Nature of the kingdom of God

[BC Editor]

Dear all,
in various studies concerning "the kingdom of God" over the years, I have noticed repeatedly that a major point for understanding the scriptures concerning the kingdom of God concerns the nature of this kingdom.
Many people understand the kingdom to be an earthly, political type of kingdom, with Jesus ruling over the world as a political ruler from Jerusalem as his capital city ... others understand the kingdom to be spiritual in nature and not necessarily an earthly rule.
Jesus' words before Pilate (cp. John 18:36) seem of importance, do they provide an answer as to the nature of the kingdom of God?

John 18:36 (KJV)
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Further insights are welcome and appreciated.

[Marilyn]

Dear all,
It has been pointed out to me that the kingdom of God as spoken by Jesus to the Pharisees in Luke is translated "within you" in the KJV, but in more modern versions has been translated "among you" or "in your midst". .

KJV:
Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
NAS95:
Luke 17:21 nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.

1. How was the kingdom of God 'within' the Pharisees who were evil?
2. How was the kingdom of God 'among' the Pharisees, if that idea is correct?
3. Does "in your midst" mean in the middle of the "inside of" individuals, or "among" the group?

I don't understand how either idea fits the Pharisees in Luke 17. If anyone has an idea, I would really like to see your thoughts about this.

Blessings,
Marilyn

[Shomer]

Shalom Wolfgang + Marilyn

Many people understand the kingdom to be an earthly, political type of kingdom, with Jesus ruling over the world as a political ruler from Jerusalem as his capital city ... others understand the kingdom to be spiritual in nature and not necessarily an earthly rule.

A very good question ideed! Why do we assume it must be either or rather than as well as? There was a time, when Yeshuah’s task was not to rule but to serve and suffer according to Isaiah 53. But Isaiah 9 refers to the Messiah, too, the ruling Servant of YAHWEH – and this scripture evidentially has not yet been fulfilled. I believe, that Yeshuah will return to his Talmidim (Disciples) as he was ascended before their eyes. Why will he return visibly? In order to seize the rulership over his Kingdom in the invisible? The Messiah never ever before has sat on David’s throne as it was pophesied – so, when will he do so, if the Kingdom of YAHWEH would come in the invisible? I personally believe, it is invisible today, but will become very visible within the next ten to twenty years.

Jesus' words before Pilate (cp. John 18:36) seem of importance, do they provide an answer as to the nature of the kingdom of God?
John 18:36 (KJV)
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

John 18:36 (Stern)
Yeshua answered, “My kingship does not derive its authority from this world’s order of things. If it did, my men would have fought to keep me from being arrested by the Judeans. But my kingship does not come from here

Let’s consider a little word, Stern unfortunately has omitted: “Now”!

In John 3:17 e. g. we read that Yeshuah had not come to judge, but to redeem. On the other hand we read:

KJV 2Ti 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom. Or: Joh 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son

I am of the opinion that there are statements which refer to the present time when Jeshuah said this, and there are statements that seemingly oppose those but that must refer to the times to come. So why must the Kingdom be always invisible, just because it is invisible now? How about the millennium?

It has been pointed out to me that the kingdom of God as spoken by Jesus to the Pharisees in Luke is translated "within you" in the KJV, but in more modern versions has been translated "among you" or "in your midst".
KJV:
Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
NAS95:
Luke 17:21 nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.

1. How was the kingdom of God 'within' the Pharisees who were evil?
2. How was the kingdom of God 'among' the Pharisees, if that idea is correct?
3. Does "in your midst" mean in the middle of the "inside of" individuals, or "among" the group?

I don't understand how either idea fits the Pharisees in Luke 17. If anyone has an idea, I would really like to see your thoughts about this.

We find the word “Kingdom” 158 times in KJV. All scriptures give us most information we need in order to comprehend this matter. Well, mostly Yeshuah taught in parables about it and we should have the key to understand. Let’s look at this e. g.:

Mat 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

In Hebrew thinking, everything that has to do with leaven e.g. has to do with impurity; with defilation. Here, you see one aspect of the kingdom of heaven only: it is defiled! Unfortunately Christians tend to blame the Pharisees for this defilation but what Cesar Constantine did to the Body of the Messiah was much worse than what the Pharisees had done. – And we are the victims of this defilation, since the reformation just only did some biblical face-lifting on Constantine’s pagan Christian religion. This, now, is what we’ve got today. This is our Christian defilation. Are we Kingdom of God? Sure we are! I know its very tuff when we are confronted with our own leaven and defilation. And yet YAHWEH blesses us!

Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

I suggest to take this as the key kingdom message, because it contains not the love of God only but the love, riches of His goodness and vorbearance, longsuffering and justice

Shalom, Jürgen HaShomer

[Marilyn]

Hello Shumer and Wolfgang,
I would like to put the parable of the leaven in context and explain my view of it in the positive sense. I see this leaven as goodness, mercy, and eternal life being spread through Christ to those who love and trust Him:

Matt 13:31ff
Jesus put before them another parable. “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a mustard seed which a man takes and sows in his field. It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it grows up it is larger than any garden plant and becomes a tree, so that the birds flying about come and nest in its branches.” And he told them yet another parable. “The Kingdom of Heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed with a bushel of flour, then waited until the whole batch of dough rose.”

I understand that leaven is used throughout the Old Testament in the negative sense, but here I see that in this case, the tree in v31 becomes useful, a lovely place for birds to nest and raise their young. The leaven is useful as well, as the woman was going to bake leavened bread when the yeast had done its work in the dough. These are examples explaining how the Kingdom of Heaven was going to grow over time. The mustard seed was planted as a very small seed, that seed died and in doing so, brought forth life which was the living tree.

Rev 22:1
Next the angel showed me the river of the water of life, sparkling like crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb. Between the main street and the river was the Tree of Life producing twelve kinds of fruit, a different kind every month; and the leaves of the tree were for healing the nations–no longer will there be any curses.

Likewise, the leaven in the dough caused it to rise and be useful for baking delicious bread, sometimes called "the staff of life". The parable of the leaven is a physical illustration of the eternal life spread into all nations and given to people who are believers. Jesus said in

John 6: 47
Yes, indeed! I tell you, whoever trusts has eternal life: I am the bread which is life. Your fathers ate the manna in the desert; they died But the bread that comes down from heaven is such that a person may eat it and not die. I am the living bread that has come down from heaven; if anyone eats this bread, he will live forever. Furthermore, the bread that I will give is my own flesh; and I will give it for the life of the world.”

Blessings,
Marilyn

[BC Editor]

Hello Jürgen
a short note on a paragraph in your post

...

Mat 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

In Hebrew thinking, everything that has to do with leaven e.g. has to do with impurity; with defilation. Here, you see one aspect of the kingdom of heaven only: it is defiled! Unfortunately Christians tend to blame the Pharisees for this defilation but what Cesar Constantine did to the Body of the Messiah was much worse than what the Pharisees had done. – And we are the victims of this defilation, since the reformation just only did some biblical face-lifting on Constantine’s pagan Christian religion. This, now, is what we’ve got today. This is our Christian defilation. Are we Kingdom of God? Sure we are! I know its very tuff when we are confronted with our own leaven and defilation.

It seems that you liken the kingdom of heaven not to the leaven but to the three measures of meal? Is this to what Jesus was comparing the kingdom of God, or was he likening it to the leaven which over some time spreads throughout the whole?

I tend to think that the comparison made by this parable (as well as the other in the immediate context) concerns the one point of growth from rather small to large, and rather little influence to influence over the whole. I don't think that the point of this comparison here is the "evil" which in other contexts is also associated with comparisons made to leaven.

[Shomer]

Dear Wolfgang

I know that my point of view is quite unusual in general. But I can't see any growth here. The three measures are three measures before and after the leavening process likewise. Once, I have computed over that these three measures are a load of three donkeys or approx. 1.179 tons (in comparison: a VW-Bus has a capacity of about 1 ton). This means: as an ordinary measure of leaven is able to penetrate some 1.2 tons of flour, so the defiled Christianity would penetrate the true body of the Messiah. And church history has proved that it was so. Another point is the woman that puts the leaven into the flour. Even a woman in biblical thinking is defiled in a certain way, since she isn't a virgin any more. In Rev 14 we read that the 144000 did not defile themselves with women. I even can see the link between the "great whore of Babylon" and the leaven.

In Acts 8 we read, how Simon Peter cursed the founder of the Roman Catholic Church and the "first pope", Simon. This Simon’s religious background, Samaria, even till today is the religious background of the RCC: a mixture of the Babylonian, Greek and Jewish religions. (The Samaritans expected the Messiah but the Jews had no fellowship with them – exactly for this reason.) Especially the Babylonian magic (transubstantiation) or astrology (sun calendar) and Greek philosophy are irrevocable elements of the RCC until today.

The year 325 a. c. e. was the darkest year for the Ecclesia. The religion of the mentioned Simon became the official religion and later everybody was killed who was not willing to submit to the Trinity doctrine, Christmas, Easter or the Sunday e. g. The spiritual leaven did it's work on the true believers and polluted the whole flour.

Act 20:29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

This, Paul said to the Ecclesia in Ephesus but it turned out that the grievous wolves did not spare the Ecclesia in the whole Roman Empire. The true Ecclesia was swallowed up by the wolves later – to the very day.

Today’s Christianity is evidentially based on the forceful Christianisation that followed the Nicaea Council in the year 325. The reformation unfortunately couldn't reverse every single false doctrine. Even Martin Luther maintained the baby sprinkling e. g. although he had taught that no babies are to be baptised any more, earlier. When we return to the early Christians, in our minds we unfortunately can return back to Cesar Constantine only. If we would live and thingk according to the apostle’s teachings, I believe, we would have to repent of our “Christian” mindset.

I have cast out the leaven in my thinking of the Christianity that was faked by Simon the magician and Constantine. I have not finished yet, but what I have seen I cast out. Trinity, Christmas, Easter and Sunday are not the only heresies in Christian paganism. Constantine has implanted many more heresies. But a Kingdom of God with pure flour and without leaven is an illusion today. Yet it will be a reality in the millennium - I am looking forward.

Shalom, Jürgen