Drew
Member
Post 1 of 2:
Many Christians, perhaps most, seem to think that Jesus is not yet king of this world. One argument advanced to this effect is that if Jesus were truly king right now, there would be no evil in the world. This argument has a simplistic appeal. However, as shown elsewhere, there are many texts that strongly suggest that Jesus is indeed presently enthroned over this present world. So does the person who denies Jesus present reign based on the existence of evil have a point, requiring that we re-think texts that seem to suggest he is already enthroned?
No, such a person does not have a point. This particular objection to the “kingdom now†position is based on an historically inaccurate concept of kingship. If we are going to understand what it actually means to say that Jesus presently reigns, we need to appeal to some model of the nature of kingship. When someone says “Jesus cannot be reigning since there is still evil and deathâ€Â, that person implicitly appeals to a model where the king instantaneously solves all the problems in his realm. And that, as we shall see, is not likely the kingship model which the first century authors of the New Testament likely had in mind.
No doubt, the proponent of the view that present kingship is incompatible with the presence of evil will assert that since Jesus is specifically divine, He will be able to instantly and completely solve all the problems of the world when He is enthroned. In other words, while we can accept that a human king is enthroned even while there is chaos in his realm, at least for a time, this could not be case for a divine king (such as Jesus).
Such an argument is easily undermined by the fact that God’s grand plan of redemption, beginning with the call of Abraham and climaxing centuries of years later on the cross was decidedly not an “instant†solution. Was God not ruling over that creation during that time? Well of course he was. So one is being more than a little Biblically naïve if one insists that any divine rule must accomplish all kingdom objectives instantly.
In any event, the historical model of kingship that was ingrained in the mind of the 1st century Jew was one where kingship was decidedly a project that was implemented over time, and therefore not brought to full consummation the instant the king was enthroned.
Post 2 follows.
Many Christians, perhaps most, seem to think that Jesus is not yet king of this world. One argument advanced to this effect is that if Jesus were truly king right now, there would be no evil in the world. This argument has a simplistic appeal. However, as shown elsewhere, there are many texts that strongly suggest that Jesus is indeed presently enthroned over this present world. So does the person who denies Jesus present reign based on the existence of evil have a point, requiring that we re-think texts that seem to suggest he is already enthroned?
No, such a person does not have a point. This particular objection to the “kingdom now†position is based on an historically inaccurate concept of kingship. If we are going to understand what it actually means to say that Jesus presently reigns, we need to appeal to some model of the nature of kingship. When someone says “Jesus cannot be reigning since there is still evil and deathâ€Â, that person implicitly appeals to a model where the king instantaneously solves all the problems in his realm. And that, as we shall see, is not likely the kingship model which the first century authors of the New Testament likely had in mind.
No doubt, the proponent of the view that present kingship is incompatible with the presence of evil will assert that since Jesus is specifically divine, He will be able to instantly and completely solve all the problems of the world when He is enthroned. In other words, while we can accept that a human king is enthroned even while there is chaos in his realm, at least for a time, this could not be case for a divine king (such as Jesus).
Such an argument is easily undermined by the fact that God’s grand plan of redemption, beginning with the call of Abraham and climaxing centuries of years later on the cross was decidedly not an “instant†solution. Was God not ruling over that creation during that time? Well of course he was. So one is being more than a little Biblically naïve if one insists that any divine rule must accomplish all kingdom objectives instantly.
In any event, the historical model of kingship that was ingrained in the mind of the 1st century Jew was one where kingship was decidedly a project that was implemented over time, and therefore not brought to full consummation the instant the king was enthroned.
Post 2 follows.
