The prophets of God under the Mosaic economy freely predicted a coming state of affairs in which the Messiah would reign and which they designated as "the kingdom which God would set up." Micah affirmed that the mountain of the Lord's house would be established in the last days, and would be the goal of heathen nations, whose citizens would invite and encourage each other to go up to it for instruction in the law of God that they might walk in his ways. Peace would be effected when such nations submitted their disputes to God for arbitration, and accepted his chastisement, so that war as a means of international discipline would no longer be requisite. In peace and quiet each man would sit in the shade of his own vine and fig tree, without fear of molestation or disturbance of his domestic tranquillity. Those who had suffered affliction would no longer have to endure such an ordeal, but God having removed the trials would "reign over them in mount Zion from henceforth, even for ever" (Micah 4:1-7).
It was this kingdom of which John was a harbinger, specially sent from God (John 1:6). During his earthly sojourn Jesus also heralded its approach, and sent out at one time, twelve; and at another time, seventy, messengers, all of whom were commissioned to declare the same message. During the forty days of interval between his resurrection and ascension Jesus made his topic of conversation with his chosen envoys, the kingdom of God (Acts 1:3). It behooves us to study carefully the connotation of a term so important as to be the subject of divine revelation and consideration.
The word "kingdom" is found 161 times in the common version of the new covenant scriptures, and is, without exception from basileia. The expression "kingdom of God" occurs 72 times, while the expression "kingdom of heaven" occurs 32 times. The word basileia is defined as a "kingdom, realm, the region or country governed by a king; kingly power, authority, dominion, reign, royal dignity, the title and honor of a king."
Even the casual student will instantly observe that the Greek term is much wider in scope than the English word "kingdom," for basileia has at least three meanings. These may be expressed by realm, reign and rank. The first has to do with the territory or place over which the sovereignty extends, the second has to do with the duration or time of such sovereignty, and the last with the honor accruing to the regnant monarch.
The term "kingdom" is too limited in significance to express all of these phases, and for that reason it is not a proper rendering in some places. When the nature of the statement or the context shows that it is the beginning of a period of sovereignty, or the duration of such an epoch that is being considered, "kingdom" is not an appropriate rendering, and may actually be incongruous. "Kingdom" has to do with the place, locality or province governed by a monarch, and does not express time or endurance. Upon such occasions the word "reign" is far superior to the other. In the new covenant scriptures, the allusion is much more frequently to the time, than to the place, yet the King James Version invariably translates by the word "kingdom" rather than "reign."
This version was given to the English speaking world in 1611 by James I, and has been hallowed by long generations of usage. Familiarity with its language, and reverence for its phraseology, will cause the pious reader to become insensible to expressions which in other documents would be immediately discerned as inappropriate. We cite as examples the following passages. Jesus taught his disciples to pray "Thy kingdom come" (Matt. 6:10). He said to the critical Pharisees, "If I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you" (Matt. 12:28). He declared that some who stood in his presence "would not die until they had seen the kingdom of God come with power" (Mark 9:1). It was said that a certain Arimathean "waited for the kingdom of God" (Mark 15:43).
In every one of these, the term "kingdom" is inappropriate. One may wait for a reign to commence but not for a place. He may come to a place, but it is surely conceded that a place connot come unto him. We may properly pray for a rule or authority to come or start, but not for a territory or region to do so. The difference between reign and region can readily be seen. We can ascribe motion to the first as it comes, continues and is protracted, but not so with the second, for it is by nature stationary and immovable. Those who plead for "sound speech which cannot be condemned" should understand that John proclaimed, "Reform, for the reign of heaven is approaching." This is sensible and correct.
Summarizing the rule for correct interpretation of basileia, it can be said quite simply, that when it indicates time it should be rendered "reign," but when the place is signified, it should be rendered "kingdom." In every case where the word is employed in conjunction with the word "preached" it should, without exception, be translated "reign." For example, "From that time Jesus began to proclaim, saying, Reform, for the Reign of Heaven approaches" (Matt. 4:17). "Then Jesus went over all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and proclaiming the glad tidings of the Reign" (Matt. 4:23). "As you go, proclaim, saying, The Reign of Heaven approaches" (Matt. 10:7). These are here given exactly as found in the translation from the original Greek by Dr. George Campbell of Glasgow, Dr. James Macknight of Edinburgh, and Philip Doddridge of England, and published with certain additions in the United States, by Alexander Campbell, generally under the title "Living Oracles." The words translated by our English word "preach" in their original usage by the Holy Spirit, meant something far different than the modern meaning attached to "preach." The idea of announcing or heralding was ever present in them.
When we speak today of "the Kingdom of Great Britain" or "the Kingdom of Norway" we visualize the territory or realm over which the Queen of England or the King of Norway has jurisdiction. Our employment of the word "kingdom" followed by a place name automatically leads us to associate the monarchy with the place or territory. This cannot be true, however, in the expression, "kingdom of heaven," for heaven is not the territory governed to the exclusion of other parts of the universe. Far from being so, the kingdom of heaven was proclaimed on earth to men, and they were told it was approaching them and would actually be among them on earth. It is obvious, then, that the expression "kingdom of heaven" would confuse and perplex the sincere student of the English language, for it is not used in the sense in which he is accustomed to use the word "kingdom." The words "rule" or "reign" as a translation of basileia under such circumstances, relieve us of the difficulty.
While it is a digression from our main theme, the fact that we have instigated a critical study of basileia in our attempt to fathom the meaning of the holy scriptures, makes it rather imperative that we point out that there are occasional uses of the word "kingdom" where neither "reign" or "kingdom" expresses the thought. Dr. George Campbell correctly cites two of these. One is in Luke 19:12, 15. This concerns the parable of the pounds, which is not to be confused with that of the talents. This one was voiced because of the proximity of Jesus to Jerusalem and due to the prevailing idea that the coming of the kingdom of God was imminent. The narrative concerns a certain nobleman who made a journey to a remote country to secure a kingdom, and who returned after having obtained it.
This is clearly a reference to the political situation of the Jews at the time, when Judea was tributary to Rome, after having been subjugated by Pompey. In order to obtain certification of his right to govern, the local ruler had to journey to Rome and receive the authoritative approval of the reigning Caesar. This was the case with Archelaus, son of Herod the Great, who reigned in his father's stead, a fact which caused Joseph and Mary to turn aside into Nazareth upon their return from Egypt. The Jews sent a deputation of fifty men to Rome, who joined with eight thousand Jews then living in that city, in an appeal to Caesar at the temple of Apollo, that Archelaus not be allowed to reign over them. Caesar listened to the appeal and reduced Archelaus to the status of ethnarch. The term "kingdom" in verses 12 and 15 clearly refers to regal dignity or royal authority.
In Matthew 18:23 is introduced the parable of the unjust and unscrupulous debtor. The context shows that "kingdom" here relates to a mode or form of governing, or to a type of administration. It does not refer either to the realm or reign of a monarch, but to the method of dealing with those who are under his control.
The term "kingdom of heaven" is used more frequently by Matthew than any of the other writers of the New Testament, who seem to prefer "kingdom of God." Matthew uses both terms, and in such a manner as to show they are interchangeable. He records the words of Christ, "Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5:20). In the very next chapter he has "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness" (Matt. 6:33). Moreover, in recording the same events, where Matthew uses "kingdom of heaven," the other writers have "kingdom of God." A case in point concerns John, the baptizer. Matthew has it, "He that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he" (Matt. 11:11). Luke writes "He that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he" (Luke 7:28).
Moreover, the expression "kingdom of heaven" does not occur at all in Acts of Apostles, the epistolary writings, or in Revelation. It is apparent that there was something distinctive about the purpose of Matthew, or the ones to whom he wrote, which would make him use so frequently an expression which other writers do not employ. The answer can no doubt be found in the fact that while Mark wrote especially for the Romans, and Luke wrote to a Greek and for Greeks, Matthew's account was designed for the Jews. God always adapts his revelation to the needs and condition of those to whom it is addressed.
The Jewish world at that time was in a state of great expectancy. All were looking for a restoration of the kingdom to Israel, and the ushering in of a golden age by the Messiah of whom the prophets had spoken. Jerusalem, as the capital of the new regime, would be world famous. The Gentiles would become tributaries and would converge upon the Jewish commonwealth with gold and silver in abundance. Much of the thinking centered around a materialistic and earthly speculation. Matthew's account was addressed to the Jews to prove that the Nazarene was the Messiah. The term "kingdom of heaven" was employed to distract their minds from the idea of an earthly prince leading a victorious army. It was intended to point their minds upward and to recognize a higher source of origin and a different type of sovereignty. An appeal of a different nature was necessary to reach the non-Jewish hearers of that day.
Summarizing our findings thus far, we have found the following implications of "the kingdom of God":
1. The kingdom universal and unlimited.
2. The kingdom before our Lord died for the sins of men.
3. The kingdom over which the Messiah now reigns.
4. The kingdom in a more glorious state in a dispensation to come.
It is essential to a correct understanding of the Bible that we keep in mind these four distinctive usages of the expression "kingdom of God." Those who do not properly distinguish them, often become guilty of perverting the scriptures to sustain a particular kingdom theory. They read a passage which speaks of the kingdom yet to come as an inheritance, and conclude that in no sense has the kingdom yet come. To sustain such an assumption they must twist or wrest those passages which refer to the kingdom in the past, or to the present rule of Christ. The true student has no recourse to such methods. He realizes that ancient Israel composed the kingdom of God, and that God took out of the way their law, priesthood and kingdom, and established another reign upon a more elevated plane, and that there is yet another more glorious and eternal kingdom to come. And prior to all of these phases, everything was ruled by God, as it still is, in a great universal sway over all creation.
If we except the first in our numerical catalog above, it is possible that the last three are co-related and are a manifestation of the unity existing in God's plan of the ages. In the reign over Israel we have introduced unto us the terminology and language by which God proposed to describe our relationship in the present kingdom. No one can apprehend to its fullest the teaching of God with reference to the present reign of heaven if he ignores God's dealings with Israel. Hardly a phase or feature of our worship, service, sacrifice or religion was without its type or shadow in the prior dispensation. Neither can be fully understood without studying the other.
And just as the language, elements and relationships of ancient Israel served to depict those of God's children under the present regime, so do those of the present look forward and explain those of the future yet to be revealed in culmination of this age. And the final phase of the kingdom is related to the first, for as earthly Jerusalem was the holy city to which all came to worship and serve, so in the last, "the great city, the holy Jerusalem" lying foursquare, with its walls of jasper and its twelve gates of pearl, will be the dwelling place of the saints, and they shall bring the glory and honor of nations into it.
Because of the close relationship of the various aspects of the kingdom, it is not surprising that the inspired writers often speak of them in the same context. One who reads the parable of the tares will note that our Lord says it is a likeness of the kingdom of heaven. But the first part deals with the events in this age, while the harvest is distinctly said to be the end of the world, or the conclusion of this state. When the angels have gathered out all seducers and iniquitous persons "then shall the righteous shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father" (Matt. 13:36-43).
The past condition and present status of the reign of heaven are both dealt with in the parable of the vineyard as related by our Lord in Matthew, chapter 21. The leaders of the Jewish nation are depicted as rebellious and murderous husbandmen, who despised and stoned the prophets and others sent by the owner to secure fruits. When he sent his son, expecting them to properly respect him, they reasoned that since he was the heir, they could kill him and keep possession of his inheritance. The parable concludes with the statement, "Know, therefore, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation who will produce the fruits of it." That there is a connection between the administration of God over the fleshly seed of Abraham and the kingdom embracing the spiritual seed of Abraham, there can be no question. Yet we must distinguish between them as we differentiate between a man and his shadow.
Our concern in this book is chiefly with the kingdom of God as now manifested, and with its fruition in the everlasting phase awaiting all of the faithful of all ages. We shall concern ourselves with the prophecies of that kingdom and then deal at length with its nature and with our relationship as citizens thereof. To such a voyage of discovery, with the foundation thus laid, we invite all of you to go along as our guests through succeeding pages.