seek first the kingdom

8/7/2019 Seek First the Kingdom

1/144

SEEKFIRST THE KINGDOMThe Kingdom of God as a Framework

for Theological Instruction in the Church

Integrative Paper Assignment

Reformed Theological SeminaryDan Claire, Advisor

Mark Leone

April 2002

Seek First The Kingdom i Mark Leone


2/144

SEEKFIRST THE KINGDOMThe Kingdom of God as a Framework

for Theological Instruction in the Church

Abstract:

The Kingdom of God is an important theme woven throughout the biblical revelation, onewhich has undergone significant development over the course of redemptive history. Avast amount of study has been devoted to this theme, yielding valuable biblical insightswith relevance to virtually all theological disciplines. The biblical significance of theKingdom of God, however, and its subsequent theological development, is notproportionally reflected in the general sensibilities of Christian lay people today. Thetheological consciousness of the laity, generally speaking, is not significantly conditionedby the biblical concept of the Kingdom of God. An appreciation by the church for ourplace in the general scheme of the Kingdoms manifestation in history is particularlylacking.

This paper addresses this disparity by presenting a discussion of the biblical treatment ofthe Kingdom of God, illustrating how this theme can be incorporated into the teaching

and preaching regimen of the church today, specifically the Presbyterian Church in

America (PCA). Foundational to this discussion is an understanding of the revelation ofthe Kingdom of God as a phenomenon in history, and an appreciation for how this

understanding is conditioned by the biblical concept of time itself. This paper begins,

therefore, with an examination of the Kingdom of God in the context of redemptivehistory and the structure of time. We then consider what it means to live today in theKingdom of God, by examining, in turn, the ethical stances of Jesus and Paul, and

demonstrating how they are integrally related to the Kingdom framework. The paper

concludes with a reflection on the pastoral use of the material presented.

This material is prayerfully offered as a framework for instilling a more robust and

fruitful theological conception of the Kingdom of God throughout the PCA.

Copyright 2002 Mark Leone All Rights Reserved

Seek First The Kingdom ii Mark Leone


3/144

Seek First The Kingdom iii Mark Leone


4/144

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1

THE KINGDOM MOTIFIN SCRIPTURE....................................................................................... 5

THIS PRESENT FUTURE: REDEMPTIVE HISTORYANDTHE INTRUSIONOFTHE ESCHATON.............10

REDEMPTIVE HISTORYAND TIME.......................................................................................... 11THE OVERLAPOFTHE AGES................................................................................................ 14

THE MEANINGOF ESCHATOLOGY..........................................................................................16

DISCERNINGTHE KINGDOM..................................................................................................19

CHRIST, THE LAW, AND RIGHTEOUSNESSINTHE ESCHATOLOGICAL MANIFESTATIONOFTHE

KINGDOM.............................................................................................................................25

THEETHICALSTANCEOF JESUS.............................................................................................27Righteousness and the Law in the Messianic Kingdom.............................................27

The Social Trajectory of Kingdom Ethics..................................................................33

PAULS TEACHINGON CHRISTANDTHE LAW......................................................................... 42

2 Cor. 3:7-11: The Law as a Ministry of Death.........................................................43Gal 3:15-25: The Law as a Conductor to Christ......................................................44

Rom 10:4: Christ is the Telos of the Law.................................................................. 45

Christ the Fulfillment of the Law...............................................................................47Law and Spirit in the Messianic Kingdom................................................................ 50

RIGHTEOUSNESSAND LIFE: THE ESCHATOLOGICAL GIFT.......................................................... 51

The Unity of Pauls Thought......................................................................................52Paul and the Synoptic Gospels.................................................................................. 57

CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................58

LIVINGINTHE KINGDOM.......................................................................................................60

SEEKFIRSTTHE KINGDOM.................................................................................................. 60Matthew 6:33.............................................................................................................60Two Kingdoms........................................................................................................... 62

A PEOPLEFORGODS OWN POSSESSION............................................................................... 64

THE CHURCHINTHE WORLD...............................................................................................66The Postmodern Context........................................................................................... 66

Finding the Center.....................................................................................................67

Recovering the Antithesis.......................................................................................... 70The Democratization of the Spirit............................................................................. 74

THE CHURCHANDTHE KINGDOMOF GOD..............................................................................78

PREACHING

THE

WORD

....................................................................................................... 80CHRISTIANITYASA WORLDVIEW.......................................................................................... 82

A FRESH LOOKAT ECUMENISM............................................................................................84

BUILDINGA COMMUNITY.....................................................................................................86

JESUSTHE KING.................................................................................................................89

ESCHATOLOGICAL RIGHTEOUSNESS: THE CURRENT CRISISIN PAULINE THEOLOGY...................93

THE DOCTRINEOF JUSTIFICATIONIN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE................................................. 95

Seek First The Kingdom iv Mark Leone


5/144

THE NEW PERSPECTIVEON PAUL....................................................................................... 101A Theological Sea Change...................................................................................... 103N.T. Wrights Approach............................................................................................ 110

Critical Analysis...................................................................................................... 120

A WAY FORWARD............................................................................................................ 127

CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................133BIBLIOGRAPHY....................................................................................................................137

Seek First The Kingdom v Mark Leone


6/144


7/144

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

One of my most memorable airline experiences is the time I flew from Baltimore to a

connecting flight in Phoenix seated next to an aggressively argumentative member of the

Sri Rajneesh cult. His female partner, noticing a Christian book in my hands, engaged me

with a polite question as to why I believed in Jesus; but before I could barely begin my

answer I was interrupted by her partner with a loud and angry denunciation of Christian

belief, delivered with a venomous snarl and flashing eyes. In a voice that carried

throughout the otherwise quiet passenger cabin of the American Airlines MD-80, this

poor lost soul lambasted me with questions and commentary apparently designed to keep

me off balance, laced throughout with tortured Scripture renderings and highly selective

quotes from the mouth of Jesus.

Although this was perhaps the most memorable encounter I have ever had with

unbelief, there was one particular argument thrown at me that stands out in my mind to

this day. After quoting Rev 4:9-11 to me from memory (this is the account of the twenty-

four elders casting down their crowns before the throne of Almighty God), my inquisitor

stared intently into my eyes and said If youre so smart, when was that Scripture

fulfilled? After several seconds of stunned silence, I replied with obvious irony As far

as I know, it hasnt been fulfilled. I then was informed that the correct answer to his

question was 1974, at the Houston Astrodome, a reference, as I eventually understood,

to the blasphemous culmination of a large cult gathering in which Sri Rajneesh was

Seek First The Kingdom 1 Mark Leone


8/144

worshipped as God the Father. I continued the debate, politely and firmly, for the sake of

our captive audience, but I think I have never encountered one who seemed so lost as this

man with flashing eyes, insisting that Rev 4:9-11 was fulfilled in 1974.

I wonder if I would induce a similar sense of incredulity if I were to sit next to a

typical Christian on a flight to Phoenix and forcefully insist that the end of the world has

already occurred. I could probably defuse the tension by explaining about the overlap of

the ages and the delay of judgment, but I expect that the best I could do by the time we

landed would be to demonstrate that Im not out of my mind. My scheme would have a

certain logical coherence, but I dont think it would resonate with what this average

Christian has been taught, or how he reads his Bible, or how he understands the dynamic

of the Christian life. Furthermore, I am not any more hopeful of success if I were to try

this exercise in a randomly selected pew of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA),

my own denomination. My pessimism is based on several years spent occasionally

explaining just this concept to my brothers and sisters in the PCA. My experience has

been that it takes much longer than the time required to fly to Phoenix, because I cant

seem to find anyone who has not been to seminary who has heard anything about the

overlap of the ages, or even has any inkling that the last days they so eagerly await have

qualitatively intruded into the present age, the very days in which we are now living.

This is disconcerting to me for two reasons. First, this scheme is taught in the

seminaries from which the PCA draws her ministers, and there is generally no principled

or practical objection raised there against the assertion that it captures the sense of the

Bibles teaching on the meaning of Christs appearance in history. Why, then, does no one

in the pews seem to understand it? Second, the intrusion of the eschaton is no small



9/144

matter. It is true that the essence of this intrusion is plain enough to the typical Christian.

He knows intuitively that something other-worldly has gripped him, that he has crossed

over from days of death to days of life, that Gods Spirit has been given to him. What

scheme, however, is generally available to provide a coherent explanation of what the

Christian has experienced and what he believes to be true?

There is no commonly valid answer to this question, because there is a wide variety

of competing and often contradictory theological frameworks extant in the evangelical

church. Christians make sense of their experience and grapple for ways to explain their

beliefs as best they can, using schemes that range from simplistic formulaic explanations

like the four spiritual laws to complex soteriological arguments and anthropological

analyses, and many options between these extremes. By and large these schemes contain

assertions that are precious truths of Christian doctrine, but in general they do not give a

compelling account of what it means to be a Christian. Christians are in need of a

Christian worldview if they are to live faithfully in this world, and this requires a

coherent scheme that accounts for as much of the biblical data as possible, while also

explaining the relevance and significance of this data to the Christians daily life.

We in the PCA are blessed with a wonderfully coherent set of doctrinal standards that

provide a faithful summary of the Bibles teaching on a number of topics. These

standards constitute a reliable system for interpreting our Christian experience, but such a

comprehensive summary of Scripture is not easily appropriated by the typical PCA

member, and many are sadly ignorant of our standards. Our flock is badly in need of a

framework with which to interpret even that excellent framework of Scripture passed

down to us from the Westminster Divines. This suggestion may appear arbitrary and



10/144

conducive to an endless proliferation of frameworks, except that the Bible itself provides

us with just such an overarching scheme, namely the Kingdom of God.

In the pages that follow, I will survey the Scriptures treatment of the Kingdom, and

elaborate a framework for theological instruction that is rooted in this Kingdom motif.

This paper is addressed to pastors and other church officers, especially Ruling and

Teaching Elders in the PCA, in the hope also that a general readership will find the

material interesting and useful.



11/144

CHAPTERONE

The Kingdom Motif in Scripture

The sustained focus on the Kingdom motif in this paper is not intended to suggest

that there is any absolute significance to the Kingdom of God as an overarching template

for understanding Christian life and doctrine. Other organizing schemes may certainly be

found to be profitable. There is, however, much to recommend the Kingdom of God as a

scheme by which we may enable Gods people to more effectively appropriate Christian

truth into the warp and woof of their daily life.

Jesus himself adopts the Kingdom motif as a summarizing scheme for his mission.

The announcement of the inauguration of the Kingdom is central to Jesus public ministry

and figures prominently in his teaching. In the synoptic gospels, the very commencement

of Jesus ministry is identified as the proclamation that the Kingdom of God is at hand 1.

This focus on the Kingdom as a summary statement of Jesus mission continues

throughout the gospels, identified repeatedly as something fundamental to it. Not only do

Jesus and the gospel writers associate Jesus ministry with the coming of the kingdom,

but his followers often raise the subject of the Kingdom in questions addressed to him,

and the devil himself seeks to tempt him with an alternative vision of the Kingdom 2.

1 Mt. 4:17; Mk. 1:15; Lk. 4:18-19. Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture references are from the NewAmerican Standard Bible (NASB).2 Mt. 4:8;18:1;20:21; Mk. 11:10;15:43; Lk. 1:33; 17:20;19:11;23:42.



12/144

The centrality of the Kingdom as seen in the ministry and teaching of Jesus is set in

the larger context of the comprehensive relevance and dominant position of the Kingdom

of God motif throughout the Bible. From the vantage point of Scriptures eventual clear

and explicit revelation of the Kingdom of God, the significance of the Kingdom motif is

readily seen in the earlier biblical revelation as well. The fallen man and woman are

banished from the realm of Gods special presence, where Gods protection, provision,

and personal governance (kingdom artifacts in the nature of the case) are the dominant

features of their existence. This banishment is pronounced in almost the same breath as a

promise to send a savior for the womans seed who will, by implication, return to their

progeny the lost Kingdom blessings. The accounts of contrasting and adversarial

bloodlines (the descendents of Seth versus those of Cain, the seed of the woman versus

the seed of the serpent) imply a kingdom dynamic throughout the ensuing human history.

As the Kingdom motif is eventually made explicit in the biblical revelation, its

centrality and comprehensive significance for all of salvation history is self-evident. The

very occasion for the writing of the introductory books of Scripture is the founding of the

Kingdom of God among the community of nations,3 and Moses expounds the meaning of

the Kingdom in terms of a cosmogony, acts of divine election, and subsequent bloodline

descent that have their culmination in the Kingdom he has been appointed to inaugurate.

Thus all that precedes the time of Moses and the Exodus is teleologically tied to the

establishment of Gods people in the wilderness. All that follows, furthermore, is

presented as the organic development of a Kingdom that has its roots in those wilderness

events.

3 It is difficult to identify a single event as the founding of the Kingdom of God. For the purposes of thecurrent argument, Moses may be seen as the founder of the Kingdom in the sense that he establishes for thefirst time a large political body that constitutes the People of God.



13/144

Under the Davidic dynasty the Kingdom subsists in its most perspicuous form, while

also adumbrating future meanings of the Kingdom that are yet to be fully revealed. The

life of Gods people for all time is thereby irrevocably tied to the Kingdom rubric.

Kingdom blessings during the Davidic dynasty are mediated through prophet, priest, and

king; yet these very blessings point to a future transformation of the Kingdom motif that

establishes its significance for all time. Not only do the priestly sacrifices anticipate

Gods all-sufficient sacrifice, but the prophetic ministry also points to a future, universal,

permanent Kingdom dynamic. The early prophets do business with the kings, not the

people at large, until the corruption of the kings leads to a turning point with the coming

of the prophet Elijah. Subsequently the prophets prosecute Yahwehs covenant with his

people directly, and their message turns more and more to the coming judgment of

national Israel, and the call for a remnant to bind themselves to Yahweh through

faithfulness to his covenant, that they might be graciously preserved in the coming

judgment.

Jeremiah speaks of a future transformation of the Kingdom, when God will establish

a new covenant written on the hearts of his people;4 Ezekiel writes about a new and

vastly superior temple;5 Isaiah paints a sublime picture of the renewal of all creation

under God the King;6 and many other prophets proclaim this coming transformation in

various ways. All these descriptions of a transformed dynamic of Kingdom life are

realized by the character of the Christian life in the present age.

Far more significant than that of prophet and priest, however, is the development of

the Kingdom with respect to the King. If the coming of Christ is the central defining

4 Jer. 31:27-40.5 Eze. 40-48.6 Isa. 65:17-66:24.



14/144

moment for all of human history, then the centrality of the Kingdom motif is self-

evidentfor the coming of Christ is the coming of the King, and therefore the coming of

the Kingdom, into history. This is not merely an inference from the nature of Christs

ministry. Christ himself, when he sums up his ministry in a single thought, speaks of the

coming of the Kingdom.7 The establishment of the Kingdom of God, therefore, is widely

regarded as the main focus of Christs ministry.

Furthermore, inasmuch as Jesus ministry represents fulfillment without

consummation, the Kingdom is the central motif for the future as well. Both Jesus and his

followers speak repeatedly of the Kingdom as something coming in the future.8 This

expectation is made more explicit in various passages of the New Testament, including 2

Thessalonians 2:1-12 (the prediction of Jesus overthrow of the man of lawlessness by

the breath of his mouth) and Revelation 11:15ff (the announcement at the opening of

the seventh seal that the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord, and

of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever).

Thus the Kingdom of God is an all-encompassing summarizing scheme for what

God has done in ages past, the life we have in Christ in the present day, and all that we

await in the culmination of salvation history. It is a comprehensive rubric for

understanding Gods acts in history, including the Christians personal history, and it

fundamentally represents our current state of affairs and expectations for the future. That

God chose to establish his people as a kingdom is of great significance. A kingdom, a

political entity by definition, makes fundamental, comprehensive, and irresistible claims

on its subjects. We readily recognize how critical to our well-being is the earthly kingdom

7 See note 1.8 Mt. 6:10;7:21-23;8:11-12;20:21;25:31-34; Mk. 11:10;15:43; Lk. 11:2;13:22-30;14:15;17:20-21; 23:42.



15/144

to which we live in subjection. How infinitely more significant is our life in the Kingdom

of God, a biblical motif of inestimable value for making sense of the life we live in Christ

and the precious truths to which we cling.

Having seen the great significance that Jesus assigned to the Kingdom of God, and

that the Kingdom of God motif is woven comprehensively throughout the biblical

revelation, we now turn to an exploration of this great biblical theme. In Chapter Two we

will explore the general scheme of the Kingdoms manifestation in history and the way

that the New testaments concept of time conditions our understanding of the Kingdom as

a dynamic force in the world. In Chapter Three we will explore the ethical implications of

the presence of the Kingdom today, considering the teachings of Christ and Paul and how

we may obtain a unified view of them. In Chapters Four and Five, respectively, we will

present some general principles of application and a discussion of how the Kingdom

framework can be promoted within the church. An appendix is also provided, which

presents a critical analysis of a current issue in the church that has a significant bearing

on our discussion of the present manifestation of the Kingdom, namely the debate

concerning the so-calledNew Perspective on Paul.



16/144

CHAPTERTWOThis Present Future: Redemptive History and the Intrusion of the Eschaton

To the extent that the Kingdom of God is contemplated today in the church, there is a

general tendency among Christians to appropriate the concept in contemporary terms,

often as a rallying point for aspirations for the future. This amounts to a more or less

abstract conception of the Kingdom as something offered to us today in some limited,

inward sense, which will make its real mark upon the world in the great future. This view

of the Kingdom is essentially accurate as far as it goes, but what is missing is a proper

sense of the specific nature and meaning of the Kingdom of God as revealed to Gods

people throughout salvation history.

When Jesus announced his ministry he could speak of the Kingdom of God, making

reference to a subject that was well established in the conceptual landscape of his hearers.

Although he lamented the hardness of heart and dullness of mind of the generation to

which he appeared, and brought into history a manifestation of the Kingdom that was

ultimately unrecognizable to the majority of that generation, he nevertheless appealed to

the contemporary conception of the Kingdom of God to identify what he was

inaugurating. Present day recipients of Jesus message should likewise be given a

conception of the Kingdom that is mediated by its explicit revelation in salvation history

and the pregnant sense of expectation that prevailed among Jesus generation.

A proper historical perspective is an effective antidote to a merely abstract

conception of the Kingdom of God. This requires more than an interpretive historical



17/144

narrative, however. A proper understanding of the Kingdom in the context of redemptive

history also requires an appreciation for the New Testaments unique conception of time

and the fundamental restructuring of time brought about by the coming of Christ into

history. This will be illustrated below in terms of the redemptive-historical implications

of the coming of Christ into history.9We will then investigate how a biblical view of the

nature and meaning of eschatology can greatly invigorate these redemptive-historical

insights and enhance their appropriation in the daily life of the Christian.

Redemptive History and Time10

Oscar Cullmann calls attention to the uniqueness of the Christian practice of marking

time forward and backwardfrom Christ, and argues that this is indicative of a significant

theological tenetnamely, the central and controlling position of the Christ-event within

a linear time process in history. The New Testament, he argues, presupposes a linear

concept of time, in contradistinction to the Hellenistic conception of time as a circular

process. This is not merely a metaphysical distinction, but one with significant

theological implications. If time is a circular process, unique significance cannot be

assigned to any division of time. History is not under the control of a telos, or goal, and

9 The redemptive-historical approach to Biblical theology takes as its point of departure the assertion thatthe essence of divine revelation is the redemptive history revealed in the Bible, of which the appearing ofChrist is the determining event. Over against systems of Biblical interpretation that seek to establish theircenter in some controlling thematic principle or systematic conceptual framework, the redemptive-historical approach seeks its center in the historical events of redemption themselves, which are in turn seento be thoroughly conditioned by and organically related to the Christ-event, such that all of redemptivehistory is seen as a Christ-process. (Oscar Cullmann, Christ and Time, (Westminster Press, 1950) 24-25.)

See also Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, (Eerdmans, 1975). Noting thefundamental tension within Pauls theology between the already and the not yet, Ridderbos asserts thatPaul is not a systematic theologian but a preacher of the Christ revealed in history. For he was not atheologian who thought in terms of the aeons, but a preacher of Jesus Christ, who has come and is yet tocome. Here is the reason why this eschatology is ambivalent and fits into no single schema, and why he canemploy the eschatological categories at one time in a present, and another time in a future sense, apparentlywithout concerning himself about the unsystematic character of it (53). Elsewhere, Ridderbos asserts thatthe historical death and resurrection of Christ determines the fundamental theological conceptions of theNew Testament, which are pictured as radiating outward in concentric circles from this central historicalfact. (85).10 The discussion in this section of the New Testaments concept of time draws heavily on Cullmann, Christand Time.



18/144

therefore has no ultimate meaning. Redemption cannot occur in history, for the salvation

sought is a salvation out of history. The idea of salvation in Hellenistic thought is

dominated by a spatial contrast rather than a time contrast between now and then,

such that salvation is always available in the timeless realm of the great beyond, rather

than something worked out as a process in history.

The New Testament knows nothing of this circular concept of time, but everywhere

presupposes a model of time as an upward-sloping line. This paradigm is warranted by

the Biblical emphasis on the distinction of the beginning from the end, and the pervasive

tone of expected culmination. The New Testament recognizes a qualitative difference

between the time before creation and the time after the eschatological culmination of

history, and this distinction can only be maintained within the framework of linear time.

If the eschatological expectation of culmination within history is replaced with a

metaphysical distinction between this world and the timeless beyond, the entire

theological program of the New Testament is rendered meaningless and arbitrary. For if

there is no distinction between the time before history and the time after, there can be

no significance for the events that happen in between.

Therefore, Cullmann argues, the meaning of each age within time is not determined

in reference to a timeless eternity, but each segment of time has its own unique meaning

which is determined by its relationship to a decisive mid-point, namely the appearing of

God in history in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. 11 This is the event that gives meaning

11 Cullmann argues that time is not bound to the created realm, but is simply everything that God causes tohappen. Thus for Cullmann God is not timeless, but exists necessarily in a segment of time that has nobeginning and no end. Cullmann grounds his concept of the mid-point of history in this assertion, arguingagainst any opposition of time to timelessness. This view of time is problematic at best, and impossible toprove or disprove definitively from the biblical data, although both general and special revelation seem tosupport a concept of time that is, like space, bound to the created realm.

Cullmanns argument, however, highlights an apparently insurmountable problem that arises whentime is considered to have a beginning and an end. If eternity is nothing other than the absence of time, thenit is impossible to claim any significance for the events that occur in time; for it is impossible then to assert



19/144

to all of history. The events that come before this mid-point have their meaning as

preparation, and the events that follow have their meaning as culmination. Thus Christ is

presented as the mediator of the creation event, the one in whom Gods people are

predestined before the foundation of the world, and the second Adam who is predestined

as the pattern after which redeemed humanity will be fashioned. Likewise for the period

beyond revealed history, Christ is presented as the goal toward which all history is

aiming, the one in whom all things are summed up, and the mediator of the new creation.

The events within the period of revealed history have their meaning only in reference

to Christ. This fact is prophetically asserted12 in the scriptures for the events of

redemptive history, such as the history of Israel as the preparation for the coming of

Christ, or the character of the Church as the Spirit-mediated locus of his redemptive

power. Yet this decisive mid-point gives meaning to all of history in addition to the

special case of redemptive history, for the slim line of salvation history interprets and

judges the entire line of history. It is part of the great offense of Christianity that the

seemingly insignificant events revealed in Scripture give meaning to all of history, for the

Christ-line of Biblical history is entitled to render a final judgmenteven on the facts of

general history and on the contemporary course of events at any period.13

any distinction between eternitypastandfuture, those words being meaningless in a timeless realm. If weare therefore unable to make a distinction between before history and afterhistory, how can the events ofhistory have any significance?

We can solve this problem more satisfactorily with a modification of Cullmanns thesis. If time isheld to be bound to the created realm, then let us postulate for it a beginning but no end, consistent with ourview of the spatial realm. In viewing time as having a beginning, we avoid Cullmanns problem of makingGod subject to time. In arguing that time continues forever along with the rest of creation, we maintain asound basis for asserting genuine meaning for the events in history. This modification of Cullmanns thesisregarding the nature of time does not invalidate his argument about the mid-point of history.12 Cullmann, Christ and Time 98. Cullman defines prophecy as redemptive history as a whole, whosecharacter is such that it must be apprehended by faith. Prophecy serves to unify what Cullmann refers to asmyth and history in its process of revelation, since both historically verifiable and unverifiable events mustbe apprehended by faith. The creation of Adam is an example of a historically unverifiable event that canonly be apprehended by faith. The assertion that the Holy Spirit was at work in the growth of the primitiveChurch is an example of a historically verifiable event that nevertheless requires a prophetic apprehension.13 Ibid. 20.



20/144

Thus the appearance of Christ in history is the central and decisive mid-point, giving

meaning to all of history. Events at all points along the timeline of history have their own

unique significance, but this significance is determined by their relationship to this

decisive mid-point. Baptism, regeneration, physical death, for example, each have a once-

for-all significance in the lives of individual people; but the meaning of each of these

unique events is determined by its relationship to the decisive mid-point of history, the

Christ-event.

The Overlap of the Ages

The radical nature of the Christ-event can be seen in the fact that it brings about an

entirely new division of time, with profound implications for the manner in which we

perceive the events of salvation history. Cullmann explains this division in terms of the

diagram on the following page, reproduced from Cullmans work.14

A three-fold division of time is drawn to demarcate three stages of time: the time

before creation, the time between creation and the Parousia, and the time after the

Parousia. Superimposed on this scheme in Judaism, without discarding it, is a two-fold

division in which the coming of the Messiah divides the timeline between this age and

the age to come. The boundary of the two-fold division coincides, in Judaism, with the

boundary between the second and third stages in the three-fold division. In the Christian

scheme, the boundary of the two-fold division is drawn so that it occurs in the middle of

the second stage of the three-fold division.

14 Ibid. 82 (slightly modified).



21/144

The significance of this change is that while for Judaism the mid-point of history lies

in the future, for Christianity it has already occurred. Thus Christ has brought a new

division of time. Judaism looked forward to the coming of a new age, associated with the

coming of the Messiah. With the coming of Christ, the decisive mid-point now lies in the

past. With regard to the two-fold division, Cullmann argues, the part that follows the mid-

point is already in the new age. But in terms of the three-fold division, which is still valid,

the final period is yet to come. This is, in schematic form, the already/not-yet tension that

the New Testament asserts for the present age. This is how it is that Jesus preaches that

the kingdom of God has come and is yet to come.

This tension is possible because in Christ time is divided anew. A future is still

expected, just as in Judaism, but the center of the timeline is no longer in the future. The

center lies in a historical event. It has been reached, but the end is yet to come. The

eschatological expectation of Judaism is still valid for Christianity, but it is no longer the

center. The focal point is not the eschatological expectation, but the conviction


Before Creation Between Creation

And the Parousia

After the Parousia

Mid-Point of HistoryJudaismJudaism

Time

Before Creation Between CreationAnd the Parousia

After the Parousia

Mid-Point of History

ChristianityChristianity

Time

This AgeThe Age

to Come

This AgeThe Age

to Come

TodayToday

TodayToday


22/144

concerning the Resurrection.15 In other words, the eschatological hope of Judaism is

replaced by the eschatological faith of Christianityfaith in the historical

accomplishment of events that constitute the mid-point of history.

So long as the mid-point lay in the future, the relationship with the future was

primarily characterized by hope, for the specific details of the events of the mid-point

were not known. But now that the mid-point lies in the past, its events are the objects of

specific knowledge. The decisive event that exclusively determines and interprets our

existence now lies in the past. Our expectation for the future is not simply rooted in hope,

but is characterized by faith in the already-accomplished reality of Christs incarnation,

death, and resurrection. Our hope for the future is no longer the central element of our

religious consciousness, for this hope now concerns only the culmination of the process

already initiated by the decisive mid-point events that lie in the past and are apprehended

by faith.

This is not to say that our hope for the future is not intensified by our present

experience of Christ, but only that it is no longer the center. In actuality our intensity of

longing is increased by virtue of the fact that we are already tasting the life of the future

age. It is characteristic of the overlap of the ages in which we live that we are actually

tasting rather than merely hoping.

The Meaning of Eschatology

The significance of the foregoing discussion is made more apparent when we

consider the primarily ethical function of eschatology. Let us briefly review the nature

and function of eschatology in Old Testament times and then consider, in light of this

15 Ibid. 84-85.



23/144

insight, the ethical implications of the new division of time resulting from the coming of

Christ into history.

The prophetic strand in Judaism was characterized by an all-embracing conviction

concerning a God who was active in history.16 While the salvation awaited in the future

required an inbreaking of God into history, it was nevertheless a salvation in time that

was pictured.17The God who would act in the great eschatological drama was the God

who was acting in the present day and who would act in the immediate future. This is

why the prophets often did not distinguish between the near-term judgments of God and

the great eschatological judgment awaited for the future. The specific timing was not

significantwhat was significant was that God was going to act.

The ethical commandments of the prophets were rooted in the eschatological vision

of Gods redemptive acts. Eschatology was not intended by the prophets as a means of

providing a timeline of Gods redemptive acts, but as a means of revealing the broad

sweep of Gods redemptive plan and the character of his redemptive acts, in the light of

which the people were called to interpret the issues of the present day. They proclaimed

Gods will for the ultimate future, that in its light they might proclaim Gods will for his

people here and now.18 For the Old Testament recipients of the prophetic messages, the

mid-point of this redemptive plan was in the future. Therefore they were motivated by an

16George Elden Ladd, The Presence of the Future, (Eerdmans, 1974) 87-94. This characteristic of the OldTestament prophetic strand is especially apparent in contrast to the later apocalyptic interpretation of OldTestament prophecy, in which God was seen as having abandoned history to the forces of wickedness, andsalvation was awaited in a supra-historical realm.17 Ibid. 52-59. The historical forces presently at work could not bring about the necessary salvation, thusrequiring an apocalyptic intervention from God; but the prophets make no sharp distinction between historyand eschatology.18 Ibid. 65. Elsewhere Ladd points out that historical judgments and the eschatological judgment could beblended together in the prophetic writings, because the focus of the attention was the acting of God, notthe chronology of the future (67-68).



24/144

eschatological hope, as they sought to interpret the ethical and religious issues that faced

them in the light of Gods promised decisive action in the future.

We have seen, however, that with the coming of Christ a radical shift has occurred

regarding the point of view with respect to redemptive history. Now the decisive mid-

point is in the past, and the future expectation is for the consummation of what already

has been inaugurated. Therefore, the eschatological hope of Judaism is replaced by the

eschatological faith of Christianity. As with the Old Testament Jews, the eschatological

pronouncements are brought to bear on us that we might interpret the ethical and

religious issues of our day in the light of Gods revealed plan of redemption in history.

But we have experienced a shift in perspective that is of tremendous significance. The

decisive event that gives meaning to all of history has already occurred, and is known by

us and apprehended by faith. We are called to interpret the issues of our day not merely in

terms of our hope for the future, but primarily in terms of the decisive redemptive act of

God at Calvary, which now for us lies in the past.

Life in the present aeon is not to be determined by mere hope for Christs return, but

by faith in the Christ who has already come and who will come again. We are not

empowered merely by a hope in the Spirit who will one day transform our bodies, but by

the reality of the Spirit who is already present within us, who has already installed

himself within us as a deposit of that incorruptible life that one day will take hold even of

our bodies. The life of the age to come is already available, and it is this fact that

primarily determines our present existence. The eschatological pronouncements of

Scripture provide us with a picture of the culmination of this process that has already

begun in us.



25/144

This is the meaning of the eschatological focus of scripture. It is not a reportorial

prediction of future events that is provided, but an all-embracing presentation of the

redemptive program of the God who acts in historya program whose decisive and all-

determining mid-point lies in the past, the benefits of which are received in the present

day, by faith. Eschatology, properly considered, is not about the future but the present. Its

primary purpose is not to reveal narrowly specific details of the future, but to provide a

meaningful context for ethical thought and action in the present. History has a goal, and

what we do in the present is related to that goal. This is the manner in which the Old

Testament prophets applied their eschatological pronouncements. This ethical function of

eschatology is intensified in the New Covenant, for the eschatological drama has already

begun. The life of the age to come has been born within us, and we are already ripening

as the first-fruits of the new creation.

Discerning the Kingdom

The foregoing discussion is no doubt largely a review for many with formal

theological training, and for others a strange new teaching that nevertheless seems to

resonate with Scripture. Let us explore how we can make this resonance more apparent.

A useful starting point might be a recovery of the New Testament sense of the

centrality of eschatology in the Christian life and its pervasive presence in the Scriptures.

There is a strong tendency in the church today to view eschatology as a separate

discipline that we tackle periodically or when were feeling especially brave. This

tendency is fueled by the common misconception that the study of last things is almost

exclusively focused on the future, and relevant for the present only in an indirect sense.

The elements of the present which happen to figure in the eschatological scheme are



26/144

conceived as having no significance in themselves, but only insofar as they point to some

impending future that is qualitatively different from the present age. Thus, for example,

wars and earthquakes in the present day may be discerned as vital components of the

eschatological focus; but they have no qualitative significance or ethical meaning for the

present day, and they are significant only because they are believed to presage the

impending appearance of Christ.

Contemporary Christians must be shown that the eschatology of which the New

Testament speaks is vitally concerned with the present in a qualitative sense, and that this

establishes an essential ethical function for eschatology. The eschaton is significant not

merely because it lies on the horizon and is eagerly awaited, but because it has in a

qualitative sense already arrived.

How, then, do we understand, appropriate, and explain this intrusion of the eschaton

in a way that will be meaningful for the typical Christian? The Kingdom of God is an

effective scheme for accomplishing this task, and, as we saw in the Introduction, the

scheme of our Lords own choosing. The Kingdom parables in particular, when

understood in their redemptive-historical context, can be used to bring home the reality of

the Kingdom in our present day. The problem that Jesus was addressing with these

parables, a failure to appreciate the hidden and progressive character of the Kingdom, is

also prevalent in our day.

Jesus was teaching that the new age had dawned, that the eschatological Spirit was

poured out, that the kingdom of God was present, and that Satans kingdom was being

looted. Although signs of these things were apparent to those who were willing to receive

them, many of the things commonly associated with the coming of the kingdom were not



27/144

being observed. Gods enemies had not been judged, Israel remained oppressed by a

foreign power, and the Kingdom Jesus proclaimed seemed to be small and insignificant.

It turns out that Jesus had brought a hidden kingdom, which was only later to be made

visible to all the world. It was this special character of the Kingdom that Jesus sought to

explain with the parables of the Kingdom in Mark 4 and Matthew 13, which he described

as revealing the mystery of the Kingdom. A thoughtful reading of these parables

demonstrates that for Jesus the mystery of the Kingdom is the coming of the Kingdom

into history in advance of its apocalyptic manifestation.19

The parable of the four soils (Mt 13:1-23; Mk 4:1-20), for instance, is not intended

merely to teach that one must be careful how one receives the word that Jesus sows,

which seems to be a common use of it in the church today. The parable, like all the

Kingdom parables, teaches redemptive-historical truth, and not merely a general moral

lesson.20 The point of the parable is to answer the disciples question as to how the

Kingdom can be present while very little on earth appears to have changed. Jesus

explains that the Kingdom is like a field being sown with a crop. The seed sown is

received differently from one place to another. In some people the word is received and

takes root, while in others it fails for various reasons. But even in the places where it

takes root, it will take some time before it bears its large volume of fruit. The Kingdom,

Jesus explains, is a dynamic reality, an organic process that has been inaugurated in their

midst with his coming.

19 Ibid. 222.20 Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, (Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962) 121-123. This is not to arguethat it is inappropriate to draw from parables moral lessons that are not explicitly connected to the parablesredemptive-historical context. Moral applications may and should be drawn from all Scripture, includingparables, since Scripture consists of the very words of God. The Kingdom parables, however, are clearlyintended to assert redemptive-historical facts, and any merely moral application of them misses theirfundamental point.



28/144

The parable of the wheat and the tares (Mt 13:24-30) teaches a similar truth, with

emphasis on the fact that Jesus had not come to establish a separatist group. The

Kingdom had come into the world without effecting a separation of men; this awaits the

eschatological consummation.21 The mystery that had to be explained was the delay of

the Judgment, for Jesus had come this first time to bear the Judgment rather than to bring

it.

The parable of the mustard seed (Mt 13:31-32; Mk 4:30-32) explains how the great

eschatological Kingdom can be present and yet seem so insignificant. It may be

unobtrusive in its seminal form, but it will one day be the most prominent feature in the

garden of history. In similar fashion, the parable of the leaven (Mt 13:33) teaches that the

Kingdom will eventually prevail so that no rival sovereignty exists.22The parables of

the hidden treasure and the pearl of great price (Mt 13:44-46) teach that the Kingdom is

of inestimable value, even though at present it seems crude and inconsequential. The

parable of the growing seed (Mk 4:26-29) explains that the Kingdom seed grows by its

own power and that the crop is produced gradually, first the blade, then the head, after

that the full grain in the head. And finally the parable of the net (Mt 13:47-50) explains

the strange character of Jesus followers.23 The Kingdom of God has come into the world,

but it is not now making a separation among men.

When these parables are understood by the church in their redemptive-historical

context, we will take Jesus pronouncement of the presence of the Kingdom far more

seriously. We will understand that the Kingdom is not any less real because of its

21 Ladd, Presence of the Future 232. Ladd notes that the fact that the wicked will not be separated from therighteous until the end of the world was well-accepted in Judaism and could not be the point of the parable.The fact that the Kingdom had come and yet not brought about this separation is the secret truth that Jesusis teaching his disciples.22 Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom 237.23 Ibid. 241.



29/144

hiddenness nor any less powerful because it subsists as an actual process in history. This

realization of the exercise of Gods dynamic power, through the eschatological Spirit that

has been poured out in this age, changes our perception of history as well as the present.

We look back on 2,000 years of Kingdom history and see striking evidence of the organic

process Jesus spoke of in the Kingdom parables. This conditions our view of the present

day, for we discern in the past no ordinary history, but the ever widening wave front of

some other-worldly impulse that entered history long ago. That wave front is advancing

still today, and it is nothing other than the dynamic power of God.

We do not forget, however, what Jesus taught about the tares, the thorns, the rocky

soil, and the birds that swoop down and steal the seed. Nor do we regard this present age

as insignificant by virtue of the fact that the decisive salvation event has already

occurred. Precisely because of the fact that we speak of a culmination of history, we

understand that a process in time is required to continue. The decisive mid-point of

history is not interpreted in a metaphysical or existential sense, but as a real point in

time. That which lies before it really precedes it, and that which lies after it really

follows. The fact that sin is still present although the Holy Spirit is already at work

demonstrates that it is a redemptive necessity for time to continue in order to carry the

redemptive history to its goal.24

The Kingdom is therefore a powerful paradigm for confronting the myriad problems

facing the church today. Theological dullness, devotional apathy, racial divisions,

preoccupations with wealth and power, worldly values, worship of comfortthese

should not exist in the Kingdom, but we understand that its history is still unfolding.

24 Cullmann, Christ and Time 92-93.



30/144

Furthermore, the Kingdom paradigm is a powerful antidote for these remnants of the old

order. Not only is the Kingdom a transforming agent bringing Gods dynamic power to

bear in history; it is also the purveyor of invincible hope, offering a certain vision of the

comprehensive renewal of all things that is grounded in what has already been decisively

accomplished, the culmination of which is being worked out before our very eyes.



31/144

CHAPTERTHREEChrist, the Law, and Righteousness in the Eschatological Manifestation of

the Kingdom

In the preceding chapter we outlined the basis for claiming that the end of the

world has already come, and we illustrated the sense in which this is asserted. We now

consider what it means to live in the Kingdom of God in this eschatological moment. It is

the presence of the King which reveals and defines the presence of the Kingdom, and our

King is now present in a transformed way. The ascension, not merely the resurrection,

determines the character of our present experience of the Kingdom, as the poured-out

eschatological Spirit mediates the presence of Christ to his people in these last days.

The eschatological Spirit is also theHoly Spirit, which indicates the significant place

of ethics in the Kingdom. Kingdom ethics must, however, be considered in the

fundamental redemptive-historical and theological context of the Kingdom. In other

words, our assessment of what it means to live in the Kingdom today should include an

examination of how the coming of the King relates to the fundamental ethical construct

of the preceding age, namely the Law, and that of the age that has come, namely the

theological teachings of the New Testament on law and righteousness. When the

Kingdom is considered in its essential ethical framework, it becomes apparent that

Kingdom righteousness involves far more than forensic justification, which seems to be

the dominant concern in contemporary Protestant thought and life.

This is not intended as a deprecation of the Protestant doctrine of justification, which

is one of the most precious of Christian truths, and, as Luther wisely observed, a doctrine



32/144

so critical that the very existence of the church is dependent on a right view of it. It is one

thing, however, to assert the necessity of embracing the doctrine of justification by faith

alone and the critical role that doctrine plays in the life of the Christian, and another thing

to treat the doctrine of justification as a uniquely central and all-controlling principle in

Christian theology that serves as the entrance point to all other doctrines. A sincere and

earnest belief in the former does not require an affirmation of the latter.

The Scriptures revelation of the Kingdom presents an ethical landscape far broader

than is generally possible when forensic considerations are taken as ones starting point

for thinking about Gods salvation. This will be illustrated below through a consideration,

first, of the ethical teachings of Christ, followed by an analysis of Pauls view of the

validity of law in the Messianic age. It will then be demonstrated through a unified

analysis of Christs and Pauls teachings that the eschatological manifestation of the

Kingdom of God has its center not in forensic justification, but in the revelation of Christ

and the believers union with him, and that the doctrine of justification is more properly

understood within this Kingdom rubric.25

25 Any discussion today of Christ, the Law, and righteousness must occur against the backdrop of animportant theological controversy in the contemporary churchthe debate concerning the so-calledNewPerspective on Paulin which the historic Protestant doctrine of justification is seriously challenged andfundamental revisions to it are advocated

The claims made by the New Perspective proponents should not be summarily dismissed, for theyare made on the same basis that Luther pleaded his case at Wormsan appeal to Scripture as a correctivefor theological error in the churchand they include alleged new insights into first century PalestinianJudaism, an important component of the backdrop against which Paul developed and communicated histheology. If these claims are true, however, we should conclude that the Protestant doctrine of justification,a doctrine that was central to the Reformation, which constitutes the primary discriminator between theRoman Catholic and Protestant branches of the church, and which has played a critical role in the life ofProtestants throughout the world for nearly 500 years, is fundamentally flawed and requires radicalrevision. Thus the controversy cannot be ignored.

A detailed analysis of the New Perspective debate is presented in the Appendix of this paper. Thematerial in the present chapter is loosely based on the findings presented there, which are summarized asfollows. The New Perspective presents interesting and provocative arguments for a reinterpretation ofPauls doctrine of justification, but these arguments ultimately fail to justify an abandonment of theclassical Protestant position on that critical doctrine. There are, however, certain aspects of the NewPerspective argument that resonate with Scripture in such a way as to suggest that they should not bediscarded, despite the problematic conclusions that have been drawn from them. An attempt should bemade to account for these observations in a manner that gives due consideration to the historic doctrines ofthe church, while maintaining a commitment to their integration with the whole teaching of Scripture.



33/144

The ethical stance of Jesus

Righteousness and the Law in the Messianic Kingdom

When we reflect on the Jesus of the gospels from our present vantage point in

redemptive history, certain impressions of him stand out immediately in our mind: the

miracles he worked, the wisdom he imparted, the love he expressed, the judgment he

threatened, the traditions he trampled, the enemies he denounced, the death he died, his

resurrection from the dead. While these must have figured prominently also in the

impressions of him held by his contemporaries, an understanding of Jesus in his time

suggests a dominant impression among his contemporaries that is not so prevalent in our

minds todaythe note of fulfillment which he sounded so clearly and so powerfully.

More than four hundred years of Yahwehs silence, followed by the Roman conquest,

had served only to heighten the sense of expectation among the Jewish people in

Palestine, an expectation of national deliverance from oppression and the vindication of

Israel before the nations as Yahwehs covenant people.26 Jesus dared to proclaim in this

setting that the Kingdom was at hand, the time was fulfilled, the Day of the LORD had

arrived, the culmination of history was about to unfold before their eyes. 27 He must have

known that his words would be like fire on dry timber. This note of fulfillment, therefore,

must be taken as an essential aspect of his mission and central to his teaching.

The fulfillment he preached, however, besides being hidden and provisional (a

fulfillment without consummation, as discussed in Chapter Two) was also quite strange to

Jewish ears. One by one, he grasped each of the pillars of Judaism and turned them on

their heads. There was but one God, but Jesus claimed identity with himforgiving

26 F.F. Bruce,New Testament History (Doubleday, 1969) 170.27 Mk. 1:15; Lk. 4:16-21; Mt. 10:9-11;11:20.



34/144

sins,28 commanding the elements,29 receiving worship,30 teaching with divine authority.31

Israel was the elect of God, but Jesus warned them more than once that the Kingdom

would be taken away from them and given to the Gentiles. 32 The Law was their great

privilege and source of life, but Jesus unflinchingly rejected much of the interpretive

tradition of that Law, not keeping the Sabbath in the way they expected,33 eschewing

ritual washings,34 denouncing the Pharisees, keepers of the Law, as hypocrites, brood of

vipers, whitewashed tombs.35

From our historical distance in the 21st century, we can place the idiosyncratic

characteristics of Jesus mission in the overarching framework of Gods redemptive plan;

but to his contemporaries it must have seemed at times that everything was up for grabs.

Perhaps that is why Jesus delivered such a clear and unequivocal statement about the

continuing validity of the Law in the messianic age.

Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did notcome to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earthpass away not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law,until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of thesecommandments, and so teaches others, shall be called least in the kingdomof heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great inthe kingdom of heaven.36

Critical to the understanding of this text is what Jesus intends by the word fulfill.

Before considering this question, however, let us note some additional statements of

Jesus concerning the continuing validity of the Law. Bahnsen notes that Jesus rebuked

Satan (and many modern ethicists) by declaring that all people should live on every

word that comes from the mouth of God (Matt. 4:4), and that when our Lord called us

28 Mt. 9:2;26:28; Mk. 2:5; Lk. 5:20; 7:47; Jn 20:23.29 Mt. 8:23-27.30 Mt. 2:11; 14:33; 28:8,17; Lk. 24:52; Jn. 9:38.31 Mt. 7:28-29; Mk 1:21-22; Lk. 4:31-35; Jn 5:24-27.32 Mt. 21:43; 8:10-13; Lk. 4:24-29; 13:6-9 (provisionally stated);33 Mt. 12:1-14; Mk. 2:23-3:6; Lk. 6:1-11; 13:10-17; 14:1-6; Jn. 5:10-18; 7:20-24; 9:13-16.34 Mt. 15:1-2; Mk. 7:1-2; Lk. 11:37-38.35 Mt. 15:1-9; Mt. 23:1-32; Mk. 7:1-7.36 Mt. 5:17-19.



35/144

to recognize the more important matters of the law (Matt. 23:23), he immediately added

that the lesser matters should not be neglected. Bahnsen also reminds us of Jesus words

If you love me, you will obey what I command (John 14:15).37

We may add to this list those chilling words of Jesus concerning some on the last day

who will claim to have taught and worked miracles in his name: Then I will declare to

them, I never knew you. Go away from me, lawbreakers!38 Jesus also warns that on the

last day The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather [for eternal judgment]

from his kingdom everything that causes sin as well as all lawbreakers,39 and that it is

easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tiny stroke of a letter in the law to

become void.40 Finally we note that when Jesus is asked which of the commandments

handed down from Moses is the greatest, he does not dismiss the question as irrelevant in

light of the inauguration of his ministry, but answers by highlighting the commands to

love God and ones neighbor, asserting that on these two commandments depend the

whole Law and the Prophets.41

It is clear therefore that Jesus saw a continuing necessity of obedience to law in the

Kingdom he had inaugurated, and that he often had recourse to the Mosaic Law while

discussing this. His appropriation of the Mosaic Law, however, has certain idiosyncratic

features that are significant for our discussion. One who annuls one of the least of these

commandments, and so teaches others is spoken of not as excluded from the kingdom,

37 Greg L. Bahnsen, The Theonomic Reformed View in Five Views on Law and Gospel, Wayne G.Strickland, ed. (Zondervan, 1993) 113-115.38 Mt. 7:23 (NET). The Greek text reads , literally workers of lawlessness orthose who do not law.The NASB rendering is you who practice lawlessness. It would be difficult tomake the case that the Mosaic law is exclusively in view here. Neither should we conclude that it isexcluded, however, especially in light of the other statements of Jesus noted in this section.39 Mt. 13:41 (NET). The NASB rendering is those who commit lawlessness. See note 38.40 Lk. 16:17 (NET).41 Mt. 22:34-40.



36/144

but rather called least in the kingdom of heaven. He then, however, concludes

somewhat paradoxically that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees,

you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.42 The meaning of these statements is more

readily apparent when we read the continuation of Jesus sermon.

As noted above, Jesus apparently felt the need to point out that he was not abolishing

The Law and the Prophets. Now as he continues his discourse he makes it clear that

neither is he advocating a loosening of our obligation to the Law. He argues not only for

the enduring validity of the Law, but also for an intensified relationship to it. He

explicates the Law as concerned not merely with the external manifestation of

righteousness, but having its true genius in commanding an inward disposition and

commitment to its requirements. The law prohibits murder, but Jesus notes that everyone

who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court...and whoever shall say,

you fool, shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell43The Law prohibits adultery,

but everyone who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her

already in his heart.44 The sermon continues with a list of commands extracted from the

Law and its interpretive tradition, each one followed with a related command from Jesus

to possess inward righteousness.

This is neither a hyperbolic restatement of the Laws commands, nor a proleptic

pronouncement of the Law as it will be kept after the consummation of the Kingdom. The

preceding context (1:1-5:16) highlights Jesus as the new Moses, the lawgiver of the

messianic age, and the succeeding context (6:1-24) emphasizes the necessity of inward

obedience in addition to outward conformance to the law. Poythress shows that Matthew

42 Mt. 5:19-20.43 Mt. 5:21-22.44 Mt. 5:27-28.



37/144

1-7 reveals Jesus as fulfilling the purpose and meaning of the first five books of Moses,

with Matthew 1-4 representing the narrative and Matthew 5-7 the didactic sections. 45

Jesus speaks on his own authority as the new Moses, articulating a shift in perspective on

the Law from primarily concerned with outward obedience to being focused on inward

disposition. Jesus teaching does not contradict the true meaning of the law of Moses,

but neither is it a straightforward expression of the obvious meaning of Moses.46

Poythress argues that Jesus is not establishing another external rule that replaces that

of Moses, but rather announcing a transformation of the Law through his fulfillment of it.

This fulfillment is not merely his successful obedience to all of the Laws requirements,

but the appearance of the person of Jesus, representing the embodiment of everything the

Law was intended to be, the fulfillment of the purposes of the Law in the deepest sense.

The coming of the kingdom of heaven means a fundamental advance inthe working out of Gods purposes. Gods promises of His reign and Hissalvation, as given in the Old Testament, are being accomplished. Whatthe law foreshadowed and embodied in symbols and shadows is nowcoming into realizationJesus teaching represents not simply thereiteration of the law but a step forward, bringing the purposes of the law

into realization. The law is to be written on the hearts of his disciples (seeJeremiah 31:31-34).47

Jesus transformation of the Law does not take the Law in a new direction but is

accomplished in accordance with the true character of the Law and represents the

fulfillment of its very purposes. This transformation, however, fundamentally alters our

relationship to the law. In contrast to Bahnsens approach of carefully analyzing the Law

in the hope of discerning which parts are applicable to the New Covenant and how their

application is transformed by virtue of our redemptive-historical and cultural distance

45 Vern S. Poythress, The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses (Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991) 252-255.46 Ibid. 258.47 Ibid. 264-265.



38/144

from the Old Testament,48 Poythress argues for a Christocentric understanding of the Law

that comprehends its transformation in terms of the very person of Christ.

Jesus in His person and His ministry brings to realization and fulfillmentthe whole warp and woof of Old Testament revelation, including therevelation of the law. All the commandments of the law are binding onChristians ([Mt.]7:19), but the way in which they are binding isdetermined by the authority of Christ and the fulfillment that takes place inhis workSince Jesus commands us to practice and teach even the leastof these commandments of the law ([Mt.]5:19), we are bound to do so.But we do so as disciples who have learned how to discern the function ofthe law of Moses as a pointer to the realities of Jesus Christ our Lord. Theway in which each law is fulfilled in Christ determines the way in which itis to be observed now. Since the law foreshadows the righteousness ofChrist and the kingdom of heaven, the practice of the law in the deepestsense takes the form of replicating the character and grace of Christ in ourlives and imitating our heavenly Father.49

Jesus unprecedented note of fulfillment, therefore, is of critical importance for our

understanding of Kingdom ethics. Although Jesus represents the transformation of the

Law into a personal mode, however, its particular expression in the Mosaic writings

continues to have great importance for us. The written commands of the Law are

invaluable guides as we seek to be obedient to the Law through personal faith in and

commitment to Jesus Christ, Gods personal expression of the Law. We are ever mindful,

however, of the mediating function Jesus performs with respect to the Law. The writings

of Moses are not the last words from God on ethics, and we have the prophetic word

made more sure (1 Pe. 1:19) in the revelation of the person of Jesus.

In all this, something more far-reaching than forensic righteousness and double

imputation is in view. The King who comes to bear in his own body the judgment due his

people nevertheless preaches the necessity of living according to law. Although his

concept of law-keeping is integrally connected to his epoch-making appearance in history

and the regenerative effects of spiritual union with his people, there is nevertheless a

48 Bahnsen, The Theonomic Reformed View 100-124.49 Poythress, The Shadow of Christ268-269 (emphasis added).



39/144

content to his ethics that has a significance in its own right, quite distinct from the reality

of the substitutionary atonement. The Kingdom which Jesus inaugurated makes ethical

demands on its subjects that represent essential aspects of what it means for the Kingdom

to come into history.

The Social Trajectory of Kingdom Ethics

It is one thing to assert that Jesus taught and personified the continuing validity of

the Mosaic law, and quite another to insist that his words or example are normative today

on the societal level. So disputed is the question that J. H. Yoder found it necessary to

provide a book-length argument for the proposition that Jesus taught a normative social

ethic.50An objection to the normative relevance of Jesus for contemporary society may be

raised on the basis of three general lines of argument. 1) The vast cultural and temporal

distance between Jesus day and our own makes it difficult or impossible to extract

ethical norms from his life that may be applied today at the societal level. 2) Jesus

unique identity as God incarnate and the Jewish Messiah severely limits the normative

relevance of his deeds for those who believe in him, and his unique and all-consuming

mission of providing atonement for the people of God calls into question the very

assertion that Jesus taught a normative social ethic. 3) Many of the teachings of Jesus

were thoroughly conditioned by the unique redemptive-historical moment in which he

lived, and their normative relevance is therefore limited accordingly.

50 John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus (Eerdmans, 1972 (1996)). The mainstream ethical argumentshistorically raised against a normative social ethic in Jesus are identified as follows: 1) The ethic of Jesusis an ethic for an Interim which Jesus thought would be very brief. 2) Jesus wasa simple rural figureHis radical personalization of all ethical problems is only possible in a village sociology where knowingeveryone and having time to treat everyone as a person is culturally an available possibility. 3) Jesus andhis early followers lived in a world over which they had no control[Christians] must acceptresponsibilities that were inconceivable in Jesus situation. 4) The nature of Jesus message wasahistorical by definition. He dealt with spiritual and not social matters, with the existential and not theconcrete. 5) Jesus concept of the radical discontinuity between God and humans served to relativize allhuman values. The will of God cannot be identified with any one ethical answer. 6) Jesus came toprovide atonement for sins and justification with God, and this has no connection to ethics (1-13). Yoderdoes not provide a dogmatic response to these positions, but offers instead a sustained articulation of whathe takes to be Jesus social ethic in the remainder of the book.



40/144

These lines of argument identify considerations that must be accounted for as we

seek to apply the teachings and example of Jesus to contemporary society; but to justify

the dismissal or substantial abrogation of the normative relevance of the Son of God

would require a more compelling basis than these arguments provide. Furthermore, it is

abundantly clear from Scripture that Jesus had a profound effect on the society of his day,

and although he repeatedly exerted his influence in unexpected and perplexing ways, he

did not seem to regard his influence on society as irrelevant. Much of his teaching was

couched in communitarian language and expressed social ideals. Given that the modern

idolization of the individual self is the exception and not the rule of history, the burden of

proof lies on the one who would argue for a personalist interpretation of Jesus. The prima

facie evidence of the Gospels is of a Jesus who had something to say primarily to his

society, and who seemed to encourage the appropriation of his life and teaching in a

communitarian setting.

Yoder argues that the relevance of Jesus social ethic is most plainly shown by the

fact that he was crucified, that both the Roman and Jewish authorities were sufficiently

threatened by him to violate their respective laws to be rid of him. His alternative was so

relevant, so much a threat, that Pilate could afford to free, in exchange for Jesus, the

ordinary Guevara-type insurrectionist Barabbas.51 Jesus offered not a rejection of the

relevance of social ethics, but an assertion of a competing understanding of what it means

to be human at the social level. He did not say (as some sectarian pacifists or some

pietists might), you can have your politics and I shall do something else more

51 Ibid. 106-107.



41/144

important; he said, your definition ofpolis, of the social, of the wholeness of being

human socially is perverted.52

It is precisely this social trajectory of Jesus ethics that the Kingdom of God motif

addresses. A kingdom is a society, operating according to its own distinctive values,

norms, and mores. The tendency within the evangelical church to overlook the

significance of the Kingdom framework has contributed to a radical personalization of

the believers relationship with Jesus and appropriation of his ethical teachings. The

Kingdom motif should inoculate the church against an overemphasis on such images as

walking privately with Jesus in the garden or enlisting him as ones copilot. 53 Such

radically personalized perspectives on Jesus have little or no basis in the biblical text. The

Jesus of the Gospels is intensely social, and as such is scarcely recognizable to many in

the evangelical church who reject the social Jesus, perhaps in part because they can

conceive of him in no other terms than those of the liberation theologians. The Kingdom

rubric enables us to embrace the social Jesus presented in the Gospels without retreating

from the essential Christian truths traditionally recognized by evangelicals.

The abstract representation of Jesus that is a natural consequence of

underemphasizing the Kingdom framework results in a flattening of his image into a safe

and comfortable Sunday School charactera historical myth, a future King, a

comforting presence. To see Jesus in his Kingdom-of-God context is to see him in three-

dimensional relief. He does not fit into the believers personal grid of assumptions and

52 Ibid. 107.53 This is not to say that images of intimate and personal relations between the believer and Jesus areinappropriate, but that the believers relationship with Jesus should be considered within the Kingdomrubric and not against a merely personal horizon. Although such images are not prominent in the PCA, wenevertheless fail to provide an effective antidote to the popular evangelical distortion of Jesus relationshipto his people to the extent that we have a less than adequate appreciation of the significance of the Kingdommotif in Scripture.



42/144

expectations, but the believers expectations are made to fit into the Kingdom scheme

that Jesus reveals and brings into history.

Jesus distinctive and repeated pronouncements of eternal judgment for the

unrepentant, for instance, make sense in the Kingdom framework, but are at odds with

the generally accepted abstract view of him. The abstract Jesus is to a great extent a

product of our expectations, and his words of judgment are therefore taken as dissonant

chords that represent a problem to be solved if we are to obtain a coherent view of him.

Jesus in his Kingdom-of-God context is not encumbered by our expectations as he

reveals Gods grand design for history. Thus there is no problem to be solved when he

who is stricken for the sins of his people also warns of a great cataclysm approaching for

the wicked, for the Kingdom by its very nature brings about a radical and final separation

among men while ushering in the reign of God.

Jesus therefore speaks to society, not merely to individual believers, unveiling and

actualizing Gods purposes on a cosmic scale. In this capacity Jesus is revealed as the

culminating voice of the Jewish Old Testament prophets, who, as we saw in Chapter Two,

revealed Gods will for the people of their day in light of Gods will for the great future.

Furthermore, we argued, with the coming of Jesus a new division of time has occurred,

such that our expectations for the future are centered on the decisive events that have

already come to pass. Although the coming of Christ into history has a once-for-all

significance in the life of every individual believer, the new division of time also has

implications at the societal level. The Gospels make it clear that Jesus has brought

something into history that is to function in its own right, a way of living that is to be

applied now and have its intended effect in this age, and not merely serve as a pointer to a



43/144

merely apocalyptic deliverance off the map of human experience, off the scale of time,

in that [it] announce[s] an end to history.

The Kingdom of God is a social order and not a hidden one. It is not auniversal catastrophe independent of the will of human beings; it is thatconcrete jubilary obedience, in pardon and repentance, the possibility ofwhich is proclaimed beginning right nowThat the hearers would refusethis offer and promise, pushing away the kingdom that had come close tothem, this Jesus had also predicted.54

The Kingdom which Jesus proclaimed and inaugurated, therefore, is not subject to

marginalization on either spatial or temporal terms. It is neither a proclamation of some

entirely other-worldly good, brightly but irrelevantly shining on the real world of

human history, nor a purely proleptic statement of the fulfillment of history destined to

occur beyond history. It is a proclamation of salvation in historya salvation grounded

in the possibility of miracle and the necessity of divine intervention, and yet operating as

a genuine historical quantity.

This salvation-in-history, however, operates on a peculiar principle, which is often

summarized in Christian theology as the way of the cross. The power which Jesus held

over society was wielded paradoxically as the very negation of powerthat is, the

negation of power as it is understood in the world. The victory of God is accomplished in

the defeat of Jesus. This truth is well-known among Christians, but a truth that is perhaps

not so well-remembered, at least in relation to the nature of Gods victory in Christ, is

that a servant is not greater than his master. If they persecuted me, they will also

persecute you.

55

In evaluating the social ethic of Jesus, we should not be surprised to

find that his people are to operate on the same peculiar principal, the way of the cross.

54 Yoder, Politics of Jesus 104-105.55 John 15:20.



44/144

Yoder argues that the way of the cross consists not merely in opposition to the

applicati

seek first the kingdom

Documents