“THE KINGDOM AGE”

[Buff Scott Jr.]

“THE KINGDOM AGE”

[Has that Age arrived or will it arrive later?]​

I read from an author recently the following words, “We must remember that while we have been privileged to witness the rebirth of the Nation of Israel, this is not the Kingdom age.” Another Editor in another Christian Journal encouraged his readers to... “study what the Bible says about the Kingdom of God and the Messiah’s role in restoring God’s Kingdom on Earth.”

“Restoring God’s Kingdom on Earth?” These authors’ assertion does not harmonize with the Spirit’s testimony. “Kingdom” in the new scriptures is best rendered “reign.” So when we speak of the “Kingdom of heaven,” as Jesus often did, we are talking about heaven’s reign or the rule of heaven. Jesus also expressed heaven’s rule by referring to the “kingdom [reign] of God.” He told the Twelve, “I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom [reign] of God come with power” [Mark 9:1].

By comparing the above scripture with Acts, chapter 2, we find that God’s new reign [kingdom] was ushered in “with power.” Thus God’s new reign or era of grace began. From this information, we must conclude that the “Kingdom age” has been a reality for over 2,000 years.

The old kingdom age prevailed under Moses, when God reigned over the kingdom of Israel. His Son Jesus reigns over new Israel today—the redeemed community or household of faith. Even assuming that “church” is a correct rendition instead of a distortion of the Greek ekklesia, the kingdom and the “church” would be equivalent—one and the same. The scriptures are mum in regards to a separate terrestrial “Church Age” and a “Kingdom Age,” as our Calvinist brothers claim.

Most kingdom enthusiasts see Jesus’ future kingdom as being of this world, yet Jesus Himself declared, “My kingdom is not of this world” [John 18:36]. If Jesus’ kingdom [reign] is yet future and will be of this world, as the advocates of a future earthly reign contend, Jesus must have been mistaken when He answered Pilate. Was He mistaken?

To confirm even further that the “kingdom age” has been with us for over 2,000 years, believers at Colosse had been rescued from the domain of darkness and transferred into that kingdom. “He has delivered us from the domain [kingdom] of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son [Col. 1:13].

Jesus came over 2,000 years ago and set up that kingdom and is reigning as King at the right hand of His Father. The writer of Hebrews refers to Jesus’ second coming, not a third. “So Christ, having been offered 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” [Heb. 9:28]. From this current kingdom, the redeemed community, we will be transported to the eternal kingdom in Heaven.

When He returns the second or final time, He will deliver His kingdom or reign back to the Father, according to Paul in I Cor. 15:24. Nothing is said about another earthly reign being launched. I understand the “thousand-year” reign in Revelation as a symbolic figure and covers the entire course of the grace era. Jesus is reigning as King over His subjects now! ​

 

[Josheb]

Help me out. I just did a search in my eBible for the phrase "kingdom age" and I cannot find that phrase anywhere in my Bible. Where do you find that in your Bible?

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Josheb, you are correct - the expression as such is not found in the scriptures. That's why I quoted it in quotation marks. However, just as surely as the sun shines, the so-called kingdom age is current and has been for over 2,000 years - namely, it is the community of the redeemed.

As you should know, many of our spiritual expressions are not found, as such, in the biblical documents. Expressions are simply a means of communicating our thoughts and sentiments. Many of our expressions coincide with biblical messages; many others do not. Look for Part 2 of this subject.​

 

[Josheb]

Josheb, you are correct - the expression as such is not found in the scriptures. That's why I quoted it in quotation marks.​

From whence then did the phrase originate?

Why did the phrase originate?

As you should know, many of our spiritual expressions are not found, as such, in the biblical documents.​

Yes but that is not a legitimate reason to invent phrases or frame discussion by invented phrases without acknowledging their extra-biblical nature. Appeals to other examples is a kind of fallacy. It can be a false equivalence (the phrase "kingdom age" is comparable to the term "Trinity" when it is not true; they are not comparable terms), or tu quoque ("you do it too," as in because others invent terms it's okay if I or those in my theological or doctrinal category do it too.)

So let me forthcoming: I am not unilaterally denying the veracity of the term; at least not yet. What I am trying to do - hopefully with your collaboration - is establish some of the facts and truths associated with this phrase. Some of those facts/truths are commendable and may prove efficacious, while others are neither. Among those facts would be the sectarian and eschatological differences because, if memory serves me correctly, you and I come from different eschatological povs, and there many others in CCAM who share views different from ours. That means two things: 1) terms should be defined, and 2) this is going to be a much more diverse discussion for you as others join the thread. Because the Dispensational view of the "kingdom age" is radically different than the rest of Christendom's view, it also means peripheral doctrines like Christology, soteriology, and ecclesiology will likely occur in the thread and that mean, again, you, as the author of this op will have to field a potentially very diverse set of responses OR focus your attention solely on the content of your op. It's quite likely the discussion of this opening post will be lost in five or six pages so you might consider what it is you'd like to accomplish before that happens. It does not take long for an op like this to generate five or six pages (100-120 posts) - could happen in a day or two.

Right now, it's you and me and I have several points of inquiry and several points of current and potential disagreement, but I don't want to start out critical, or at least not unduly so . I hope you'll give us both time to establish the conversation. I greatly appreciate your immediate, direct, honest, and correct response to my observation and inquiry. As you probably know, most posters would have avoided the question, posted a non-answer (and called it an answer), or started ad hominem. I make note of this to express my appreciation and commendation, but also to highlight the response for others in hopes they might learn and benefit from your example you have set. Well done.


Now.... back to the op .

Aside from some information about the origins of the phrase, its purpose (if known), and its usage as intended in this op, I'm also curious why this wasn't posted in the eschatology board since the "kingdom age" is typically an eschatological term. I'm not saying this op should be moved. I think, again, you'll have your hands full trying to keep the conversation solely or primarily theological, especially once Dispensationalists gather, if the focus is not kept on the theology of "kingdom age" as a whole. Of course, if this op is either intended as an eschatological conversation or the inclusion of that aspect isn't minded then I also think it would be beneficial for all if you stated your particular eschatological orientation.

I'm going to post a couple of other questions and comments in separate posts.

 

[Josheb]

“THE KINGDOM AGE”

[Has that Age arrived or will it arrive later?]​

I read from an author recently the following words, “We must remember that while we have been privileged to witness the rebirth of the Nation of Israel, this is not the Kingdom age.” Another Editor in another Christian Journal encouraged his readers to... “study what the Bible says about the Kingdom of God and the Messiah’s role in restoring God’s Kingdom on Earth.”
​

Would you mind citing that authors/editors and possibly linking us to the source from which his words were taken? Thx

Are you aware that of the five main eschatologies in Christian eschatology only one of those eschatologies thinks Israel is relevant to Christian eschatology? Historic Premillennialism views Israel irrelevant. So do Amillennialism, Postmillennialism, and Idealism (and their overlapping views). Only Dispensational Premillennialism teaches Israel is relevant to Christian eschatology. Therefore.....

• Are you aware the view stated in the opening of the opening posts is uniquely Dispensationalist?
• Was either author or editor Dispensationalist?
• Did either acknowledge that fact?
• Did either author/editor ever mention this was a Dispensationalist view not shared with any other Christian eschatological point of view?

I'll try to track down documentation for what I just said about the various eschatologies' views on Israel. Rose Publishing has a good chart for this.

 

[Josheb]

Here's the Rose Publishing chart showing the various eschatologies view on modern Israel. The chart contains several other comparisons so I hope thread participants will NOT use the chart abusively; they will NOT use this information to broach things unrelated to the op's content on the "kingdom age."

As you can see, only Dispensational Premillennialism hold modern Israel relevant to Christian eschatology. Theologically speaking, Dispensationalism, and none of the other alternatives in Christianity share the same theological view of the author and editor mention at the opening of this op. As far as the "kingdom" of God and "kingdom age" go, Historic Premillennialism and Dispensational Premillennialism share some common views, but the former is still much different, theologically and Christologically, than the latter.

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

From whence then did the phrase originate?

Why did the phrase originate?

Yes but that is not a legitimate reason to invent phrases or frame discussion by invented phrases without acknowledging their extra-biblical nature. Appeals to other examples is a kind of fallacy. It can be a false equivalence (the phrase "kingdom age" is comparable to the term "Trinity" when it is not true; they are not comparable terms), or tu quoque ("you do it too," as in because others invent terms it's okay if I or those in my theological or doctrinal category do it too.)

So let me forthcoming: I am not unilaterally denying the veracity of the term; at least not yet. What I am trying to do - hopefully with your collaboration - is establish some of the facts and truths associated with this phrase. Some of those facts/truths are commendable and may prove efficacious, while others are neither. Among those facts would be the sectarian and eschatological differences because, if memory serves me correctly, you and I come from different eschatological povs, and there many others in CCAM who share views different from ours. That means two things: 1) terms should be defined, and 2) this is going to be a much more diverse discussion for you as others join the thread. Because the Dispensational view of the "kingdom age" is radically different than the rest of Christendom's view, it also means peripheral doctrines like Christology, soteriology, and ecclesiology will likely occur in the thread and that mean, again, you, as the author of this op will have to field a potentially very diverse set of responses OR focus your attention solely on the content of your op. It's quite likely the discussion of this opening post will be lost in five or six pages so you might consider what it is you'd like to accomplish before that happens. It does not take long for an op like this to generate five or six pages (100-120 posts) - could happen in a day or two.

Right now, it's you and me and I have several points of inquiry and several points of current and potential disagreement, but I don't want to start out critical, or at least not unduly so . I hope you'll give us both time to establish the conversation. I greatly appreciate your immediate, direct, honest, and correct response to my observation and inquiry. As you probably know, most posters would have avoided the question, posted a non-answer (and called it an answer), or started ad hominem. I make note of this to express my appreciation and commendation, but also to highlight the response for others in hopes they might learn and benefit from your example you have set. Well done.


Now.... back to the op .

Aside from some information about the origins of the phrase, its purpose (if known), and its usage as intended in this op, I'm also curious why this wasn't posted in the eschatology board since the "kingdom age" is typically an eschatological term. I'm not saying this op should be moved. I think, again, you'll have your hands full trying to keep the conversation solely or primarily theological, especially once Dispensationalists gather, if the focus is not kept on the theology of "kingdom age" as a whole. Of course, if this op is either intended as an eschatological conversation or the inclusion of that aspect isn't minded then I also think it would be beneficial for all if you stated your particular eschatological orientation.

I'm going to post a couple of other questions and comments in separate posts.

"From whence then did the phrase originate?" Chiefly from the Baptist sect. Stay tuned, for you will soon see Part 2 of this subject.​

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Would you mind citing that authors/editors and possibly linking us to the source from which his words were taken? Thx

Are you aware that of the five main eschatologies in Christian eschatology only one of those eschatologies thinks Israel is relevant to Christian eschatology? Historic Premillennialism views Israel irrelevant. So do Amillennialism, Postmillennialism, and Idealism (and their overlapping views). Only Dispensational Premillennialism teaches Israel is relevant to Christian eschatology. Therefore.....

• Are you aware the view stated in the opening of the opening posts is uniquely Dispensationalist?
• Was either author or editor Dispensationalist?
• Did either acknowledge that fact?
• Did either author/editor ever mention this was a Dispensationalist view not shared with any other Christian eschatological point of view?

I'll try to track down documentation for what I just said about the various eschatologies' views on Israel. Rose Publishing has a good chart for this.

"Would you mind citing that authors/editors and possibly linking us to the source from which his words were taken?"

From the Editor of a recent issue print-out of "Israel My Glory" magazine. Go to Google to read more about this journal.​

 

[Josheb]

"Would you mind citing that authors/editors and possibly linking us to the source from which his words were taken?"

From the Editor of a recent issue print-out of "Israel My Glory" magazine. Go to Google to read more about this journal.​

Thanks. I'm familiar with the magazine. Did you happen to note the by-line?

"From whence then did the phrase originate?" Chiefly from the Baptist sect. Stay tuned, for you will soon see Part 2 of this subject.​

Please be more forthcoming and without delay because it wasn't just any Baptist sect. Both the magazine and the Baptist sect in question are Dispensationalist. Yes?

 

[EarlyActs]

“THE KINGDOM AGE”

[Has that Age arrived or will it arrive later?]​

I read from an author recently the following words, “We must remember that while we have been privileged to witness the rebirth of the Nation of Israel, this is not the Kingdom age.” Another Editor in another Christian Journal encouraged his readers to... “study what the Bible says about the Kingdom of God and the Messiah’s role in restoring God’s Kingdom on Earth.”

“Restoring God’s Kingdom on Earth?” These authors’ assertion does not harmonize with the Spirit’s testimony. “Kingdom” in the new scriptures is best rendered “reign.” So when we speak of the “Kingdom of heaven,” as Jesus often did, we are talking about heaven’s reign or the rule of heaven. Jesus also expressed heaven’s rule by referring to the “kingdom [reign] of God.” He told the Twelve, “I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom [reign] of God come with power” [Mark 9:1].

By comparing the above scripture with Acts, chapter 2, we find that God’s new reign [kingdom] was ushered in “with power.” Thus God’s new reign or era of grace began. From this information, we must conclude that the “Kingdom age” has been a reality for over 2,000 years.

The old kingdom age prevailed under Moses, when God reigned over the kingdom of Israel. His Son Jesus reigns over new Israel today—the redeemed community or household of faith. Even assuming that “church” is a correct rendition instead of a distortion of the Greek ekklesia, the kingdom and the “church” would be equivalent—one and the same. The scriptures are mum in regards to a separate terrestrial “Church Age” and a “Kingdom Age,” as our Calvinist brothers claim.

Most kingdom enthusiasts see Jesus’ future kingdom as being of this world, yet Jesus Himself declared, “My kingdom is not of this world” [John 18:36]. If Jesus’ kingdom [reign] is yet future and will be of this world, as the advocates of a future earthly reign contend, Jesus must have been mistaken when He answered Pilate. Was He mistaken?

To confirm even further that the “kingdom age” has been with us for over 2,000 years, believers at Colosse had been rescued from the domain of darkness and transferred into that kingdom. “He has delivered us from the domain [kingdom] of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son [Col. 1:13].

Jesus came over 2,000 years ago and set up that kingdom and is reigning as King at the right hand of His Father. The writer of Hebrews refers to Jesus’ second coming, not a third. “So Christ, having been offered 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” [Heb. 9:28]. From this current kingdom, the redeemed community, we will be transported to the eternal kingdom in Heaven.

When He returns the second or final time, He will deliver His kingdom or reign back to the Father, according to Paul in I Cor. 15:24. Nothing is said about another earthly reign being launched. I understand the “thousand-year” reign in Revelation as a symbolic figure and covers the entire course of the grace era. Jesus is reigning as King over His subjects now! ​

This is very helpful. The fewer locations (here, there, when, etc.) you can cite the better. Of course, there is one direction which the kingdom seeks to go, and that is toward this earth (the Lord's prayer), but in a way this has been true since Gen 1, when the 'image of God' (a marker of ownership) was bestowed on all mankind.

Rather than 'reigning' (in a distant heavenly sense), God made the resurrection Christ's enthronement. This is the plain sense of what we read in early Acts, in Rom 1, Phil 2, Heb 1. Modern Christians might be a bit shocked to realize their early faith was saying something so aggressive, because it calls for all rulers, not to mention the common lot, to 'honor the Son, lest he be angry.'
But it is clearly there.

The best term I have found for this (but always open to others) is imperative (which, as you can see, has the commanding sense built into the meaning of the term). The question is not when or where (as in your title), but whether we represent Christ as a king of kings deserving all honor. This does not, btw, dissolve human government, but hopefully improve them along the lines of Rom 13 (see other threads here for that). The final outcome should be something like patriotic period America.

The other thing that will shock the modern person is that the endless blare of Christian music is a misguided but comfort-intended statement that Christ is 'on the throne of your life's events.' All the sense of a world-wide reign is reduced to the 'proof' (or not) of the satisfactory nature of your circumstances at this moment. Oh, and if they are not, you are still to sing that 'he reigns' over those circumstances. No, it is not circumstantial at all. When the apostles claimed that he was enthroned, the first thing they mention is that the world plot furiously together against him.

I have tried to explain this by introducing my book THE ENTHRONED KING and had people storm out in anger, because the "Christian" music industry has them so fixed on the on-again-off-again "reign" of circumstances.

In the same way, your last line, 'he reigns over his subjects now' is not quite it, because it is isolated from the whole world. The apostles actually stated that the rulers of the world had better honor the Son, making Ps 2 and 110 the most revolutionary statements of human history.

 

[Josheb]

This is very helpful. The fewer locations (here, there, when, etc.) you can cite the better. Of course, there is one direction which the kingdom seeks to go, and that is toward this earth (the Lord's prayer), but in a way this has been true since Gen 1, when the 'image of God' (a marker of ownership) was bestowed on all mankind.

It is very common for Christians to think of the Lord's Prayer as a series of petitions, or requests. A simple google search readily provides hundreds of websites explaining this and there are centuries of theologians treating the prayer that way.

However, an examination of the Greek proves the prayer is one of declaration, not petition. Jesus did not teach his disciples to ask, "Our Father who is in heaven [will] your name be honored?" or "Our Father who is in heaven [may] your name be honored." He did not teach them to ask, "[Will You please make it so] your kingdom [will] come, Your will [might be] done on earth as it is in heaven." The conjugation is in the aorist passive imperative. An imperative is a command. A passive imperative conjugation indicates something being done by someone else with which we (or the disciples) are participants. In other words, an imperative, passive or otherwise, is never a supplication. Jesus did not teach his disciples to ask God for His kingdom to come; he taught his disciples to declare it had come and they were participants in the current actuality, not a future possibility. If you put the Lord's prayer in modern vernacular it would read something like this...

"Our Father who is in heaven, Your name is honored. Your kingdom is come, Your will is done on earth as it is in heaven! You give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive others. You do not lead us into temptation but deliver us from evil."​

Those statements are found elsewhere in the New Testament. Each of them is stated as a fact of current reality, not something that needs to be asked for or something that may happen in the future. All the Psalms declare God's glory and honor. They do not ask for it; they declare it! Israel was judged because of their chronic failure not honoring God's name (Mal. 1:6, 2:2).

Deuteronomy 28:58-59
If you are not careful to observe all the words of this law which are written in this book, to fear this honored and awesome name, the LORD your God, then the LORD will bring extraordinary plagues on you and your descendants, even severe and lasting plagues, and miserable and chronic sicknesses.

1 Timothy 6:1
All who are under the yoke as slaves are to regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine will not be spoken against.

God's name was honored - as a given. Obedience did not bestow honor as if God needed to be bestowed anything; it showed a person understood God's honor as a fact.

Matthew 12:28
But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Luke 17:20-21
Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."

Romans 14:16-17
Therefore, do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil; for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

God's kingdom had come, and it had come by divine decree, not because it needed to be asked for. God did not ask, "Would you like my kingdom?" It was not something to be petitioned for. It was to be declared! I'm not sure why anyone needs scripture to prove this, though, because simple logic necessitates if God is God then He rules everything everywhere always in all ways. God is never not King and nothing He creates is not His Kingdom and His kingdom alone. All of scripture's mentions of kingdoms should be understood in the context of there is only one Creator God and He and He alone, is sovereign over everything - even over any other kingdom ever mentioned.

Daniel 4:35
All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, But He does according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth; And no one can ward off His hand or say to Him, 'What have You done?'

Romans 9:15-20 ESV
For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”

Ephesians 1:9-11
He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will...

James 1:18
In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures.

There are scores of verses about this. God's will is. God's will is not a maybe, nor is it dependent upon the creature to ask for it or petition it for its existence, power, or effect.

James 1:13
Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.

God does not tempt anyone. Never has. God never "leads us into temptation," so there is never any need for anyone to ever ask God not to do so. By declaring the truth, "God, You never lead us into temptation!" we are asserting what is, His deity and honor, not petitioning it in supplication. Jesus even explained this at the time he taught his disciple the Lord's Pray when he said,

Matthew 6:14
For if you forgive other people for their offenses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.

We do not need to ask to be forgiven if we forgive others. It already was and is a kingdom principle. It was the Forgiver of Sins that taught them the prayer. Jesus came to give to God's people the knowledge of salvation by the forgiveness of their sins, because of God's tender mercy (Lk. 1:77).

Mark 11:25
Whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father who is in heaven will also forgive you your transgressions.

John 20:23
If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.

All these already exist. God's name is honorable and honored. His Kingdom has come, and His will is done on earth as it is in heaven. He gives His people everything the need, and He does so on a daily basis. He never leads us into temptation, and He forgives us as we forgive others. Declare it, don't just ask for it. More importantly,

Live it!​

.

 

[EarlyActs]

Josheb, you are correct - the expression as such is not found in the scriptures. That's why I quoted it in quotation marks. However, just as surely as the sun shines, the so-called kingdom age is current and has been for over 2,000 years - namely, it is the community of the redeemed.

As you should know, many of our spiritual expressions are not found, as such, in the biblical documents. Expressions are simply a means of communicating our thoughts and sentiments. Many of our expressions coincide with biblical messages; many others do not. Look for Part 2 of this subject.​

Likewise, the fact that the kingdom is an imperative one will not be found in any one verse, but from saturation in all of them. There is no other conclusion we can reach once we know Ps 2 and 110. And anyone working in NT eschatology should see that those 2 are the whole.

Advisory again: the 'game' of popular eschatology/futurism is that we are 'solving' a 'puzzle' that has various sequential and location 'slots' to be all filled out. When done with the 'game' there will be a perfect 'cube' like a Rubic cube. No, this paradigm is completely unsatisfactory. The essential thing that happened was the enthronement of Christ in the resurrection, so that all rulers and ordinary people alike are summoned to honor the Son, lest he be angry and bash you to pieces.

A clue to this is right in Acts 1:8-9. They ask when does the kingdom come for Israel. They are told to stop doing that. (A marker of a pop eschatology person is that they don't hear this ban). But in the next line 'You will be clothed...' are the two important clues: clothed and power. Clothed is Levitical garments placed on them, and the power is that of a kingdom. Not a scattered explosion, but this authoritative enthronement message, about which of course, there is nothing comparable. He is now the deserving King (and loving Redeemer) and all nations should be honoring him.

I thought these were confined to early Acts, but they are in teaching in ch 13 and 15 and then, surprise, they show up in 17 in Athens: God has set a day to judge the world through the Son, and the proof of this is the resurrection. Paul did not avoid Ps 2 and 110 to the pagans as though they were too complicated.

 

[CrowCross]

I read from an author recently the following words, “We must remember that while we have been privileged to witness the rebirth of the Nation of Israel, this is not the Kingdom age.” Another Editor in another Christian Journal encouraged his readers to... “study what the Bible says about the Kingdom of God and the Messiah’s role in restoring God’s Kingdom on Earth.”

“Restoring God’s Kingdom on Earth?” These authors’ assertion does not harmonize with the Spirit’s testimony. “Kingdom” in the new scriptures is best rendered “reign.” So when we speak of the “Kingdom of heaven,” as Jesus often did, we are talking about heaven’s reign or the rule of heaven. Jesus also expressed heaven’s rule by referring to the “kingdom [reign] of God.” He told the Twelve, “I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom [reign] of God come with power” [Mark 9:1].

932. βασιλεία (basileia) is a definition for "kingdom" You can see how it is used here. When I look at the occurrences of the word "Kingdom"...I fail to see your point.

No I will say Jesus will reign in His Kingdom.

By comparing the above scripture with Acts, chapter 2, we find that God’s new reign [kingdom] was ushered in “with power.” Thus God’s new reign or era of grace began. From this information, we must conclude that the “Kingdom age” has been a reality for over 2,000 years

With all due respect....if true Jesus doesn't seem to be doing a very good job. Why is there so much crime? Child trafficking, drug use, war, violence, abortion, satan worship,...and the list goes on and on???

 

[Mr GLee]

Josheb, you are correct - the expression as such is not found in the scriptures. That's why I quoted it in quotation marks. However, just as surely as the sun shines, the so-called kingdom age is current and has been for over 2,000 years - namely, it is the community of the redeemed.

As you should know, many of our spiritual expressions are not found, as such, in the biblical documents. Expressions are simply a means of communicating our thoughts and sentiments. Many of our expressions coincide with biblical messages; many others do not. Look for Part 2 of this subject.​

Hi I would, offer we must to look to the foundation of the matter (Genesis ) the new testament adds to the understanding.

Genesis where most doctrines have thier foundation.David in the Psalms relied What could the righteous do if foundation is taken away .We must be care in that way.

We are the temple of God the kingdom works inside as a kingdom of priest. Preachers of the gospel .Christ yoked with us , The hope of His glory . Beginning with Abel our brother in the Lord .

Abel the apostle sent with prophecy (gospel) , the first recorded martyr. Setting up the doctrine of the second born as those born again from above as a shadow pointing at the coming of the Son of man, Jesus , used to display the love and power of the Holy Father pouring out his living born again Spirit on dying flesh

Matthew 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Luke 11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

Hebrews 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

Hebrews 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.