Jesus is Presently King of the World

[researcher]

Has anyone brought up the argument that if Jesus was the ruler of the world that there wouldn't be any evil?
If so:

Gen 24:3 And I will make thee swear by the LORD, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell:

Jer 32:27 Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?

Dan 4:25 That they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wet thee with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.

Dan 2:20 Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his:
Dan 2:21 And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:

Jer 27:4 And command them to say unto their masters, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Thus shall ye say unto your masters;
Jer 27:5 I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power and by my outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me.

God was the ruler of the world for a long time, but, there was still a lot of evil, lol. ;)

 

[Drew]

God was the ruler of the world for a long time, but, there was still a lot of evil, lol. ;)

I agree with you. The "God cannot be King since there is evil" argument sounds nice, but it is not Biblical. In 1 Cor 15, Paul says "Jesus must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet". Clearly. this implies that Jesus' reign does not begin with all problems solved in an instant.

But you watch - people will simply ignore this text, and other ones, and insist that we simply cannot have Jesus as King if there are still problems.

 

[seekandlisten]

God was the ruler of the world for a long time, but, there was still a lot of evil, lol. ;)

I agree with you. The "God cannot be King since there is evil" argument sounds nice, but it is not Biblical. In 1 Cor 15, Paul says "Jesus must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet". Clearly. this implies that Jesus' reign does not begin with all problems solved in an instant.

But you watch - people will simply ignore this text, and other ones, and insist that we simply cannot have Jesus as King if there are still problems.

I'm not denying that Jesus has bound Satan for his 1000 years yet. This is where my question lies. Satan has been allowed to freely roam the earth and deceive many since Genesis. Jesus said he would take his throne, David's throne which is an earthly throne of our world, and bind satan from deceiving for 1000 years while he rules with his saints. I see over the last century especially, of how much information is available through the internet, the findings of many writings that were suppressed in the merging of church and state, Obama is on his way 'maybe' to a peace of sorts, personally I see evidence and references to God everywhere, just to name a few. If one wants to find Jesus all the answers are there you just have to find them unlike back when even finding a copy of the bible would have been hard. Now logically for me anyways, I would assume seeing as we didn't see Satan running around in physical form so to speak, that we may not actually physically see Jesus take this throne but merely signs that he has now sat down in David's throne and bound Satan. If we are in this time, well it's only judgment ahead, a last chance so to speak.

Well God could step in any minute and kick anyone or thing He didn't like right off the planet, that is not a part of His Plan so he never really 'ruled the world' so to speak. So the passage you are referring to makes no sense to me to take as Jesus ruling the physical world since his death on the cross. His death was the payment for our sin and his resurrection was a promise that one day we will be resurrected through him.

 

[Drew]

Jesus said he would take his throne, David's throne which is an earthly throne of our world,

I am not sure what text you are referring to, but I believe that I have provided at least 2 robust arguments in this thread that Jesus is Lord - one based on Acts 4 (and Psalm 2) and another based on Matthew 28. I do not believe a successful counterargument has been provided to either. In any event, it appears that you seem to think that Jesus cannot be king of this world unless He is "here in person".

Well, that does not match the concept of kingship that was present in the world of first century Palestine. In that time and place, it was well understood that Ceasar was "king". And yet he was, of course, far away and never to be seen.

I see no reason to believe that Jesus has to be "here in person" to be king. That might "make sense" to you, but I do not believe the Bible sustains such a position, nor is it true to the way "kingship" worked in the time the New Testament was written.

His death was the payment for our sin and his resurrection was a promise that one day we will be resurrected through him.

This is only a part of a much bigger picture. What does Paul think "the gospel", the "good news", is? He thinks that it is the announcement that Jesus is the Davidic Messiah, who has been declared to the Lord of this present world as a result of His resurrection from the dead:

Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— 2the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, 4and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

It may help to realize that the term "lord" was often predicated of Ceasar. I suggest that Paul sees Jesus as a replacement for Ceasar as lord of the world. In fact, this accusation from Acts 17 seems to clearly assert that this is precisely what Paul thought:

They rushed to Jason's house in search of Paul and Silas in order to bring them out to the crowd.[c] 6But when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some other brothers before the city officials, shouting: "These men who have caused trouble all over the world have now come here, 7and Jason has welcomed them into his house. They are all defying Caesar's decrees, saying that there is another king, one called Jesus.

 

[seekandlisten]

Drew,

Allright, let's take a look at what you presented. First, I don't think Ceasar's 'lordship' extended over the entire world so this reference just seems ridiculous. Second, I don't see how you can logically apply these bible references to Jesus ruling on earth, within us maybe but not on earth. See if this makes sense as to my understanding of what you are trying to put forward as a 'robust argument.'

Acts 4:25,26 (NIV)
"25You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:
" 'Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain?
26The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the Lord
and against his Anointed One."

We know this is in reference to Psalm 2:1,2

"1 Why do the nations conspire
and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the LORD"
and against his Anointed One."

If you read the whole passage to understand the context of this specific one you see God's promise to David.

Psalm 2:7-8

" 7 I will proclaim the decree of the LORD :
He said to me, "You are my Son;
today I have become your Father.
8 Ask of me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession."

Matthew 1 shows the genealogy from Jesus back to David. Now Jesus receives this inheritence in his death on the cross, the authority on earth, David's throne. Now we see in Matt. 18:18 after his resurrection this.

"Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."

Now we already know that David's throne refes to the entire nations, the world, so this would be the throne on earth. While I believe Jesus has all authority, satan is still allowed to deceive until he takes his throne on earth and binds satan. Now let's jump to Revelation.

Rev. 19:15
"Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty."

Psalm 2:9
"You will rule them with an iron scepter;
you will dash them to pieces like pottery."

See the relation back to where we started from? It goes on to say in Rev. 19:16.

"On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS."

I would assume this is Jesus being referred to here on the white horse. Now here is where we come to the question and my thoughts earlier. As this is when I think Jesus takes his place on David's throne here on earth.


Revelation 20:1-6

"1And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
4I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years."

To me this is speaking of when Jesus takes his earthly reign. My question becomes, based on my thoughts in my earlier post, are we in this period? Will we see this physically take place? Now I realize depending on where people think we are in relation to the signs put forward in Revelation will affect their response to my questions so keep it civil.

 

[Drew]

First, I don't think Ceasar's 'lordship' extended over the entire world so this reference just seems ridiculous.

I was using the term "world" loosely - it was, of course, not my intent to sugget that Caesar actually governed all the earth. But the point remains - Caesar was lord of many places he never actually went to. The point is that the notion of kingship does not require actual physical presence. So we can legitimately see Jesus as the reigning king of the world.

To me this is speaking of when Jesus takes his earthly reign. My question becomes, based on my thoughts in my earlier post, are we in this period? Will we see this physically take place? Now I realize depending on where people think we are in relation to the signs put forward in Revelation will affect their response to my questions so keep it civil.

I confess that I did not follow your argument. To me, its really quite simple. Even apart from a litany of other texts, we have Jesus telling the disciples that all authority has been given to him - not limited authority, but all authority - in heaven and on earth.

What are you if you have been given all authority on earth? You are, quite clearly, king, emperor, lord, etc. - whatever you want to call it - of the earth.

I do not deny that Jesus will someday return to us. But I have seen nothing in any of your posts that either undermines the force of the arguments I have provided, or otherwise establishes that Jesus is not presently King.

Are you denying that Jesus is presently king? If you are not denying this and merely addressing future events in the course of that kingship, including Jesus' return, I have no dispute with this at all.

POSTSCRIPT: I just re-read your post and I think I understand your main point. You see the "kinghip of this world" promise as made to David, not Jesus. And you therefore seem to think that I cannot legitimately apply the Psalm 2 material to Jesus.

Well, there is at least one big problem with that view - John and Peter are clearly invoking Psalm 2 in relation to Jesus (in Acts 4), not David. So they obviously see this "annointed one" who rules the nation as Jesus, not David.

 

[seekandlisten]

First, I don't think Ceasar's 'lordship' extended over the entire world so this reference just seems ridiculous.

I was using the term "world" loosely - it was, of course, not my intent to sugget that Caesar actually governed all the earth. But the point remains - Caesar was lord of many places he never actually went to. The point is that the notion of kingship does not require actual physical presence. So we can legitimately see Jesus as the reigning king of the world. How do you figure?? I have logically posted an argument that this is not the case based on what you are presenting yet you still think it is some how? I don't get your logic, sorry.

To me this is speaking of when Jesus takes his earthly reign. My question becomes, based on my thoughts in my earlier post, are we in this period? Will we see this physically take place? Now I realize depending on where people think we are in relation to the signs put forward in Revelation will affect their response to my questions so keep it civil.

I confess that I did not follow your argument. To me, its really quite simple. Even apart from a litany of other texts, we have Jesus telling the disciples that all authority has been given to him - not limited authority, but all authority - in heaven and on earth.I think I've clearly put forth that in regards to the 'all authority in heaven and earth' as his inheritence. Authority in heaven, his 'inheritence' so to speak in Jesus being the Christ. Authority on earth, his 'inheritence' from David. God doesn't go back on his promises so when David sinned he lost his 'inheritence' that God promised him yet it was passed on down through his bloodline to Jesus. You are skipping over the points I put forward saying you don't understand them while trying to prove a point using passages that I also don't think you understand the context of.

What are you if you have been given all authority on earth? You are, quite clearly, king, emperor, lord, etc. - whatever you want to call it - of the earth.Given authority and taking authority are two different matters.

I do not deny that Jesus will someday return to us. But I have seen nothing in any of your posts that either undermines the force of the arguments I have provided, or otherwise establishes that Jesus is not presently King.I believe I presented a much more logical argument yet you are chosing to look over the points I presented.

Are you denying that Jesus is presently king? If you are not denying this and merely addressing future events in the course of that kingship, including Jesus' return, I have no dispute with this at all. This is my question if you read my posts. You have provided me with nothing in regards to the questions/thoughts I put forth in my previous posts.

POSTSCRIPT: I just re-read your post and I think I understand your main point. You see the "kinghip of this world" promise as made to David, not Jesus. And you therefore seem to think that I cannot legitimately apply the Psalm 2 material to Jesus.

Well, there is at least one big problem with that view - John and Peter are clearly invoking Psalm 2 in relation to Jesus (in Acts 4), not David. So they obviously see this "annointed one" who rules the nation as Jesus, not David.Again you missed the point, Jesus received David's 'inheritance' which is why this references back to Psalm 2. The authority over the nations.

Sorry Drew, but you have provided nothing for me in this discussion. I have repeatedly countered your argument that you are trying to put forth, even going to the extent of explaining the argument you are presenting. You simply can't just string a couple of verses together and come up with an argument based on using verses out of context. You can string all sorts of verses together and come up with all sorts of absurd interpretations. Passages in the bible must be taken in context. Unless I'm missing something here, the passages you are trying to prove your side of the argument with does nothing in regards to providing a logical argument. If you wish to continue discussing this with me I need you to present me with some sort of point to move this ahead otherwise this debate over these passages you presented is not beneficial for me in the questions I presented. If you have nothing further to add then what you already asserted I think we've beat this point to death.

 

[Drew]

If you have nothing further to add then what you already asserted I think we've beat this point to death.

I agree - there is no further value to you and pursuing this.

 

[Drew]

I will argue that through a cryptic statement made to Caiaphus at His trial, Jesus declares that YHWH has become king, thereby fulfilling the Jewish expectation about this. In doing so, though, Jesus goes beyond this and effectively declares that He (Jesus) shares that kingship. Note what Jesus says in response to Caiaphus:

But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?" 62And Jesus said, "I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

The reference to sitting at the right hand of power comes from Psalm 110:

The LORD says to my Lord:
"Sit at My right hand

The “coming with the clouds of heaven†statement is an allusion to this material from Daniel 7:

I kept looking
Until thrones were set up,
And the Ancient of Days took His seat;
His vesture was like white snow
And the hair of His head like pure wool
Histhrone was ablaze with flames,
Its wheels were a burning fire.
10"A river of fire was flowing
And coming out from before Him;
Thousands upon thousands were attending Him,
And myriads upon myriads were standing before Him;
The court sat,
And the books were opened.
11"Then I kept looking because of the sound of the boastful words which the horn was speaking; I kept looking until the beast was slain, and its body was destroyed and given to the (V)burning fire.
12"As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but an extension of life was granted to them for an appointed period of time.
13"I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.
14"And to Him was given dominion,
Glory and a kingdom,
That all the peoples, nations and men of every language
Might serve Him His dominion is an everlasting dominion
Which will not pass away;
And His kingdom is one
Which will not be destroyed.

From both these references, it is clear that Jesus intends Caiaphus to see Him (Jesus) in the role of the Son of Man figure who gets presented to the Ancient of Days (YHWH) and takes the other of the two thrones (note the multiplicity of thrones in the Daniel material). And note: Jesus tells Caiaphus that he (Caiaphus) will see this occur. This closes the door on the option that this is an enthronement that has yet to occur (from our perspective in the 21st century).

Note also that this kingship that Jesus has already been given is not a kingship over some mysterious "spiritual" domain to the exclusion of the "real world". No - it is a kingship over nations and men. And it has already been given to Jesus.

 

[seekandlisten]

Well seeing as you seem intent on the somehow proving the fact that Jesus is currently on his throne on earth I’ll humor you a bit and debate this as long as it stays civil.

Mark 14:61-64 (New International Version)
61But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.
Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ,[a] the Son of the Blessed One?"
62"I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."
63The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked. 64"You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?"

Again you are taking passages from the bible out of context. You say that Jesus says Caiaphus is going to see this throne referred to here in Mark 14 as proof Jesus is sitting on this throne right now? If he was to see Jesus sitting at the right hand of the ‘Mighty One,’ or ‘Power’ as referred in the version you used, this was in reference to God’s Kingdom, which at the time this was being spoken was not on earth. We also know everyone in the world will stand before God to be judged one day so to say one would see Jesus seated at the right hand of God as meaning Jesus is currently reigning is not really a substantial point at all. Your references to Daniel also refers to the Kingdom of God but I wouldn’t say it has any references to this already taken place on earth other than Jesus residing within us.

The references you keep pointing out as being relative to God ruling earth right now are a stretch at best to me. I’m well aware of the mention many thrones in God’s Kingdom and I also think the only scripture, of the top of my head mind you, relevant to taking a throne on earth is what is spoken of in Revelation 20.

You seem to be against the Kingdom of God dwelling within us? What do you make of these 2 verses?

Luke 17:20-21 (NIV)

“20Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

Mat 23:26
“26Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.â€
These passages show clearly that God’s Kingdom is not a visible, physical Kingdom of this world.

Some more references:

“(3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

“(24) His disciples said to him, "Show us the place where you are, since it is necessary for us to seek it."
He said to them, "Whoever has ears, let him hear. There is light within a man of light, and he lights up the whole world. If he does not shine, he is darkness."

“(89) Jesus said, "Why do you wash the outside of the cup? Do you not realize that he who made the inside is the same one who made the outside?"

“(113) His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?"
<Jesus said,> "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is.' Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it."

Acts 17:31.
“31For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead."

Here we see reference to the day when he will take his earthly reign and judge the world. Now lets look at Revelation.

Revelation 20
“1And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time. 4I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.â€

Here, the first resurrection happens and Jesus binds satan. The beginning of his earthly 1000 year reign?

"7When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. 9They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. 10And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

Now we see satan being let loose for a little while longer.

"11Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."

Now we see the final judgment occurring, the second resurrection. I would think God’s Kingdom here on earth is not set up until after the second resurrection. We have the 1000 year reign which I think is when Jesus takes his earthly throne, David’s like I already stated.

So I ask you this question. What is the relevance to you saying Jesus currently reigns in a throne on earth? How does this relate to us? We know for a fact he reigns within us. We also see direct scriptural evidence of Jesus coming to earth to reign for a thousand years with the saints. Has this already happened? Will this be something we physically see? These are my questions. We then see God’s Kingdom being established on earth with the final judgement. So how you come to think Jesus is already ruling here on earth, other than inside us boggles my mind. I have yet to see your 'clear' biblical evidence. Your thoughts.

 

[MarkT]

It is God's will that the devil rule for a time. I'm not saying God isn't God overall. He is. Even Jesus is subject to God. The devil rules for a time and then Jesus rules for a thousand years. Jesus said temptations must come. God doesn't tempt anyone. The devil is the tempter. So it is God's will that the devil tempt men; it is his will that the devil rule for a time until Jesus returns.

The question I have in regards to this is, does Jesus take his throne from Satan before the end of this world as we know it? I base this question on the fact that Satan has been ruling the world from a non-visible throne, so will the same be for Jesus until the end of his 1000 years when all will be judged and we will live in God's Kindom? I wonder as to whether or not Jesus is sitting on this throne yet as the information that has come forward in the last century or so seems to be revealing at lot of the information that was suppressed in the first couple of centuries after Jesus? Just some random questions I have. I don't know the answers but maybe one of you has some insight. Only God holds all the answers.

Jesus is on the throne of God. He doesn't take Satan's throne. He smashes it. Satan's throne isn't invisible; his throne, so to speak, is where he dwells - where his servants are in the world, in the media, in every institution, in every court and high place where they hate God and his law, where his servants accuse us of doing evil.

Drew has said Jesus is King. I agree he is King and Lord. He has received the kingship. But he hasn't returned yet - the parable of the nobleman who went away to receive his kingship. When he returns he will rule over his people. The idea of Christ taking over Satan's throne is ridiculous. Would Jesus give up the throne of God for the throne of Satan? Of course not.

Satan is the ruler of this world. In the wilderness, Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time, and he said to Jesus, 'to you I will give all this authority and their glory; for it has been given to me, and I give it to whom I will.' Luke 4:5,6 Jesus didn't dispute it. Later on he refered to Satan as the ruler of this world. Note Satan was able to show him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time; kingdoms that were and were yet to come (future kingdoms). And Jesus did not take him up on his offer as Drew would have us believe. Later on Jesus said, 'my kingdom is not of this world'

When the causes of sin and all evil doers are gathered out of the kingdom then the kingdom will appear on Zion. That's where the throne of God will be - where Jesus will rule from.

 

[Drew]

Well seeing as you seem intent on the somehow proving the fact that Jesus is currently on his throne on earth I’ll humor you a bit and debate this as long as it stays civil.

Mark 14:61-64 (New International Version)
61But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.
Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ,[a] the Son of the Blessed One?"
62"I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."
63The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked. 64"You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?"

Again you are taking passages from the bible out of context. You say that Jesus says Caiaphus is going to see this throne referred to here in Mark 14 as proof Jesus is sitting on this throne right now? If he was to see Jesus sitting at the right hand of the ‘Mighty One,’ or ‘Power’ as referred in the version you used, this was in reference to God’s Kingdom, which at the time this was being spoken was not on earth.

No. His kingdom was on earth. There is plenty of evidence for Jesus' kingdom being an earthly one and zero evidence against it. Even apart from a myriad of other texts, we have the Matthew 28 statement by Jesus that all authority has been given to Him on earth. This text alone should settle things - Jesus is already a king of this present world.

I would caution you about using John 18:36 as a text supporting a "kingdom not of this world" - that argument will backfire badly,

We also know everyone in the world will stand before God to be judged one day so to say one would see Jesus seated at the right hand of God as meaning Jesus is currently reigning is not really a substantial point at all. Your references to Daniel also refers to the Kingdom of God but I wouldn’t say it has any references to this already taken place on earth other than Jesus residing within us.

This "kingdom within us" but not embracing the "world out there" has no Biblical support whatsoever. I suggest that you study the greek and alternate translations before you invoke that "the kingdom is within you" saying of Jesus.

In summary, there is a lot of Biblical evidence, as shown in this thread and others, that Jesus is a sitting king of this present world. There are a couple of texts, which are demonstrably mis-translations, that suggest He is only king of "the inner life of the Christian".

But, I am more than happy to discuss any and all relevant texts. I have studied this matter in some detail, having come to it believing that Jesus was actually not king of the world right now. The Biblical record shows that He is.

 

[Drew]

You seem to be against the Kingdom of God dwelling within us? What do you make of these 2 verses?

Luke 17:20-21 (NIV)

“20Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

A hugely misleading error of translation, at least in the version that you provide here.

Here are a range of different translations:

Here are several translations of verse 21:

NET: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is in your midst.â€

NIV: nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you."

NASB: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."

NLT: You won’t be able to say, ‘Here it is!’ or ‘It’s over there!’ For the Kingdom of God is among you."

MSG:Nor when someone says, 'Look here!' or, 'There it is!' And why? Because God's kingdom is already among you."

BBE: And men will not say, See, it is here! or, There! for the kingdom of God is among you.

NRSV: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ For, in fact, the kingdom of God is among you."

NKJV: "nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you."

Note how only 2 of these 8 translations render the last bit as “within youâ€. All the other translations have Jesus telling the listeners that the Kingdom is “in your midst†or “among you†– suggesting, of course, that the kingdom is “present right nowâ€.

And the fatal blow to the “within you†interpretation arises from who Jesus is speaking to:

Now at one point the Pharisees asked Jesus when the kingdom of God was coming, so he answered, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed

If Jesus is saying that the “location†of the kingdom is specifically “within the human personâ€, Jesus is telling the Pharisees that the kingdom of God is within them, the Pharisees, in this sense.

Not likely, of course – the Pharisees were precisely the ones in whom the kingdom was not present.

 

[seekandlisten]

You seem to be against the Kingdom of God dwelling within us? What do you make of these 2 verses?

Luke 17:20-21 (NIV)

“20Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

A hugely misleading error of translation, at least in the version that you provide here.

Here are a range of different translations:

Here are several translations of verse 21:

NET: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is in your midst.â€

NIV: nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you."

NASB: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."

NLT: You won’t be able to say, ‘Here it is!’ or ‘It’s over there!’ For the Kingdom of God is among you."

MSG:Nor when someone says, 'Look here!' or, 'There it is!' And why? Because God's kingdom is already among you."

BBE: And men will not say, See, it is here! or, There! for the kingdom of God is among you.

NRSV: nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ For, in fact, the kingdom of God is among you."

NKJV: "nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you."

Note how only 2 of these 8 translations render the last bit as “within youâ€. All the other translations have Jesus telling the listeners that the Kingdom is “in your midst†or “among you†– suggesting, of course, that the kingdom is “present right nowâ€.

And the fatal blow to the “within you†interpretation arises from who Jesus is speaking to:

Now at one point the Pharisees asked Jesus when the kingdom of God was coming, so he answered, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed

If Jesus is saying that the “location†of the kingdom is specifically “within the human personâ€, Jesus is telling the Pharisees that the kingdom of God is within them, the Pharisees, in this sense.

Not likely, of course – the Pharisees were precisely the ones in whom the kingdom was not present.

And is 1 Corinthians 3:16 translated wrong too?? If you don't think God's Spirit dwells within us then I am not interested in your beliefs. God's Kingdom is not of this world.

 

[Drew]

And is 1 Corinthians 3:16 translated wrong too?? If you don't think God's Spirit dwells within us then I am not interested in your beliefs. God's Kingdom is not of this world.

Well, since you offer no counter-argument to my argument about Luke - and it is not so much "my" argument as it is a pointing out that most translations do not use the concept "within you" to describe the Kingdom of God, but rather use the phase "among you" or something similar. Not the mention that, if your original assertion is correct, we have Jesus telling Pharisees that the kingdom of God is inside them - highly doubtgul.

But let's look at 1 Corinthians 3:16

Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you?

Why do you think this means that God's kingdom is not "of this world"? I entrirely embrace this teaching about the indwelling of the Spirit as many of my posts will attest. However, to acknowledge that we have the Spirit within us in no undermines the Biblical teaching that Jesus is King of this material world right now.

God's Kingdom is not of this world

You are, of course, free to believe this. But I have seen no evidence in this thread to support this. Seekandlistem, what specifically Biblical arguments are you prepared to put forward in support of this claim of yours?

 

[Adullam]

"In your midst" means that Jesus was presently among them at that time. This presence can also be brought into existence through the permanent gathering of disciples....the principle of the 2 or 3 gathered in His name. This is a spiritual presence NOT a physical one. It is by faith only at this time.

Jesus rules hearts by faith. He does not rule over people's rebellion either in the church or outside of it. To not see this difference is to neither understand faith nor the difference between obedience and rebellion.

When Jesus Christ comes to set up His kingdom here it will no longer be by faith in Him. The world will be brought into subjection by force. Then Jesus will reign over the earth...not before. :yes

 

[seekandlisten]

And is 1 Corinthians 3:16 translated wrong too?? If you don't think God's Spirit dwells within us then I am not interested in your beliefs. God's Kingdom is not of this world.

Well, since you offer no counter-argument to my argument about Luke - and it is not so much "my" argument as it is a pointing out that most translations do not use the concept "within you" to describe the Kingdom of God, but rather use the phase "among you" or something similar. Not the mention that, if your original assertion is correct, we have Jesus telling Pharisees that the kingdom of God is inside them - highly doubtgul.

But let's look at 1 Corinthians 3:16

Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you?

Why do you think this means that God's kingdom is not "of this world"? I entrirely embrace this teaching about the indwelling of the Spirit as many of my posts will attest. However, to acknowledge that we have the Spirit within us in no undermines the Biblical teaching that Jesus is King of this material world right now.

God's Kingdom is not of this world

You are, of course, free to believe this. But I have seen no evidence in this thread to support this. Seekandlistem, what specifically Biblical arguments are you prepared to put forward in support of this claim of yours?

I'm not about to put forth any arguments because you are merely interested in proving me wrong. I had posted my questions earlier that I had which you have given me your opinion on. I simply don't agree and don't see the evidence supporting your position, and that is fine. I'm not here to make you believe anything. You seem to think God's Kingdom is on earth and Jesus is sitting on God's throne. Where is this kingdom if not within us? It's definitely not in religion. While there are members of the Body of Christ scattered throughout the whole world and throughout various religions and background, the only evidence of it is fruit produced. We see in Revelation 19:11-21 and Revelation 20:1-6 it talks of Jesus returning and binding Satan for 1000 years. We know the spiritual realm is not one which can be seen as obviously no one has seen Satan cruising around for 6000 years so why do you think we would see Jesus binding Satan? Not everyone makes the first resurrection. Are those opposed to us being in the 1000 year reign not able to accept the fact that the first resurrection may have already occurred? If Jesus was ruling since the cross how has Satan been able to deceive so many? Wouldn't we be past a thousand years as well?? I see evidence of us maybe beeing in the 1000 year reign and this is where my questions lie so if you don't think we are there yet and that Jesus has been ruling since his resurrection we are on 2 different pages so you will not be able to answer my questions and I'm tired of arguments that go around in circles.

 

[Drew]

"In your midst" means that Jesus was presently among them at that time.

No. You are re-working the text and, in the process, deforming its meaning. Jesus' is answering a question about the kingdom of God:

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

Your claim that Jeus is talking about His own presence among at the time not only denies the focus on the specific matter of the Kingdom of God, it is also unworkable for another reason: Jesus stated that the Kingdom of God is not something to "be observed" or "seen". Well, clearly Jesus HImself can be seen, so it is not really possible that Jesus is talking about Himself as the thing that is in their midst.

He is talking about the Kingdom of God.

Reader, please do not get confused. Although Jesus is the initiator of the Kingdom of God, it would be a category mistake to say that "Jesus equals the Kingdom of God"

 

[Drew]

I'm not about to put forth any arguments because you are merely interested in proving me wrong.

This really begs the question. You do not really know what my motives are. Let's suppose that I am "interested in proving you wrong". Well, with all respect, the texts and associated arguments support my take on this, regardless of my "motivations". You are free to believe what you want. But if we are discussing what the Bible teaches, the arguments are important. And if you cannot make a Biblical case that Jesus is not king of the present world, or refute arguments that He is, well, then, I am not sure why any reader will understand why you hold the position that you do.

You seem to think God's Kingdom is on earth and Jesus is sitting on God's throne. Where is this kingdom if not within us?

It is "out there in public domain". Imagine that we are back in Caesar's Rome with Caesar sitting as king. If someone asked "Where is Ceasar's kingdom if not within us?", such a question would seem decidedly odd. Ceasar's kingdom is what it is - authority over a His empire and its insitutions, not just the "inner lives" of Roman citizens.

 

[seekandlisten]

I'm not about to put forth any arguments because you are merely interested in proving me wrong.

This really begs the question. You do not really know what my motives are. Let's suppose that I am "interested in proving you wrong". Well, with all respect, the texts and associated arguments support my take on this, regardless of my "motivations". You are free to believe what you want. But if we are discussing what the Bible teaches, the arguments are important. And if you cannot make a Biblical case that Jesus is not king of the present world, or refute arguments that He is, well, then, I am not sure why any reader will understand why you hold the position that you do.

You seem to think God's Kingdom is on earth and Jesus is sitting on God's throne. Where is this kingdom if not within us?

It is "out there in public domain". Imagine that we are back in Caesar's Rome with Caesar sitting as king. If someone asked "Where is Ceasar's kingdom if not within us?", such a question would seem decidedly odd. Ceasar's kingdom is what it is - authority over a His empire and its insitutions, not just the "inner lives" of Roman citizens.

You did not address any of my questions in my last post so what are you presenting to me?? Your interpretation of Scripture which I'm not interested in, sorry. I look to God for his guidance in Scripture and I have faith that He will show me the Truth. There is a reason why I don't associate myself with the religion of Christianity and that is because more often then not all that I see come out of it is judgement and condemnation, which isn't in our authority to give. Where is the hope and encouragement?? God's Kingdom is not of this world because it is of God. We are sinful and all have fallen short so how can God's Kingdom be a part of that? You say Jesus is ruling the world based on the argument that he was given authority on earth and in heaven. I already presented my take on this so for you to continue on this point is you imposing your beliefs on me, not what I'm interested in. You say God's Kingdom doesn't reside within us. I oppose your belief on this as well and the Scripture you present to support this comes down to your interpretation, again not what I'm interested in. You avoid my questions and merely present your position so what benefit does this converstion have for me?? So you are basically presenting that God's Kingdom is 'out there' and Satan is still allowed to roam freely even though Jesus is ruling the earth?