your glorious name." David knew he was king but he knew who was King.
The Gentile king, Nebuchadnezzar was recognised as the ruler of the
world (Daniel 2:37; 4:22-23,24) but the prophet assures him that if his
arrogance and unrighteousness continued he would be deprived of royal
dominion. This temporary deprivation would be "until you acknowledge
that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them
to anyone he wishes...your kingdom will be restored to you when you
acknowledge that heaven rules" (4:25-27).
The song of Moses in Exodus 15:1-18 should be read in its entirety
and the last verse noted. Psalms 24 and 148 have the same tone that
numerous other psalms have and Isaiah 37:16-16 has king
Hezekiah declaring Israel’s faith in the face of Assyrian threat. "O
Lord Almighty, God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim, you alone
are God over all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and
earth...Now, O Lord our God, deliver us from his hand, so that all
kingdoms on earth may know that you alone, O Lord, are God."
That’ll do! The beginning or the end of a human kingdom in no way
undermines the truth that universal and everlasting sovereignty is the
Lord’s. God ruled Babylon through Nebuchadnezzar and God ruled Egypt
through the Pharaohs and Israel through the Davidic line.
The royal line of David began somewhere around 1,000 BC but it was
only a particular manifestation of the everlasting sovereignty of God.
In Daniel 2:44 God said he would set up a kingdom that would never be
destroyed (the Messianic kingdom). This was not the beginning of God’s
reign; it wasn’t even the beginning of the reign of the house of David.
It was the restoration of the house of David, in keeping with Psalm 89.
The reign of the Messiah (Jesus) is an expression of the reign of God
that has always existed. Jesus is the "last Adam" and the "second man"
(1 Corinthians 15). God by the exercise of his overarching sovereignty
has given all authority to Jesus Christ.
The royal reign of Jesus Christ began no later than the Acts 2 Pentecost. But the royal reign of Jesus Christ was not the beginning
of the royal reign of God. It was a peculiar expression of God’s reign
(note 1 Corinthians 15:27). It’s foolishness to think otherwise.
The redeeming work in and through Jesus Christ was a public
demonstration of the already existing kingdom of God. And just as surely
as that is true, this is true, the judgement on Israel in AD 70 was a
public demonstration of the already exalted and glorified Christ. And
just as surely as that is true Christ’s judgement on the Roman Empire
was the public declaration of his already existing royal power.
Luke 21:20-32 speaks of events that occur after Jesus was
made Lord over all, without qualification (Ephesians 1:19-20 and
Philippians 2:5-10 would illustrate). And yet it says that in light of
those events the disciples would know (21:32) "that the kingdom of God
is near." How can it be that the reign of God is near when Christ is
already reigning as Lord of all? One could say he was not really Lord
prior to those events but that would be to ignore plain statements of
numerous texts as well as the drift of scripture (see, for example, Acts
2:36 and 17:7, 1 Peter 2:21-22 and the like). No, that makes no sense.
The truth is that in these judgements (or blessings) the already
established reign of Jesus Christ is made public in public events. The
physical judgement on the Jewish nation and the destruction of the
temple was public proof of the reigning Christ (as was the outpouring of
the Spirit on Pentecost as mentioned in Acts 2:33). Israel had rejected
Jesus, saying, "we have no king but Caesar." John 19:15. The
destruction of the temple was the public proof that the one they had
rejected as king was truly king! Luke 21:32 isn’t the beginning of the
reign of God in Christ—it is a public vindication of it. We find the
same truth set forth in Revelation 11:15 and 12:10. God is known as the
King of the Ages (15:3) and yet we hear his worshipers, at the
outpouring of the seven bowls of wrath against the Roman Empire, say of
the Lord God Almighty "you have taken your great power and have begun to
reign." (NIV and others.) The Greek text uses an aorist in the
indicative indicating that in that act (complete judgement, signified in
the outpouring of seven bowls) God reigned. But God had never ceased to
reign and his Christ is already the ruler of the kings of the earth
(1:5 and the King of Kings before we goes to the battle of Armageddon in
19:16, see also 17:14). How then can it be said that he "reigned" in
that act? It means that God’s royal power and that of his Christ’s
revealed itself in so acting.
If another power claimed world dominion and moved against the people
of the Christ, at the appropriate time he would "take his great power
and reign." He would express his reign in an historical and public
setting. He would not gain reigning power by the act as if he
didn’t already reign. The act would be an act of royal power. So it was
in events like Egypt’s destruction (Exodus 15:18). Nebuchadnezzar’s
humiliation (Daniel 4), Jerusalem’s destruction, Rome's defeat
(Revelation 11 & 12) and in his future coming (2 Timothy 4:1) to
judge the world and set everything in a final order that the already
existing kingdom of God and Christ are revealed.
(You might be interested in my little thing called: The Reign of God. In the USA, toll free, 877-792-6408)