What is This Gospel of the Kingdom Anyway? – II
by Stephen Foster
Confession time again. My questioning of what comprises the “gospel of the kingdom” is a take-off of a sermon I heard a number of years ago entitled “This Kingdom Business.” The preacher of that sermon will, for now, be unnamed for reasons that will be revealed in the future.
As I recall, this sermon was another angle on the concept of righteousness by faith. The sermon has helped shape my view of this subject and of God’s judgment and mercy. The preacher said that there is nothing that we can do to qualify us to stand in the presence of God. He indicated that God is so pure and holy that He shines with a brightness that would literally obliterate anything that is impure. We could stop sinning altogether and still not qualify to be in His presence because our very natures are inherently corrupt (basically a result of having been born into sin and “shapen in iniquity.”) We therefore have nothing to commend or qualify us for the heavenly kingdom except Jesus’ blood and His righteousness.
Further, according to 2 Corinthians chapter 4, that which we see and touch is temporary and therefore not of any real value. Things that are seen and made in this world are things that, by definition, at one time did not exist. These things are also corrupt in the sense that they will, in time, cease to exist by one means or another. Things that have no end or that which will not be destroyed are, in essence, the only real things. These things are of course, not now visible to the human eye; whereas that which is temporary is also now that which is visible. Therefore, that which we see is effectively not real, but that which we do not see is quite real.
As seekers of the kingdom, we are to focus on the invisible something as opposed to the visible nothing. The kingdom of God is the invisible something and it is only accessed by the righteousness of Jesus. Once we believe this and accept this—we’re “in.” Faith in God and love for Him and for our fellow man are all that is required of us. It is through faith that the Spirit of God is quickened in our lives to love Him and our fellow man.
As for His judgment of us, God has provided that His Son is our Judge and our Advocate. If we, by accepting Him and His righteousness, enlist His services as our Advocate, we are then judged according to His righteousness; and as a result of His blood, are found not guilty.
This, in my view, is the good news of the kingdom which, when preached “in all the world,” will occasion “the end.” I now have two questions: have I missed anything; and is this traditional Adventist doctrine?
This gospel of the kingdom is the most liberal, radical theology that anyone is promoting. That is a good thing. The freedom this gospel provides is so liberating that some religious people resist it — as it not based on behavior, but acceptance (see http://www.josephprince.org/Resources_Podcast.html?active=resources).
That is why it is both such good news — and it is resisted. This is, if we could put ourselves aside for a moment, the common ground for believers.
Stephen, I do not believe you’ve missed a thing. But I do not agree that this is traditional Adventist doctrine, yet it is the truth anyhow. To say that your view point here posted is traditional Adventist doctrine, would imply a large general agreement / support / proclamation, which is not the case today. Yet, we have the promise that the gospel of the kingdom WILL be preached in all the world as a witness of this truth… then the end will come.
Faith in the grace of God changes us, though not our qualification for God’s grace, just as seeking the kingdom of God changes us, though not our qualification for admittance. For former always frees us to love, while the later all too often isolates us from love.
Bill Garber,
Please clarify what you mean by this. How can seeking the kingdom of God, which is part of what is to be our highest, primary, or number one priority, isolate us from love?
Stephen, I don’t believe you missed anything. As for your rendering of the “gospel of the kingdom”, at this point, I can’t say / see it to be a “traditional Adventist doctrine.” There are two many variations / interpretations readily available in Adventism. If this were a “traditional Adventist doctrine”, as outlined by you, we would be far closer to a consensus on what it is that we are to proclaim to the world AS A WITNESS. The power will come when God’s people are in harmony (the consensus) with heaven’s message / agenda. Until then…
Peace
laffal,
If you don’t think that I missed anything, then the question, it would appear, is why this doctrinal take on the “gospel of the kingdom” would not be considered historical or traditional Adventism? What is it about “this” gospel of the kingdom, in your opinion, that is different or unorthodox from historical, conservative Seventh-day Adventism?
Stephen… As I have mentioned previously, there are at least 5 definitions in Adventism as to what the “gospel of the kingdom” is. We have conservative, historical, evangelical, social, and those who describe themselves as believers of the everlasting gospel, Adventists. Therefore, orthodoxy is hard to fix with this wide array of doctrinal emphasis when it comes to the gospel. I will answer your question this way, in all 5 of these camps, a key term is obedience. Mind you, the term has a different emphasis / focus in each camp. Why obedience? We as people tend to make judgment calls on people / performance. Again, each camp has its own standard of behavior that is / is not acceptable. But the simple fact is, it always falls in the realm of the visible. As a result we tend to promulgate the specific features of our doctrinal orientation based on each particular performance standard… To judge or not to judge… that is the question. What’s sorely missing as a rule is the gospel foundation of the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ as the Savior of all men. A central feature of your post is having our faith set on the invisible, which is eternal, and not the temporary visible. What I gleaned from your post is that by way of this sermon referenced, you found yourself able to fix your spiritual eyes upon Christ is a way by which you could experience the righteousness of Christ personally, and simultaneously, realize the benefits of having the Advocate, Jesus Christ the righteous standing as your representative in the judgment. What’s the difference between “this gospel of the kingdom” and the historical, conservative Seventh-day Adventism? Who’s performance are we relying upon? Ours, or Christ’s? The Holy Spirit will not produce the righteousness of God in us that we may be saved / declared righteous. But He will reproduce the righteousness of Christ in those who by faith walk in the light as Christ is in the light. And the blood of Christ will therefore cleanse us from all sin. There is a reason Christ has not yet returned… The gospel of the kingdom that Christ proclaimed / established has not be clearly understood, much less experienced by God’s people… Which results in our inability to proclaim it with power… Peace
Stephen,
The Kingdom of God certainly contains the benefits of what you have implied.
The good news of the Kingdom is that God/Christ has both at the cross and will accomplish complete restoration of the kingdom in Christ, thus God Reigns. Isa.52:7
Christ message also included repentance when preaching the good news of the kingdom. Mt.4:17.
The benefits of Christ kingdom restoration and reign are that upon repentance and acceptance of Christ we are in the kingdom of Christ and reckoned complete in Him.
>>Faith in God and love for Him and for our fellow man are all that is required of us<< I would offer the specific of “Faith in Christ/God” and purposed love for Him and our fellow man are all that “is to be our goal” as if it was “required” how would that love be different than “perfect obedience to law through the spirit?” The kingdom of Christ/God is primarily about what Christ has done to “restore it” and the “means and benefits” to mankind for upon repentance and acceptance and thus entry to the “Kingdom of God/Christ”…for He is the only door. I suggest Adventism as always had at least two ways of salvation being taught as “orthodox.” Glimpses of being justified by “faith alone” and the more prevalent “being made righteous and loving as requirements for salvation.” regards,
pat
PS.Stephen, I noticed you never offerred comments to my “Gospel of the kingdom-I” Care to offer suggestion or comments here?
Pat Travis,
I must confess that I am unclear on exactly what you refer to insofar as a restoration of the kingdom, or a restored kingdom, is concerned.
The grace by which we are saved, it seems to me, is essentially the delivery from the penalty of sin, through His blood; along with the delivery from the power of sin, through His righteousness. What’s more, this is orthodox Adventist doctrine.
Repentance, though a conscious willful decision, cannot however be effectively accomplished by human will.
Web Master…It would be a definate improvement if you could format programing to allow for paragraph breaks…and ability to edit. Regards.
Stephen,
Perhaps it would help to describe the “restored kingdom” to you as what Christ accomplished at the cross. Satan’s kingdom was cast down and judged. Rev.12:5,10-13. At the cross’ victory with resurrection Christ was exalted to the thone…the beginning of the kingdom that will never pass away.Dan.2:44; Lk.1:33.
What you rightfully speak of are the “benefits” of Christ’s restored kingdom and the “means of Grace” for entry in Christ.
Does this help? You see what some refer to as the “Great controversy” is adequately biblically covered in the war of kingdoms…of God and Satan…in scripture.
regards,
pat
Pat Travis,
Thanks for elaborating on what you were referring to with regard to the “restored kingdom.” My view is that the cross established, or ratified the establishment of, the kingdom from an access perspective; so we very well may be saying the same thing. I’m not quite sure that I buy the concept that The Great Controversy is essentially a war of competing kingdoms; but I can certainly understand how it can be viewed this way.
Stephen,
The “Kingdom” and throne represent all that the “King is.” Thus kingdom theology is concerned with the treason of satan against God’s kingdom and character. This by the way was why God allowed/brought captivity in that Isael was symbolic of God’s kingdom whom they were misrepresenting to the nations by their covenant violations. At the cross, satan was judged and Christ “restored the kingdom.” Rom.3:26;Acts 13:32-35. He ascended on high as king-priest on the throne. Ps.110.
The nice thing of an edit being availiable would be to allow such things as my above reference to be expanded to Lk.1:31-33…and 1 Cor.15:25-28 as part of His kingdoms authority.
Laffal,You say…
>>We need to grasp the fact that the Holy Spirit will not produce the righteousness of God in us that we may be saved / declared righteous. But He will reproduce the righteousness of Christ in those who by faith walk in the light as Christ is in the light, relying upon His life in us thru the Spirit, and His Advocate ministry as Priest. And the blood of Christ will therefore cleanse us from all sin.<<
By this you are saying that our sanctification can equal our justification “who by faith walk.” You are making sanctification a “clensing of all sin” from the “faithful.” Can you see this?
Pat… sanctification is a process in which the believer experiences the righteousness of Christ that saves / justifies. I have no problem / issue with the concept that declares that as we surrender more and more of ourselves to the leading / living / empowerment of the Holy Spirit that a cleansing will result as a natural consequence. I never said, nor will I say that our sinful natures will be eradicated, on the contrary, the Holy Spirit will empower the believer in / by the life of faith / surrender in which sin will not of necessity be able to express itself in the believer.
Laffal,
The wording of your first sentence is unfortunately confusing…as it appears that the “beleivers experience” justifies. You may or may not have meant this. Protestant Christian’s of the Reformed camp (as well as many others) definately believe in sanctification/growth in holiness. It is merely the degree of growth that differs from the “perfectionism/sinlessness” of some quarters taught in SDAism…and, that is not why Jesus waits. I do not feel scripture teaches sinless perfection exist in the present age in the best and most faithful of beleivers…growth and purposeful obedience of deed and attitude yes.
I hate to be critiquing your new format but it is very confusing and hard to follow.It seems best that they simply be put in order of posting IMO…also as previously mentioned no paragraph breaks or edit capability.
regards,
pat
Laffal says: “Faith, confession, and repentance do not actuate our peace / pardon / righteousness, they are a response to the grace of God that extends them to the sinner who realizes the need / benefit. There is a reason Christ has not yet returned… The gospel of the kingdom that Christ proclaimed / established has not be clearly understood, much less experienced by God’s people… Which results in our inability to live / proclaim it with power…”
This is essentially the (other) point of these blogs on the topic of the gospel of the kingdom; that Christ will return when this gospel is understood, and preached (with power, if you will). You have stated or claimed that there are numerous iterations of the kingdom that are claimed by Adventists; and seem to fully grasp how I perceive the kingdom. If it is true that there are at least five Adventist perspectives on the kingdom—and thus the gospel thereof—and there may well be; which of them (if any) would actually contradict this one?
1) Conservatives – Hard line Armenianists – how do they contradict “this gospel?” Christ will not forgive / save you until / unless you believe in Christ / confess / repent of your sin. That’s an apparent contradiction to me. 2) The Historical Adventists – They are trying to recapture the perceived state of the SDA church in the time of the Pioneers. They contradict the gospel in a similar fashion as did the Galatians. The Evangelical Adventists – Their position is that Christians will sin until Christ returns. Their is no point by which sin will be terminated in the sense of dominion / expression in the Christian, that has been all accomplished in Christ. (Where’s the power of the gospel of the kingdom on the life of the Christian – as a witness?) 4) The Social gospel – This is primarily focused on social issues apart from the specific issues / consequence of sin. In one way or another each one of these position cover the two counterfeits of Satan, whether it be very subtle to basic … legalism / antinominism. Mind you there are any number of variations that can spin off of these positions, but none the less… peace / power / assurance can not be wholly experienced and therefore witnessed from these positions… That’s why we have the Everlasting gospel. Justification by faith in the surety / righteousness of Christ. EGW says that it is the 3 angels message in verity / clear distinct lines. I will leave this thread with a quote…
“The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, is a precious thought. The enemy of God and man is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken. If he can control minds so that doubt and unbelief and darkness shall compose the experience of those who claim to be the children of God, he can overcome them with temptation.” {GW 161.1}
1) Conservatives – Hard line Armenianists – how do they contradict “this gospel?” Christ will not forgive / save you until / unless you believe in Christ / confess / repent of your sin. That’s an apparent contradiction to me. 2) The Historical Adventists – They are trying to recapture the perceived state of the SDA church in the time of the Pioneers. They contradict the gospel in a similar fashion as did the Galatians. The Evangelical Adventists – Their position is that Christians will sin until Christ returns. Their is no point by which sin will be terminated in the sense of dominion / expression in the Christian, that has been all accomplished in Christ. (Where’s the power of the gospel of the kingdom on the life of the Christian – as a witness?) 4) The Social gospel – This is primarily focused on social issues apart from the specific issues / consequence of sin. In one way or another each one of these position cover the two counterfeits of Satan, whether it be very subtle to basic … legalism / antinominism. Mind you there are any number of variations that can spin off of these positions, but none the less… peace / power / assurance can not be wholly experienced and therefore witnessed from these positions… That’s why we have the Everlasting gospel. Justification by faith in the surety / righteousness of Christ. EGW says that it is the 3 angels message in verity / clear distinct lines. I will leave this thread with a quote… “The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, is a precious thought. The enemy of God and man is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken. If he can control minds so that doubt and unbelief and darkness shall compose the experience of those who claim to be the children of God, he can overcome them with temptation.” {GW 161.1}
1) Conservatives – Hard line Armenianists – how do they contradict “this gospel?” Christ will not forgive / save you until / unless you believe in Christ / confess / repent of your sin. That’s an apparent contradiction to me. 2) The Historical Adventists – They are trying to recapture the perceived state of the SDA church in the time of the Pioneers. They contradict the gospel in a similar fashion as did the Galatians. The Evangelical Adventists – Their position is that Christians will sin until Christ returns. Their is no point by which sin will be terminated in the sense of dominion / expression in the Christian, that has been all accomplished in Christ. (Where’s the power of the gospel of the kingdom on the life of the Christian – as a witness?) 4) The Social gospel – This is primarily focused on social issues apart from the specific issues / consequence of sin. In one way or another each one of these position cover the two counterfeits of Satan, whether it be very subtle to basic … legalism / antinominism. Mind you there are any number of variations that can spin off of these positions, but none the less… peace / power / assurance can not be wholly experienced and therefore witnessed from these positions… That’s why we have the Everlasting gospel. Justification by faith in the surety / righteousness of Christ. EGW says that it is the 3 angels message in verity / clear distinct lines. I will leave this thread with a quote… “The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, is a precious thought. The enemy of God and man is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken. If he can control minds so that doubt and unbelief and darkness shall compose the experience of those who claim to be the children of God, he can overcome them with temptation.” {GW 161.1}
1) Conservatives – Hard line Armenianists – how do they contradict “this gospel?” Christ will not forgive / save you until / unless you believe in Christ / confess / repent of your sin. That’s an apparent contradiction to me. 2) The Historical Adventists – They are trying to recapture the perceived state of the SDA church in the time of the Pioneers. They contradict the gospel in a similar fashion as did the Galatians. The Evangelical Adventists – Their position is that Christians will sin until Christ returns. Their is no point by which sin will be terminated in the sense of dominion / expression in the Christian, that has been all accomplished in Christ. (Where’s the power of the gospel of the kingdom on the life of the Christian – as a witness?) 4) The Social gospel – This is primarily focused on social issues apart from the specific issues / consequence of sin. In one way or another each one of these position cover the two counterfeits of Satan, whether it be very subtle to basic … legalism / antinominism. Mind you there are any number of variations that can spin off of these positions, but none the less… peace / power / assurance can not be wholly experienced and therefore witnessed from these positions… That’s why we have the Everlasting gospel. Justification by faith in the surety / righteousness of Christ. EGW says that it is the 3 angels message in verity / clear distinct lines. I will leave this thread with a quote… “The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, is a precious thought. The enemy of God and man is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken. If he can control minds so that doubt and unbelief and darkness shall compose the experience of those who claim to be the children of God, he can overcome them with temptation.” {GW 161.1}
1) Conservatives – Hard line Armenianists – how do they contradict “this gospel?” Christ will not forgive / save you until / unless you believe in Christ / confess / repent of your sin. That’s an apparent contradiction to me. 2) The Historical Adventists – They are trying to recapture the perceived state of the SDA church in the time of the Pioneers. They contradict the gospel in a similar fashion as did the Galatians. The Evangelical Adventists – Their position is that Christians will sin until Christ returns. Their is no point by which sin will be terminated in the sense of dominion / expression in the Christian, that has been all accomplished in Christ. (Where’s the power of the gospel of the kingdom on the life of the Christian – as a witness?) 4) The Social gospel – This is primarily focused on social issues apart from the specific issues / consequence of sin. In one way or another each one of these position cover the two counterfeits of Satan, whether it be very subtle to basic … legalism / antinominism. Mind you there are any number of variations that can spin off of these positions, but none the less… peace / power / assurance can not be wholly experienced and therefore witnessed from these positions… That’s why we have the Everlasting gospel. Justification by faith in the surety / righteousness of Christ. EGW says that it is the 3 angels message in verity / clear distinct lines. I will leave this thread with a quote… “The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, is a precious thought. The enemy of God and man is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken. If he can control minds so that doubt and unbelief and darkness shall compose the experience of those who claim to be the children of God, he can overcome them with temptation.” {GW 161.1}
1) Conservatives – Hard line Armenianists – how do they contradict “this gospel?” Christ will not forgive / save you until / unless you believe in Christ / confess / repent of your sin. That’s an apparent contradiction to me. 2) The Historical Adventists – They are trying to recapture the perceived state of the SDA church in the time of the Pioneers. They contradict the gospel in a similar fashion as did the Galatians. The Evangelical Adventists – Their position is that Christians will sin until Christ returns. Their is no point by which sin will be terminated in the sense of dominion / expression in the Christian, that has been all accomplished in Christ. (Where’s the power of the gospel of the kingdom on the life of the Christian – as a witness?) 4) The Social gospel – This is primarily focused on social issues apart from the specific issues / consequence of sin. In one way or another each one of these position cover the two counterfeits of Satan, whether it be very subtle to basic … legalism / antinominism. Mind you there are any number of variations that can spin off of these positions, but none the less… peace / power / assurance can not be wholly experienced and therefore witnessed from these positions… That’s why we have the Everlasting gospel. Justification by faith in the surety / righteousness of Christ. EGW says that it is the 3 angels message in verity / clear distinct lines. I will leave this thread with a quote… “The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, is a precious thought. The enemy of God and man is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken. If he can control minds so that doubt and unbelief and darkness shall compose the experience of those who claim to be the children of God, he can overcome them with temptation.” {GW 161.1}
Pat, I most heartily agree: postings should be in the order received: chronologically. Otherwise, it is most confusing.
Clicking ‘reply’ under a comment associated the new comment with the original comment that stimulated it. This is excellent. It allows for several conversations on the general topic to be clustered, like multiple conversations in the lobby after a concert.
To start a new conversation just enter a Post without clicking reply … which is what you apparently did here, Elaine.
The new format that allows replies to specific comments is a welcome improvement.
Whew… been having issues with the new format to say the least.
I agree with Pat: chronological postings make more sense than checking through a string to find a reply.
Again, how long before we can have ability to form paragraphs as do the essayists?
Another suggestion: the sister website (Spectrum) has probably 20x more comments and is far easier to immediately check both who has posted last and on which thread. Here, it takes several steps–three at least–to reach the desired place. Site needs better management if busy traffic is desired.
Br Stephen Foster –> I am so glad that you mention ‘the blood of Jesus’. I was quite appalled by some comments in ‘Part 1’ of this discussion regarding the Blood of Jesus. Some have disrespected the Precious Blood of Jesus Christ and the ‘efficacy’ of His Blood. I remember some years ago I was on a music planning committee for a Camp Meeting and suggested that we include the hymn “Power in the Blood.” Some of those in the committee, who were prompted by one member, started singing the song in a mocking, derogatory way, which really was a shame. I realized then that they did this only because they did not ‘experience’ the Power of Jesus Blood: that is, they didn’t experience been washed from sin and the joy thereof, through the Precious Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. –>The sacrificial system was instituted right at the time of man’s fall where the blood of animals represented the Blood of the promised Messiah. The Blood ratified the OT Covenant in type in then in the NT by Christ’s Blood, the anti-type. Whoever may receive Christ’s Righteousness before and after the Cross, receives it through the Blood. There is no remission from sin without it. Mrs Nelson takes it to the next level by stating: “The Resurrection, not crucifixion, opened salvation to everyone, regardless.” Yet, without the Crucifixion there is no Resurrection. SDA’s celebrate the Cross, The Sabbath and the Resurrection: unlike others who only opt for the first and the last. The Third Angel of Rev 14 calls mankind to a position of accepting to Worship the Creator and honoring His Holy Seventh-day Sabbath of which millions around the world have done and are doing. The Blood does not ‘trigger’ God’s Grace but was shed as a result of His Love, Mercy, Grace and Power. The Good News of the Kingdom centers on the Cross; for it is there by Grace we receive our ‘Sight’ and ‘Right’ to the said Kingdom. Repentance is also found within this context. –>The most ‘highly educated’ minds can never fathom what it means to experience Salvation without experiencing the Blood. The regular Communion Service in SDA churches remind us of the Blood and Body of Christ and the Price that was paid for Redemption. Science has no place for Salvation as it makes no provision for it. The Bible unfolds the Plan of Salvation to us and is a Revelation of Jesus Christ and His Precious Blood. Praise god for the Blood of Jesus Christ! –> T