1 ABSTRACT the Kingdom of God and Its Implication to Twenty-First

ABSTRACT

The Kingdom of God and Its Implication to Twenty-First Century Believers

Dominic Adua A. Nyaaba

Doctor of Philosophy

2012

Newburgh Theological Seminary

This dissertation presents an exegetical, interpretative, historical, and ethical study of the kingdom of God. Since the kingdom of God is analyzed critically using various biblical elements, both the New and the Old Testaments are explored to unearth the true meaning of the kingdom of God. It is absolutely necessary for Biblical words to be transliterated and transcribed to fit properly into morphological, phonological, syllable and grammatical structure of Hebrew and Greek languages as well as exposing these words and expressions in their English connotations.

Next, standard definitions of terms are rendered to usher the reader into fully grasping the subject treated. The rendering of significant terms such as “God”, El,

Elohim, Eloah, Yahweh, “King”, melekh, “kingdom”, “basileia”, “malkuth” are so significant for proper elucidation and comprehension of the subject studied. Apart from these terms, biblical genres such as parable, metaphor, simile, and the proverb are properly accentuated. Exegetically, several passages, sentences, phrases, and words of the two major Biblical languages, Greek and Hebrew are illustrated intensively in the dissertation.

A greater proportion of the dissertation is wholly devoted to interpretation of scriptures. The beatitudes are profoundly explicated for the readership of theologians, 1

professors, seminarians and Church leaders. The Parables, which constitute a bulk of

Jesus’ Teaching and Preaching, are given an in-depth clarifications leaning heavily on erudite works. Interpretation is expanded to embrace terms such as “Theophany”,

“Torah”, and “Royal”, “Covenant”, berit, mishpat “justice”, tsedeqah “righteousness”, and its Greek equivalent dykaiosyne. Present and Future of the kingdom of God, and its eschatological implications are fully explained in Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom.

Since the Messiah is the protagonist in the kingdom of God, extension of the kingdom to

Gentiles, especially in the Book of Isaiah is succinctly illustrated, where Gentiles, and

Proselytes in Deutro-Isaiah are ushered into the light of God. The dissertation also learns itself copiously to narratives since literary genres used in these historical events are narratives. Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants are replete with theophanic encounters intertwined with sumptuous narratives. Davidic covenant as well as Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of hope and redemption is analyzed using narratives and explanations. Since believers sojourning in the kingdom of God are confronted with venomous attacks, the tail end of chapter three is wholly designated to discussing spiritual warfare in Eph. 6:1-17. Believers are made to be aware that all is not auspicious in the kingdom of God as they seek to worship and serve God in righteousness. Exegetical study of this passage is fully analyzed by critically examining

Greek lexical items employed by Paul, the apostle.

Furthermore, the dissertation renders concisely an in-depth analysis of data gathered from the administration of questionnaires to 500 respondents in Los Angeles, and the City of Canoga Park in California. This portion of the dissertation takes a critical look at ethical issues confronting believers in the 21st Century American Church and 2

Biblical response to such ethical problems. Finally, an executive summary, and recommendations are wholly accentuated for the readership of scholars, pastors, and seminarians and the Laity.

Content Readers: Grading Team

Word Count: 533

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I express my sincerest and profoundest gratitude to the Almighty God for calling me out of Darkness into his marvelous light to serve him with all my heart. My heart felt gratitude also goes to him for his enormous help in my entire Educational career. My deepest gratitude also goes to Jesus and the Holy Spirit for helping me to comprehend and pursue the PH.D program. There were times I was left without answers but whenever I turned to them they exuded their manifold blessings, intelligence and encouragement on me.

My effusive thanks go to the grading Team of Newburgh Theological Seminary, staff members and all who played a pivotal role in my life while I was pursuing this program. I must say without you, it would have been extremely difficult to accomplish such a gargantuan task in a period of one year.

I also appreciate my late mother, Madam Mary Abugre Nyaaba for her care and affection for me before her departure to heaven in 2008. My deepest appreciation goes to International Theological Seminary, University of Ghana, Christian Service College,

Prempeh College, St. Charles Secondary School, Salaga Roman Catholic Middle

School, and Kparigu Local Authority Primary School for laying a solid academic foundation for me over the years.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………… 1

Preliminary consensus

Statement of Problem

Goal and significance of Study

Methodological Focus

Literature Review

CHAPTER

1. ETYMOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE NAMES OF GOD AND DEFINITION OF

“KING” AND“ KINGDOM”…………………………………………………… 24

Etymological study, meaning and use of EL, Eloah, Elohim

Etymological study of Yahweh: Yahweh- Sabbaoth, and Yahweh-Raah

Definition of “ king” in Biblical Terms

Definition of “ the kingdom .” in Biblical Terms

Conclusion

2. COVENANTS, THEOPHANY, THE MESSIAH, ROYAL AND TORAH PSALMS, GENTILE AND PROSELYTE BELIEVERS AND LIGHT OF THE KINGDOM…49

Introduction

Abrahamic Covenant and the Kingdom

The Land, the Mosaic Covenant and Theophany

The Davidic Covenant

The Messiah is the Representative of Yahweh in his Kingdom

The Royal, Torah Psalms and the Messianic Kingdom

Gentiles and Proselyte Believers in Deutro-Isaiah

The Light of the Kingdom of God in (Isaiah 49:1-6)

Conclusion

3. INTERPRETATION OF THE BEATITUDES, THE PARABLES AND SOME SALIANT BIBLICAL POINTS OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD……………………..80

Idealism, Grace-based Prophetic Interpretations, and Participative Grace of the

Beatitudes

Blessed are the Poor in Spirit, for there is the Kingdom of Heaven ( Mt.5:3)

Blessed are Those Who mourn, for They will be Comforted ( Mt. 5:4)

Blessed are the Meek, for They will inherit the Earth (Mt.5:5)

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled

(Mt. 5:6)

Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy (Mt.5:7)

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God (Mt. 5:8)

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God (Mt. 5:9).

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the

kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and

falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me (Mt. 5:10-11)

Definition of a parable

How the parables were interpreted, and why Jesus taught in parables

The parable of the four soils (Mt. 13:1-23; Mk4:1-9; 8:4-8)

The parable of the tares (Mt.13:24-30, 36-43)

The parable of the Mustard seed (Mt. 13:31-32; Mk. 4:30-34)

The parable of the yeast (Mt. 13:33-35)

The parable of the pearl and treasure (Mt. 13:45-46)

The parable of the fishing net (Mt. 13:47-52)

The parable of the ten virgins (Mt. 25:1-13)

The parable of the Loaned money (Mt. 25:14-30; Mark 13: 34; Lk. 19:11-27)

The parable of the workers paid equally (Mt. 20:1-16)

The Samaritan problem and the parable of the Good Samaritan ( John 4:1-26;

Lk. 10: 25-37)

The Spiritual, and Political Kingdom of Christ, and God’s Spiritual reign in the

Church

Synoptic Attestation of Present and Future of the Kingdom of God

The Lord’s Prayer and the Kingdom of God ( Mt. 6:9-13)

Peter’s Confession (Mt. 16: 13-20), The Baptism, and Transfiguration of Jesus

(Mt. 17:4-5; Mk. 9:6-7; Lk. 9:34-35)

Universality of Grace in Luke, the Miracles of Jesus, and the miracles of Paul in the Kingdom of God

The Believer and Spiritual Warfare ( Ephesians 6:10-17)

Be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might and putting on the full armor of God that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil ( Eph. 6: 10-

11)

We do not wrestle against flesh and blood, therefore take up the full armor of

God ( Eph. 6:12-13)

Girding the waist with truth, putting on the breast plate of righteousness, and

proclaiming the Gospel of peace ( Eph. 6:14-15)

The shield of faith and the Helmet of salvation ( Eph. 6:16-17)

Conclusion

4. OVERVIEW OF LOS ANGELS AS A CASE-STUDY OF ETHICAL

ISSUES………………………………………………………………………………..174

Table 1 shows Detailed Statistics of Data Analysis

Abortion and Biblical Response

Homosexuality and Biblical Response

Illegal Acquisition of Money and Biblical Response

Syncretism, Idolatry and Biblical Response

Bestiality and Biblical Response

Drug Addiction and Biblical Response

Table 2 shows detailed Statistics of Data Analysis on Divorce

Divorce and Biblical Response

Conclusion

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………..201

6. APPENDIX: FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD….215

BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………...217

INTRODUCTION

Preliminary Consensus

This Dissertation will develop a biblical, interpretive, and exegetical foundation that deliberates on critical issues confronting believers in the Kingdom of God in the 21st century. Actually, the 21st century believers in America and other parts of the world are grappling with the concepts of the Kingdom of God. The kingdom of God will be studied in the light of Biblical, interpretative, and exegetical illustrations. The question of what really constitutes the kingdom of God will be explored succinctly. The definition of the

Kingdom of God, its participants, and what, really represents the ideologies of the kingdom will be analyzed formulating a reservoir of knowledge for my readers. The dissertation will wrap up with an in-depth analysis of data produced on the kingdom of

God based on approved administered questionnaires to professed believers. The results of the research findings will be used to develop a formidable pedagogical foundation for Churches. Hence, adherence to kingdom ideologies by Twenty-First

Century believers is the pillar upon which this readjustment is authenticated.

Christianity is a living organism; hence, it is increasing and advancing in all ages and in all communities and societies. Christianity is not a system of canon or outward organization, but an actual salvation, a new life for humanity. It is not merely an enactment of laws and living by those belief systems. The kingdom of God is not instituted by Jesus, and governed by the laws of his appointment. “It is a body pervaded by new spiritual life or that spiritual life itself pervading and transforming the life of

men.”1 There are general conditions that must be fulfilled by any definition of the kingdom of God. The generic meaning of the kingdom of God is “gathering together”, thus we can keep hold of the comprehensive denotation of the Greek word, “basilica” which carries the nuance of both reign or the exercising of kingly power over subjects or a realm. “The name is not merely, a figure of speech but the appropriate designation of a great reality. Actually it is a society bound together by certain laws, and ruled by a power which guides the action of the parts and of the whole to an end that is adequate and good.”2 Even though the kingdom of God is a society, a city, a country, a congregation, a neighborhood, a community, a people of God, it is a gathering of men and women by spiritual impetus, power dunamis, and authority exousia. It is not just a circularized society with circularized norms and laws; it is described as a heavenly country, the Jerusalem that is above, and the city that is to come. Frankly, it is described as being spiritually one, having the same objects and the same principles, the same supports and the same enemies.3

1 James Stuart Candlish, The Kingdom of God: Biblically and historically considered (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 38 George Street, 1884), 194-195. I agree with him because scripture clearly states in Acts 2:42-44, “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread, and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common” They lived by the new spiritual impetus they had received from Christ on the day of Pentecost.

2 Ibid., 199.

3 Ibid., 200.

refers to the awesome dominion of God (Mt 28: 18; 1 Cor15: 25). It also refers to a specific place for the chosen people (Mt 5:5:3, 10; 7:21). Entering the kingdom of heaven does not require the achievement of a defined social status or a certificate, but being roped into a believing community. This community hosts staunch believers of the

Lord Jesus Christ who have both received the salvation of the Lord and have been redeemed of their Adamic and personal sins. Thus, the latter sense of the kingdom of heaven signifies both present and future aspect. The kingdom of God has already come is notified in (Mt 12:28). At the same time it will be inhabited at the parousia (Mt. 13: 24-

30) where there will the final judgment, sinners will be bundled up and burned, while the elect will inherit life everlasting. In the eschatological kingdom of God, believers who wield the authority, and power of God will reign with Jesus Christ in his new kingdom.

Matthew’s genealogy describes the beginning of “new” Israel as the fulfillment of that covenant. This has happened in Christ Jesus. It is the purpose of his ministry.

Thus, the purpose of Jesus ministry can be summed up as, “The Gospel of the

Kingdom”4 and call his people into true worshipping body in order for them to inherit the kingdom of God. Hence, the “new” Moses theme is subordinate to the theme of the new

Israel. In Jesus, the two traditions of the covenant, Abraham and Moses become one.

David Holwerdda declares as follows:

If Jesus is the one through whom the promise is being fulfilled, then he can lay claim to being’s Abraham’s true descendant, the one who is what a descendant of Abraham is supposed to be. Jesus, then, is true Israel, the one who does everything that Israel was supposed to do, and who is everything that Israel was supposed to be. Historical Israel has failed, and promises had not come to

4 Jack Dean Kingsbury,Matthew as Story (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Fortress Press, 1988), 61.

fulfillment through the Israelites.”5

George Eldon Ladd on his part explicates, “The kingdom in its eschatological form is a reward bestowed in return for obedience to Jesus’ teachings. It is the gift of grace. Nevertheless, the kingdom is not only a future gift; it is also a present gift to those who will renounce all else and throw themselves unreservedly upon the grace of

God. To them both the kingdom and its righteousness are included in God’s gracious gift.”6

Thus, the kingdom of God is prepared solely for the elect and the regenerated. In my estimation, the kingdom of God comes with undisputed authority of God. “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in

Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” (Acts1:8). One of the most important features of the kingdom of God is the display of insurmountable authority of God in the lives of the community of believers. The participants of the kingdom of God receive the spirit of boldness, knowledge and eloquence of speech to become unchallenged witnesses of God throughout nations, kingdoms, and territories.

Through the power (dunamis), and the authority(exousia) of God, the kingdom of God is proclaimed to all nations.

5 David Holwerda, Jesus, and Israel: One Covenant or Two? (Grand Rapids: Earmans, 1995), 33.

6 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus And the Kingdom: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism (Harper & Row, New York, Evanston, London, 1946, 1952), 298.

Statement of the Problem

The major problem confronting believers of the 21st century is serious incapacitation in exegetical analysis, delineation, and interpreting the kingdom of God within the acceptable Biblical confinement. Morally, kingdom ideologies are compromised seriously with postmodern values. George Eldon Ladd defines the problem this way, “Walter Rauschenbusch interpreted the kingdom of God as the ideal human society, and Jesus’ ethics set forth the standard of social conduct which would create the true society.”7 Most scholars view this definition as heretical presentation of the kingdom to believers. They underscore the philosophy that, the kingdom is not earthy, but is a divine organization, and governed by a supernatural personality. George

Eldon Ladd further declares, “It is disappointing that recent studies on eschatological and social ethics have made little use of the concept of the kingdom of God. Recent

Biblical studies have sought for a scriptural basis for social ethics in the keryma rather than in the teaching of Jesus Christ.”8 As a result, the 21st century believer is left wallowing in the quagmire of pandemonium when issues about the kingdom of God do arise. Inadequate and inaccurate definitions of the kingdom of God have emanated perverted behavior among 21st century believers, leading to heretical exhibition of kingdom principles. Hence, the Christian lacks the desired spiritual impetus to comprehend fully the personality of God, and this degenerates into lack of the required spiritual judgment and intellectual momentum to be committed to God.

7 Ibid., 298.

8 Ibid., 298.

The God of the Bible is the Supreme Commander of the Universe, he is the chief architect of the universe, and he has absolute power and authority over all created beings. He is the only personality to be worshipped because he is the ultimate source of our existence. God of the Bible is all-powerful and able to do anything consistent with his own nature. Arthur W. Pink judiciously declares, “The sovereignty of God is the supremacy of God, the kingship of God, the Godhead of God. To say that God is sovereign is to declare that God is God. To say that God is sovereign is to declare that he is the Most High, doing according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth, so that none can stay his hand or say unto him, what doest thou?”9

Prominently, it is empirical to all scholars that the objects of worship of other religious entities are founded on traditional ideologies of those religions rather than on the God of the universe. It is also essential to notify that while nominal Christians in other parts of the world practice syncretism by consulting gods, Islamic shrines, voodoos, and being engaged in various forms of divinations, and witchcraft activities, the contemporary American has consciously substituted Kingdom principles with the consultation of a psyche. Biblical scholars have unanimously agreed that philosophical presentation of the virtues of God is incompatible with Christianity. Glen H. Stassen &

David P. Gushee in their masterpiece Kingdom Ethics, 2003, state assertively, “Aristotle has no place for the virtues of humility, and his account of friendship preludes the

9 Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God (Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1928, seventh Reprint 1998), 20.

possibility of friendship between God and humility.”10 He actually advocated other virtues, which appear to be in conformity with those of Christianity, but his philosophical identification of those virtues was not based on the omnipotent God. These were,

“generosity, magnificence, high-mindedness, gentleness, truthfulness, wittiness, friendship and proper amount of ambition but not too much. He chose these virtues by observing admired males in a hierarchical and warlike society that defended slavery and male superiority and did not believe in the God of Israel.”11 If Christianity were to be anchored in Aristotle’s virtue ethics, then communities, nations, and kingdoms would engage in a dauntless warfare against each other. This in my view must be addressed.

Glen H. Stassen and David P. Gushee incisively state, “Aristotle’s virtues ethics are based on a homogeneous view of community and the need for war against those who differ. Instead Christian belief in God calls for love of enemy and affirms participation of those who differ.”12

Pertaining to prosperity, a majority has consciously engaged in illegal practices with the cardinal aim of amassing wealth. Due to materialistic ideals and principles permeating our societies, a considerable number of people have seriously compromised

Biblical ideologies with worldly standards without the slightest qualm of being remorseful. It must be emphasized, that the kingdom of God is not against prosperity of the believer nevertheless, it is the attitude of the believer towards wealth that is

10 Glen H. Stassen & Gushee P. David, Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 52.

11 Ibid., 52.

12 Ibid.,52.

paramount for kingdom ethics. Robert H. Gundry explains, “The mentioning of reward in the following scriptures, (Mt.6: 19-34; Luke 12: 22-36; 16:13) leads to prohibition of hoarding earthly wealth because of greed and anxiety.”13 Greediness, selfishness, and lack of moral justice have plunged a myriad of Christians into financial malfeasance, thereby ruining their fervent relationship with God. If these problems are not addressed, the dissemination of good news about the Kingdom of God will be woefully weakened, and a deteriorated Gospel will lead to training of vulnerable souls whose spiritual supremacy will be sapped by every frivolous doctrine. Jesus gave Christians an authoritative warning against ravenousness in Luke 12:15 He asserted, “Take heed and beware of covetousness.” Voraciousness stimulates materialism and materialism emanates secularism and backsliding, and backsliding may eventually lead to apostasy.

Scripture also warns, “The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (1Tim 6:10).

George Gallup’s research has proven that among people who reported earning more than $50, 000 a year, sixty-two percent stated that the acquisition of wealth caused their spiritual life to plummet. Only 25% of this group maintained that money assisted them to experience an enormous spiritual growth.14 Furthermore, proliferation of Churches with scrawny souls and without imbibing the required Kingdom ethics will further the downward course of the Gospel in America. If this trend continues in the contemporary societies, a majority of believers will be plunged into a dungeon of spiritual perplexity.

13 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982),111.

14 Jack Graham, Lessons From the Heart (Chicago: Moody Press, 2001), 46.

Interpretation of the parables has experienced the fiercest debate over the centuries. It is estimated that over one third of Jesus’ teaching in the synoptic Gospels is located in the parables. Since the parables are central to the teaching about the kingdom, several scholars have researched into their interpretations. The first scholar to bring to the attention of Biblical scholars was Adolf Julicher who deliberated on the parables in his first volume of Die Gleichnisreden Jesu in 1888. “Until 1888, the allegorical interpretation reigned supreme in the interpretation of the parables.15 He emphasized that the parables were not allegories. While allegory may be defined as a series of metaphors in, which each metaphor has its own meaning and significance,

Julicher defined a parable as a similitude, which has only a single point of completion

(tertium comparationis). Each parable is therefore a single picture which seeks to portray a single object or reality.”16 A majority of preachers and Biblical scholars still render allegorical connotations to the parables. The dissertation seeks to address all these issues confronting the 21st Century kingdom citizens by giving an in-depth analysis of some of Jesus’ parables.

Goal and Significance

15 Robert H. Stein, AN introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 198), 53 Cf. Adolf Julincher similar statement that the parables are not a series of metaphors, but are similtudes, First volume of Die Gleichnisreden Jesu in 1888. I agree that while a metaphor is a comparison without similes such as “as”, “like”, “resembles”, a parable carries one kingdom principle, which is necessary for the consumption of the hearers or readers.

16Ibid., 53.

A vast majority of Biblical intellectuals have researched into the Kingdom of God over the centuries underscoring its importance for believers and the Church. Eldon Ladd affirms, “The Church is the community of the kingdom but never the kingdom itself.

Jesus’ disciples belong to the kingdom as the kingdom belongs to them; but they are not the kingdom. The kingdom is the rule of God; the Church is a society of men.”17

Research into this subject matter is so significant because a conscientious attempt must be made to unravel the myth behind people’s lackadaisical attitude towards the principles of the Kingdom of God in our contemporary Churches and societies. The dissertation seeks to ascertain reasons pertaining to the identification of the Church as a secular society. Peter Jessen observes, “Pressure brought to bear on the intellectual assertions of Christianity by secularism have been intense, it is not surprising that they have contributed both to loss of membership and to significant tensions and strains within the Christian community itself.”18 As a result, it is urgent to redefine the kingdom of God, which must fit properly into the theological and Biblical framework as well as the thinking process of the 21st century Christian. Who really belongs to the kingdom is a very tough question to pose. The parable of the draw net elucidates on the character of the Church and its relationship to the kingdom. “The net scoops out of the waters not only good fish but also bad, and when the net is brought to shore, the fish must be sorted out”.19 It is therefore imperative to affirm that it may be extremely difficult to sieve

17 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, London: Harper & Row, 1946, 1952), 258.

18 Peter Jessen, The Revelation of God : Contours of Christian Theology (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2002),18.

19 Ibid., 261. 18

out regenerated persons from unbelievers in the present age, but the consummation of judgment will distinguish the godly from the tyrants. Nevertheless, an in-depth study of the kingdom will unravel the virtues of a true believer in the contemporary Church.

The dissertation will educate that the kingdom creates the Church and not vice versa. It is a dynamic rule of God, present in the mission of Jesus, challenged by men to respond, bringing them into new fellowship. Next, it will illustrate that it is the mission of the Church or disciples to witness the kingdom, unraveling kingdom principles to people of all nations.20 Furthermore, George Eldon Ladd declares, “The Church is the instrument of the kingdom. The disciples of Jesus not only proclaimed the good news about the presence of the kingdom; they were also instruments of the kingdom in that works of the kingdom were performed through them as through Jesus himself. They too healed the sick and cast out demons”21 (Mt. 10:8; Lk 10:17).22 For me, the 21st century believer must consciously avail himself to be used of God as an instrument in his kingdom. The Bible declares, “All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. So that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16).

The significance of this study will help to inspire pastors, evangelists, theologians, Biblical expositors, Seminarians, and lay people, who read this dissertation to adopt and adapt their messages according to Kingdom ethics and virtues. Engaging

20 Ibid., 264.

21 Ibid.,.264.

22 Ibid., 265.

in such fundamental ideologies will go a long way to lay a solid Biblical foundation, first for their Church members, and then use these beliefs to evangelize others. According to

Puedemann, “an evangelical educator must have more than a cultural transmission view of curriculum, yet be committed to transmitting content of scriptures. Brian Hill suggests that the motive for this should be elevated to glorify God and to lead to worship”23. Furthermore, “The evangelical must have more than a romantic, naturalistic learner-centered view of curriculum, be committed to life and experiences and growth of an individual. The evangelical has the task of bringing about change in the society.”24

Correspondingly, these kingdom ideologies will also constitute a firm pedagogical foundation for training up other people in righteousness since we live in a cosmopolitan world. It will methodically equip pastors and evangelists with sound biblical knowledge so that they will recognize and communicate Kingdom vision to their members.

Inductive conclusions drawn from data analysis will offer solutions and guidelines for action in the field of the kingdom of God. The work will be highly academic, which will form an inspiring and impressive resource base for higher theological education. It will prepare pastors to meet the spiritual as well as the intellectual challenges of their communities, and the societies around the world.

Moreover, the dissertation will address moral issues confronting the Church, the

Christian, as well as the unbeliever. Contemporary issues such as abortion, marriage and divorce, homosexuality, corruption, bestiality and drug addiction in the kingdom will

23 Pazmino Robert, Foundational Issues in Christian Education [Grand Rapids Michigan: Eerdmanns, 1988], 21.

24 Ibid., 21.

be addressed. Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee explicate that there is an explicit publication of abortion in the Didache, a very early handbook of Christian teaching and catechism. It states, “Do not kill a fetus by abortion, or kill a new born infant” (Didache

2:2)”25 U.S census statistics record that in 1986, 16 percent of known pregnancies ended in spontaneous abortion or fetal loss- and 22 percent ended in elective abortion

(U.S census bureau, statistical abstract, 2000 table 103).26 As at 1973, 18 million

Babies were exterminated by their mothers consent through the induced method. It is also recorded that Americans caused thirteen million abortions in the years 1972-1982.

It is known that 24% or one out of four bearing women had committed gruesome murder of a fetus. In 1982, almost ½ of all known pregnancies were aborted.27 And since 1973, over 43 million pregnancies have been aborted in the United States of America.

Worldwide statistics indicate that about 1.5 billion women in the world are of childbearing age that is between the ages of 15 and 45. Each year there are about 26 million legal and an estimated 20 million illegal abortions in the world. Worldwide, there are about 126, 000 abortions every day. Most abortions by far occur in the developing world.28

Marriage in the U.S.A is on the verge of collapse. Over 51 percent of all marriages in the Church end up on rocks. According to Divorce Guide, current divorce

25 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom of Ethics [Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003], 216.

26 Ibid., 220.

27 J. Kerby Anderson, Moral Dilemmas (Nashville,Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 1998), 4.

28 Pam Koerbel, A division of scripture presses publications [ INC, USA, Canada, England, 1986], 58.

statistics in America is estimated at 50%. Accordingly, The Americans for Divorce

Reform estimates that most probably, 40% or possibly 50% of marriages will end in divorce in the coming years if current inclinations persist.29 It is also documented that the divorce rate in America for first time marriage is 41%; the divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%; and finally, the divorce rate for third marriage is 73%.30

Scripture educates, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery” (Mk10: 11-12). Divorce and remarriage cause adultery in that the freedom to end one’s marriage in order to start another one can create vulnerability to the temptation to covet another man’s wife” (Ex 20).31 The dissertation will provide Biblical and evangelistic framework needed to tackle the cankerworm of divorce in the contemporary Church.

There is a continuous struggle over homosexuality in the Church. Research has proven that the number of homosexuals in the contemporary American society is on the increase. The dissertation will undoubtedly learn itself to providing solutions to this emerging perilous social behavior of the 21st century. According to 2000 census, total number of Gay Couples in America was 594, 391; the number of people in a couple was

1.2 million. The state of California was ranked the most couples with 92, 138. State with

29 http: www.divorceguide.com/USA/divorce information/divorce-statistics in the USA.html (Accessed October 23, 2011).

30 Ibid., 1.

31 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom of Ethics [Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003], 283.

the least Couples was North Dakota with 703. The highest concentration of Gay

Couples was Washington D.C constituting 1.29%, while the least concentration of Gay

Couples was North and South Dakota totaling 0.22%. Gay people make up 1-4 % of the population in most cities, but more are concentrated in metropolitan areas. New York,

NY had 47,000 couples; Los Angeles, CA recorded 12, 000; and Chicago, Il documented 10,000. The highest concentration by major Metropolitan cities was San

Francisco, CA 15.4%; Seattle, WA 12:9 %; and Atlanta, GA 12. 8%.32 It must be underscored that it has been a decade since the year 2000, and more people across the nation are yearning for gay marriages, an indication that there must be an upsurge in homosexuality in the contemporary America society. The Bible attests that

“homosexual behavior is forbidden as an abominations against holiness that engender divine wrath on the offender and danger to the entire community”33 “In 1Timothy, the discussion concerns the legitimate use of the law to condemn a wide range of flagrantly immoral practices among which homosexual is included.”34 The Dissertation will provide measures for the systematic treatment of homosexuality without condemning the addicted persons.

32 http://www.gaymarriageresearch.com/gay/facts-statistics 2011, (Accessed October 23, 2011), 1.

33 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom of Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 30.

34 Ibid., 308.

Methodology Focus

In treating this significant subject, I intend to lean heavily on previous research works done by other scholars. My primordial intention is to catalogue all virtues of the kingdom of God for sound doctrinal teachings in Churches. I will research books in

Fuller Theological Seminary Library that deal succinctly with the Kingdom of God.

This will give me the golden opportunity to deeply comprehend all Biblical and theological standards of the Kingdom of God and how to employ them properly in methodological endeavors in Sunday schools, in Churches, and in Evangelism. Both the

Old and New Testament Biblical concepts of the kingdom of God will be expounded on meticulously. I will limit this study to Biblical concepts of the Kingdom of God, even though there may be sporadic references to theological issues confronting the Kingdom of God in contemporary American society. The accounts and analysis of renowned works will provide evidence of the Kingdom of God, supplementing, and supporting

Biblical, theological, exegetical, and interpretive conclusions regarding the kingdom.

Using Los Angeles as a case- study, I will draw precise conclusion on the implication of the Kingdom of God to all believers. Some sample questionnaires on the

Kingdom of God will be distributed to Christians, especially pastors, and the clergy to collate their opinion on the subject matter. All these will be done to assemble their beliefs about the supreme God, the creator of the universe. The investigation will constitute a primary source for the production of data. Deductive studies have authenticated that the moral fiber of these communities is broken, and the Gospel compromised seriously with circularized standards. The questionnaires will form

bedrock of high standard analysis of data produced in order to draw logical conclusions on the findings. This will create a comprehensive roadmap, which will properly, empirically, and inductively arrive at conclusions highly relevant to the subject treated. I will contact the grading team of Newburgh Theological Seminary for further assistance in order to accomplish the task within the stipulated time. Undoubtedly, Old and New

Testaments study will be of a tremendous patronage for the study of The kingdom of

God and its implication to the 21st century believers.

I must stress that words and sentences quoted in Biblical languages such as

Hebrew and Greek will be transcribed and transliterated using a previous background in

Hebrew, Greek and linguistics. However, accents, diacritics, and complex vowels may be very difficult to transcribe but the nearest English sound will be used meticulously to avoid wrong transliteration and usage. These words and phrases will be written in italics to highlight them as forms of biblical languages. To facilitate the fullest comprehension of the proposed project treated for my readers, I will define some significant words and terms. For example, “the Kingdom of God” will learn itself copiously to the study. A kingdom is ruled or governed by a King. Therefore, “King”, and “Kingdom” will be delineated in biblical contexts using Hebrew and Greek lexical items.

Additionally, the dissertation will characterize some prominent names or appellations of God. There will be a conscious etymological study of the name Elohim since it portrays different semantic representations in dissimilar textual settings. It must be discussed to avert heretical presentation of the personality of God. The name

Yahweh that has undergone biblical wrangling and metamorphosis over the centuries

will also be elucidated properly for the readers. Several compounds of the name are instructive in describing God: Yahweh-Nissi “The Lord is my banner” (Ex. 17:15);

Yahweh-Maccaddeshem“ The Lord your sanctifier” (Ex. 31:13); Yahweh- Tsikenu“ The

Lord our righteousness” (Jer 23:6); Yahweh-shammah “ The Lord is there” (Ez 48:35);

Yahweh-Elohim Israel “ The Lord, the mighty God of Israel” (Jud 5:3; Is. 17:6); Yahweh-

El Gemolah- “ The Lord God of recompense” (Jer. 51: 56); Yahweh-Nakeh“The Lord who smites” (Ez 7:9); Yahweh-Rapha “ The Lord who heals” (Ex. 15: 22-26); Yahweh-

Jireh “ The Lord will provide”(Gen 22:14); Yahweh-shalom “The Lord our peace”

(Judges 6:24); Yahweh-tsebbaoth “ The Lord of Hosts” (Psalm 46:7, 11). Nevertheless, the dissertation will discuss only Yahweh, Yahweh-tsebbaoth “ The Lord of hosts” and Yahweh-Raah “ The Lord is my shepherd.”

Literature Review

Scholars, over the years have written and published a myriad of Books on the

Kingdom of God, focusing on interpretive, Biblical, and exegetical elements. G.R

Beastley-Murray in his work, Jesus, and the Kingdom, [1986] asserts that in the “Old

Testament, the coming of the Lord and the day of the Lord is the establishment of the

Kingdom. The expression “The Kingdom of God” does not occur in the Old Testament, nevertheless, references are made to the kingdom that Yahweh rules.”35 Bruce Chilton in his masterpiece, Pure Kingdom: Jesus Vision of God, [1996] affirms, “The Kingdom is well represented by a number of terms that are reflected to the root of word melekh

35 G.R Beastley-Murray, Jesus, and the Kingdom (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986),17.

“King” and “rule as king” malakh. The concept of kingdom was embedded in early

Judaism.”36 Bruce Chilton and McDonalds [1987] also elucidate, “The Kingdom is of

God whose claims are absolute, and it necessarily addresses itself to the people as a cognitive and ethical challenge at one and the same time.”37In a similar renaissance of the kingdom of God, James Luther Mays, Psalms Interpretation: A Bible commentary

For Teaching and Preaching (1994), declares,“ The subject of Psalm 24 is the kinship of the Lord. It speaks about the Lord’s sovereign rule, which constitutes liturgical act of identification.”38

In addition, the notion that the Messiah is a partaker in the ruler ship of the kingdom of God can be seen in most recent scholarly work. Jack Dean Kingsbury’s asserts that Jesus Presents himself to Israel by preaching (Mt. 4:23’9: 35) and the message he proclaims is the Gospel of the Kingdom, which is the basis for the messianic rule in the kingdom is worth discussing, [1986, 1988].39 C .Hassell Bullock’s work titled, Encountering the Book of Psalms has emphasized that Psalm 2 has laid the

36 Bruce Chilton, Pure Kingdom: Jesus Vision of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 25.

37 Ibid., 24,31

38.James Luther Mays, Psalms Interpretation: A Bible commentary For Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994), 119.

39 Jack Dean Kingsbury Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew as Story: (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Fortress Press, 1986), 61.

40 C. H. Hassell Bullock, Encountering the Book of Psalms. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, (2001), 61.

Messianic program for the ruler (2001).40 Similarly, C. Hassell Bullock asserts that there is copious evidence that the royal psalms are a watershed of the Messianic hope.

Seven refer to the “King”(melekh) (1,18,20,21,45,72, 89) while six of them

(2,18,20,45.89, 132) refer to the “anointed one” (Hebrew) Mashiakh, or English

“Messiah”. The term “the anointed one” occurs nine times in these eleven psalms, and twice in verbal form “to anoint” (2001).41 G.R Beasley-Murray states, “The Messiah is the representative of Yahweh in his Kingdom, in whom Yahweh is present, and through whom he acts. Representation is firmly embedded in the faith and institutions of Israel, applying to holy people such as the priests, prophets, and kings” (1986).42 Walter

Brueggemann reechoes an analogous sentiment by stressing that, “one can see exilic anticipations for the restoration of a valid public life, the very anticipations that the

Christian community has found embodied in Jesus of Nazareth. The coming king will be genuine righteousness (tsedaqah)” (1998).43 James Kallas incisively declares, “All three

41. Ibid., 172

. 42 G.R Beastley-Murray, Jesus, and the Kingdom (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986) ,22.

43 Walter Brueggemann, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), 207.

44. James Kallas, Jesus and the power of Satan (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1952), 118.

45 Stassen H. Glen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003, 35. .

synoptics agree that the ministry opens with announcement of the imminence of God’s rule: The kingdom of God is at hand” (Mk1: 15; Lk 4:43; MT 4:17), (1952).44 Stassen H.

Glen & Gushee P. David affirm, “Prophet Isaiah provides the context for Jesus’ proclamation of the coming of the kingdom as deliverance” (2003).45 Finally, Eduard

Schweizer reechoes, “The Kingdom has already come among those who see the acts of

Jesus. The kingdom of God has already been attested by the Beatitudes in Mt. 5: 3-48

(1975).”46

Opposition to the Kingdom of God and the rejection of the Messiah as the representative of Yahweh in his kingdom was embraced during the rise of formed criticism Formgeschichte (formed history) in the interpretation of the New Testament.

The proponents of the theory believed that the Sitz im leben (that is the original setting in the life of Jesus and in the context of his ministry) understanding was only attributed to the life of the early Church, and not to the life of Jesus. Consequently, the Gospel authors were never writers at all but compilers of traditions that had been adapted to their own communities. The first major opponent to the writings of the New Testament and the Kingdom of God was Martin Dibelius’s Die Formgeschichte (1919), revised in

(1934)47. Rudolf Bultman was more severe in his opposition to Jesus and the Kingdom

46 ibid., 35.

47Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1966), 287

48 Elwell A. Walter Robert W. Yarbrough, Encountering the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 1998, 2005), 172.

than Debilius in his work titled, The History of the Synoptic Tradition (1921), and revised in (1963).48 Elwell A. Walter & Robert W. Yarbrough explicate that Voltaire, (1694-1778) was one of many European scholars who cast doubts on the Bible’s trustworthiness during the enlightenment period. In doing so he refused the validity of the kingdom of

God (1998).49

Dennis P. Hollinger identifies Immanuel Kant as an antagonist of the Kingdom of

God. “Immanuel Kant, the eighteenth-Century German philosopher, who came to be considered one of the most influential thinkers of the modern times, is recognized as one of the opponents of the Kingdom of God. Kant claimed reason over divine revelation. He believed that the existence of God could not be philosophically demonstrated, though God and religious beliefs were a practical necessity to ensure moral living” (2002).50 Equally, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, assumed a dualistic standpoint of the interpretation of the kingdom of God. “He claimed that God had ordained the nation- state to guide us in politics, war, and economics. In our social responsibilities, we should not follow Jesus but the realities of German politics”(1980).51 Justin Martyrs in addressing his apology in about A.D 154 to emperor Antoninus Pius dualistically interpreted Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 22: 17-21: “Render therefore to Caesar the

49 Ibid., 172.

50 Ibid., 157

51 Dennis P. Hollinger, Choosing The Good ( Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 38.

52 Todt Heinz Eduard, kirche and Ethik, Diedrick Bonhoeffer S, Entscheidungen in den krisenjahren 1929- 33, In Krische: Festschrift fur Gunther Bornkamm. Tubingen: J.C B. Moher, (1980).

things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are God’s (RSV). “ Whence to God alone we render worship, but in other things we gladly serve you, acknowledging you as king and ruler of men.”52

On the contrary, Kohler declares, “The one fundamental statement in the theology of the Old Testament is this: God is the ruling Lord.” Martin Buber in a similar dimension states, “The realization of all embracing rulership of God is the proton and

Eschalon of Israel. It was Yahweh’s sovereign action on which the attention of the Old

Testament writers focused, and it was the manifestations of his sovereign power that called forth their worship”53 Essfeld argues that the concept of a King was known in

Israel in the earliest times since the term melekh “King” is fundamental to Semitic linguistic repertoire.

God is the supreme commander of the universe. He triumphs in every circumstance, and those who ally themselves with him will reign, triumph, and enjoy with him in his everlasting Kingdom. No matter how pernicious the enemy provokes persecution against believers, they cannot extinct the community of believers. Daniel authenticates that this has always been possible (Dan 1-12). Even though there is pervasive message about four great kingdoms, namely Babylonia, MODO-PERSI,

GREECE, and ROME, those kingdoms are temporary and cannot endure forever.

Ultimately, the Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth, also known as Jehoshua, Joshua, or

53 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom of Ethics: (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 128.

54 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus, And The Kingdom of God: (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eardmans, 1986), 17.

Jeshua in Hebrew meaning the deliverer or savior will usher in the eternal kingdom of the ancient of days (7:14).54

If this study is successful, we should be able to test the validity, the state, and function of the kingdom of God in the 21st century. According to Glen H. Stassen, David

P. Gushee in their masterpiece, Kingdom Ethics, the Beatitudes form spiritual substratum for the emulation of every believer since they constitute the cardinal virtues for the survival and growth of every generation of believers. But again, my dissertation will be the first cardinal mission for the kingdom of God in the 21st century- interpretively,

Biblically, and exegetically.

55 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology: Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 470.

CHAPTER 1

ETYMOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE NAMES OF GOD AND DEFINITION OF “KING” AND KINGDOM

Chapter one deals with etymological study of the names of God: (1) The exegetical and semantic analysis of the three principal names of God and how the usage of those names are paramount to believers, (2) the meaning of the names, Yahweh “ LORD”,

Yahweh- Tsebhaoth, “The Lord of Hosts”, Yahweh-Raah, “The Lord is my shepherd (PS

23:1), and (3) The definitions of terms such as melek, “king”, and (4) malkuth, “kingdom” in Hebrew, and basilia, “kingdom” in Greek. The chapter expatiates on reasons why it is supreme to give these terms their right Biblical renditions. A conclusion will be given in the last paragraph of this chapter. The major sections are as follows:

1. Etymological study, meaning and use of EL, Eloah, Elohim

2. Etymological study of Yahweh: Yahweh-Rapha, Yahweh- Sabbaoth, Yahweh-Raah

3. Definition of “ king” in Biblical Terms

4. Definition of “ the kingdom .” in Biblical Terms

Etymological Study, meaning and use of EL, Eloah, Elohim

El means the “mighty”, “strong”, and “prominent”. It has occurred more than 250 times in the Old Testament (Gen 7:1; 28:3; 35:11; Num 23:22; Josh 3:10; 2 Sam

22:31,32; Neh 1:5; 9:32; Isa 9:6; Ezek 10:5. “May God (El) almighty bless you and make you fruitful and increase your numbers until you become a community of peoples” (Gen

28:3). Hebrew semanticists and grammarians believe that El is linguistically equivalent to the Moslem “Allah.” However, the attributes of Allah in Islam are entirely different from those of the God of Hebrews or the Bible. Similarly, Elah is Aramaic form of “god.”

Elah occurs in the Hebrew Bible in Jer 10:11, which is Aramaic and is plural, “gods.” In the Book of Daniel, however, Elah is used of pagan “gods”, and of the true God in

Aramaic. It is also used in some sections of the Book of Daniel as plural “gods”.55 Since names are so important in our relationship with our superiors, compatriots and subjects, it is significant as ardent readers of the word of God, and devoted Christians to adopt and adapt names of God as we relate with him on daily basis. It therefore essential to fathom that anytime El is employed, the Christian is admonished to beware in his psychological impetus, spiritual might, and his mental capacity that he is dealing with the “ mighty” one or the “prominent one.”. Elohim is the common name for God. It is the plural of the noun El. Grammarians calls it the plural of majesty or rank, or abstraction, or of magnitude. Actually, it is explained as the plural form of Eloah, or as plural derivative of EL. The ancient Jewish and modern Jewish scholars concur with several modern scholars in deriving Elohim from El. Nestle agrees that the plural is carved out by artificial insertion of H forming word final syllable.56 Biblical scholars consider Elohim as a kind of affix signifying great size of El. Scholars thus, agree that in early Hebrew,

55 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology: Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota:

Bethany House, 2005), 470.

56 Lambert Dolphin, Names of God: Old Testament (The Hebrew Scriptures,or Teach), http://www.ldolphin.org/Names.html (accessed January 15, 2004), 1.

57 K. Knight &Nihil obstat, The Catholic Encyclopedia,Elohim, 1909, 2003:www.newadvent.org/cathen/05393a.htm/ (accessed January 15, 2004), 1.

the singular of the word forming God was El and its plural form was Elohim. It was only in recent times that the term Eloah was coined depicting Elohim a grammatically accurate communication.57 In biblical terms, Elohim is a Trinitarian plural form. The triune God is envisioned in the use of this plural form. Even though it is majestic plural, the noun is frequently used with singular verb forms and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular. For instance, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”

(Gen 1:1). The word class for Elohim is a noun and it is third person plural, but the verb form is singular, bara, “to create”, “to fashion”, “to produce”, “to generate” or “to regenerate.” Therefore, in the beginning, God the Father, God the Son, and God the

Holy Spirit created the heavens and the earth. The meaning of the majestic plural therefore is God’s unlimited greatness and supremacy. Elohim is the summation of the supremacy, the sovereignty, and the dominion of three Gods in one person whose redemptive power is demonstrated in God himself, Jesus Christ, the second person of the Trinity, and the supernatural working of the Holy Spirit, and the third person of the

Godhead.58

The Jews had three names for God, EL, Elohim, and Eloah. They also had the proper name of God as Yahweh, which occurs about six thousand times in the Old

Testament. The name Elohim is found 2570 times in the Old Testament. About 2300, it is used as a name for the true God. The other usages refer to false deities, Eloah 57

58 k.knight & Nihil Obstat, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Elohim, 1909, revised 2003.www.newadvent.org/cat hen/05393a.htm/(assessed January 15, 2004), 1. See Handworterburch, 12th Edition, 1895, PP. 41 Sq.

59 Ibid.,1.

times with 41 of them occurring in the Book of Job; 4 times in the Psalms, 4 times in the

Book of Daniel, 2 times in Hab; 2 in canticle of Moses in Deut 32; 1 in Proverbs; 1 in

Isaiah; 1 in par, and 1 in Nehemiah. El occurs 226 times, and Elim, 9 times.59 Some

French semanticists conjecture from Genesis 46: 3 as “the most mighty God of thy father” (KJM), and Ex. 6:3 “by the name of the almighty” that El replaces Yah in proper names and concluded that El was understood first to be the proper and personal name of God. El has been intensively used among all Semitic races as illustrated in (Gen 4;

18; 25: 13; 36:43). Elohim on the contrary is not determined in all Semitic races; only

Aramean has analogous form of the noun. Semanticists and Grammarians have suggested that the name Elohim must have been ushered into their linguistic repertoire after the descendants of Shem separated into district nations.60

The meaning of Elohim is “the strong one” or “the foremost one”, or “to be in front”. It also connotes, “the mighty one” or “to be mighty” and finally, “He after whom one strives” or “who is the goal of all human aspiration and endeavors”, “to who one has recourse in distress or when one is in need of guidance”, and “to whom one attaches oneself closely.”61 In the proper sense of the word, it denotes either the true God or the false God, and metaphorically, it symbolizes judges, angels, and kings. The Semites believe that the world is surrounded, penetrated, and governed by ELohim. A number also considers myriads of active beings, identical to the spirits of the savages, alive, and somewhat indissoluble from each other. They can be considered as a multifaceted

60 Ibid., 2.

61 Ibid., 2.

62 Ibid., 2.

totality. Some semanticists and anthropologists maintain that there is a trace of original

Semitic polytheism. The word implies the sum of the divine beings that inhabited any given place. F.C Baur in his work (Symbolic und Mythology, 1,304), and Hellmuth-

Zimmermann in his article (Elohim, Berlin, 1900) make Elohim an expression of power, grandeur, and totality. In conclusion, the name El is preceding to Elohim, and El is both a proper and a common name of God. El has its offshoot as Elohim, which must have denoted the one true God.62 In addition, Psalms 42-83 are commonly called “Elohistic

Psalms” because Elohim (God) occurs far more frequently than Yahweh ( LORD) in these Psalms. This signifies that in the chronological history of the psalms, it is possible that Elohim was analytically substituted for Yahweh perhaps for doctrinal raison d'être as accentuated in Psalms 14:2,4; 53:2, 4; and Cf. “I am God, your God” in Psalm 50:7, and “ therefore, God, your God” in Psalm 45:7.63 The equivalent of Elohim in the New

Testament is Theos, used most frequently to refer to God. It is mostly referred to one true God, even though sometimes it is designated to pagan gods. The significance of the use of the name is not farfetched. (1) He is the only true God (Mt. 23: 9; Rom. 3:30;

I Cor. 8: 4, 6; Gal. 3:20; 1 Tim. 2:5; and James 2:19. (2) He is unique in his character towards his chosen people (Mt. 6:24; John 17:3; Rom. 16:27). Because he is so unique, exhibiting love and care for his people, he makes a clarion call to us to lay our burdens on him. (3) He is transcendent (Acts 17:24; Heb. 3:14; Rev. 10:16). (4) He is savior and redeemer of humankind ( John 3:16; Rom. 8:32; 1 Tim 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 2:3; 2:13;

63 Ibid., .2.

64 James Luther Mays, Psalms Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994), 181.

and 3:4).

Yahweh: Yahweh-TSebhaoth- The Lord of Hosts; Yahweh-Raah-The Lord is My Shepherd (Ps 23:1)

It is the most habitually used name in the Old Testament, occurring about 5320 times. The name ostensibly emanates from root hawa, which signifies either existence or development. Actually, both names can be combined to mean that God is active and self-existent one. The revelation of the meaning of the lexical item was revealed to

Moses at the burning bush when God identified himself as eh-yeh ashar eh-yeh, "I am who I am (Ex. 3:14). The cardinal connotation is that God was present with the people of Israel. To be present meant that He was active in their midst. He was their providential God who protected them in all circumstances. He built a canopy of protection around them and they recognized him as their shield and rampart. They also recognized that his name was a strong tower that surpassed every military prowess of any earthly power or tyrant. Prior to the call of Moses, the name was used in (Gen 4:1,

26; 9:26) but its in-depth significance was revealed to Moses. In post-exilic times, the name YAHWEH was considered religiously sacred to be misrepresented. Thus, it has always been observed as the most distinctive name of God, the incommunicable name.

The Jews therefore forbade and were terrified using the name YAHWEH since they read Lev 24: 16 “Anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord must be put to death.

The entire assembly must stone him to death.” Because of this, the name was substituted for Adonai or Elohim. Epigraphically, the four consonants of the name

(YHWH) popularly known as Tetragrammatton were written but not pronounced.64 The name emphasizes God’s changeless self-existence. And for that matter it assures

God’s everlasting presence with his people. “And God said, I will be with you. And this will be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this Mountain” (Ex. 3:12). It is related with God’s power to work on behalf of His people and to keep His covenant with them, which was illustrated and confirmed by His work in their deliverance from Egypt (Ex. 6:6). He also showed his mighty acts by patting the Red sea for them to cross, escaping the valiant and mighty army of the tyrannical Pharaoh.

Yahweh-Tsebhaoth refers to the commander of the angelic hosts and the armies of God. Church fathers Oregin and Jerome considered the term tsebhaoth as an apposition65- “a syntactic relation in which an element is juxtaposed to another element of the same kind. Especially, between noun phrases that do not have distinct referents.”66 Notwithstanding this definition, scholars do not subscribe to this analysis.

They argue that this method of defining the appellation highly yields an intelligible sagacity. Three cardinal opinions are developed over the years to delineate the term

Tsebhaoth. The erudite first considered the use of the term in relation to the armies of

Israel. According to Luis Berkhof, the validity of this opinion is highly debatable and the

65 Lambert Dolphin, Names of God: Old Testament (The Hebrew Scriptures,or Teach), http://www.ldolphin.org/Names.html (accessed January 15, 2004), 1.

66 Luis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 49.

67 P.H Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 22. See Merriam Webster, Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary [Springfield Colorado: 1983], 97.Also See Encarta, A World English Dictionary and The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition: (Boston Philadelphia: Houghton Mifflin, 2000), 87.

alacrity of its usage is untenable. Most of the biblical passages quoted to support this idea have little or no reference to the name. Only three passages allude to this opinion particularly 1 Sam. 4:4; 17:45; 2 Sam 6:2. Scholars do not consider 2 Kings 19: 31 as an appellation of God. It must be emphasized that the plural form Tsebhaoth is used frequently for the hosts of the people of Israel while the army is often written in the singular.67

In describing the stars, the hosts of heaven, scripture regularly employs the singular and never the plural form of the lexical item. While the stars are aptly highlighted as the hosts of heaven, they are never designated the hosts of God.68 The next most important use of the name is applied to the angels of God, thus the interpretation of Yahweh-tsebhaoth in relation to angels is the most appropriate. The semantic representation of the term is often employed in conjunction with the angels of

God, particularly 1 Sam. 4:4; 2 Sam. 6:2; Is. 37: 16; Hosea 12:4-5; Ps. 80: 1, 4ff; Ps. 89:

6-8.69 Scripture identifies the angels as a host surrounding the throne of God, Gen

28:12; 32: 2; Jos. 5: 14; I Kings 22:19; Ps. 68:17; Ps.103: 21; Ps. 148:2; and Is. 6:2. In relation to the preceding statement, there are several divisions of angels, Gen 32: 2;

Deut. 33:2; Ps. 68:17. Nevertheless, this interpretation is in synchronization with the expression, which has no material essence, but is communicative of the glory of God as king, Deut. 33:12; 1 Kings 22:19; Ps. 24:10; Is. 6:3; 24:23; Zech. 14:16. In consonance

68 Luis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 49.

69 Ibid.,50.

70 Ibid., 50.

with these scriptures, Yahweh-Tsebhaoth is therefore king of glory, who is always encamped by angelic hosts as the supreme commander of the universe, working among his people, and receiving unfathomable glory from all His creatures and chosen people.70

The thesis therefore is angelic hosts surrounding the throne of God, worshiping and serving God in various capacities. I would want to state incisively that since some of these angels engage in spiritual warfare for God and on behalf of men, Yahweh-

Tsebhaoth is related intricately to imprecatory prayers even though the term Tsebhaoth is not directly cited in some passages. Jeremiah for instance made a powerful request to the Lord of hosts to send forth his armies in order to deliver him from tyrannical persecutors. He prophesied against the house of Israel and the house of Judah for rebelling against God and for burning incense to Baal after he had planted them firmly in the land. Hence, they plotted to assassinate him. His prayer was meant to provoke the army of God to assemble for the protection of the messenger of God. The appeal is addressed to the lord of hosts, and therefore an appeal to God’s regal power. Jeremiah reminded God that he “judges righteously” (Gen 18:25) and because he is such a righteous personality he must intervene in the cause of the faithful to administer justice and fairness for them at all times. Consequently in Jeremiah 11: 20, his petition to God for help is reduced to one construction. “Let me see your vengeance upon them, for to you I have committed my cause.” The verdict of the appeal was that God had prepared to punish the culprits, the men of Anathoth. Trying to silence or lynch a prophet in Israel

71 Ibid., 50.

was scandalous. Accordingly, they were to be punished for committing sacrilegious acts against a prophet of God.

“Therefore this is what the Lord Almighty says: I will punish them. Their young men will die by the sword, their sons and daughters by famine. Not even a remnant will be left to them, because I will bring disaster on the men of Anathoth in the year of their punishment” (Jer 11:22-23). Jeremiah’s prophetic message evoked hostilities against him. Jeremiah 18:18 is an epitome of how pervasive and massive the opposition is.

Similarly, Jeremiah did not relent in his appeal to God in the subsequent chapters. The following is an indication that Jeremiah was being confronted with a daunting task71.

“They said, come let’s make plans against Jeremiah.” They made a plot and devised a plan against him. His prophetic message was neither irrationalism, nor emotionalism, nor was it lack of spiritual maturity. It was God’s word spoken to them by a heavily anointed prophet. His message provoked a formidable and intentional opposition to silence him. Like Jesus who had stiff opposition from the priests, elders, and the scribes, Jeremiah’s opponents were recalcitrant priests of the communities, and the societies. They included obstinate and sinful people like the “wise”, and the false prophets. These represented the power structure of Jewish communities, and most communities in those days. They wanted to attack him with their tongue.72 “Come let’s attack him with our tongue and pay no attention to anything he says.” It was not a

72 Walter Brueggemann, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), 171.

73 Ibid., 172.

gossip or a slander. It was not just a squabble or a short quarrel; it was to summon him before the court of law with the intention of making him a public enemy. If he became a public enemy then, they could have the opportunity to stone him to death or lynch him in any form. Jeremiah’s response to the conspiracy is spelt out clearly in the verses 19-23 of chapter 18. “Listen to me o, Lord. Hear what my accusers are saying. Give them over to famine, hand them over to the power of the sword, let them be made childless and widows. Men be put to death, young men be slain by the sword, and a cry be heard in their houses. Do not forgive their crimes or blot out their sins from their sight. Let them be overthrown by the sword. Deal with them in the time of your anger.” In Psalms 35: 1-

28, David appeals to the heavenly king, the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent God as Yahweh- Tsebhaoth, the divine warrior and judge to come to his defense. David is attacked maliciously, so he prays to God for help and to make a woe of his enemies.

“Contend, O Lord, with those who contend with me; fight against those who fight against me…… May they be like chaff before the wind with the angel of the Lord driving them away……May their path be dark and slippery with the angel of the Lord pursuing them”

(Ps.35:1, 5-6). The term imprecations imply “curses” and suggest that the psalmists who faced imminent danger prayed that evil and misfortune would befall their adversaries or persecutors. Biblical scholars view it as a strong term and perhaps, not the most accurate one to use. They believe terms such as “psalms of anger”, or “Psalms of wrath” should be used instead. Scholars have identified seven psalms, which fall into this category. These are psalms 35, 55, 59, 69, 79, 109, and 137. Of these psalms 35,

69, and 109 are the fiercest, even though the others have some level of venom to frustrate the efforts of persecutors and adversaries. Metaphorically, their enemies were

visualized as “Lions” (35:17), or “snarling dogs who prowl about the city (59:6, 14-15).

Their ravenous and malicious temperament is highly manifested in the phrase, “blood thirsty men” (59:2). The psalmist recognized that those who orchestrated and perpetrated malevolence against him were his friends. He also observed that his accusers had no reason for perpetrating evil and malicious deeds against him. He declares, “For wicked and deceitful men have opened their mouths against me.”

(Psalm109: 2-3). As a result, the psalmist recognized he was suffering for the Lord’s sake. Even though men and women had forsaken him, he had dauntless faith in God.

He also discerned that the community had favor before him and he had a sense of belonging. There were some, who hoped for his vindication (35:27). In conclusion, curses were meant to pronounce judgment upon his enemies and in some cases the angelic hosts were requested to assist the supplicant.

In relation to the action of God against the enemies of a righteous person is show- cased in the first King of Israel who became the fiercest adversary of King David after Yahweh forsook him as king. On several occasions, he sought for the life of David.

He sent emissaries to lynch David in his house, and threw a javelin against him when

David sat playing the harp for him. He took swift action to destroy David, when he was informed of his location (1 Sam 23:7-8, 19-23; 24:1-2; 26:1-2). He also cast a javelin at

Jonathan, when he tried to marshal support for David (20:32-33). Saul also decimated the entire city of NOB when he found out that the priests of the city had shown benevolent attitude towards David loyalists (21: 1-9; 22:7-19). Under such a life threatening circumstance, David had the right to pray against his enemies. In all these traumatizing situations, David escaped death partly because of his prayer nature, and 44

partly because he was a righteous man in the eyes of God and his fellow Israelites.

Other scriptures that dilate on Yahweh-Tsebbaoth are (Isaiah 1:24; Ps 46:7, 11; 2Kings

3:9-12; Rom 9: 29; James 5: 24; Rev 19:11-16).

Since the Kingdom is governed by a loving and caring God, who showers his hesed (loving kindness) on us in enormous proportions, it is appropriate for us to discuss Yahweh-Raah-The Lord is My Shepherd (Ps 23:1). Comprehending the theological and Biblical implication of the 23rd Psalm will help provide spiritual as well physical panacea to famished souls and the emotionally troubled. It may even act as hope and confidence to the fatherless. Biblical scholars have unanimously concurred that the most appraised psalm used to illustrate the guiding nature of God is Psalm 23.

The Psalm begins with a metaphor. The employment of a metaphor unravels all that it connotes in regular verbal and written communication to the analysis of the subject matter to which it is intricately related. “A metaphor conveys more, and it speaks more powerfully than it is possible to do in a discursive speech. It draws on various experiences that evoke imagination of the reader. It is therefore decorative in connotation, capable of polysemy.”73 Thus, the commencement metaphorical expression is an indication that the entire psalm is composed in a metaphorical idiom.

That has firmly established the psalm as a poem exhibiting a powerful poetic endurance

74 James Luther Mays, Psalms, Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994), 116.

as a psalm of faith. The psalm therefore makes an intensive use of the term “shepherd” which becomes the nerve center of the psalm, and controls the entirety of it74.

The term “shepherd” was rich, and complex notion in the Israelite culture as the relationship of the shepherd to his flock was well accustomed in peasant communities.

The cardinal duties of the shepherd’s occupation were to protect, and provide for the flock. The shepherd pastured the flock, led them through stream ways, and right ways, and fended off predators. The sheep were his core responsibility and he accounted for their welfare and safety. Using “shepherd” as imagery, the notion transcends beyond activities of animal husbandry to embrace divine love, and protection for his people. The word makes a clarion call to the clergy to emulate the true meaning of divine care in order to shine out the glory of God to their members.75 In the Ancient near East therefore, the role and title of shepherd was designated to leaders as they discharged their responsibilities to the people. As a vocative, “shepherd” came to connote royalty.

God and kings of Israel were designated the title, “shepherds” of the people. As a result, in the kingdom, God is our shepherd, caring, providing, and protecting us always. God and kings are described with specific nouns (mace), the rod and the shepherd’s staff as authority of office. The shepherd’s rod is also used to guard and guide the sheep. It is also used to rescue and protect the sheep from ferocious wolves, lions, bears, and other ravenous animals. In the Pentateuch, the psalms and in the prophets, the LORD is called the shepherd of Israel, and his flock in ( Gen. 49:9; Ps. 28: 9; 74:1; 95:7; 100:3;

75 Ibid., 116.

76 Ibid., 116.

Jer. 31:10; Micah 7:14). The Lord made David his special shepherd (Ps.78: 70-72), and the kings of Israel were judged as shepherd and not as common people (Jer. 23:1-4;

49:20; Micah 5:4). Furthermore, the title has special meaning with the Lord’s leading and protecting his people in the wilderness (Pss. 77:20; 78:52-53; 80:10) and return from exile (Isa.40:11; 49:9-10).76

Mays further illustrates “The Lord is my shepherd” portrays all richness of theological, biblical, social and political background as well as the pastoral domain of the shepherd. The expression is an epitome of trust and commitment to God. It is a zenith of polemical trust as against human rulers and divine powers. The psalms entrusts life complexities, guidance, providence, and protection only to the one whose name is Yahweh.77 The expression, “I shall not be in want” in Psalm 23:1 is worthy of explication. For instance, during forty years wandering in the scorching and perilous desert, the Israelites lacked nothing (Deut. 2:7). David specifically declares in Psalm 34:

10, “The lion may grow weak and hungry, but those who seek the LORD, lack no good things.” Since the Lord is a good “shepherd, the psalmist declares, “He restores my soul” in verse three, which is a declaration of trust and total dependence on God. The restoration of life is significant for the survival, peace and tranquility of the individual, and the community as they offer thanksgiving to God (Pss. 30:3; 116:7; 80:3, 7; 44:25;

Lam. 1:11, 16-19). “He leads me in the path of righteousness” resonates with Pss. 5:8;

27: 11; 77:20). Correspondingly, Exodus 15:13 depicts, the Lord leading the people like

77 Ibid.,117.

78 Ibid., 117.

a flock to the holy pastures.78 The psalmist declares, “For you are with me” in verse four, is an archetype of salvation addressed to those who are in danger of perishing. For example, the road between Jerusalem and Jericho was dangerous to travel on. It was a haven for career criminals who waylaid travelers and robbed them of their possessions.

In some instances, some were maimed for life or killed. The parable of the Good

Samaritan illustrated in Luke 10: 25-37 constitutes a prototype example of walking through the valley of the shadow of death. It is in view of this that David, the writer of the psalm, says he will fear no evil because God is with him. The lord always declares to his people, “fear not, I am with you” (Gen 15:1; 26:24; Deut. 20:1; 31:8; Isa. 41:10, 13;

43:5). Additionally, “you prepare a table before me” is an imagery describing a feast, which was part of rituals of thanksgiving. In other words, in the Ancient near east covenants were often concluded with a meal expressive of their bond of friendship (Pss.

22:22-26; 116:13). Yahweh prepared a table before Israel in the wilderness (Ps.

78:19).79 The psalmist demonstrates that “Goodness”, the benefit of blessing, and hesed (loving kindness), which is the basis for unfathomable deliverance shall pursue him all the days of his life. Thus, dwelling in the house of God continually is an imagery of constant protection from the enemies who likewise pursue the worshipper.80

79 James Luther Mays, Psalms, Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching [Louisville Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994], 118. See Craigie, Peter C. Psalms1-50, World Biblical Commentary, Vol. 19.(Waco, Tex: Word Books, 1983), 207

80 Ibid., 118.

81 Ibid., 118.

In the New Testament the expression, “The Lord is my shepherd” is designated to Jesus Christ. In John 10:11, Jesus declares, “I am the good shepherd.” The disciples of Jesus saw him to be their shepherd and guardian in the kingdom of God (1 Peter

2:25; 5:4). Edmond Clowney, states, “Jesus is not only the good shepherd who gives his life for the sheep; he is also the seeking shepherd, the Lord who gathers his remnant flocks.”81 The chief shepherd, Christ will appear at the consummation and will bestow a crown of glory on all believers that will never be removed (1Peter 5:4).

Therefore, the coming of the great shepherd of the sheep (believers) must remind all pastors and the clergy of their daunting responsibility of caring for the flock. At his impending arrival, believers will possess their birthright that is theirs in Christ. They will receive a crown that will sparkle with divine glory. The Greek word translated crown describes any circlet, whether of gold, silver, laurel or flowers, and the expression, “that will never fade away” is translated as amarantinos signifying unsurpassable glory, beauty and honor. It is a symbol of perpetuity, and immortality.82 Mays in concluding his discussion on psalm 23 perspicaciously declares, “Jesus as the shepherd in David’s place, is the one who restores our souls, leads us in the path of righteousness,

82 Edmond Clowney, The Messege of 1 Peter (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1988), 123. The imagery of a seeking shepherd illustrated in John 10:10:16, and Luke 15:5-7is attested in the Old Testament promise in Ezekial 34 where God condemns and judges the false shepherd for not seeking the lost ( 34: 6, 8) and promises to seek and gather his scattered sheep ( 34:11-13). The verb is used in active mood to describe turning to the Lord in Acts 11:21; I Thess.1:9.

83 Ibid., 207.

accompanies us through danger, spreads the holy supper before us in the presence of sin and death, and pursues us in gracious love all the days of our lives.”83

Definition of “king” in Biblical Terms

A majority has held the view that Israel could not have been imagined as a king until the time of David. Essfeld argues that the concept of a King was known in Israel in the earliest times since the term melekh “King” is fundamental to Semitic linguistic repertoire. All Semitic people considered gods as melekhs “kings.” Essfeld asserts that the term melekh “king” implies more than a monarchical state. It can carry the semantic representation as “prince” or “leader” and “counselor”. Therefore, it was in existence before the Semites experienced the concept of malkut “kingdom.”84 Accordingly, Buber argues that the concept of melekh “king” was carved out of the nomadic lifestyle of the tribes, thus in such a milieu; the melekh was insurmountable God who guarded and guided his people through unknown dangerous areas. It was possible they had to plow their way through valleys such as the shadow of death to good pastures and needed to be shielded from venomous, pernicious, and relentless attack of predators and their enemies. Melekh was the only supernatural with supernatural abilities to protect them from their enemies. From the Patriarchs through to the Exodus and their circumnavigation in the wilderness, God undoubtedly was believed in this fashion.85

84 James Luther Mays, Psalms, Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994), 119.

85 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus, And The Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan:.William B. Eerdmans, 1986),18.

86 Ibid., 18. 50

The Exodus event and its aftermath were of critical importance for Israel’s understanding of divine interventions. Their deliverance from the bondage of slavery in

Egypt with outstretched arm, and with mighty acts of judgment, meant that God was sovereign in their affairs. In addition, their experience of theophany in the wilderness, their covenant with Yahweh at Mount Sinai, possession of the Promised Land, the revelation of his awesome name to Moses, and to the community of Yahweh people, constituted a reservoir of knowledge about the sovereign reign of God in Israel. The

Bible declares, “And God said to Moses, I am who I am” (Vayomer Elo-him el Moseh eh-yeh ashar eh-yeh (Exod 3:14).86 This text copiously elucidates that the concept of a king melekh and the sovereignty of God over the people of Israel was not new to the

Israelite community. Scripture further affirms, “Therefore, say to the Israelites: I am the

LORD, and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment. I will take you as my own people, and will be your God. Then you will know that I am the Lord your God, who brought you out from under the yoke of the

Egyptians.” (6:6-7).The text states empirically that the Israelites were in a theocratic

Kingdom, and thus worshipped him as the overlord of the house of Israel. As an excellent governor, he wielded authority and omnipotence to extricate his chosen people from perennial slavery under the Egyptians. The interpretation of the divine name “I AM” eh-yeh conveys more than God is the existent one; it connotes that the hesed, “the loving kindness” of God is with them. God was with his people always, and

87 Ibid., 18.

would act for them. In the theocratic state, God is the governor and the leader in the lives of the community of Yahweh believers. The kingship of Yahweh belongs to his sovereign acts on behalf of his people. “The Lord is king”, melekh (Psalm 93:1). “The

Lord is God” (Psalm 100:3). G.E. Mendenhall confirms that the Mosaic covenant was promulgated to galvanize the tribes into a viable community belonging to Yahweh (Ex.

19: 5-6). Buber in a similar tone declares that it was a Theo-political act; Israel came under the sovereignty and dominion of God and constituted a formidable unit of God’s people.87 Possession the Promised Land constituted an undeniable manifestation of

God working with his people. The Bible states, “There is no one like the God of

Jeshurun, who rides on the heavens to help you and on the clouds in his majesty. The eternal God is your refuge, and underneath are everlasting arms. He will drive out your enemy before you, saying, destroy him” (Deut 33:26-27). The conquests illustrated in the text are interpreted as continued series of Theophanies for the deliverance and establishment of his people.

Definition of “Kingdom” in Biblical Terms

The term “kingdom” is found 146 times in the Old Testament. A greater proportion of them refer to earthly political powers. Only a microscopic number implies the kingdom of God. For instance, Chronicles has one; Isaiah has two; while the book of

Psalms has recorded five; the book of Daniel on the other hand has a myriad of Old

Testament references to the kingdom of God, with seven. In the New Testament, the term basileia “kingdom” is used 161 times. It is employed three times in reference to the

88 Ibid., 18.

devil’s kingdom.88 Seven times of its usage denotes earthly kingdoms.89 It is also employed three times in a general sense.90 The root connotation of the word “kingdom” signifies “kingship”, or “a royal dominion or governance.” It involves a supreme authority of a ruler, the deeds of a ruler as well as the control of a territorial integrity of a realm.91

In the Old Testament, the coming of the LORD and the day of the LORD Yom ado-nay is the establishment of the “Kingdom” of God. The Hebrew word for kingdom is malkuth.

The expression “The Kingdom of God” does not occur in the Old Testament.

Nevertheless, references are made to the Kingdom of God that Yahweh reigns. The term king is applied to Yahweh forty-one times in the Old Testament. L. Kohler declares,

“The one fundamental statement in the theology of the Old Testament is this: God is the ruling Lord.”92 Martin Buber in a similar dimension states, “The realization of all embracing rulership of God is the proton and Eschalon of Israel. It was Yahweh’s sovereign action on which the attention of the Old Testament writers focused, and it was the manifestations of his sovereign power that called forth their worship.”93 A majority of

Biblical scholars and exegetes have affirmed that the central connotation of basileia, like its Hebrew equivalent, malkuth is the nonrepresentational or the vibrant idea of

89 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 459. See Mt. 12: 26; Lk.11: 18; Eph. 2:2.

90 Ibid., p. 459. See Mt. 24:7; Mk. 6:23; 13; 8; Lk. 21:10; Rev.11: 15; 16:10; and 17:12.

91 Ibid., p 459. See Mt. 12:25; Mk.3: 24; Lk. 11:17.

92 Ibid., 460.Cf. McCain, Alva j. Greatness of the Kingdom: (Winona Lake Ind: BHM, 1974), 17

93 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus, And The Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986), 18.

94 Ibid.,18.

supremacy, rule, authority, or sovereign control rather than the tangible idea of realm.94

“The twine that unites them [the two Testaments] together is the energetic perception of the rule of God”95 Malkuth can be both the reign of a king and the realm over which he reigns. Both malkuth and realm are indissoluble ingredients of a sole multifaceted thought. For instance, the author of Esther uses malkuth to designate both the reign to which Esther has come as queen (Esth 4:14) and the realm over which the husband was king (Esth 3: 6, 8)96. In addition, in the apocalyptic writings, and in the literature of the intertestamental period “the kingdom of God” is seldom found, but when it occurs, they refer to God’s reign, not to the realm over which he reigns, nor to the new age.

Likewise, in the psalms of Solomon (17:23ff), “kingdom” is not used of the messianic order to be established by the lord’s anointed; it is God’s rule.97 Malkuth therefore, is

God’s sovereignty, God’s rule. Actually, God’s rule de jure permeates universally through the heavens and the earth. It exists in the present only when men and women submit themselves to divine rule. However, God’s kingdom will be made manifest at the eschatological age, and then at that time, God will establish his sovereign de facto in all the earth. Thus, “the rule of God becomes a dynamic concept in its eschatological dimension when God will demonstrate his sovereign power on earth and will definitely

95 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 126.

96 John. Bright, The Kingdom of God (Michigan: Eerdmans, 1953), 123.

97 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus And the Kingdom: The Eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and Londdon: Harper and Row, 1964), 126.

98 Ibid., 126.

provoke his rule to illuminate the entire earth.98

In the New Testament, the kingdom of God supports empirically the abstract connotation of reign or rule. The Revised Standard Version renders basileia by “kingly power” in Luke 19:12, 15; 23:42 and by “kingship” in John 18:36. A second group of pronouncement about the kingdom of God is anchored in the consummation where the righteous will take full possession of the kingdom of God. In this context however, the kingdom of God is used interchangeably with the expression, “the age to come” (mark

9: 47: 10:23-25; 14:25; Mt. 11:8; Luke 13:28).99 The third dimension exhorts believers to seek the kingdom of God, since it is present among men and women. The most prominent among these sayings are Mk 10:15; where the kingdom is a desirable thing that men and women must receive; likewise in Mt.6: 33, and Lk 13:28 where Jesus exhorts all his disciples and the world to seek the kingdom. In a parallel statement, Mt.

11:12 and 12:28, the kingdom is portrayed as sovereign power of God and active in the world. The fourth dimension of the kingdom of God is the perception and representation of the kingdom as a present realm or a sphere into which men are now entering (Mt.

11:11; Lk 16:16; Mt. 21:31; 23:13; Lk 11:52).100

The kingdom is also described as a new era of salvation (Mt. 11:11-13). This passage is associated with one of the most important pronouncements of Jesus as the

99 Ibid., 129.

100 Ibid.,119.

101 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 119. Cf. S. Aalen, NTS, VIII, 1962], 215. Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew, Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, (1975), 166.

present dynamic activity of God in the world. Jesus undoubtedly declared John the

Baptist as a great prophet, and yet more than a prophet because he was an embodiment of prophetic fulfillment of Malachi 3: 1 (Mt. 11:10) which prognosticated a divine visitation. Prior to the great and terrible day of the Lord appears (Mal 4: 5-6),

Prophet Elijah would appear to ensure conversion of Israel in order to avoid a catastrophic divine judgment. Jesus asserted that the prophecy of Malachi was fulfilled in John the Baptist. John was Elijah sent to sternly warn Israel of the approaching day of the Lord (Mal. 11:14). A willing heart was a pre-requisite for the recognition of John the

Baptist as Elijah (Mt. 11:15). Not many recognized his prophetic role, thereby putting him to death. Nonetheless, Jesus declares that Elijah has come and something, which really belongs to the day of the Lord, is present. The restoration of all things (Mk. 9:12) is under way. This term apokathistemi-apokatastasis has come to have a technical meaning designating the promised of Israel to her promised blessings. Jesus reiterated that the day of restoration meant a spiritual metamorphism of the people in terms of repentance and forgiveness.101 It is also a dynamic concept in its eschatological context when God will cause his rule to appear in all the earth.” 102 Norman Geisler classifies the kingdom of God into three significant components: primarily, “there is a ruler with adequate authority and power; in the penultimate dimension, it connotes a realm of

102 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 129. See Jer. 16; 15; Hos. 11:11; Ezek. 16:55; Acts. 3:21. See also Oepke, TWNT, L. p.388. See also Jeremias, TWNT, and II, p. 940.

103 Ibid., 129.

subjects to be ruled; and finally, the actual exercise of the function of kingship.”103

It is paramount to emphasize that there are several locations in the New

Testament outside the Gospels where basileia implies reign and not realm. One of the apocalyptic writings in the New Testament expatiates on ten kings “who have not yet received royal power (basileia), but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour.”

(Rev. 17:12)104 Basileia is also used undoubtedly of a society of men; the redeemed are called a “kingdom” because they will one-day reign with Christ in his kingdom

(Rev.5: 10). The Disciples of Christ are called a kingdom because they will participate in the royal reign. When the kingdom of the world is passed over to Christ, the rule exercised by men will be arrogated to Christ and “he shall reign forever and ever.” (Rev.

11:15). Unquestionably, there is a clarion announcement in the voice proclaiming the consummation (Rev 12:10).105 Similarly, Paul’s message delivered on the kingdom of

God was a tour de force. At the consummation, Christ will hand over the kingdom to

God the father where Christ must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

Christ is to reign, to exercise kingly authority, and defeat every enemy including the last enemy, death (1 Cor 15:24-23)106.

104 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology: Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 460.

105 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism [New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964], 130. Cf is revelation 17:17 where God overrules all the plans and intrigues of the evil. Although evil is pervasive in this present age, the new earth will never experience sin.

106 Ibid., 130.

107 Ibid.,130.

Conclusion

We have critically examined the names of God, and most scholars define the proper name of God as supreme and infinite personal being, the creator, and supreme commander of the universe to whom man owes allegiance, obedience, tribute, and worship. Actually, he is the giver of life and the sustainer of the heavens and the earth.

He showers his manifold blessings on both the righteous and the wicked. For that reason man is obliged to venerate him and uplift him in every circumstance. His sovereignty and dominion over the earth and all that it contains must deepen our veneration of him. He preserves all his creatures, is active in all that happens in the world, and directs all things to their appointed time. We have also discovered that

Elohim implies a generic name of various identified beings, in polytheistic worship, divine attributes are applied consciously to, and divine worship enforced. The name in several other contexts refers to an idol as an icon or an abode of a god. Yahweh-

Tsebhaoth is illustrated to mean angelic hosts who either, congregate to worship God or become divine emissaries to undertake activities for humankind. Thus, imprecatory prayers are intricately associated with the notion of this appellation as Jeremiah, David and many others had to wade through waters of life as they faced stiff opposition from individuals and the public. The antidote for their public acrimony in Yahweh’s kingdom was to employ swiftly the tool of imprecatory prayer. Additionally, the Hebrew word, melekh “king” is analyzed seriously because it is so significant to the definition of the kingdom of God. The Hebrew word for kingdom is malkuth, and even though the term

“kingdom of God” is not directly expressed in the Old Testament, the working of God amongst his people authenticates his presence in his kingdom. The Greek equivalent 58

term for kingdom is basileia. It denotes world kingdoms and powers or the kingdom of

God where believers reign with Christ.

CHAPTER 2

COVENANTS, THEOPHANY, THE MESSIAH, ROYAL AND TORAH PSALMS, GENTILE AND PROSELYTE BELIEVERS AND LIGHT OF THE KINGDOM

Chapter Two discusses the kingdom of God in the Pentateuch since the patriarchs constitute formidable spiritual bedrock for the nation of Israel and the kingdom of God. It unravels the Abrahamic covenant and its basic tenets to the community of Yahweh people. The Land Promised to Abraham’s descendants as well as the Mosaic covenant are deeply expatiated on, showcasing abundant blessings associated with the covenant. Besides, the Davidic covenant, theophany in both the Old and New Testament are given an in-depth study. The messiah as the representative of

Yahweh in his kingdom in the Old Testament is elucidated properly. The significance of the psalms in the Messianic kingdom, especially the royal and the Torah psalms are also expatiated on for my readers. Homogeneously, Gentile, and proselyte believers in

Deutro-Isaiah as well as the light of the kingdom of God in Isaiah are illustrated in this chapter.

Major sections include the following: (1) Abrahamic Covenant, ( 2) The Land, the Mosaic covenant, and theophany (3) Davidic covenant, (4) The Messiah is the representative of Yahweh in his kingdom, ( 5) Royal, Torah Psalms and the Messianic

kingdom, ( 6) Gentile, and proselyte believers in Deutro-Isaiah, ( 7) The light of the kingdom of God in Isaiah.

Abrahamic Covenant and the Kingdom of God

In the Beginning of creation, it was a meticulous plan of God to establish a kingdom through Adam and Eve. Nevertheless, their demise in the Garden propelled

God to choose Abraham to be the father of the Hebrew nation. Thus, God’s sovereignty on earth began when Abraham submitted himself to divine rule. George Eldon Ladd declares in his book titled, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical

Realism [New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, (1964) ,“Before our father Abraham came into the world, God was, as it were, only the king of heaven; but when Abraham came, he made him king over heaven and earth.”107 The significance of

Abraham in the kingdom of God cannot be glossed over. Abraham is mentioned 42 times from Exodus to Micah, and 75 times in the New Testament. He is mentioned 7 times in the Gospel of Matthew, 9 times in the Gospel of Mark, 15 times in the Gospel of

Luke, and 11 times in the Gospel of John. Abraham is also described 8 times in the Acts of the Apostles, 9 times in the Book of Romans, 9 times in 2 Corinthians, 9 times in

Galatians, 10 times in the Book of Hebrews, 2 times in James, and finally 1 time in

1Peter.108

According to the Old Testament, the history of the Israelites began when God

108 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 127.

109 Senior Pastor, www.smithvillechurch.org/html/abraham, (accessed November 10, 2011), 1.

called Abraham and sent him from Mesopotamia to the Land of Canaan to become the ancestral father of God’s people. Abraham was to salvage humankind from condemnation to hell because of the fall of Adam and Eve. He was designated to spread the message of redemption to the entire world. Consequently, Abraham became the father of the Hebrew people. Genesis 12 commences the history of the chosen people of Yahweh, starting with the Abrahamic covenant when the Lord said to Abram, “ leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you.” [1] I will make you into a great nation and [2]I will bless you, [3] I will make your name great, and [4] you will be a blessing, [5] I will bless those who bless you, [6] whoever curses you I will curse and [7] all peoples on earth will be blessed through you”

( Gen 12: 1-3). [8] God also promised Abraham innumerable descendants (12: 7; 13:14;

15:4-7; 17:4-7, and [9] the treaty would be instituted with them (17: 7, 9, 21). The

Abrahamic covenant encompasses the following significant elements: (1) It is unconditional (“I will bless you”). (2) It is national (I will make you into a great nation”).

(3) It is geographical (involving “the [Holy] Land”). (4) It is perpetual (“to you and your offspring”). (5) It is international (“All peoples on earth will be blessed through you”)109

Consistently, Genesis 17:1-8 is the focal point of the Abrahamic materials. It is the centerpiece in which all the important aspects of Abraham’s life come together. God changed his name from Abram to Abraham at the age of ninety-nine. He changed

Sarah’s name from Sarai to Sarah. He was now to be a “Father of many nations”. A change in name signifies a new reality, a changed status before God. God changed

110 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Thing (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 501.

Saul to Paul, Simon to Peter, and Jacob to Israel. Sarah at this point was assured that despite her senile age of 89, she was going to conceive and give birth to a bouncing baby boy within a year.110

To reemphasize the working of God with Abraham, God signed a covenant

(berit) with him in this chapter. The term berit occurs thirteen times in 22 verses (17:1-

22). It is abundantly clear that God had established a unique, permanent, and binding relationship with Abraham. Having indicated this, Abraham who is an epitome of biblical character with unflinching faith in God illustrates Christian Doctrine of conversion. The expression, “walk before me and be blameless” highlights the demand of piety, and devoutness throughout the life of Abraham. Certainly, Noah and Enoch are considered devout because they walked before God. Be blameless (tamiim) may be considered to be an extreme demand. In spite of that, Abraham is expected to emulate Noah’s moral perfection. Walking before God “so that “I will confirm my covenant between me and you”, actually the word “confirm” could also be translated as “put” or “give” natan, which is used only here and Num. 25:12 with the object covenant.111

In Chapter 22, Abraham in total obedience to the command of God offered to sacrifice his only son, Isaac to God. Just as Jesus offered his life vicariously for humankind, so did Abraham offer his only son magnanimously to Elohim. Nevertheless,

God miraculously provided a ram to be sacrificed in place of Isaac. This event was the climax of Abraham’s spiritual journey. He had proven faithful to God from Ur to Haran to

111 Ibid., 503.

Moreth and the Negev, and now at Morlah. In Gen. 22:17-18 several of the covenant blessings are repeated here, including (1) God’s promised blessings to Abraham, (2)

God’s manifold blessings on his descendants, (3) God’s multiplication of his offspring,

(4) God giving his descendants the Promised Land, (5) God blessing all nations through

Abraham.112 In Gen. 26:3-5, Abraham’s covenant is confirmed with his son Isaac.

Several significant features of the covenant blessings are repeated to Isaac: The land, the blessing, the descendant blessings, the multitude of descendants, and the blessings of all nations.113 The Kingdom of God is made manifest in the miraculous lifestyle of

Jacob. Through the favor and blessing of God, Isaac and Rebecca had twin sons,

Jacob and Esau. Esau was the older son who was positioned strategically by birth to inherit his father blessings. He however lost his rightful heir of the Abrahamic covenant promises to Jacob through lack of spiritual and intellectual judgment. Jacob out clashed his brother in a trickery culinary game to assume an admirable position in life. This phenomenon was common in the Old Testament as in the case of Isaac and Ishmael,

Ephraim and Manasseh, Moses and Aaron, David and his brothers. This is an indication that seniority has so little to do with our commitment, devotion, and loyalty to God.

Jacob implies “supplanter” or “cheater”. Having cheated his brother he fled for his dear life to Haran fearing a virulent, vicious, and venomous attack from him. On his heart-throbbing journey to Haran, he had a dream that confirmed that he was part of the live wire of the patriarchal covenant (Gen 28:10-22). God reechoed his covenant

112 Ibid.,, 504.

113 Ibid, 504.

promise to Abraham by informing Jacob that he was going to give him the Promised

Land, and he would become a father of many nations and that God would bring them back from Egypt to the Promised Land (Gen. 46:3-4). Additionally, Jacob, his son

Joseph and their descendants will increase, and they and their descendants will be given a prosperous land (Gen. 48: 3-4).114

The Intrinsic worth, supplications, intercessions of “fathers” were so paramount in the contemporary Judaism. The patriarchs guaranteed the covenantal grace that God had bestowed upon Israel. This attitude is held in high esteem since we are dependent on the blessings of the Lord. It is only God’s faithfulness that sustains our lives. Without distracting the assurance of the election itself, God is capable of raising up “children” of cause who are spiritual giants to unite with Abraham in his kingdom.115 God’s elect are elucidated profoundly in Romans 9:7-33; Gal 3:7; 4:22ff; and most overpoweringly deliberated in Gal 3: 16. In addition, Gal 3: 29 states, “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”116 The enigmatic proposition of 2 Esdras 6:8 that Israel’s genealogy will only go from “ Abraham to Abraham” is postulated to depict that at that era a new crop of people will be raised up for Abraham by God. Paul nevertheless, emphatically declares in Rom 4:17 that God’s free creative

114Ibid, 504.

115 Ibid., 504.

116 Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew ( Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975), 50.

act will bring into being what does not exist.117

Paul in Gal 3: 6-14 vehemently argued against the wrong doctrine provoked in the Church by disgruntled Jewish preachers who insisted on the circumcision of

Abraham (Gen 17: 10, 14). However, in Abraham all nations would be blessed who become part of the kingdom of God (Gen 12:3). The Abrahamic promise is absolutely independent of circumcision, so that in offering the Spirit of God to uncircumcised

Gentiles, through faith in Christ, God is undoubtedly fulfilling his promise in Abraham, a man whose faith was reckoned as righteousness (Gen 15:6). Inheritance from the promises does not depend on the law, which came 430 years after the promises to

Abraham. Abraham’s righteousness came by faith, not by the law.118 While Hagar, the slave woman does not represent the descendants of believers, but the enslavement of the covenant of the law given on Mount Sinai; Sarah the free woman, represents the heavenly Jerusalem, and the covenant of God’s promise to Abraham. She is the mother of all who are set free in Christ Jesus.119

For example, Abraham has become a formative part of Paul’s understanding of

God’s plan. During Paul’s era, the Jews would have considered Abraham as their ancestor, but for Paul, he is undoubtedly “the father of all of us” who consciously share

1117Ibid., 50.

1118 Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 472. In Romans 3:28, Martin Luther introduced an adverb not found in the Greek “only through faith” or “through faith alone”. The lexical items sola fides had existed in Latin Church writers prior to the emergence of Luther as a theologian. However, his addition in Romans elucidated the theological and Biblical contrast with James 2:24 “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.”

119 Ibid., 472.

his faith (Rom 4:16).120 Appealing to the example of Abraham in Gen 15:6, the author of the epistle of James asserts, “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). While Paul argues that observance of ritual works prescribed by the Mosaic Law, especially circumcision would not justify the Gentile, the writer educates that this thesis is addressed to people who are already justified and are a redeemed of the Lord. Intellectually, they believe in God but have failed woefully to translate their faith into practice. Thus, James is insisting that their works {not ritual works prescribed by the Mosaic Law but behavior that reflects love) must correspond to their faith, an admonition that Paul would agree with.121 James is exhorting all believers that having surrendered to God through faith in Christ; they must back it up with positive actions of kingdom principles. Failure to exhibit righteous deeds in the kingdom of God demonstrates a dead faith in God.

120 Ibid., 567.

121 Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 733. We have a myriad of passages in the Pauline heritage where “works” is used positively to demonstrate good works in general, e.g., 1Thess 5:13; Rom 13:3; Eph. 2:10. See Gal 5:6 where “faith expressing itself through love”. I Cor. 13:2-3 “I f I have faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing”; Rom 2:13, “It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law”. Paul also insisted on obedience in Rom 6:17; 16:19-26; 2 Cor. 10:6; Phlm 21. These are a confirmation that Paul believes in the positive imperative recorded in James 2:24.

122 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Thing (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 501.

The Land, the Mosaic Covenant and Theophany

Deuteronomy 28:8-13 is a catalogue of unconditional Mosaic blessings. God reminds the people through the versatile leader, Moses of the promise made to the patriarchs that he would bestow upon them and their descendants the Promised Land.

Unearthing their manifold blessings on this land anchored in total obedience to the commands of God. In Joshua 1: 2-6, God catalogued all the blessings of the covenantal promise in a form of a Holy Land. Notwithstanding the promise, they had not yet possessed the entirety of the land and had not yet received the unfathomable blessings in it. Possession and being blessed were highly restrictive on their acquiescence of the

Mosaic covenant. Thus, Joshua 1:7 states, “Be careful to obey all the law my Servant

Moses gave you.”122

Additionally, the Lord gave all the land he had sworn to the patriarchs to the

Israelites. He also gave them rest on every side, just as he had promised them through their Forefathers. The Lord also handed all their enemies to them. None of his promises to the house of Israel failed (Joshua 21:43-45). Consequently, 1 Chronicles 16:15-18 declares, “He remembers his covenant forever, the word he commanded, for a thousand generations, the covenant with Abraham, the oath he swore to Isaac. He confirmed it to Jacob as a decree, to Israel as an everlasting covenant: To you I will give the land of Canaan as the portion you will inherit.”

Moreover, Jeremiah 25: 9-12 educates that the alienation of Israel from the

Promised Land was regarded as temporary. She would return after seventy years in

Babylonian captivity. The word olam in Hebrew translated as “forever” or “everlasting” does not connote an unlimited time future, rather it signifies a conceivable future, and that future is often left for God’s transformative accomplishment. Consequently, the reference to seventy years saps out the venom in olam, “forever”. It suggests that divine wrath is not final and is not to perpetuity. God in the end judged the empire harshly because of the “iniquity” of Babylon and the remnants returned to the Promised Land.123

This prophetic pronouncement is reechoed in Ezekiel 37: 21-25; Daniel 9:2; and Amos

9: 14-15. These passages are predictions that God will fulfill his land- promises to

Abraham’s descendants.124

We would want to deliberate on the Mosaic covenant and its implication to the

Israelites in the kingdom of Yahweh. “The Israelites experienced the kingdom of God by obedience to the law. Daily, they faithfully repeated the shema, “to hear,” which was a liturgical prayer consisting of three scriptural passages (Deuteronomy 6: 4-10; 11:13-21, and Numbers 15:37-41). The scriptures were recited twice daily by Jewish males to affirm their faith in Yahweh. The prayer was regarded as a repeated taking upon oneself the yoke of the sovereignty of God.”125 Whenever a Gentile was converted to a Jewish

123 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things: (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 505

124Walter Brueggemann, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), 222-223.

125Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 508.

proselyte, and adopted the law as a way of life and obedience to God, he did so in taking upon himself the sovereignty of heaven.126 Consequently, the covenant Moses received at Mount Sinai was meant to govern the nation of Israel. Connoisseurs of the

Old Testament believe that the Sinaitic covenant was anchored in the Ten

Commandments “Decalogue” (Ex 20:1-17). The Bible describes them as “words” (Dt

10:4) because they are more like ten principles for living rather than laws. Exodus chapters 21-23 are called the “Book of the Covenant”. It was also referred to as casuistic law in the ancient near East.127 As a group of people who sojourned in the kingdom of God, they were obliged to obey the Decalogue and other commands (Ex.

21-23). This formed a formidable relationship between Yahweh and the Israelites. The terms of the covenant for the Israelites in the kingdom were not designated to punish them but as a demonstration of grace and love for them. The Torah “law” served as a seal on that relationship. The law was a positive expression of God’ love for his people128 God therefore, did not expect them to violate the very tenets of the Decalogue and the Torah. Breaking them willingly culminates into dire consequences. God’s desire was “a priestly kingdom and a holy nation” that he could be in their presence always

(Ex. 19:12). The purpose of the Exodus from Egypt, and the giving of the covenant, and the instruction to construct the covenant were for God to dwell in the midst of his

126 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 127.

127 Ibid., 127.

128 John H.Sailhamer, The Pentateuch As Narrative (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1992), 283.

people.129 It is in total obedience to the commandments (Torah) of God that God’s presence (panim) is realized and fathomed. God’s way of living in the earliest Judaical community was for them to circumcise their hearts. Circumcision of the heart was to be realized in their deeds rather than their thinking. "The LORD your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendant so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live" (Deut 30:6). Obedience to God in the theocratic kingdom engenders unfathomable prosperity (Deut 30:1-10).130

From the very inauguration, the Mosaic covenant was provisional in perspective.

It was a contract enacted on the same legal sphere as the suzerain-vassal treaty of the times. It encompassed the following: (1) Identity of the king (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 1ff). (2)

Historical relationship between king and people (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 1:6-4:49). (3)

Stipulations-laws of the king (Ex. 20-31; Deut 5-26). (4) Blessings and curses (Lev. 26;

Deut. 27-30). (5) Witnesses (Deut. 4: 26; 30:19; 31: 28). (6) Ceremonial meal (Ex. 24:9-

11). Filing of the treaty (Ex. 25: 16; 40:21; Deut. 31: 25-26). From the following passages, it is abundantly clear that the Mosaic covenant was bilateral. God put a demand on Israel to obey his commandments as a condition for being “ Kingdom of priests and a holy nation ( Ex. 19: 4-6) and the people in unison agreed, “ we will do everything the Lord has said” ( v.8).131

129 Ibid., 473.

130 Ibid., 473.

131 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 512.

According to Norman Geisler, the pictorial presentation of the blessing was earthy and transient, consisting of the land the Lord had promised them, a heritage in it, and plenteous offspring in it, divine healthiness, and several other fundamentals of the covenantal blessing.132 Some of them were: (1) Blessing of Israel (Lev.26: 4-12; Deut.

7:13-15; 28: 3-12). (2) Multiplication of Israel (Lev. 26: 9; Deut. 6: 6: 3; 8:1; 28:11). (3)

Give Israel the land (Lev. 26: 5; Deut. 6:3; 8:1; 28:11). (4) Making Israel a great and invincible nation (Deut. 7:14; 28: 1, 3). (5) To be Israel’s God, and they his people (Lev.

26: 11-12; Deut. 7: 6-10; 29: 9-10). (6) Finally, it was to corroborate his covenant with

Israel (Lev. 26: 9).133 Most of the promises enacted in the Mosaic covenant were already part of the Abrahamic covenant, and hence were incorporated here. They and their offspring, crops, livestock, calves, and wielding the military prowess to defeat their enemies constituted a significant part of their blessing.134

It must be accentuated that the covenant was temporal in nature. The cardinal reason pertaining to the evanescence of the covenant was that it succinctly involved sacrifices pointing the way to fulfillment of the promise in Christ.135 Consequently, in

Jeremiah 31:31-34, God promises a new covenant, a new relation, offered, given and firmly established by God. The old covenant enacted at Mount Sinai was resisted

132 Ibid., 512.

133 Ibid., 512.

134 Ibid, pp. 512-513.

135 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things: (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 514. See 1 Cor 5:7 exhorts all believers to “rid themselves of every evil that they may appear to be what they profess to be-new creatures in Christ, walking in newness of lifr, keeping the true and spiritual Passover, for Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed for us.”

severely until it was abrogated. However, the new covenant will not be resisted and abrogated because the commandments will be written in their hearts. Under the auspices of the new covenant, Israel will practice absolute obedience to God. There will be genuine solidarity, expressed in the covenant formulary. There will also be full knowledge of Yahweh. There will be shared access to the knowledge of Yahweh, and all newness is possible because Yahweh has forgiven through Christ.136In addition,

Norman Geisler reiterates that the old law is abrogated in order to usher in the new covenant in Christ Jesus. The following scriptures are archetypes of biblical texts that illustrate the blessings of the new covenant that all believers receive through the preaching and vicarious death of Jesus Christ, Heb. 8: 7, 13; Rom. 6:14; Rom. 7:1-4;

10:3-4; Gal. 3: 17-25; Gal. 4: 1-7; 4: 21-31, 2 Cur. 3:7-11; Col. 2:14, 17; and Heb.

7:12).137

It is imperative to dilate on theophany in the Old Testament because this dissertation acts as a catalyst for all-embracing kingdom ideologies in the Twenty-First century. Actually, some see theophany as a dream, and yet others consider theophany as hallucination. In opposition to these two schools of thought, theophany is described as a dramatic fashion in which the sovereign God makes manifest his glory in the

136 Walter Brueggemann, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Williams B. Eerdmans, 1998), 294. Brueggeman comments that the exhaustion of punishment and the intrusion of forgiveness is expressed in Isa.40: 2. Knowledge grows out of forgiveness. And forgiveness remains incredible miracle that wipes out time, establishes time, and illuminates time.

137 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 516.

presence of his congregation, which most scholars argue is theophanic appearance.138

Julius Morgenstern declares, “The natural form in which Yahweh was thought to reveal himself to mortal eyes.”139 James Barr believes that “It is the theophanies, where God lets himself be seen”.140 He further authenticates that the appearances in human form, their relation to the angels of God, the glory, the presence (panim) of God, is imperative for the fullest comprehension of anthropomorphism in the Old Testament. He declares,

“There is a real attempt to grapple with the form of his appearance.”141 Westerman on the contrary, defines theophany as “a coming out of a place for action among men and a coming to a place to speak to them” Hence, “coming out” he calls “epiphany” and

“coming to a place to speak to them he calls “theophany.”142 In summation, theophany is defined as the supernatural appearance of God to men in order to communicate divine truth to them. In his appearance, envisioning the physical appearance of God is practically impossible.143 E. Jenni postulates three archetypes of appearances, critically employing the verb “to come.” In the first instance, Revelation Meetings is recognized as theophanic expression in which, God comes to converse with man, whether directly or through a messenger as in (Judges 6: 11; 13:6ff). Revelation encounters in a dream are intensively illustrated as theophanic manifestations (e.g. Gen 20: 3; Num. 22:9). It

138 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus, And The Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan :William B. Eerdmans,1986), 4.

139 Ibid., 4.

140 Ibid., 4.

141 Ibid., 4.

142 Ibid., 4.

143 Ibid., 4. 73

could also be fathomed as a supernatural encounter at midnight (I Sam 3: 10). The

Second most significant aspect of theophanic revelation is the coming of God in cultic events. This is in relation with the worship of God (Ex. 20:24) is reflected in praise such as (Psalms 24, and 27: 4).144

In consonance with Psalms 24, and 27, the initial theophanic visitation at Sinai reflects a theology of a relationship of God to his world and to his people. God is transcendent above the earth, and yet he comes in theophanic forms to visit his people, to bless and to judge. The shaking of the earth when God comes reflects his glory, majesty, and utter dependence of the creation upon the creator.145 The Third most important aspect of theophanic manifestation is the coming of God for judgment and salvation (Judges 5:4-5; Deut 33:2; Psalm 68: 7-8; Ex.19: 20).146 Nevertheless,

Scriptures declare empirically, that God communicates to his people generally without granting a vision of himself, so that they should be careful not to confuse an image with the reality of God (Deut 4: 15-20). Another important question to pose is, are there theophanic appearances in the New Testament? While others may argue for theophanic appearances only occurring in the Old Testament, there is copious evidence that some occurrences in the New Testament may be considered as Theophanic orchestrations.

For instance, prior to the call of Paul he was vigorously engaged in the persecution of the community of God (Gal. 1:13). He journeyed around Palestine organizing hostile

144 Ibid., 5.

145 Ibid., 5-6.

146 Ibid., 6- 7

activities against believers. As he approached Damascus in one of his notorious journeys, he was struck down by light and a voice came from heaven saying, “Paul,

Paul, why do you persecute me?” (Acts 9: 3-4). The event actually took place about noon (Acts 22:6). Paul refers to the incident in Galatians 1:16 as revelation, and elsewhere, he insists that the risen Christ had appeared to him. The Lord appearing to him is described aptly as theophanic in nature systematizing of divine will and mandate and not a physical relationship. Thus, the theophanic experience and mission of Paul cannot be glossed over. Furthermore, Peter’s vision about a sheet being let dowm from heaven containing all kinds of food and the voice requesting him to eat can be aptly be described as theophany (Acts10:9-23). Similarly, Paul’s Macedonia call in a spectacular vision in Acts 16:6-10 can also be considered as a theophanic encounter.

These are copious evidences that theophanic appearances are real in the New

Testament.

The Davidic Covenant

Unlike Abrahamic covenant which orbits around the land, the David covenant circumnavigates the throne. While Abrahamic covenant authenticates the provision of the land, and establishment of a nation, the latter provides a king to rule over a nation.

However, both entail factual, nationwide, absolute, and incessant blessing.147 In 2 Sam.

7:11-16 God declares that he would build David’s house for him, a dynasty from which the Messiah would come and reign. The same is expounded in 1 Chronicles 17:1-27.

147 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 517.

Even though David wanted to build God a dwelling place as a symbol of gratitude for the immeasurable blessings the kingdom had received, God told him he would rather build him one-a house of descendants. God’s special covenant with David included the following: (1) God would provide a place for Israel to dwell securely (1Chr. 22:10-11).

(2) God would raise up David’s son, who would build up the Temple (vv. 12-13). (3) God would establish David’s dynastic line forever (v.13). (4). God would establish a father- son relationship with David’s descendants (v. 14). (5) God’s loving kindness would not depart from David’s dynastic line as it had from Saul (vv.14-15).148

The Davidic covenant, which brought glory, victory, expansion and international honor and reputation to Israel was irrevocable based on the mercies of God ( Is. 55:3).

Even though the prophetic pronouncements in these texts refer to Solomon, the employment of the word olam “forever” highlights that generations of Davidic descendants were envisaged to reign forever. David’s comprehension of God’s blessing depended partly on the faith of his descendants (1Kings 2:4). Nevertheless, the ultimate fulfillment of God’s covenant lies in Jesus Christ, the son of David (Mt.1:1).Other passages authenticate that 2 Sam. 7:11-16 is a prediction that the Messiah would be birthed through David’s genealogy and would reign on David’s throne.149 At his triumphal entry, Jesus was praised and exalted as the invincible son of David accompanied with shouts of “Hosanna to the son of David” (Mt. 21: 15. Evangelist Mark reechoes a similar messianic declaration, “Blessed is the coming kingdom of our Father

148 Ibid., 518.

149 Ibid., 518. Cf. Isaiah 9:7; 16:5; Jer. 13:13; 29:16; 30:9

David” (Mk.11:10). Additionally, David ruled as king of Israel, Jesus will return to rule as king of all kings and Lord of all Lords (Rev. 19:16). Hence, the Davidic covenant promise to Israel is Political, Religious, Moral, and visible earthly kingdom and God guarantees that it will endure forever and that all nations will be blessed through it with the enforcement of the Abrahamic covenant.150

The Messiah is the Representative of Yahweh in his Kingdom

The question regarding who is the Messiah can be answered in diverse ways depending on the religion. The Rastafarians believe that Haile Selassie of Ethiopia is their messiah. The Muslims believe that Mohammed was the last prophet of God and so he is their messiah.151 The Buddhists on the other hand believe that they can obtain their nirvana through Buddha known as Siddhartha Gautama who was dead and buried centuries ago, awaiting the parousia where the righteous will be separated from the ungodly.152 Hinduism likewise does not have a founder or a prophet. It lacks the desired ecclesiastical or institutional structure, nor a defined prophet of the Religion, nor does it have a clear creed.153 It is a religion without a Messiah, without a prophet and without a creed. The Jews fervently anchor their hope in Mosses, expecting an eschatological messiah who will decimate all earthly kingdoms. On the contrary, the Messiah is the representative of Yahweh in his Kingdom, in whom Yahweh is present, and through

150 Ibid., 519.

151 Pat Alexander, A lion Hand Book: The World’s Religions (Sutherland, Australia: Lion Publishing, 1982 and 1994), 315.

152 Ibid., 222.

153 Ibid., 170.

whom he acts.”154 Representation is embedded firmly in the faith and institutions of

Israel, applying to holy people such as the priests, prophets, and kings. They exhibited the highest ideals of the Messiah. Moses and David were par excellence of Yahweh representation in the history of Israel. Even though the Messiah is the consecrated

(anointed) ruler through whom Yahweh governs the people, the term “mediator” is also applicable to him. The Messiah wields supernatural power to subjugate evil powers in the world and submission of nations to God, and the establishment of a new order where the reign of the Kingdom of God is given to the Messiah.155

Isaiah 40: 9-10 does not only place high premium on the return of the exiles but on the coming of God. The feminine imperatives indicate that Jerusalem (Zion) is personified and her primary function is the proclamation of the good news to the remaining cities of Judah. Thus, Isaiah 40 is quoted in the gospels (Mt 3:1-3; Mk1: 2-3;

Lk 3:2-6) to authenticate that the true covenant promise is embedded in the ministry of

John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. The Old Testament prophecy thus gains its true meaning from the revelation of Christ in the fullness of God’s time. Walter Brueggemann reechoes a similar sentiment by stressing that God has not finally abandoned his commitment to the Davidic house (beit). The Davidic element is envisioned as a King who will practice righteousness. There will be a royal obedience, which will make public life possible. He states, “One can see exilic anticipations for the restoration of a valid public life, the very anticipations that the Christian community has found embodied in

154 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus, And The Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986), 22.

155 Ibid., 22.

Jesus of Nazareth.”156 The coming king will be genuine righteousness (tsedaqah). The proposed name for the newly enthroned king will embody the reality. It indicates governance that brings well-being through justice.157

In addition, the servant song (Isaiah 42:1-4) expatiates on the messianic rule.

Israel had complained vehemently that its right (mishpat) had been gravely overlooked.

God replied that he would guarantee total justice (mishpat) to all the nations through his beloved servant, chosen and anointed through the Holy Spirit. The servant would be well equipped and would not fail until justice was orchestrated for the nations. He would bring justice and God’s law to the nations on whom the spirit of God resided. He would handle the weak and the fragile with compassion. He would not give up until the fulfillment of his task. In the canonical context the ultimate servant has to be Jesus

Christ because the New Testament and the Church understand the forth servant song as the greatest messianic prophecy about Jesus’ life, ministry, death, resurrection, and glorification.

In the Old Testament therefore, the Messiah is related uniquely to God and man, as a representative of Yahweh he is the instrument of his rule. The Messiah is the son of David par excellence. According to G.R.Beasley-Murray “the Messiah is the future eschatological realization of the ideal kingship.”158 The Messiah is the form of the

156 Walter Brueggemann, A commentary on Jeremiah: Exile, and Homecoming (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), 207.

157 Ibid., 207.

158 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus, and the Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986), 24.

appearances of Yahweh the Lord. Correspondingly, he states, “There could never have been a stage in Israel’s history when the kingdom of God was looked for apart from the coming of Yahweh. The hope of the kingdom was not founded on an inherited

Messianic hope; rather the Messianic hope was integrated into Israel’s hope in Yahweh as truly as the covenant with David was subsequently related to Sinaitic covenant.”159

The Royal, Torah Psalms and the Messianic Kingdom

There is copious evidence that the royal psalms are a watershed of the

Messianic hope. Seven refer to the “King”(melekh) (1,18,20,21,45,72, 89) while six of them (2,18,20,45.89, 132) refer to the “anointed one” (Hebrew) Mashiakh, or English

“Messiah”. The term “the anointed one” occurs nine times in these eleven psalms, and twice in verbal form “to anoint”. There are two levels of thought in the royal Psalms: the historical and eschatological levels. The historical level represent literal meaning, connoting that the King is an Israelite king and that king is David, popularly known as the King of Old Testament history. The eschatological level on the other hand denotes a future personality, who is a superhuman figure, designated by God to accomplish a superhuman task. Ultimately, he is the Messiah, the Christ of the New Testament. He was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontus Pilate, crucified, died, and buried.

He resurrected on the third day, and ascended into heaven. He will return to administer judgment to the living and the dead.160 The New Testament has quoted from this group

159Ibid., 24.

160 James Luther Mays, Psalms, Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994), 182, 238.

of psalms fifteen times, a majority of those quotations taken from Psalm 2 (6 times), 18,

45, and 110 (7 times). The universal concept of Israel’s king, which is heavily embedded in the royal Psalms, was a significant concept in the ministry of Jesus Christ and the

New Testament authors. Accordingly, the New Testament leans heavily on these psalms to authenticate Christ’s superiority over angels, over David, over Aaronic priesthood, and over principalities and powers of darkness. The author of the Book of

Hebrews quotes psalm 45: 6-7 to affirm Christ superiority over angels (Heb 1:8-9). He also delves into psalms 2:7 and 110:1 for a similar reason. Heb 1:5 and 1:13 also affirm

Christ’s superiority over angels. Consequently, Christ is the chief executive officer of the

Melchizedian priesthood.161 He wields authority (exousia), and is superior to Aaronic priesthood (Heb 5:5/Ps2: 7; Heb 5:6; 7:17, 21/Ps110: 4.

The royal psalms have played a pivotal role in affirming Jesus Christ’s exaltation over powers of the world systems, and eventually over death. His death and resurrection has liberated the Kingdom of God from the shackles of the enemy, and ultimate harassment from powers of darkness. On the day of Pentecost Peter delivered a powerful message converting 3000 people to Christianity. He quoted from Psalm

110:1 and asserted that Christ having been raised from the dead, had become both

Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36). Similarly, Paul in his powerful sermon in Pisidia of Antioch laid heavily on Psalm 2:7 to proclaim the Christ crucified. He declared, “We tell you the good news. What God promised our fathers he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second psalm: You are my son; today I have

161 Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 685.

become your Father” (Acts 13:32-33). Paul in his enduring words to the Corinthians proclaimed the authority and dominion of the Kingdom of God through the crucified and the resurrected Christ. He stated, “Then the end will come, when he hands over the

Kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.

For, he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death” (1 Coo 15:24-26).

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is a cornerstone for the providence of God and the redemptive work for humanity, especially for the elect in the Kingdom of God. The resurrection of Jesus constitutes spiritual bedrock for the Christian faith, without which our religion would have Tanta mounted to mockery. It is therefore imperative to reemphasize that unshakable faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is an indispensable requirement to have access to the glorious kingdom of God.162 I

Corinthians 15:12-19 demonstrates that everything stands or falls with Christ bodily

Resurrection, which is so significant in the kingdom of God. In addition, since burial and

Religion were the two most significant epigraphy in Asia Minor, Paul deemed it wise, biblically, culturally, and evangelically to write on the resurrection for the community of believers in Thessalonica. As they had not yet comprehended fully the return of Christ

(the Parousia), he felt the need to educate them one more time on the resurrection (1

Thess. 4: 16-17). Without his resurrection, the apostolic preaching and teaching about the kingdom of God is vain and (V.14); The Corinthians’ faith is vain (V.14); the Apostles are false witnesses (v.15); The Corinthians are yet in their sins (v.17); those fallen

162 C. Hassell Bullock, Encountering The Book of Psalms (Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2001), 185.

asleep have perished (v.18). Christians are of all people most miserable (v. 19). 6:4, 9;

7:4; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Cor. 4: 14; 2 Cor. 4:14; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:20; Col. 2:12; 1 Thess. 1:10; 2

Tim. 2: 8; 1 Pet. 1:21. Throughout the Book of Acts and in Paul’s preaching, the emphasis is on the resurrection of Christ. This is profoundly demonstrated in Acts

2:24,32; 3; 15, 26; 4:10; 10:40; 13:30-37; 17:31; Rom. 4: 24, 25; 6:4,9; 7:4; 8:11; 10:9; 1

Cor 6: 14; 2 Cor. 4:14; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:20; Col.2: 12; 1Thess. 1:10; 2 Tim. 2:8; 1 Pet.

1:21.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ plays a significant role in the salvation of humankind. God has raised him up, exalted him to his own right hand, that he might be head over all things to Church and his sovereign kingdom (Eph. 1:19-23. Moreover, the resurrection of Jesus paves way for him to baptize the redeemed in the Holy Spirit

(John 1:33; 15:26; 16: 7; Acts 2:32, 33 in order that they will be fortified by the Spirit as they are anointed by Jesus Christ to be used of godly instruments in the kingdom of

God. In addition, his death, resurrection, and ascension are preparatory to his bestowing of gifts upon humankind (Eph. 4: 8-13). He must rise to be a prince and savior, to give repentance and remission of sins of the New Israel of which he is the king, and Messiah. Since the kingdom of God is replete with undeniable miracles, the resurrection is important as a polemic for miracles. If the miracle of the resurrection occurred, all other miracles in the kingdom of God become credible. If the resurrection failed to occur, all other miracles become inconsequential. Thus, if Christ did not rise from the dead, Christianity is nothing more than a Museum piece, an interesting historical event, and a tourist place, which has no practical significance for contemporary humanity. 83

Similarly, the Torah psalms play a significant role in the messianic rule. The

Torah psalms are anchored in the five Books of Moses, namely from Genesis through to

Deuteronomy. Psalms 1, 19, and 119 are classified as Torah Psalms because of the intensive use of the law in these psalms and the urgent demand to fully obey the law and decrees of the LORD in his kingdom. Apart from these three authenticated psalms, there are other psalms that make allusions to the Torah, even though it is not their main theological and Biblical intent. Some of these are 18, 25, 33, 68, 78, 81, 89, 93, 94, 99,

103, 105, 111, 112, 112,147, and 148.163 Psalms 19 and 119 have eschatological relationship to their neighbors. Just like Psalm 2, psalm 18 depicts Israel national calamities in the zone of world history and the salvation of Israel embedded within the history. Psalm 118 is a personification of deliverance from the wicked one and Psalm

119 is an intense prayer for salvation by those who are rejected. All these portray the immanent approaching of the Kingdom of God.164

Defining the Torah Psalms is not mind- boggling. In the psalms, God’s law or

Torah assumes three dimensions, which are God’s ways, God’s works, and God’s words. God’s way usually refers to “ways of the LORD”, “his paths”, or “his deeds”. The meaning of God’s way is enshrined in psalm 103 where King David confirmed that God had made known his ways to Moses and his deeds to the people of Israel. God’s ways are equivalent to his statutes suggesting that the graphic law of God is a magnificent portrait of God’s character. If an Israelite or a Christian obeys the law of the LORD, then

163 James Luther Mays, Psalms, Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994), 92-445.

162 Ibid., 373-385.

one lives according to his ways.165 One cannot be oblivious of the works of God in the

Torah Psalms when dealing with his people in the kingdom. Vocabularies that feature prominently in the Torah are mishpat “justice”, tsedaqah “righteousness”, and “truth”. As

God performs his works in history and in the lives of the Israelites, he makes known his awesome character to them. Consequently, psalm 111 employs the nouns “truth” and

“justice” as grammatical complements to “precepts”. “The works of his hands are faithful and justice; all his precepts are trustworthy” (V.7). Their principal delight in life is the works of the Lord, and they are exhorted to study them. “Study” is translated, darash, meaning “to seek, search out” 166

Torah, which is the Law of God, is both verbal and written. We have the richest and immeasurable vocabulary to enrich our linguistic repertoire and to acquire enough biblical information about God. These include: word (davar), decrees (omer), statutes

(imrah), precepts (piqqudhim), testimony (edhuth), commandments (mitzvoth), covenant

(berith), and Law (Torah). These words generally imply spoken or written communication. In addition, God’s main medium of communication is verbal. However, these verbal and written Torah are the psalmist main source of joy acquiring a reservoir of knowledge of God, and the mishpat “justice” of his kingdom.167

165 Ibid., 358. See C. Hassell Bullock, Encountering The Book of Psalm (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001), 216. Also see Psalms 119:45, 94, 155; 1 Chronicles. 28:8; and Ezra 7:10.

169 Ibid., 373-385C. Hassell Bullock, Encountering The Book of Psalms. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001), 217.

167. C. Hassell Bullock, Encountering The Book of Psalms (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001), 217 see Luther Mays, Psalms, Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994), 382.

Gentiles and Proselyte believers in Deutro-Isaiah

There is plenary confirmation that Zion will be the epicenter of the world in the

Book of Isaiah, and that Gentiles are called to consciously participate in the veneration of God in the first segment of the Book of Isaiah (e.g., 2:2-4; 11:9; 14:1-2; 18:7; 19:18-

25). Nevertheless, it is principally in the second component of the Book that acquaintance of God is to be shared with the entire nations of the world. It is imperative to point out that in the Old Testament, whenever Gentiles intended to identify themselves as staunch believers of the God of Israel, they made undeniable confession worthy of acceptance. For instance, when Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, the priest of Median, heard the story of the awesome deliverance of the nation of Israel from the shackles of slavery, he declared as follows, “Now I know that the LORD is greater than all other gods” (Ex. 18:11).168 Similarly, Rehab, a prostitute of Jericho recounted to the spies the fear and trepidation effects of the Exodus narrative on her kith and kin. Hence, made the following confession, “When we heard of it, our hearts melted and everyone’s courage failed because of you, for the LORD your God is God in heaven above and on the earth below (Josh 2:11). Ruth’s fervent reply to Naomi is also interpreted as a confession of faith: “Your people will be my people and your God will be my God” (Ruth

1:16). Naaman, the Syrian general after receiving a miraculous healing from the prophet

Elisha made an extraordinary confession of faith: “now I know that there is no God in all

168 John H.Sailhamer, The Pentateuch As Narrative (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1992), 281.

the world except in Israel” (2Kings 5:15).

The first empirical example of the theme of Gentile believers is Isaiah 44: 3-5.

There are four principal archetypes of the eschatological people of Israel in 44: 5, which are interpreted as follows: “One will say, “I belong to the Lord; another will call himself by the name of Jacob; another will write on his hand, “The Lord’s” and will take the name Israel.” When the four cardinal types of people are interpreted as Gentiles, it is understood that the religion of Israel is a faith, which accepts proselytes. The tense employed in the Hebrew text is the future tense, and the passage spells out that the conversion of Gentiles requires taking a new name. In addition, inscribing the name of

Lord on the hand portrays a change of ownership or allegiance, which is reminiscent of a custom of tattooing slaves.169 There are a number of summons directed to the survivors among nations. Verses 20, 22, and 23 of Isaiah 45 highlight the principle that these survivors are Gentiles, and not Diaspora Jews. In verse 22, the invitation to survivors goes beyond the Gentile to embrace the entire nations of the earth. (“Turn to me and be saved”).170 All Gentiles receive a clarion call to hasten to the lord to be saved because he is the only one who wields power to confer it. The implication of “turning to the Lord” indicate that the bowing of the knee and the confession of faith in the Lord in verse 23 implies total abandonment of the adoration of other gods and assuming a radical re-orientation of their religious as well as their spiritual lives.171

169 Barry G. Webb, The Message of Isaiah, ed. J. A Motyer (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1996), 179-180.

170 Ibid., 180-181.

171 Ibid., 181.

The Light of the Kingdom of God in (Isaiah 49: 1-6)

It is indicated in verse 6 that God will make his servant the “light for the Gentiles” in his kingdom. R.E Clements stresses that the metaphor of light in Isaiah implies salvation. Therefore, the metaphor of light is a cardinal theme that permeates the entire book. The principal function of the theme of light in the book of Isaiah is recapitulated in the following texts: Isaiah 9:1 stipulates that God will remove Israel spiritual darkness

(blindness), while chapter 9:2 states that this light will be brought by the Messiah. In

Isaiah 42:6-7, the prophet declares that God will make his servant the light for the

Gentiles to remove blindness and to set prisoners free who sit in darkness. Isaiah 49: 6 reiterates that God will make his servant the light for the Gentiles to bring salvation to the ends of the earth. Paul quoted this verse in Acts 13:47 as he informed his audience in Asia Minor that those who authentically announced the good news of Jesus Christ satisfied God’s instruction through Isaiah.172 Isaiah 60: 1-3 crowns the theme of light by emphasizing that the light will remove the darkness of the earth. In resume, the ultimate goal of the Isaiah texts related to the metaphor of light is to bring salvation to the nations of the world.

In relation to acceptance of Gentiles and proselytes as part of the community of

Yahweh people, foreigners are called to join God’s family (Isaiah 56:1-8). The text commences and ends with assurance of salvation comprising of conglomeration of foreigners and eunuchs forming a formidable relationship in the community of Israel.

The foreigners and the Eunuchs are interpreted as proselytes. Eunuchs were a group of

172 Ibid., 194.

male adults either Jews or proselytes who were sexually mutilated to qualify them to perform certain functions in the community of believers or in the imperial service. Even though a few texts in the Torah (Lev 21:16-24, and Deut 23:1-8) favored the Israelites and vehemently forbade a certain category of males from serving as priests, God still promised abundant blessings for both groups. The following were not to serve in the house of God: Those who had physical defects; those who had been born of a forbidden marriage (or more like those of mixed Jewish-Gentile descent; Ammonites and Moabites (until tenth generation; First and second generation Edomites and

Egyptians.173 Isaiah 56: 1-8 anticipated the Apostle Paul’s proclamation that believers of all nations and types would congregate as one family in the name of Jesus Christ (Gal

3: 28-29). There is also a copious evidence of Gentile mission in the Book of Isaiah.

Chapter 66: 18-21 is an epitome of a grand conclusion of Isaiah’s prophecies concerning Israel and the nations. The benchmark of his message is centered on mission to the Gentiles as an obligatory prelude to the final manifestation of God in the history of humankind. The themes are universal and eschatological in nature and are studied together as a concluding oracle: Gathering all nations and tongues( v18), coming and seeing God’s glory by the nations (v19), sending survivors to the nations to declare God’s glory (v19), Returning of all brothers from all nations to the holy mountain of God in Jerusalem ( v20). Verse 21 declares that Gentiles will be enrolled into the priesthood and Levitical office, which means an abrogation of the former law. The hitherto law, which forbade them of certain privileges are now annulled. There is

173 Barry G. Webb, The Message of Isaiah, ed. J.A Motyer (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1996), 221. Cf. Lev. 22:24-25 where the offering of an emasculated animal to God is strictly forbidden.

salvation awaiting those who belong to God through faith in Christ Jesus.174

Conclusion

The Abrahamic covenant was categorical or unilateral because God made promises to Abraham that required nothing of the patriarch. Gen. 15: 18-21 is a vivid description of part of the Abrahamic covenant spelling out the dimensions of the Land promised to

Abraham and his descendants. On the contrary, the Mosaic covenant that was promulgated at Mount Sinai was conditional since it strictly demanded the community of

Yahweh people to obey the law that he gave to Moses, his servant. In continuation of the awesome experience of the patriarchs, the Israelites’ journey to the Promised Land was interspersed with theophanic encounters as a sign that God was working with his people. Like the Abrahamic covenant, the Davidic covenant was unconditional since

God was the sole initiator of the partnership without placing a demand on him. It was given to David through Israel’s seasoned prophet, Nathan and is located in 2 Sam 7 and later enumerated in 1 Chronicles 17:11-14 and 2 Chronicles 6: 16. In this covenant, God stated categorically that the Messiah (Jesus Christ) would be a direct descendant of

David and Judah and would establish a kingdom that would never end. The analysis that the messiah is the representative of God in the kingdom cannot be glossed over. A myriad of Biblical scholars have affirmed that the Messiah plays a pivotal role in the

174 Barry G. Webb, The Message of Isaiah, ed. J.A Motyer (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1996), 250. In Mt. 28: 19-20 Jesus appeared to his disciples and commanded them to make disciples of all nations, Jews as well as Gentiles and in Acts 1: 8, the Holy Spirit was to empower the disciples to be witnesses of Jesus to the ends of the world.

kingdom of God in salvaging and redeeming humanity from damnation. To reiterate

Movinkel statement is appropriate that “The Messiah is the representative of Yahweh in his Kingdom, in whom Yahweh is present, and through whom he acts.”175 Thus, he wields supernatural power to triumph over all poneros “evil spirits” who constantly militate against Christians in the kingdom. He is the son of David par excellence and hence is crowned with the royal diadem of God and whose mandate is to fulfill the

Torah by his proclamation of the kingdom. His death and resurrection also authenticates our hope in the Lord, for our hope is not in vain. Similarly, Deutro-Isaiah is an epicenter where the messiah is depicted as light and salvation to the Gentile and proselyte nations. His kingdom is all encompassing, and the dividing wall separating gentiles from

Jews is completely decimated. The Messiah therefore is Jesus, the only begotten son of

God.

CHAPTER 3

INTERPRETATION OF THE BEATITUDES, THE PARABLES AND SOME SALIANT BIBLICAL POINTS OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD

175 G. R. Beasley-Murray, Jesus, And The Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986), 22.

This chapter deals with the interpretation of the beatitudes and the parables. The interpretation of the beatitudes and the parables that have experienced divergent views of definitions and explanations over centuries are clarified intensively. The hitherto allegorical interpretation of the parables is elucidated while the single point of reality in the Sitz im Leben of every parable is considered as the most advanced and appropriate way of rendering the parables in contemporary theological and biblical studies. It is imperative to point out that a selected number of Jesus’ parables are studied to unearth their true Theological, and biblical foundations, and interpretations for the contemporary theologian or biblical expositor. Additionally, the Spiritual, and political kingdom of Christ, and God’s sovereign reign in the Church is accentuated for my readers. Synoptic attestation of the present and future of the kingdom of God is exposed by leaning heavily on biblical materials. Using Hebrew and Greek lexical items, as well as Jewish literature, the Lord’s Prayer, and Peter’s confession are explicated.

Besides, extraordinary attention is paid to the miracles of Jesus and Paul with distinctive emphasis on therapeuein “to serve, to heal”, and dunameis “deeds of power” or

“miracles.” Since theophanic pronouncement in Jesus’s baptism is similar to that of his transfiguration, considerable interpretation and exegesis are explained to my readers.

Finally, in this chapter, much is penned on spiritual warfare with an in-depth exegetical analysis of Eph. 6: 10-17.

Major sections include the following: (1) The idealism, Grace-based prophetic interpretation, and participative grace of the beatitudes, (2) “Blessed are the poor in

spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven” (Mt 5: 3), (3) “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted” (Mt 5:4), (4) “ Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth” ( Mt.5:5), (5) “ Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled” ( Mt. 5:6), ( 6) “ Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy” ( Mt. 5:7), (7) “ Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God” ( Mt. 5:8), (8)

“ Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God” (Mt. 5:9), ( 9) “

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for there is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me” ( Mt. 5:10-12), ( 10) Definition of a parable, ( 11) How the parables are interpreted, and why Jesus taught in parables, (12)

The parable of the four soils, ( 13) The parable of the tares, (14) The parable of the mustard see, (14) The parable of the yeast, ( 15) The parable of the treasure and the pearl, ( 16) The parable of the net, (17) The parable of the ten virgins, (18) The parable of the loaned money, ( 19) The parable of the workers paid equally, ( 20) The Samaritan problem, and the parable of the Good Samaritan, (21) The Spiritual, and political kingdom of Christ, and God’s Spiritual reign in the Church, ( 22) Synoptic attestation of the present and future kingdom of God, (23) The Lord’s prayer and the kingdom of God,

(23) Peter’s confession, the baptism, and transfiguration of Jesus Christ, ( 24)

Universality of grace in Luke’ Gospel, and miracles of Jesus and Paul, (25) The believer, and Spiritual warfare, ( 26) “ Be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might”, ( 27) “ We do not wrestle against flesh and blood” ( 28) “Girding the waist with truth , putting on the breastplate of righteousness, and proclaiming the Gospel of peace”(29) “ The shield of faith and the helmet of salvation.

The Idealism, Grace-based prophetic Interpretation, and Participative Grace of the Beatitudes

Many Biblical expositors and Theologians have given a high degree proposition of idealistic interpretation to the Beatitudes. They accentuate that they are the most potent ideals that Jesus is urging us to live up to or to emulate. If only we will be poor in spirit, mourn, be humble in spirit and hunger, and thirst for righteousness, then we will receive unfathomable reward from God.176 This to many is the idealistic standpoint. If only the righteous would consciously live by those idealistic principles, they will enjoy the manifold blessings of the Lord.177 Another group of people stipulates that the

Beatitudes are the entry requirements for the Kingdom of God. So that if we yearn for peace, mourn and believe that we live in spiritual poverty, and are peacemakers, then the doors of the Kingdom of God are flung open for us to enter.178 Nevertheless, there is a major problem associated with this type of interpretation. It is fathomed that its main focus is on good works and not by grace. Turning the gospel into good work only, assures us of salvation, which is erroneous in its outlook. It also causes feelings of guilt and resistance. The more we lay emphasis on these principles of ideals to live up to the more we are engrossed in the punishment of guilt. Jesus’ feeling is not to punish us but to help us possess the Kingdom of God. Therefore, if we erroneously believe that we

179 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee: Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 33.

177 Ibid., 33.

178 Ibid., 33.

are the epitome of these idealistic principles, we plunge ourselves into hypocrisy of self- righteousness. We will thank God that we are not like other people.179

“Two men went up to the Temple to pray, one was a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself; God, I thank you that I am not like other men-robbers, evildoers, adulterers-or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get” (Luke18: 9-12). The exhibition of pomposity in the life of this man was beyond his human capacity. He failed to recognize his moral bankruptcy and the need for salvation. Our moralistic pretentiousness makes us difficult to live godly lifestyle. According to Stassen and Gushee, “we try to make our realities fit the ideals, but it simply does not fit.”180 This according to them and many scholars is heteronomous ethic, imposed on us by outside authority, and not fitting our nature and real situation.181

Biblical scholars Robert Guelich, Glen H. Stassen, and Gushee P. David spearheaded a graced-based and prophetic interpretation of the Beatitudes. This type of interpretations is focused mainly on Isaiah 61. They argue that the beatitudes should not be interpreted as wisdom teachings but as prophetic teachings. Wisdom teachings are based on human actions that are wise and are in total compliance with the word of

God and that fits God’s way of ordering the expanse of the World and thus get us good

179 Ibid., 33.

180 Ibid., 33.

181 Ibid.,33.

and heavenly results. Prophetic (or eschatological) teachings on the other hand champion God’s mighty action that delivers, rescues, frees, releases us from depravity, mourning, and depression into rejoicing with the Lord, rejoicing with ourselves and with our neighbors.182

The beatitudes speak to people who are already being made participants in the spiritual wealth of the Holy Spirit through Jesus Christ. These people already have a form of knowledge and personal experiences of what is meant by mourning, mercy, peacemaking, spiritually poor, and are hungry and thirsty for righteousness. They are based not on the perfection of the individual but by the outpouring of grace, already emitted to us by Jesus Christ, (Mt 13:31); 17: 20; Mk 4:31; Elk 13:19î.

One most important aspect of the good news that Jesus brought to humanity in the beatitudes is participative grace. The thematic approach to the study of Isaiah 61 is the abundance of God’s grace and the reverberation of this theme appears in the

Beatitudes. Jesus in his inaugural sermon located in Luke 4: 16-22, asserts and therapeutically indicates that his incarnation and his atonement was deliverance from sin, captivity, depravity, and restoration of a formidable relationship with God. Grace is a gift from God that humanity does not deserve it; and we do not encapsulate it in self- righteousness deeds. 183

Scripture indicates, “All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious

182 Ibid., 34.

183 Ibid., 36.

words that came from his lips.” The Greek connotes, “logois tes chariots”, meaning He is bringing us deliverance or God is delivering grace to his people. It must be indicated that some have erroneously taken grace to imply passivity, disempowerment of those who open up their hearts to receive the abundant grace of God. That is if God is giving us grace, we have no role to play in receiving the grace exuded on us and if we endeavor to be active to receive God’s grace then it is not grace. According to Stassen and Gushee this brings about the fierce rivalry between God's grace and our discipleship. According to the two theologians, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a well-known theologian, and even though he was dualistic in his approach to the kingdom of God, calls it “cheap grace”.184 Such grace may be described as grace without change or without a cost, which characterizes those who claim to be Christians without a concrete change of heart, (Mt 7:15-27). Bonhoeffer therefore states that Christ is the epicenter of our lives, when God acts deliver us from bondage of sin and captivity, we are empowered, energized and not disempowered and not sapped out, therefore, when we receive the out pouring of the Holy Spirit, we are fully empowered to undertake the task of evangelism, live godly lifestyle and not disempowered.185 Stassen and Gushee state of Bonheoffer that through God’s grace in Christ, we become active participants in

God’s grace and Christ takes shape in us.186 The noun may denote gracefulness or beauty. It most generally means favor or goodwill. The New Testament word is charis, from chairein, “to rejoice”, signifies pleasant external appearance, “loveliness,”

184 Ibid.,36.

185 Ibid., 36

186 Ibid., 36.

“agreeableness,” “acceptableness” and has such connotation as in Luke 4:22.

Nevertheless, its general meaning is the unmerited operation of God in the heart of man, affected through the agency of the Holy Spirit. It is the active communication of divine blessings by the invoking of the Holy Spirit.187 Grace is an attribute of God. It is a divine perfection. It is God's free, sovereign undeserved favor or love to humanity in our state of depravity, sin, guilt, which depicts in the forgiveness of sin and total deliverance from its judgmental consequences. It is redemptive grace in the rudimentary meaning of the word. The sinner is justified, renewed, and receives supernatural supply of the Holy

Spirit. Hence, the beatitudes engender the grace of God to be received by the community of believers.188

The term grace is used as a description of the divine provision, which God made in Christ to prevent the destruction of humankind. Christ as the savior of the world is a tangible proof of the grace thus in the beatitudes, Christ exemplified the virtuous way of living for the chosen people of God. “The word became flesh and dwelled among us… full of grace and truth” (John 1; 14). The term is applied not only to what Christ deserved but what he merited for sinners and the fallen world. Grace is not passivity, but workings with Christ to achieve sanctification and rightful living as we daily submit ourselves to him. The apostle John says, “The law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (John 1:17)189

187 Luis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 427.

188 Ibid., 427.

189 Ibid., 427.

Grace is Christomorphic and not amorphic; it has a definite shape, which is exposed in Christ. Its shape is the shape of the Kingdom, and the Beatitudes being an epitome of Christomorpic aspect of grace.190 We participate in the grace by answering

Jesus’ call, come follow me. This is not cheap grace or work righteousness, in which we try to make our way into the Kingdom by din of hard work. This gift is a gift of deliverance; a gift bestowed on humanity by God through his son, Jesus Christ, who is fully human and fully divine. This gift comes through faith in Jesus Christ; it is the Spirit led, participative, Christomorphic grace191

The Beatitudes lack a clear structure but it is evident that the first part of each beatitude portrays the present position of the community, and the second part prognosticates the future of the community of believers. The juxtaposition of the two radically situations or circumstances, allows the trials and temptations of day-to-day life to be stemmed down by anchoring our faith in the Kingdom to come. The beatitudes are not imperatives as indicated in 13: 16, Rev19: 9 and 22:14, they offer hope and undeniably theodicy. There is no an illustration of evil imagination but through the fervent contemplation of God’s future engenders hope and assurance of hope and comfort. The form, “blessed” (makarios) + subject+ that (hoti) clause is attested elsewhere Gen 30:13; Dan 12:12 as eschatological orientation of the beatitudes.192

190 Glen H. Stassen &David P. Gushee: Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 36.

191 Ibid.,36.

192 John Barton and John Muddiman, The Oxford Bible Commentary (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001) ,853.

Since some versions render “blessed” as “happy” the Hebrew word for “happy”, or

“blessed” is oshrii193. This word has occurred 26 times in the Psalms, a classic example is Psalm 1: 1, which states, “Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked” The term” blessed is the man” is translated as oshrii haish. It carries the nuance of positivity in most places in the Book of Psalms194 correspondingly, in the Beatitudes, the word “blessed” is used in a positive dimension to describe those who hearken to kingdom principles.

Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven (Mt 5: 3)

The Gospel of Luke states, “blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God” (Luke 6:20). The scripture refers to both the economically bankrupt, and the spiritually poor. The evangelist translated from the original Hebrew text in Isaiah

61:1, which Jesus quoted in his teaching of the Beatitudes.195 The Hebrew lexical item used for this syntactic construction combines both semantic representations- economically famished and spiritually humble. The Brown, Driver, and Briggs Lexicon

(776) interpret the following connotation of the Hebrew utterance: poor, oppressed by

193 Miles Van Pelt and Pratico D. Gary: The Vocabulary Guide to Biblical Hebrew (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2003), 36.

194 H.P Ruger A. Alt, O. Eibfeldt, P. Kahle ediderant, and R. Kittel eds, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: Stuttgarttensia, Vierte verbesserte Auflage, 1990], 1087. The following scriptures of the Book of Psalms that dilate on the word “ashree” are Psalms 41:1; 84:5; 106:3; 112:1; and 119:1.

195 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee: Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 38.

100

the rich and powerful, powerless, needy, humble, lowly, pious.196 In one circumstance, it will have more than one denotation than the other. Jesus categorically states that those who pray earnestly without making claim of being better than others are worthy of participating in the reign of God. The target of the individual who is humble is not anchored in his or her own humility or virtue, but is fervently rooted in God’s grace and compassion.197

The Bible affirms, “For this is what the high and lofty one says- he who lives forever, whose name is holy: I live in a high and holy place, but also with him who is contrite and lowly in spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite” (Isaiah 57:15). Isaiah 66:2 unravels the same message of humility of those who are contrite in heart. It declares, “This is the one I esteem: he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my words.” Humility does not only portray a downward and dejected state of spiritual need, but total surrender to God’s benevolent grace (Mt

5:16). Humility is giving oneself over to God, total submission to God. The poor are blessed not because of their own effort or not for the reason that they wield supernatural abilities to phase out their transgressions, but because it is the interest of God to stoop down with compassion in order to salvage the spiritually poor from perpetual damnation.198 In consonance with this, Jesus fulfilled Isaiah 61: 1-2, proclaiming high- quality news to the underprivileged (Mt 5:3-5; 11:5; Lk 4:16-21; 7:22). He embraced the

196 Ibid., 38.

197 Ibid., 38.

198 Ibid., 38.

101

religious social outcasts. His preaching to them, his invitation to them to join the community of believers, his care for them by feeding them, his bestowing on them to be his disciples, was in all grace-based deliverance. This beatitude is directing to the good news that Isaiah’s prophetic messages authenticated. That God’s intervention in the lives of the poor, oppressed, humble, needy, weak, and lowly have been fully accomplished in Jesus the Messiah. He is the chief shepherd in the Kingdom of God.199

“Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted (Mt 5:4)

The term “mourning” has duel connotations. It implies the intense grief, the sadness, and emotional turbulence of those who have lost their dear ones or something endearing to them. The term also signifies repentance. Sinners undoubtedly mourn for their own sins and transgressions, and for the sins of their communities and societies.

Archbishop Dmitri Royster indicates that those who mourn are not just people displaying too much uncontrolled or self-indulgent emotion, or who weep at the slightest irritation but those who are profoundly remorseful for their iniquities. They also weep for the sins and transgressions of their neighbors. This weeping is focused on the love and compassion of God towards the repentant.200

The prophet Amos pronounces a virulent judgment on those who blatantly rebuff mourning. They suppress the poor, the needy, and subjugate the outcasts and the downtrodden under the yoke of their tyrannical rule and say to their husbands, “bring us

199 Ibid., 38.

200 Archbishop Dmitri Royster, The Kingdom of God (Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1992), 26.

102

some drink”. They plunge themselves into lasciviousness, brawling, murder, cheating, and debauchery believing that their offering given to God in the Temple will swathe their iniquities, and transgressions. Accordingly, God pronounces viruliferous woes on those who do not mourn. Scripture stipulates, “Woe to those who are complacent in Zion, and to you who feel secure in mount Samaria, you notable men of the foremost nation, to whom the people of Israel come…Woe to those who lie upon beds of ivory…who sing idle songs to the sound of the harp…but are not grieved over the ruin of Joseph! Surely

I will never forget any of their deeds. Will not the land tremble on this account, and everyone mourns who dwell in it? I will turn your feast into mourning” (Amos 4:1-5; 5:6,

14; 6:1-7; 8:7-10; 9:5). Hence, when Jesus enjoined people to mourn, he meant that they should mourn in repentance that is honest enough to engender a holistic change in their lifestyle.

“Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth” (Mt 5:5)

Jesus quotes from Psalm 37: 11, which declares, “But the meek will inherit the land and enjoy great peace”. The Hebrew word used for “meek” has the same connotation with the Greek word employed in Matthew 5:5. The meek in this context deals with people who recognize their spiritual depravity and surrender to God in order to be rescued from sin, trouble, and damnation.201 If you are economically as well as spiritually poor, and you surrender to God, he is capable of delivering you with his out

201 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom of Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 40.

103

stretched arm. If you are encumbered with social enigma, surrendering to God will extricate you from social, psychological, and mental gymnastics. In English language however, the word “meek” implies “weak”, “harmless”, or “spiritless.” A meek personality is considered a doormat where others clean off their dirty feet, he is timorous and qualms about what others think.202 On the contrary, the Biblical language use of this word is in total variance from English implication. The word is used to describe two significant personalities, Moses (Num. 12:3), and Jesus Christ in (Mt 11:29). Moses subdued the seemingly invincible Egyptian might, and a pungent Roman representative could not cow Jesus. Both of them appeared absolutely dauntless, and surrendered their will and emotions to God.203

The word “meek” has another connotation worthy of explanation. Wherever the

Greek word translated “meek” or “humble” (pra- yes) occurs in the Bible it always signifies peacefulness or peacemaking. For example, Matthew 21: 5 is a quote from

Zechariah 9:9. The God to whom we surrender is “the God of peace” (Rom15: 33). God is a universal lover and a peacemaker. He causes the rain and the sunshine to bestow blessings on our enemies as well as our friends. He admonishes us to love our enemies

(Mt 5: 43-48). Martin Luther King Jr said, “Jesus understood the difficulty inherent in the act of loving one’s enemy…. He realized that every genuine expression of love grows out of a consistent and total surrender to God” (King, Strength to love, 48).204

202 Ibid., 40.

203 Ibid., 40.

204 Ibid., 41.

104

Jesus did not only expound on this but emanated God’s love and meekness to his disciples, tax collectors, outcasts, and Gentiles. He welcomed all of them into the

Kingdom of God for divine fellowship. Archbishop Dmitri Royster affirms, “The meek are those who live, conscious of their own unworthiness, with patience and in peace with their fellow men. Those who live in hostility with others cannot enter the kingdom of

God, the new earth which the meek shall inherit.”205 The literal sense of the word

“meek” or “gentleness” refers to those who make no claims for themselves before God or other people. The zealots in Jewish community claimed their rights. Thus, in this context, it is those who push, who struggle, who get their piece of land. Admirably,

Jesus does not say, “The gentle may inherit heaven,” but they will be given the earth. It means that the earth is the sphere of the kingdom of God, this renewed earth.”206

“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled” (Mt 5:6)

New Testament intellectuals have unanimously agreed that righteousness and the Kingdom are the two most significant themes of the Sermon on the Mount. They postulate that God conveys righteousness to his people as deliverance, and Christians studiously participate in it by executing righteous deeds. The Greek lexical item employed here is dikaiosyne, and its root is dike having the overtone of justice. Jesus in this verse is succinctly quoting from (Isaiah 61:3, 10, 11) authenticating the

205 Archbishop Dmitri Royster, The Kingdom of God [Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Press, 1992], 26.

206 Ibid., 26.

105

administration of righteousness or justice. The Hebrew word is tsedaqah, which carries the nuance of administering justice that rescues and delivers the oppressed. Tsedaqah restores the immobilized and the rejected to their equitable place in covenant society.

The word tsedaqah is equivalent to other words such as mishpat (Psalm 37). That is the cardinal reason why the hungry and the thirsty hunger and thirst for righteousness.207

Righteousness in the Old Testament implies fostering and conserving of peace in the community of God’s people, and is sometimes used interchangeably with shalom, peace (Isaiah 32:16-17). The tsedaqah “justice”, “righteousness” in Yahweh is fathomed in the deliverance of his people from the shackles of slavery in Egypt and ushering them into becoming covenant inhabitants of the Promised Land. There is copious evidence that Israel continued to appeal Yahweh’s righteousness from deliverance, and from trouble (Pss31: 1; 143:11); from enemies (Pss 5:8í 143:1), from the wicked (Ps 36;

71:2), for vindication of her cause before her enemies (Ps 35:24), and Yahweh maintains the cause of the afflicted and needy (Ps 140: 12).

“Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.” (Mt 5:7)

The Greek word for “merciful” is eleemon, which implies executing generous deeds of deliverance. Mercy is a generous action that engages in delivering someone else from trouble or bondage. It reaffirms proverbs 14:21, which declares, “He who despises his neighbor sins, but blessed is he who is kind to the needy.” Nevertheless,

207 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 41.

106

mercy in the gospel depicts forgiveness that rescues from the bondage of guilt. It is an action that heals and gives freedom to the needy. According to Luis Berkhof, “it is the goodness or love of God shown to those who are in misery or distress, irrespective of their deserts.”208 He further affirms that the Hebrew word used most often to refer to mercy is chased. Another word frequently used in the Bible is richen, which is rendered tender mercies in English Language.209 His mercy is depicted as God revealing himself as a compassionate God, who has insatiable love for those who are engrossed in misery. He is ever ready to alleviate them from their anguish. His mercy is plentiful

(Deut 5:10; Ps 57:10; 86:5).

In the Lord’s Prayer Jesus employs a different word for forgiveness, aphiemi (Mt

6:12), which might have been translated from an Aramaic verb connoting, “to forgive.”

When the two blind men called out to Jesus saying, “Have mercy on us son of David”

(Mt 9:27), they meant “heal us, deliver us from our affliction.” It is for the same reason that Mt 6: 2 executing merciful acts, eleemosyne, implies giving alms to the poor.

Actually, the Gospel of Matthew dilates so much on mercy. It is a fundamental demand

(Mt 9: 13; 12:7; 23:23). The disposition of mercy towards the needy could not be glossed over by Jesus. For, mercy requires an outward act and an inward feeling for the oppressed, the out casts, the down trodden, and the sinners. It is acknowledged as a human virtue and a divine attribute. Jesus opponents neglected important virtues such as “justice”, “mercy”, and “faith” (Mt 23:23). Accordingly, merciful deeds are concrete

208 Luis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan/Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 72

209 Ibid., 72.

107

loyalty to God, benefiting others as the loving kindness of God.210

“Blessed are the pure in heart for they will see God” (Mt 5:8)

The heart(kardia) is so significant in the worship of God. It is so paramount when it comes to individual, and co-operate service to God. Therefore, the heart determines the attitude and actions of people. Consequently, “Pure heart” expresses Old Testament psalms of piety (Ps 23: 4; 50:12; Ps 73: 1). These psalms stipulate undivided obedience toward God (James 1:8). The heart in the Jewish tradition does not designate the biological organ of a human- being, but constitutes the focal point of human wanting, thinking, and feeling. One must constantly be on guard that purity of heart and seeing of

God will not pave the way for total removal from the world or to an isolated abode of piety for the one who is religiously gifted. People know things in their heart (Dt8: 5), Pray in their heart (1Sam 1: 12-13), meditate in their heart (Ps 19:14), hide God’s word in their heart (Ps 119:11), devise plans in their heart (Ps 140:2), Keep words within their heart

(Pr. 4:21), think in their heart (Mk 2:8), doubt in their heart (Mk 11:32), ponder in their heart (Lk 2:19), believe in their heart (Rom 10:9), and sing in their heart (5:19).

The heart is the center of emotions. The glad heart (ex 4:14), the loving heart ((Dt

6:5), the fearful heart (Js 5: 1), the courageous heart (27:14), the repentant heart (51:17), and the anxious heart (Isaiah 57:15. Nevertheless, it will consciously manifest itself as obedience toward God in the world and as hope for the future seeing of God, which is

210 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee: Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 43.

108

more than private individual experience (Luz. Comm, 240). Since the ancient Hebrews fervently believed that the heart was the core of reflection and contemplation, and the abode where perilous and joyful life’s issues were meticulously resolved, they place high premium on matters pertaining to the heart. That is why King Solomon declares in proverbs 23: 7 “As a man [person] thinks in his heart, so is he.” The French philosopher

Rene Descartes similarly emphasized, “I am what I think.” The importance of the heart cannot be ignored, that is why the Bible admonishes, “Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it, springs the issues of life” (Pr. 4: 23). The Hebrew term shalom means well- being or wholeness, a sense of being together at the center of life.211 David and Allison declare, “ Purity of heart must involve integrity, a correspondence between outward action and inward thought, a lack of duplicity, singleness of intension… and the desire to please God above all else. More succinctly: purity of heart is to will one thing, God’s will, with all of one’s being.”212

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God (Mt. 5:8)

Peace in Hebrew is shalom, and its Greek equivalent is eirene. Septuagint (LXX) translated shalom into three significant words, soteria, “peace”, eirene, “peace” and telos, “end, goal.” Usually people who foster peace work assiduously to bring about peace. The connotation of peace in this context transcends beyond fostering peace

211 Jack Graham, Lessons From the Heart (Philadelphia: Library of Congress, 2001), 32.

212 Davis, W.D, and Dale Allison: A critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew, Vol. 1 (Edinburgh: T &T Clark, 1988), 456. See Glen H. Stassen & Gushee P. David, Kingdom Ethics: (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 45. Cf. Mattew 15: 8; Isaiah 29:13.

109

between individuals and Elohim. The semantic representation of the lexical item ereine is understood in social context as spelled out in Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of

God. The following scriptures are archetypal of Jesus and the apostles proclaiming peace to nations and kingdoms: Lk. 2:14; 19:38; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; Eph. 2:14-18; Col

1:2; Heb. 7:2.213 Hence, being exhorted to be a peacemaker, the believer is emulating the God of heavens and the earth, “the God of Peace” (Rom.16:20).214 Contrary to the zealots who called for all embracing physical warfare so that all nations could be massacred in order to enforce the reign of the kingdom of God, Jesus proclaimed a kingdom replete with Peace. The zealots with their militarism who claimed to be the faithful children of God in a pretentious manner would have annihilated the downtrodden, the underprivileged, harlots, and the weak who received the Gospel of the kingdom of peace. Persistently, Jesus proclaimed that it is the peacemakers who “will be called the children of God.” The call for peace is envisioned as a universal motif in the New Testament. The prototypes of scriptures that dilate on the peace of God are

Rom. 14:19; Heb. 12:14; Js. 3:18; 1 Pet. 3:11.215 Jesus, in preaching and teaching his disciples concerning the immanent outpouring of the Holy Spirit declares, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I leave with you. I do not come to give as the world gives. Do not let

213 Glen H. Stassen & David P.Gushee: Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 45. Cf. Isaiah 9:6 where it states, “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, and Prince of Peace.” See also Zech. 9:10.

214 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee: Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 43. Cf. Rom. 15:33; Phil. 4:9; 1 Th. 5:23; 2 Th. 3:16; Heb. 13:20. See also Davis and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 1: 457-58.

218 Ibid., 45.

110

your hearts be troubled and do not be dismayed” (John 14: 27).

In the Old Testament, Yahweh- Shalom signifies “The Lord our peace” (Judges

6: 24). Shalom translated peace is found 170 times meaning “whole”, “finished”,

“fulfilled”, and “perfected.” It is also referred to “well”, “welfare” (Deut. 27:6; Dan 5:6; 1

Kgs. 9:25; 8:61; Gen. 15:16. Shalom connotes the type of peace that emanates from being an absolute person having the right relationship with God and to fellow humankind. Yahweh the peacemaker has formulated and enforced a roadmap of peace and thus calls us to emulate him in nurturing peace and tranquility in his kingdom.

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you (Mt. 5:10-12).

These two significant beatitudes deal with persecution against believers for righteousness sake and for Jesus Christ. As the prophets were persecuted severely in executing their divine duties, so we must brace-up our spiritual and mental fervor for every form of persecution. The Hebrew word radap and the Greek word dioko or diodmos emphasize the concept of pursue (Gen. 44. 4; Lk. 17:13). They also have a designation of pressing on (Pr. 11:19; Ph. 3: 12). Their contextual connotations can be extended to encompass “pursuing” or “pressing on”. “To press”, “to harass” (Deut. 30:7,

Job 19:22; and Acts 8:11). It also connotes bringing judgment or punishment on tyrants and the recalcitrant. Two other Greek words sometimes used to denote “oppress”, or

“persecute” are thlipsis (oppression, affliction) and thlibo “press on, oppress and in the 111

passive, “to be oppressed or to be persecuted.” It must be pointed out that persecution involves mental, physical, social, and spiritual.216

Physical persecution involves murder as in the case of Cain assassinating his own brother (Gen. 4) and Abimelech murdering seventy of his own brothers (Judges 9). In the dimension of social persecution, there is often severe discrimination against the godly and the social outcasts. Jeremiah suffered both social and physical abuse in his ministry as a prophet designated to Judah ( Jer. 9:11; 9:13-16; 21: 3-7; 25: 1-44). In

Jeremiah 37:15, the prophet was severely beaten. His public life was enmeshed deeply with the encumbrances of his public utterances. His message of the imminent

Babylonian captivity provoked public hostility against him. His message was rejected, and the police arrested him, brutalized him, arraigned and imprisoned him and in Jer.

38: 6-13, his persecutors dropped him into a muddy cistern.217 In the New Testament, an archetype of social discrimination orchestrated against godly people is recorded in acts 5: 28; 5:40) where Peter and John were threatened not to preach the Gospel. King

Herod beheaded John the Baptist because he opposed him for marrying Herodias, his brother’s Philip’ wife and for having unacceptable coition with her (Mk. 6:21-29).

Stephen was the first Christian to be martyred in Acts 6: 5; 7:1-60). Equivalently, Paul had been in prison more frequently, been flogged severely, been exposed to death again and again, he received 39 lashes from his fellow Jews, beaten with rods for three times, once he was stoned, been shipwrecked five times ( 2 Cor. 11: 23-29) and was

216 Ibid., 45.

217 Walter Brueggemann, A commentary on Jeremiah: Exile, and Homecoming (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), 357, 363.

112

killed in Rome ( 2 Tim. 4: 6-8). Jesus was persecuted by his hearers ( Mt. 4:17; 11: 28-

29; Lk. 4:28-30; and plotted against, arrested, flogged, tried in a kangaroo court, nailed to the cross and left to die. Homogeneously, Justin Martyr was martyred in 165 AD in

Rome for exhibiting his faith as both Biblical and credible in the face of hostilities from both Jews and Pagans. He was murdered for no other reason than confessing Christ as his Lord.

Definition of a Parable

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, a parable “is a simple story illustrating a moral or religious lesson.”218 Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines a parable as “Short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.” Similarly, the Encarta Encyclopedia describes a parable as “a short simple story intended to illustrate a moral or religious lesson.”219 This definition is incapacitated because the encyclopedia principally defines “parable” as twentieth century English speaking people. It is empirical that the New Testament and the Old Testament were not written in the 20th century. Defining a parable using first century Greek social linguistics principle, a parable is “an illustration, a comparison, or analogy, usually in story form, using common events of everyday life to reveal a moral or a spiritual

218 The America Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition ed. Beth Anderson, Benjamin W. Fortson IV, Steven R. kleinedler, Hanna Schonthal (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000), 1273.

219 Merriam Webster, Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary: (Springfield Colorado: 1983), 853. See Encarta, A World English Dictionary.

113

truth.”220 However, this characterization fails to describe properly a parable used in the

New Testament. The Greek term that Jesus used in the New Testament is parabole and the Hebrew/Aramaic term that Jesus used in his teaching was the lexical item marshal.

In the Septuagint, the term parabole was used to translate marshal. According to Robert

H. Stein, since Jesus spoke Mashalim rather than parabolai, it is imperative to study the definition of the parable from mashal-parabole perspective.221

In the Old Testament, the term marshal is frequently referred to as a proverb

(Ezek. 18:2-3; 1 Sam24: 13; 1 Sam 10:12; Ezek.12: 22-23; 16:44). The term can also refer to a Proverb, Satire Taunt, or a word of Derision (Is. 14:3-4; Hab. 2:6; Num. 21:

27-30; Deut. 28: 37; 1 Kings 9:7; 2 Chron. 7:20; and Psalms 44:14; 69: 11). The term marshal is also used in the Old Testament to refer to a riddle. This is clearly illustrated in (Psalm s78: 2; 49:4; Ezek. 17: 2ff; and Prov.1: 6). A fourth use of the term in the Old

Testament is for the description of a story or an allegory. In Ezek. 24:2-5, God instructs the prophet Ezekiel to utter an allegory (marshal) against the rebellious. Two other passages where a story parable or an allegory is portrayed as marshal are Ezek.

17:2-10; 20:49-21:5. There are also references to three other passages in the Old

Testament where the term is not used directly. The parable of Nathan in 2 San 12: 1-4;

2 14:1-11; and Is. 5: 1-7 are classic examples of this sort222

220 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1981), 16.

221 Ibid., 16.

222 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1981), 16-17. Psalms 69: 12 in the Hebrew text and 48: 12 in the Septuagint.

114

Like the Old Testament, in the New Testament the term parabole can refer to as a proverb. “Jesus said to them, surely you will quote this proverb to me” (Lk. 4:23).

Jesus also taught his disciples using proverbs. “Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?” (Lk. 6:39). The parallel is Mt. 15:14. Co-reference is Mk.

3:23-24 where Evangelist Mark reports that Jesus spoke to them in parables. “How can

Satan drive out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself that kingdom cannot stand.”

Moreover, a parabole can also refer to a metaphor or be used figuratively. Prime examples are (Mk.7: 14-17; Lk. 5:36-38). The parallels in Mk. 2:21 and Mt. 9:16-21 lack the lexical item parabole. The simile and the metaphor are two prominent ways of making comparisons. A simile makes an explicit compassion that employs terns such as

“like: “as”, “resemble, “as if” and “seems.”223 When a simile is illustrated from a straightforward overt comparison into a pictorial representation of facts, ideas, and events then a similitude is defined. By and large, a similitude is comparing abstract or concrete concepts like the kingdom of God to archetypal happenings of daily life (Mk.

4:26-29, 30-32; 13: 28-29; Mt. 7:9-11; 13:33; Lk. 15:4-7; 15:8-10; 17:7-10).224 On the contrary, when a similitude is demonstrated from a picture into a story, then a story parable, an analogy, or an example parable is defined. A story parable refers to a single event. Luke 14: 16; 15:11-11-32 16:1-8; Mt. 21: 28-31; 25:1-13; 14-30.225 An allegory on the other hand consists of a string of metaphors. Unlike a story parable, which has one principal point of comparison, an allegory has a myriad of them. A classic example of a

223 Ibid., 17-18.

224 Ibid., 17-18.

225 Ibid.,17-18.

115

passage, which is embedded with several allegories is Mark 12:1-11. Other examples of passages in the Gospels that contain allegories are Mt. 13:24-29, 36-43; 21:1-14; Mk.

4:3-9 and 13-20. It must be emphasized that these allegories do not constitute the main objective of the parables but are local colorings.226

How the Parables are interpreted, and why Jesus Taught in Parables

One of the most difficult problems confronting pastors of the 21st century is the interpretation of the parables. The thesis, how the parables are interpreted and why

Jesus taught in parables will be thoroughly considered in this section. Scholars adopted the allegorical interpretation of the parables for centuries even though the reformation fathers Luther and Calvin protested against this method of elucidation. The allegorical exposition persisted until Adolf Julicher published his premiere volume of Die

Gleichnisreden Jesu in 1888. The publication of this masterwork brought about total abandonment of the allegorical interpretation that assumed a superior position over these centuries. With high voltage academic attitude, Julicher demonstrated that the parables were far from being interpreted as allegories. He established that while an allegory may be interpreted as a series of metaphors, in which each metaphor carries its own nuance and significance, Julicher defined a parable as a similitude, which has a single point of comparison (tertium comparationis). Each parable therefore seeks to present a single pictorial reality or object to its readers. The details and explanations of

226 Ibid., 21.

116

a parable are somewhat irrelevant to the main point since they serve as coloring for the single objective that the imagery or picture seeks to present.227 Adolf Julicher’s principal contribution to the interpretation of the parables was that he dichotomized the differences between parables and allegories and by revealing so, he “laid to rest once and for all the allegorical method of interpretation that had plagued the Church for centuries. It is now clear that the parables are not allegories, as Origen, Augustine and others thought.”228

However, Adolf Julicher overemphasized the wrongful method of allegorical interpretation, denying elements of allegories in parables. A numbers of scholars refuted this position and believed he erred in that direction. Not all Old Testament and rabbinic parables are similitudes. For them, the Hebrew term marshal has various connotations and can mean a proverb, a taunt, a riddle, a story parable, or even the much-debated allegory. It is therefore imperative to assert that a parable can have allegories, but they are colorings of the main single object. For instance, in the parable of the hidden treasure, we are not obliged to fish out the details for allegorical significance, but we should endeavor to ascertain the one single objective that the parable is making. The behavior of the man provides local coloring for the story. According to Robert H. Stein,

“The one main point that Jesus is seeking to make in the parable is clear. It is worth the

227 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1981), 153. Actually, in his first volume of Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, Julicher massively refers to Aristotle’s Rhetoric 2, 20, 2ff where a parable is described as a comparison (Gleichnis), in his first volume p, 51 he refers to Cicero’s Orator 27, 94, where Cicero declares, when there is a continuous stream of metaphors, a wholly different style of speech is produced; consequently, the Greeks call it allegia or “allegory.”

228 Ibid.,154.

117

surrender of everything to enter the kingdom of God.”229

Into the bargain, R.C. Dodd contributed enormously to the investigation of the parables. Even though scholars such as W.H. Robinson, and A. T. Cardoux explicated in their theories that the parables needed to be interpreted fully in their original context and setting, it was R.C Dodd who brought about a radical transformation to the interpretation of the parables. His masterwork, The Parables of the Kingdom (1936) was considered the subsequent most improved in parabolic illumination after Adolf Julicher.

Robert H. Stein asserts, “It was Dodd, who, more than anyone else, pointed out that to understand the parables correctly one needed to interpret them first of all in their original Sitz im Leben that is the original setting in the life of Jesus and in the context of his ministry.”230 He admonishes all theologians to seek foremost the original semantic demonstration of the parables and their indispensable significance to Jesus’ audience in the first century. If this is acknowledged and experienced, it will unravel a new intellectual and spiritual impetus, as well as enhancement for the 21st century believers.

Nevertheless, R.C Dodd failed to comprehend fully Jesus’ pedagogical illustration of the parables in the SItz im Leben but rather argued vehemently that the teachings of Jesus comprised of only a present reality. He assumed the position that the kingdom of God was conceived from its present phenomenon as Jesus proclaimed the

229 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1981), 155-57. Scholars have generally agreed that while parables need to be interpreted based on a single point reality, there are elements of allegories in parables, which cannot be denied. Some recent theologians have affirmed presence of allegories in the parables as in Maxime Hhermaniuk, La parabole evangeligue (Louvain: Bibliotheca Alfosiana, 1947). Matthew Black, “The parables as Allegory,”BJRB, Vol. 42 [1959-60], 273-287. Raymond E. Brown, “ Parable and Allegory Reconsidered,” NT, Vol. 5 [1962], 36-45.

230 Ibid., 158-59.

118

kingdom of God. Therefore, the birth of Jesus and his ministry on earth indicated that the kingdom of God had come in its entirety with manifestation of God’s awesome power. Dodd educated that the kingdom of God had come in its plenary form in the teachings of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Forming this conviction in this analysis, Dodd interpreted the parables from the viewpoint of “realized” eschatology. He entirely ignored eschatological passages such as Mark 13:28-30; Mt. 24:45-51; Mt.25: 1-13; Lk.

12:35-38. He argued that these passages do not refer to the consummation but they were crises in the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ.231 According to Robert H. Stein, R.C

Dodd’s analysis was partly fulfilled during the lifetime of Jesus. Jesus did not only enforce a purely “realized” eschatology or a purely “consistent” eschatology, rather

Jesus unraveled the truth that the kingdom of God had come in the fulfillment of Old

Testament prophecies and promises, and was at the same time something awaiting the consummation.232

Another prominent theologian who made an impact on the interpretation of the parables was Joachim Jeremias. In his Magnus opus titled, Die Gleichnisse, (1947), he meticulously built on the work of Dodd, demonstrating his outstanding ability over the

Religious traditions as well as lingua Franca of the Hebrew people during Jesus’ days.

Jeremias in assiduous manner sought to grasp fully the ipsissima verba, “actual words”

231 Ibid., 60.

232 Ibid., 60. See Stein, The Method and Message of Jesus’ Teachings, PP. 65-79.Also see Robert H. Gundry, Matthew-A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art: (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), 495-510. George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom-The eschatological of Biblical Realism: [New York: Harper and Row, 1964], 225-238.

119

of Jesus in the parables.233 The archetype of parables that deal with the Sitz im Leben and ipsissima verba are the parables of the lost sheep (Lk. 15:4-6), and the parable of the lost coin (Lk. 15:8-10). Even though the Sitz im Leben of these parables demonstrate God’s unquenchable love for the lost, in their proper context, historical

Jesus directed them to the Pharisees and the scribes.234 These disgruntled social powers vehemently opposed Jesus dining with publicans and sinners (Lk. 15:1-2; Mk. 2:

16-17; Mt. 11:19; Lk. 7: 39; 19:7). Even though they illustrate God’s redeeming grace, they are both an apology and a proclamation. Empirically, they are an apology or defense of Jesus’ behavior in associating with publicans, harlots, and sinners. They are also a proclamation because in this divine assignment, God is visiting his people in fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies.235

The question of why Jesus taught in parables is so significant in understanding parabolic interpretation and teaching in the 21st century Church. In the first instance, scholars have unanimously concurred that the primordial reason pertaining to Jesus’ use of parables was to conceal the truth or his teaching from outsiders. Mark 4:10-12 is a prototype of explanation pertaining to concealment. Jesus needed to hibernate the truth from them because they were hostile personalities in his audience. The

Sadducees considered him a threat to their sacerdotal system. Jesus vehemently repudiated their doctrine (Mk. 12:18-27) because they grossly abused their office in

233 Ibid., 60.

234 Ibid., 61.

235 Ibid., 61, 62.

120

performing temple duties (Mk. 11: 15-19). They also believed Jesus was a direct threat to their civil and religious authority (Mk. 11:11; 27-33).236

On the same note, Jesus vehemently attacked the Pharisees for their high-level hypocrisy in the Jewish society (Mt. 23:13-36). While they go beyond what the law requires, and they tithe the most insignificant proportion of their garden harvest, they willfully neglect issues that confront the very fabric of their communities, and societies in matters regarding the law (Mt. 23: 23-24). Inwardly they are ravenous wolves and ferocious animals because they are full of pretentiousness and chart the course of social anarchy.237 In addition, using parables to proclaim the “coming kingdom” stemmed down political venom that Pontus Pilate might have poured out on Jesus and his disciples for challenging the Roman Empire in his proclamation of the kingdom of

God. Thus using terms such as “the “Mustard seed, “leaven” tares”, fish” appeared politically friendly and harmless. It made it extremely difficult to bring any charges against him (Mk.14: 55-59).238 Similarly, Paul in writing to the Romans accentuated that the unbelief of the Jewish people was because of divine toughening of their heart in order that the message of deliverance could be extended to the gentiles (Rom. 1125-

32). In consonance with this, Jesus concealed his message of the kingdom from the

Pharisees and Sadducees so that they might not repent and be forgiven.239

236 Ibid., 33. Cf. Mtt.14:58; Jon 11: 47-50.

237 Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew as a Story (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), 21.

238 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parable (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1981), 34.

239 Ibid., 34. 121

The second most important reason why Jesus taught in parables was “to reveal and illustrate his message to both his disciples and those outside.”240 It was the most effective pedagogical tool used by Jesus. For instance, the parables of the prodigal son, the lost sheep, and the lost coin recorded in Lk. 15:1-32 demonstrates the redemptive work of God for the lost. The parable of the Good Samaritan on its part reveals an epitome of love showered by one’s neighbor. For those “outside”, the Pharisees,

Sadducees, scribes, and teachers of the law, they sometimes understood that his teaching was against them and they tried to harm him. “Then they looked for a way to arrest him because they knew he had spoken the parable against them. But they were afraid of the crowd; so they left him and went away” (Mk.12:12).241

The final reason why Jesus taught in parables was “to disarm his audience.”242

Jesus at times sought to abate the virulent attack of his enemies and hardness of heart of his audience by means of a parable. A classic example of Old Testament parable that stemmed out hardness of heart is 2 Sam 12: 1-4. If Prophet Nathan had presented the message of David’s adultery and subsequent murder of Uriah to him directly, he might have hardened his heart. I would also want to add that this could engender hostility between the prophet and the king. Such unprofessional behavior could culminate into a chaotic kingdom with the Davidic dynasty experiencing an early defeat. To resolve the king’s problem, Nathan shrewdly employed a parable and David became grossly

240 Ibid., 35.

241 Ibid., 35.

242 Ibid., 35.

122

involved in it. When his heart was ushered into grasping the tenets of the parable, unraveling his iniquitous state, he was completely disarmed of any defensive mechanisms. Jesus used a similar method in Lk. 7:36-50; and 15:1-2 to disarm his listeners.243

The Parables of the Four Soils (Mt. 13:1-23; Mk 4:1-9; Lk 8: 4-8)

The Sitz im Leiben of the parable is fathomed in Jesus pronouncement that the kingdom of God has come among men. Prior to this announcement, the Jews expected the manifestation of God’s insurmountable power, which would decimate godless nations and pull down dominions and territories (Dan 2: 44). The dominion of wicked rulers would utterly be annihilated and the kingdom rendered to the sanctified people of the most High, so that all nations and kingdoms should serve and obey them (Dan

2:7)244 Nevertheless, the kingdom of God had come upon all men. The cardinal purpose of the kingdom was not to shatter evil. It was not an eschatological display of power over irresistible powers of the kingdom of darkness. Rather, the kingdom in its present function is compared to a farmer sowing seed. The word of the kingdom may be like seed on the roadside and never take root, or it may be received superficially only to die;

243 Ibid., 35.

244 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), 226. Cf. The standard studies by Trench, A.B. Bruce, and M. Dods. See A. Plummer, The Gospel according to St. Mark, 1914], 125. N. Gledenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, 1950], 244ff. Cf.Life Application study Bible, NIV, Wheaton, Illinois, Tyndale House 1984], 1989. It states, “The four types of soil represent different responses to God’s message. People respond differently because they are in different states of readiness. Some are hardened, others are shallow, others are contaminated by distracting worries, and some are receptive.”

123

it may be choked by the cares of life, which is hostile to the kingdom of God. The logos,

(word) does not get rid of the wicked, who oppose the tenets of the kingdom.

Nonetheless, the kingdom is working quietly, secretly among men. It does not impose itself on men and women, but they must be willing to receive the logos (the word) of the basilia (kingdom), which is practically identical with the kingdom itself bringing forth much fruit.245

The Parables of the Tares (Mt. 13:24-30, 36-43)

There has been severe debate over the authenticity and interpretation of this parable over the years. A vast majority of intellectuals fiercely argue for the analysis that the interpretation is essentially a Matthean invention. Several other scholars anchor their conclusion in Jeremias’ analysis of this passage, which in their opinion is

“impossible to avoid the conclusion that the interpretation of the parable of the tares is the work of Matthew himself.” The interpretation is widely believed to be the work of

Matthew.”246 Essentially, its authenticity is greatly debated over the years. Some believe that verses 24b-26 constitute the hallmark of the parable. Others insist that the cardinal core composes of verse 24b, 26b, 30b, whereas others argue for the indispensable authenticity of the entire parable.247 According to Robert H. Stein, since the parable is

245 Ibid., 226.

246 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 143.

247 Ibid., 143.

124

located in the Gospel of Thomas 57, and there is no evidence of internal contradictions, it should be recognized as authentic. It should also be acknowledged as a masterpiece, heavily laden with Matthean terminology as an editorial rewording of Jesus’ teaching.248

The parable of the tares equally illustrates the ministry of the kingdom. The kingdom is hidden, and carries unexpected presence in the world. The identity of the servants is irrelevant since that constitutes only local color, and yet the enemy who sows the weed vanishes from the scene is also insignificant to the interpretation of the parable. Bundles into which the weeds are gathered is local and cultural. Likewise, the sleeping of the servant does not portray dereliction of duty; it was merely out of exhaustion.249 However, the addition of the “reapers” in verse 30 as a dimension cannot be ignored. There is no fundamental reason to deny the substantial authenticity of this image. The Gospel of Thomas also makes a distinction between the “servants” and the “reapers.”250

The principal point is that good men, women, and evil people must grow, interact, work, and congregate in the world, not in the Church until the end of the age when an irresistible separation will occur. George Eldon Ladd affirms, “To attempt such a separation before the eschatological battle will involve the uprooting of society itself.”251

248 Ibid., 143.

249 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 227.

250 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 144.

251 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 227. Cf. B.T.D Smith, The Parable of the Synoptic Gospels 1937], 125

As a result, the kingdom has come into the world without effecting a separation of people, societies, and communities. This undeniable dichotomization will be envisioned in the eschatological era. This interpretation alone gives the parable its place in Jesus’ pronouncement of the kingdom of God.252 At his coming, the Son of God is given dominion (Dan 4:7) so that the “world” will be purged of the power of the evil one and become the kingdom of the son of man. At this time, he will then “gather out of his kingdom” the unrighteous. This expression means the unrighteous shall not be permitted to enter the kingdom.253The kingdom has actually come, but society is not uprooted or pulled down. That is the mystery of the kingdom. George Eldon Ladd in a similar dimension emphasis that Mt. 13: 41 cannot be interpreted to mean, evil men will be gathered out of “the kingdom.” It means that they will be separated from the righteous so that they do not enter the kingdom. This scripture is supported by Mt. 8:

11-12 where strangers will come from far to enter the kingdom of heaven along with the patriarchs, while “the subjects of the kingdom be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” The conclusion of this parable is that the kingdom has come into history in such a manner that society is not disrupted.

The elect of the kingdom have received its supernatural reign and have taken

196 ff. A.H McNeie, The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 1915] 202. W.C. Allen, The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 1913], 70.

252 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964], 226. Such an apt interpretation is documented by J. Schniewind, Das Evangelium nach Markus, 1952), 169. N.A Dahl, StTh, V, 1952], 151ff.

253 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 145.

126

possession of its manifold blessings. The dichotomization will occur at the consummation.

The Parable of the Mustard seed (Mt.13: 31-32; Mk. 4:30-34)

Many interpreters believe in the impression that the Church would grow to be a magnificent institution, illustrates the parable of the mustard seed254. The parable further demonstrates that the kingdom will one day be like a tree, even though it is already present in the world, tiny and insignificant. Others interpret it as a mammoth growth of the Church. This interpretation is erroneously based on the identification of the kingdom as the Church.255 Others interpret it as the growth of the circle of Jesus’ disciples who are considered to form a new community.256 The mustard seed was actually not the smallest seed known in Ancient near East. It was rather a proverbial illustration of smallness within the context of faith and the kingdom of God.257

The Jews expected the kingdom to be like a great tree under which the nation would find shelter. For them, a mere illustration of the kingdom did not constitute an evidence of the presence of the kingdom. They yearned for an all-encompassing

254 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 230. Cf. Trent, Goebel, H. B. Swete, on the parables, Cf also N. Celdenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, [1950], 377; and B.F.C Atkinson, The New Bible Commentary- The Gospel According to St. Luke, 1930], 277.

255 Ibid.,p. 230 .Others believe that the parable cannot be authenticated. Cf. C.G Montefiore, The Synoptic Gospels, 1927], 107-108.

256Ibid., p. 230.Cf. C.J cadoux. The Historic Mission of Jesus [n.d], 113-114, 131. R.N Flew, Jesus and His Church, 1943], 27ff.

257 Ibid., 230. Cf. Mt. 17:20; Lk 17:6. Strack and Billerback, kommentar in Loc.

127

manifestation of God’s sovereign reign. It was philosophically and empirically impossible in their view to accept Jesus as the Messiah of the kingdom. Even though the Jews rejected Jesus and failed to perceive the kingdom in Jesus, the smallness and relative insignificance of what was happening in his ministry did not exclude the secret presence of the kingdom of God.258

The Parable of the Yeast ( Mt. 13:33-35)

The fundamental interpretation of this parable is that the kingdom of God will someday rule over all the earth. It has already entered the world in an inconceivable or imperceptible manner. Its theological impetus is illustrated only in the life setting of

Jesus’ ministry. The Jews believed in the mighty, irresistible, and invincible character of the eschatological kingdom. They held the belief that the coming of the kingdom would usher in a new world order, a dimension of complete change in their favor, anchoring their belief in the philosophical thought that the present evil order of the world and society would be utterly displaced by the kingdom of God. Jesus did not undertake such a revolutionary project. Jesus was not a totalitarian in his approach to kingdom ethics; neither was he a warlord and a physical combatant ready to vanquish the enemy in a surface-to-surface biological or chemical battle. His approach to the kingdom of God was orchestrated divinely to salvage the downtrodden and the entire world from the

258 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom:The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 233. Cf. N.A Dahl, StTh. V 1952), 147-148. Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 1954], 91.C.E. B Cranfield, The Gospel According to St. Mark, (1959), 170.

128

sulfur of fire awaiting them. When yeast is mixed with a mass of dough, the experimental result is a complete metamorphosis of the dough. The idea of the kingdom of God overpowering the world through the process of gradual permeation and inner transformation was utterly foreign to Jewish thought.259

The Parable of the Treasure and the Pearl (Mt.13:45-46)

In both of these parables, the treasure and the pearl are acquired by means of purchase. A number of scholars tend to interpret the parables tenaciously using purchase as a core of the stories. This is a total misinterpretation of parabolic approach to scriptural elucidation.260 In the ancient near East, the safest “bank” for the protection of property and treasure was burying the treasure. By doing so, the owner would protect it from being stolen by thieves or being robbed of it by conquering enemies. If the owner died, was murdered, or taken into captivity, such treasure would remain buried for centuries.261 The parable of the pearl similarly describes a merchant seeking to buy pearls. The Greek expression used to illustrate “merchant” is emporos, a wholesale dealer who is involved in the purchasing of pearls.262 The most significant and apt

259 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom:The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 231. Cf. N.A Dahl, StTh. V 1952], 148-149.

260 Ibid., 234. G.C Morgan permitted this feature to determine the interpretation, rendering the parabolic method a complete misunderstanding. The Parables of The Kingdom, (1907), 136.

261 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 99.

262 Ibid., 101.

129

interpretation is that in both parables, the kingdom of God is immeasurable worth and is to be sought above all other possessions. If it costs a man everything he possesses, it is woefully inadequate in comparison with gaining the kingdom of God. Robert H. Stein incisively declares, “The end stress of both parables lies with each man selling all and purchasing the treasure. It is the behavior of both men that receives the primary emphasis in the two parables. They both reacted similarly. They sold all that they had to possess the treasure/pearl.”263 For Matthew, it is the “sacrifice” aspect of the parables in the Sitz im Leben, that obtains the major prominence. He admonishes his readers through the duel parables that having found the kingdom of heaven and having surrendered to it, they must continue in faithful to that commitment. He urges them to

“hold fast to the confession of hope without wavering” (Heb. 10:23, “to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12), and “to be faithful, even to the point of death” (Rev. 2:10).

On the contrary, the Jews waited in anticipation of the kingdom of God to extricate them from the oppression of Roman rule. The kingdom had come in unexpected way, in a form, which might easily be overlooked and despised.

Nonetheless, to accept “the yoke of the kingdom” and form an alliance with the

Pharisees in their utter devotion to the law gave them inestimable prestige in the eyes of the Jews.264 If Jesus had offered to lead an insurgence against Rome, it could engender

263 Ibid., 103. Cf. Luke 14:28-33; Mt. 8:19-22; 10:37-38 which dilate on cost of discipleship.

264 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 235. Cf. Josephus, Antiquities 13: 10.6.

130

an enthusiastic response from the power structure of the Jewish community, the

Pharisees, the Sadducees, the essences, teachers of the law, and the chief priest.265

The parable of the Net (Mt.13:47-52)

The parable of the net carries the undertone that the kingdom of God has now come into the world without effecting a radical eschatological dichotomization and is to function properly in an intermixed society. The community created by the working of the kingdom involves the World, which is devoid of purity until the eschatological separation. The king of glory will return at the consummation of age to work out a perfect partition, however, prior to this eschatological, and mammoth event, unexpected manifestation of God’s kingdom has already occurred which is like a net accumulating both the rotten and good fish. The invitation to participate in the deeds of the kingdom of

God goes out to all kinds of men and women beckoning them to respond generously to the present discipleship of the kingdom of God.266 The parable has a more conclusive emphasis on the inescapable judgment that awaits false disciples. The introduction of the parable is also linked to the treasure and the pearl, admonishing that failure to give up everything for the sake of the kingdom of God characterizes false discipleship and the dire consequences of such unholy behavior is fiery judgment. According to Robert

265 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 235. See Acts 5:36-37; 21: 38; John 6:15. T.M Mansion, The servant-Messiah, (1953), 8.

266 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 238. Cf. N.A Dahl, StTh. V 1952], 150-151.

131

H. Gundry, the metaphor of fishing might have come immediately from Jesus taking a boat at the start of chapter 13, and from fishing for men as a figure of evangelism (Mt.

4:19). Jesus used the Greek word ballo “throw” in the account of calling his disciples to become fishers of men (Mt. 4:18). This is parallel to the throwing of the dragnet into the sea and throwing the bad fish away (Mt. 13:47-48). “Into the sea” is also parallel to the parable of the tares in Mt. 13:24 which symbolizes the Worldwide extent of Christian

Evangelism (Cf. v.38; 28: 19), and frequent Old Testament portrayal of the nations of the World as a sea.267

Accordingly, the dragnet accumulating or gathering all kinds of fish (V. 48) and collecting (gathering) the weeds in Mt. 13:30 depicts Matthew’s diction. This style is also seen in “gathering of the crowds, an amalgamation of faithful and counterfeit disciples in

13: 2. The “containers” into which the fish are put correspond to the “barn” into which the tares are put in the parable of the weeds (V.30). And the throwing out of the bad corresponds to the burning of the tares in a furnace (Vs. 30, 40-42). Thus the Greek words exho “putting in” and ekballo “throwing out” are archetype of Matthew’s diction

(3:1; 12:8) especially when used for judgment.268 Just as the bad fish were separated from the good ones so will it be at the consummation, the false disciples who pretend to be in the kingdom will be separated from the righteous ones. 269 Matthew 13:51-52 places high premium on the marks of true disciples (Cf. Sir 39: 1-3). His favorite

267 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew, A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), 279.

268 Ibid., 280.

269 Ibid., 280.

132

vocabulary in this context is sunechote, (5:1), and tauta panda where it occurs elsewhere in chapter 13. Tauta Panda therefore refers to the parables in verses 34, and

56. The disciples in accepting the true saying of Jesus responded, “Yes”. This comprehension is fervently reiterated in 9: 28 where evangelist Matthew uses these words in addition to the word kurious “Lord.” Jesus in Matthew 13: 52 responded to the disciples with o de (Cf. vv. 37, 38, 39). The response opened with dua touto (4:2), which denotes that because the true disciples have understood the parables, they will be the kind of scribe demonstrated in chapter 8:19270. Just as Jesus is a new and better

Moses, so his disciples are new and better scribes. Therefore, matheteutheis “disciples” occurs only in Matthew among the Gospels (13: 52; 27:57; 28:19).271 The statement, “is like a man” (owner of a house) is parallel to the opening six important parables (V 24b,

31b, 33b, 44a, 45a, and 47a especially those in described in 24b and 45a where Jesus employed “a man” as a designation of a true disciple. It represents the housemaster understanding of the kingdom and emanates from the parable of the hidden treasure

(vv. 44). The “new things” expounded in this verse portrays the new understanding acquired through the illustrations of the parables while “the things” stand for the comprehension of things before the parabolic pedagogical presentation.272

270 Ibid., 280-281.

271 Ibid., .281.

272 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), 281. It must also be emphasized that the injunction to make disciples of all nations (Mt 28:19) signifies a portrayal of a “disciple-scribe”, which applies to every regenerated believer and not a designated class of people in the Church. Nonetheless, the figurative references made to speaking out of new and old understanding denotes that emphasis is heavily placed on the instruction of the kingdom of God (cf. vv. 36c and 51a).

133

The Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25: 1-13)

The parable defines watching as doing good works, over against Antinomianism.

The believers of antinomianism opposed Jesus’ teaching of dikaisune, “righteousness.”

Matthew aptly wrote the parable of the ten virgins by relying heavily on Markan material

(Mk 13: 33-37) and Lukan’s traditions (Lk 12: 35-38; 13:25-28). His special lexical items are pote and omouthesetai and “the kingdom of heaven” (25:7). The future tense “will be like” alludes to the eschatological age (v. 12). According to Robert. H. Gundry, the number of ten is taken from the ten slaves in the next parable (Mt. 25: 14-30; Luke

19:11-27). Matthew however excludes that number in the following parable because he has already executed that in this parable. “Their lamps” tas lampadas, eauton is derived from the diction recorded in Luke 12:35, which declares, “Be dressed ready for service, and keep your lamps burning.”273 In Judith 10:22 however, the Greek word used refers to “lamps” as it denotes the same linguistic representation in Acts 20: 8 and a Greek translation of Dan 5:5. Rabbinic literature speaks of lamps that are copper bowls filled with oil and rags and fasted to a pole. Verse 8 states that lamps are about to go out because the bridegroom delayed in coming to the banquet hall. Waiting for the second coming of Jesus requires dexterity, patience, and righteous deeds.274

273 Ibid., 498.

274 Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975), 466. Cf. According to Schweizer, the bridegroom symbolizes God in Isaiah 62:5, would then be an allusion to God’s time of salvation as in Mark 19:12. Matt hew, however identifies the bridegroom with Jesus by means of the terminology used in Mt. 25: 11-12 which is Reminiscent of Mt. 7:22-23.

134

Additionally, the expression that five of them were foolish and five were wise signifies Matthew’s style of contrast. The Greek word de contrasts the portioning into two classes of five summing up to ten. It is also a diction envisioned in Matthean writings. For instance, he has in his linguistics repertoire the following diction: “the

Faithful and wise servants versus bad servants” (24: 45-51), the good and faithful servant versus the evil and sluggish servant (25: 14-30). These words represent his special designations for non-membership and membership of the kingdom of heaven.

The foolish failed woefully to take extra oil with them while the five wise proactive virgins carried oil with them. Thus taking enough oil to keep the lamps burning signifies good works in total obedience to Jesus’ teaching. Matthew states assertively in chapter 5: 14-

16 that, the lamplight represents “good works. In addition, failure to take adequate oil represents blatant disobedience to Jesus instructions on the kingdom of God. The disobedience are regarded as lawlessness and vituperative attitude towards kingdom ideologies. Noncompliance may also include acts of omission and commission as good works contrast with hypocrisy of the scribes and the Pharisees in chapters 5-7.

According to Gundry, good works glorifies the Father; while hypocrisy emanates self- glorification.275 The plea of the foolish virgins on their return to enter the wedding hall represents the attempt of false disciples to gain access to the kingdom of God at the last judgment. “I do not know you” demonstrates the rejection of the false disciples to

275 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew-A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), 499. The foolish five failed to exhibit good works not because they did not take enough oil with them but they failed to anticipate the delay of the Parousia. Those who fail to anticipate the delay of the return of Christ lose the spiritual impetus to do acts of dykaiosyne, “righteousness.”

135

enter the kingdom of heaven at the Parousia. In concluding this parable, evangelist

Matthew reiterates Christians to keep watching because they do not know the day or the hour the Parousia will occur. Additionally, intensified persecution during the tribulation may compel staunch Christians to profess antinomianism.276 Another antithetic parallelism is exhibited in the parable is the request made by the foolish virgins which states, “Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out” signifies Jesus’ exhortation that the disciples must keep their lamps burning in expectation of the

Parousia (Luke 12: 35-36). Hence, the going out of the lamps represents conduct that contravenes the righteousness of the kingdom of God. In addition, going out to purchase oil in the middle of the night displays their lack of watchfulness for the arrival of the bridegroom and hence for Jesus. The wise virgins on the other hand demonstrate keenness for a wedding, connoting their vigilance to make the messianic banquet a celebratory feast (22:1-15).277

The Parable of the Loaned Money (Matthew 25:14-30; Mark 13:34; Lk 19:11-

27)

Matthew dilates on the parable enshrined in Mark 13:34 but gives an in-depth analysis of the parable by unraveling the parable recorded in Luke 19: 11-27 after the dramatic story of Zacchaeus in Jericho. The main objective here is the definition of

276 Ibid., 502.

277 Ibid., 501-502. 136

watching as executing righteous (dikaiosune) deeds (Mt. 25:1-13).278 To compensate the ten minas recorded in the Gospel of Luke, Matthew employs the expression, “And to one he gave five talents, and to another two, and to another one.” According to Robert

H. Gundry, talents had much more value than minas. Talents were the largest denominations of all times and ranged from $300 to $1700 each or from 50 to 80 pound in weight.279 Thus, the substitution of talents for minas places high premium on righteous conduct surpassing that of the Pharisees and the scribes. Five reflects the preceding five foolish virgins and five wises virgins (25:1-13). Even though dunamai means “miracle”, in this context, the cognate verb employed signifies “ability”. According to the master’s own ability, he instructed the servants to engage studiously in profitable business ventures until he returned from his journey. According to Robert. H. Gundry, the five talents earned by the first servant totaled his income to ten talents. Evangelist

Matthew uses special vocabulary to describe what the servants did to the talents he entrusted to them. “The one who received the five talents” labon is derived from a favorite verb of Matthew (21: 16) “esgasato “worked”. The verb also anticipates psosesyasato, worked for”, “made more”. The use of this verb is to highlight on watchfulness. Consequently, two servants who gained more talents signify watchfulness in righteous deeds as we sojourn in the kingdom of God. The last servant however, failed to gained more talents because he lacked the desired righteousness in the kingdom of God, and since he lacked the required spiritual dynamism, it means he

278 Ibid., 502.

279 Ibid., 503. 137

was not watchful.280 In a similar dimension, the servant with the highest performing history is highlighted as an example to be emulated. The talents do not refer to inborn talents; they symbolize opportunities to do good works. Appropriately, the single objective or reality sought for in this parable is that Jesus will mete out severe punishment to disciples who engage in pretentious activities by failing to execute good deeds. The weeping and gnashing of teeth signals the punishment awaiting the wicked at the eschatological era. Just as the good fish were separated from the bad ones in the parable of the net, and just as the wheat was separated from the tares in the parable of the tares, the slothful servant and those who fail woefully to execute righteous deeds will be first gathered by the angels. Then, they will be thrown into hell fire where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth for life everlasting.

The Parable of the Workers Paid Equally (Mtt.20:1-16)

In the social setting, the interpretation of this parable is analyzed in the circumstance of severe joblessness, which was a reality in Israel during Jesus’ era. The social situation of the time was characterized by abject poverty and hunger as a result economic down turn.281 Hence, Jeremias incisively declares, “It is because of his pity for their poverty that the owner allows them to be paid a full day’s wages. In this case the

280 Ibid., 505-510.

281 G.R Beastley-Murray, Jesus, and the Kingdom (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986),

117.

138

parable does not depict an arbitrary action, but the behavior of a large-hearted man who is compassionate and full of sympathy for the poor”282 in the literary context, however, the commencement of chapter 19 is an intriguing test question posed to Jesus by the

Pharisees concerning divorce. At the conclusion of the intellectual battle between the two parties, the Messiah refused to permit divorce in the Christian community. This episode is trailed instantaneously by the blessing of “children.” Then, the rich ruler imbued with legalistic ideas as a Pharisee failed woefully to obey Jesus’ commands.

Additionally, since the ending of chapter 19 and chapter 20 are the same, we may conjecture that the “last” whom Jesus rebuked at the closing stages of the parable may refer to the Pharisees. Despite the legalistic tendencies exhibited by the incorrigible

Rich Ruler, “ the last “ in this context are to be presented with the mercy, love, goodness, kindness, and providence of God . Beasley-Murray incisively declares,

“Nothing could be closer to the parable of the Good Employer than this, indicating that

Matthew knew full well, that the last are the publicans and sinners and the “first” are the

Pharisaic objectors to Jesus and his ministry.”283

The interpretation of the parable for those Scrutinized as the “last” and their attitude to the proclamation of the kingdom are those on whom God lavishes his

282 Joachim Jeremias, Parables of Jesus (Oxford: Oxford Press, 1947], 37.

283 G.R Beastley-Murray, Jesus, and the Kingdom (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1986) P.117. Cf. Matt. 21:31 explicates that even though the first son earlier refused to undertake godly projects, obeyed his father’s command later and did the work required of him. The second son, even though he warmly accepted to execute the responsibility that his father entrusted to him failed miserably to obey his father’s commands. The publicans and sinners who have accepted Jesus and his ministry are the ones to receive the blessings and spiritual wealth of the kingdom ahead of the recalcitrant Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes who have blatantly rejected the Messiah’s proclamation of the kingdom.

139

manifold love, protection, anointing, greatness, emotional health, mental impetus, and psychological momentum. They also receive immeasurable spiritual wealth as well as physical blessings. Most Biblical scholars affirm that the command, “Take your pay and go home” Tanta mounts to dismissal because of their intractable legalistic comprehension of kingdom ideologies. In an effort to procure their own security, they exclude themselves from the sovereign power, the source of grace.284 Robert H. Stein asserts, “Jesus in the parable wanted to show the Pharisees and the Scribes how unjustified, hateful, loveless, and unmerciful their criticism was.”285 Robert H. Stein further accentuates, “ If the proposed Sitz im Leben of the parable is indeed Jesus’ defense of his association with publicans and sinners and his offering to them the kingdom of God, then there is a sense in which the parable does reveal that the last will be the first, and the first last.”286 For me it is imperative to assert that one may be emotionally traumatized, spiritually famine, and lacks the desire mental impetus in one’s cultural setting, but the acceptance of Jesus and his ministry as he proclaims the kingdom of God will save the social outcasts, the down trodden and the ostracized in the 21st century. Our social classification plays an insignificant role in the acceptance of

Jesus Christ. Just as Jesus bestowed love and acceptance on publicans, sinners and prostitutes, if we accept him, we will be blessed both in the spiritual and physical dimensions of the kingdom.

284 Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus (Oxford: Oxford Press, 1947), 154.

285 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 128.

286 Ibid., 128.

140

The Samaritan Problem and the Parable of the Good Samaritan

(John 4:1-26; Lk.10:25-37)

There were several reasons for the continuous existence of acrimony, vindictiveness, and virulent hatred between the Jews and the Samaritans. It was based on these reasons, and animosities that the woman in John 4: 9 retorted when Jesus requested her for a drink. Scripture states, “The Samaritan woman said to him, you are a Jew, and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink? (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans).” In the first place, after the death of Solomon in 922

B.C, Jeroboam revolted against the son of Solomon who was anointed king over the

Kingdom. In his revolt, he broke away from Rohoboam, forming the northern kingdom with ten tribes. These nations of rebels decimated the unity of God’s people, gingering chaos between the northern and southern kingdoms. Even though they formed alliance on a few occasions to oust their archenemies, they nevertheless had their differences.

Hence, the ten tribes came to be known as Israel, Ephraim, and Samaria at various times. The Samaritans of Jesus’ days were descendants of these rebels who destroyed the unity of God’s people. The glory that surrounded the monarchy was also destroyed plunging the people of God into total pandemonium. Hence, the Samaritans were regarded as Israel’s enemies.

141

Concisely, the Mishnah explicates that Samaritan women were the worst unclean women in the region. The Mishnah describes them as menstruants from the cradle. If

Jesus had accepted a drink from the woman’ goblet, his fellow Jews would have considered him as ritually unclean because many Jews would interpret that to mean communicating impurities to the vessel. Mishnah Abot 1.5 abhors speaking with a woman since engaging in conversation with a woman, even one’s spouse was a waste of time and a deviation from the commands of the Torah. Such discussion risked provoking curses or evil of magnitude proportions on oneself.287

This explication ushers us into grasping the Biblical truth about the parable of the

Good Samaritan in Luke 10: 25-37. According to Robert H. Stein, “the parable is not a pleasant tale about the Traveler who did his Good Deed: it is a damning indictment of social, racial, and religious superiority.”288 The parable depicts a very dangerous seventeen-mile highway that linked Jerusalem to Jericho. Psalm 23 describes a road of that nature as the valley of the shadow of death. Armed robbers ambushed a man, gave him a severe beating and left him to his fate. A priest and a Levite blatantly refused to assist him when they passed by. On the contrary, a Samaritan who was despised by

Jews passed by, had compassion for the wounded man, and exhibited high- level medical skills by caring for the victim of the robbers. He dressed up the victim’s wounds, anointed his wounds with oil, and transported him on his donkey to an inn. He also left

287 Darrell L. Bock., Jesus According to Scripture ( Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 435.

Cf. Ant.20.6.1 &118; War 2.12.3&2.32; Life52&269.

288 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 77. See Jones, The Art and Truth of the Parables, .258.

142

money to pay for his stay until he returned.289 Recitation of the shema in Deut. 6:5 and

Lev. 19: 18 asserted that it was imperative for a true Israelite to love God totally and one’s neighbor as oneself.290 In this context, Jesus posed a question to the lawyer.

“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of

Robbers? It was evident that the Samaritan’s compassion for the wounded man could not be challenged by any human endeavor. The lawyer exhibiting gross enormity of pomposity refused to mention the Samaritan for his virtuous lifestyle but said, “The one who had mercy on him.” The indictment is that the priest and the Levite who were experts of the law, and should have lived above reproach by helping the wounded man failed miserably and woefully to exhibit godly gesture to him. Nevertheless, the despised religiously ignorant Samaritan lived up to the expectations of the law better than the so- called connoisseurs of the Torah. The parable is therefore an indictment of social, racial, and religious superiority over righteous people.291 Actually, the parable is a virulent attack against racial, social, and religious bigotry. Robert H. Stein asserts, “The parable of the Good Samaritan teaches us to love our neighbor and that this love is to be unconditional and unqualified. The parable rejects all prejudice and discrimination,

289 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 255.

290 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 255. See also Bock, Luke 9: 51-24:53, 10:25-26, 10: 35-36. Two Rabbis, Akiba & Hillel of the first and second centuries, considered love for one’s neighbor as representative of the entire Torah ( Sipra on Lev. 19:18[ akiba]; Sabbat 31 (hillel).

291 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 255- 256.

143

be it racial, intellectual, financial, religious, nationalistic, which in any way would restrict our doing acts of love.”292

The Spiritual, and Political Kingdom of Christ, and God’s Spiritual reign in the Church

The spiritual kingdom of Christ is identified as sovereign regime over the regnum gratiae, that is a rule exercised over his chosen people and the Church. It is described as a spiritual sovereignty because it is directly related to a spiritual realm.293 It is mediatorial governance over his people as it culminates into the salvation of His people.

It is also spiritual because the method of governance is not totalitarian in nature but by the word and Spirit, which is the Spirit of truth, and “hakmah” wisdom, of mishpat or tsedaqah “justice” and qadesh “holiness” and of grace and mercy.294 God’s spiritual kingdom refers to the sovereign reign of God in the hearts of men and women who are elected, sanctified, and prepared by the word of the Spirit to live eternally in the presence of God. However, the unsaved are repudiated from the awesome presence of

God, for a person can only be redeemed of their sins and enter the presence of God by believing in Jesus Christ and being regenerated (John 3:3-7).295 Accordingly, the

292 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 79.

293 Luis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 406.

294 Ibid., 406.

295 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things ( Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 463.

144

publicans and sinners are the first to embrace kingdom ideologies warmly ahead of the obstinate, legalistic erudite of the Jewish society (Pharisees, Sadducees, and the scribes). They are the last group of disgruntled and unspiritual people who occupy the highest hierarchy of the social strata. They have failed to accept the Messiah and his message.296

Since the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven is spiritual, we would want to deliberate on the doctrine of heaven. Heaven is an authentic dwelling place of departed spirits. It is a tremendous place in the presence of God the Father, God the

Son, and God the Holy Spirit where all regenerated persons have access to when they die. Enoch entered heaven (Gen. 5:24), Elijah also “went up to heaven in a whirlwind” (2

Kings 2:11. Jesus journeyed to heaven at his death, after declaring, “father, into your hands I commend my Spirit”. A repentant criminal nailed adjacent Jesus received heavenly words from Jesus “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Lk. 23:43). St. Paul refers to it as being “absent from the body” and “present with the Lord” (John 14:2-3).

Jesus asserted that he came from heaven and would return there (John 3:13). There are many rooms in his father’s house (John 14:2-3), which is heaven.297

Angels of God are also known to be residents of heaven (Mt. 18:10). They travel from heaven to the earth (John 28:2), and they also come and return to heaven after accomplishing a divine assignment (Lk. 2:13-15). Correspondingly, heaven is God’s

296 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1981), 128.

297 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things ( Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 294.

145

“throne” (Mt. 5:34) where Christ is the crowned king, and sited at the “right hand” of God

(Rom. 8:34; Heb. 1:13), where the angels encamped God with glory, and with praise and worship (Rom. 4-5), where the seraphim sing the tersactus: “Holy, holy, holy is the

LORD almighty” (Is. 6:3).298 He is omnipresent (1kings 8:27); we cannot run away from the sovereign commander of the universe (Ps. 139:7-9). Heaven is actually, a place where the righteous will “see his face” (Rev. 22:4). God the son is also in heaven. “The lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals”(Rev. 5:5). Christ is in heaven and the Holy Spirit is also in heaven; he is described as “the sevenfold Spirit” (Rev. 1:4).

The messianic kingdom is an embodiment of spiritual reign and perfection.

Armaments and ammunitions, or chemical or biological warheads do not govern it; its power is embedded wholly in the sovereign God and the spirit of his might.

Consequently, the kingship of Christ is demonstrated in the gathering of the Church. In his spiritual governance, he protects, and maintains divine perfection. His rule is profoundly illuminated in Ps. 2:6; 45:6-7 (Cf. Heb. 1:8-9); 132:11; Is. 9:6-7; Jer. 23: 5-6;

Mic. 5: 2; Zech. 6:13; Lk. 1:33; 19:27, 38; 22:29; John 18: 36-37; Acts 2: 3-36.299

Christ is the spiritual overlord of the ekklesia “Church” (Eph. 1:22; 4:15; 5:23;

Col.1: 18; 2:19. He is also clothed with exousia, “authority” as the head of the Church (1

Cor. 11:3). Because he is the overlord of the Church, he wields power to rule it in its

298 Ibid., 295.

299 Luis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 406.

146

organic and spiritual dimensions. While the kingship of Christ aptly describes how majestic he is clothed with authority, and demonstrates his power in the judicial domain, the headship of Christ is acquiescent to his kingship, and by the working of his Spirit, he exercises dominion over the Church. The regnum gratiae “The redemptive work of

Christ” is identical with “the kingdom of God” or “the kingdom of heaven” where the spiritual dimension is emphasized in the New Testament.300 Appropriately, the spiritual kingdom is demonstrated in diverse ways in the New Testament. The kingdom is not a natural and an external kingdom of the Jews, Mt. 8:11-12; 21:43; Lk. 17:21; John18: 36.

The kingdom can be entered only by regeneration, John 3:3-5. It is in the hearts of people, Lk. 17:21, “is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit,” (Rom 14:17), and is not of this present age but a kingdom characterized by truth, John 18:36-37.301

In chapter two, the messianic rule in his kingdom through the call of Abraham, and through the Mosaic covenant at Mount Sinai and the role of Davidic covenant are given an in-depth analysis. However, the political dimension of the messianic kingdom cannot be glossed over. Prophet Isaiah prognosticated about the coming of the

Messiah, “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting

Father, Prince of Peace” (Is. 9:6). His deity and political reign is stated categorically in this scripture. He is not only a divine personality; he is man, born to reign over all people. Furthermore, in order to bring to a perfect state of the restoration of the kingdom

300 Ibid., 408.

301 Ibid., 408.

147

of David, God will bring his chosen people to the land (Is. 11:11-12). According to

Norman Geisler, the political reign of the Messiah was partly fulfilled on May 5, 1948 when Israel was declared a nation and millions of Jews extricated from Nazi concentration camps and made to return to Israel.302 The Old Testament has severally asserted that the Messianic kingdom will be monarchical. The Messiah will sit on

David’s throne (cf. 2 Sam. 7:12ff) and “the government will be on his shoulders” (Is.

9:6). Disastrously, the Babylonians annihilated the early political kingdom through which the Messiah could reign and the glory of God departed (Ezek. 11:23). The destruction of the political empire of Israel led to the transfer of power to the Gentiles (Hosea 3:4).

Nevertheless, God would reconstruct the devastated Davidic kingdom, which was decimated because of the invasion of other political powers (Amos 9:11). The modernized kingdom will not only be moral or spiritual kingdom but also political (Micah

4:7-8).303

The prophet Daniel after deliberating on four dauntless successive earthly empires namely, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome and ten kings to succeed them proclaims, “In the times of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever” (Dan 2:44). In consonance with scriptures, Jesus pedagogical presentation is firmly rooted in the Old

Testament (cf. Mt. 5: 17-18) that the Messiah and his forerunner, John the Baptist

302 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 468.

303 Ibid., 469-470.

148

employed a phrase evocative of that of Daniel. Norman Geisler affirms that there is the literal sense of a visible, outward political kingdom, which resonates with biblical use of the terms “tribes or Israel in Mt. 19:28. Similarly, the humiliation of king

Nebuchadnezzar was to prepare him to eventually profess: “The most high is sovereign over the kingdom of men and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of men” (Dan. 4:17). There is an element of an earthly political kingdom in the king’s humiliation and confession of the supremacy of the sovereign God.304. Norman

Geisler affirms, “According to The Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy by J. Barton Payne

(1922-1979)305, some one hundred thirteen prophecies of the coming Messiah were fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth in the New Testament. Many of these are connected to the claims that He will one day set up a messianic government in Jerusalem and reign over the whole earth.”306

There are innumerable Old Testament passages that vividly illustrate that the

Messiah reigns in glory and in power. Scripture cites, “The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up to David a righteous branch, a king who will reign wisely and do what is justice in the land in his days, Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety”(Jer. 23:5-6). “He will judge all nations and establish permanent peace in the land” (Micah 4:1-7), with a universal dominion from the city of David, Jerusalem (Zech.

9:9-10). Correspondingly, Isaiah asserts, “The moon will be abashed, the sun ashamed;

304 Ibid., 470.

305 Ibid., 470.

306 Ibid., 472.

149

for the Lord almighty will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and before its elders, gloriously” (Is. 24:23).

The eschatological arrival of the Messianic kingdom will exhibit certain unfathomable characteristics. Both the Old and New Testaments incisively state that the arrival of the messianic kingdom will not be steady or ordinary but swift and calamitous.

The day of the lord’s coming will burn like furnace. The arrogant and the evildoers will be stubble, and they will be set on fire (Malachi 4: 1-6). On that day, the Lord will search

Jerusalem with lamps and punish those who are complacent. Their wealth will be plundered, and their house demolished. The day will be a day of wrath, a day of distress and anguish, a day of trouble and ruin, a day of darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and darkness (Zephaniah 1:12-18). Zechariah 14:1-9 echoes a similar sentiment.

Jerusalem will be captured, the house ransacked, the women raped, and half of the people will be taken into exile. Other Old Testament passages that reiterate the catastrophic day of the Lord are Joel 3:1-2; Isaiah 63:1-4. In the New Testament, the eschatological arrival of the Lord is envisioned properly in Matthew 24:3, 27-30; 26:63-

64.307

In the introduction, I mentioned that several 21st century believers confuse the kingdom of God with the Church, thereby anchoring their faith in legalistic principles instead of living in righteousness according to the word of God. This subsection seeks to address the differences between the kingdom of God and the Church of Christ.

According to Norman Geisler, “While God’s spiritual reign has continued into the Church

307 Ibid. 498.

150

age, this reign is not identical to the Church. God’s spiritual kingdom began while Jesus was on earth, and the Church did not start until the day of Pentecost”308 Ray Baughman states firmly, “The nucleus of 120 believers formed on the day of Pentecost into the

Church by the Holy Spirit is the starting point.”309 John Bright further illustrates that

Jesus did not found an organic institution or a Church but as a Messiah, he beckoned to the remnants of Israel who were obedient to his call to sow the seed of his Church, his ekklesia (that is those who are called out). For that reason, the kingdom was not founded on a specific date; it only began with a handful of those who had been obedient to the call of God.310. It is therefore expedient to explicate that Jesus came proclaiming the kingdom of God several years before the Church was birthed. And the kingdom of

God makes a clarion call to those who seek Christ in righteousness and live by kingdom principles. The Church actually is a mystery, which was not revealed until New

Testament times, constituting a unique organic entity where Jews and Gentiles are coheirs with Christ (Eph.3: 3-5; Col.1: 26-27). The Church is an embodiment of God’s broader spiritual society, it is a narrower group made up of all believers since

Pentecost’s event baptized believers by the Spirit into Christ body. While Christ may not be described as king in the Davidic sense of the political rule localized in Jerusalem, nevertheless, he is the supreme commander of the Church and reigns over it in spiritual

308 Ibid., 475-477.

309 Ray E. Baughman, The Kingdom of God visualized (Chicago: Moody Press, 1972), 115.

310 John Bright, The Kingdom of God (Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1981), 225.

151

dimension.311

Synoptic Attestation of Present and Future of the Kingdom of God

The kingdom of God in the Gospels was Jesus Christ’s core theme. An enormous proportion of Jesus’ pedagogical presentation on the Kingdom is illustrated intensively in the synoptic Gospels. He believed that the Kingdom of God was both present and futuristic in nature. The kingdom describes God’s sovereign rule or reign rather than a realm. The kingdom of God was made manifest through the proclamation and the activity of Jesus Christ. There is well-documented literature on the tension between the present and the future kingdom. Dominical teachings postulate that the

Kingdom of God is present and must be viewed, studied and appraised from the present theological and Biblical illustrations. For instance, they fervently believe that sayings involving existential challenge to the individual in the kingdom of God, as God is acting as king in the ministry of Jesus such as Luke (17:20ff), the kingdom of God is “among you”, or “ within you” lentos upon. Strikingly, the kingdom is something, which men and women can seek here and now (Mt. 6:33; Lk. 12:31). In affirming this, both Filson and

Schniewind point out “to those who seek God’s kingdom, other things which pertain to this life will be added.”312 George Eldon Ladd incisively asserts, “Before the eschatological appearing of God’s kingdom at the end of age, God’s Kingdom has become dynamically active among men in Jesus’ person and mission. The kingdom in

311 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things: (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 494.

312 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom:The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 238. Cf. N.A Dahl, StTh. V 1952], 106. Cf. J. Schniewind, Das Evangelium nach Matthaus [1937], 95. F.V Filson, The Gospel According to St. Matthew, (1960), 34.

152

this age is not merely the abstract concept of God’s universal rule to which men must submit; it is rather a dynamic power at work among men. This is not only the element which sets our Lord’s teaching most distinctively apart from Judaism; it is the heart of his proclamation and the key to his entire mission.”313 In consonance with the above, and before the apocalyptic appearing of God’s kingdom and final manifestation of his sovereign rule over all the earth, God has already manifested his dominion and rule, drawing men and women into the kingdom in advance of the eschatological era. In his present kingdom, however, God exudes his blessings mightily upon people who participate in his redemptive proclamations.

Pointing to his powerful dominion over Satan and his cohorts, Jesus declared, “If it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come

(ephtasen) upon you” (Mt. 12: 28; Lk 11:20). Here, the lord speaks unambiguously of the present coming of the kingdom. The other derivative of the Greek verb (phthaano) carries the nuance, “to come first, “to precede” is found in 1 Thess. 4:15. That is at the

Parousia, the living will not take precedence over the dead, but both will be taken up together to be with the Lord. Dynamic interpretation of the kingdom of God is required by the passage. Ephtthasen eph’ humas implies actual presence and not mere proximity of the kingdom of God. Thus, the interpretation of (Mt. 12:28) ephthasen means “has come” is not merely the signs of the kingdom, or the powers of the

313 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 135.

153

kingdom, but the kingdom itself is present.314 The present aspects of the kingdom of

God also involve discipleship, which stresses true stewardship, prayer, vigilance, and banquet. Indeed Jesus sees the coming of the kingdom upon men and women in his own mighty acts (Mt. 12:28). Therefore, whoever prays for the coming of the kingdom, prays for the establishment of the of Jesus’ authority, that is at work in the words and deeds of his disciples. The presence of the kingdom is already causing “Satan to fall like lightning from heaven” (Lk 10:17-18).315 Jesus further proclaims that the coming of the

Messianic age and promise is being fulfilled. There is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. For instance, Jesus in this context did not promise a better future or promise them that they would take possession of the kingdom. Nevertheless, he boldly announced to them that the kingdom of God had come to them. Actually, the promise was fulfilled in the action of Jesus Christ. This was envisioned in the proclamation of the good news to the poor, release of captives out of bondage, restoring the sight of the blind, and extricating those who were in shackles of oppression.316 Dibelius on his part declares, “The eschatological order is not present, but rather the powers of the kingdom

314 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 139. Cf. Research has proven that the meaning of Ephtthasen is properly illustrated in the Greek Old Testament. Second Chronicles 28: 9 dilates on a rage “which has reached up to heaven” (Ephtthasen). Songs of Songs 2: 12 speaks of “the time of singing has come (Ephtthasen). Dan 6:24 “Before they reached (Ephtthasen, Dan 6:25, Theodotion) the bottom of the den the lions overpowered them.” Dan 7:13, I looked, and before me was one like a son of man coming with the clouds of heavens. He approached (Ephtthasen hoes, Theodotion) the Ancient of days.” Dan 7:22 “ The time came (Ephtthasen, Theodotion) when they possessed the kingdom.” In all these pronouncements, something actually happens in the form of arrival, not merely comes close or in proximity.

315 Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975), 152.

316 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 238. Cf. N.A Dahl, StTh. V 1952], 107.

154

of God, what was present was divine power, the activity of the Spirit of God, the working of God himself.” C. Gloege declared, “The kingdom of God (Gottesherrschaft) is never something which can to some extent be separated from God, but is only a more pregnant expression for God himself.”317 In Jesus, the kingdom of God has been made manifest among men and women in a redemptive way. In its dynamic connotation, the kingdom of God is the sovereign God himself, who is not merely ruling in the universe, but actively establishing his rule among people.

This engenders a biblical battle against sayings related to the future consummation of that has begun in the ministry of Jesus Christ, such as Mt 24: 17. The

Futuristic aspects of the conflict will include the day of the Lord where the wicked will gnash their teeth and languish in perpetual hell fire. It will also include the inauguration of the glorious manifestation of Jesus’ kingdom where every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that he is our Lord, hero, king and conqueror. Teaching on growth and judgment are the significant symbol. The tension between the present and future of the Kingdom has been illustrated properly without laying emphasis on either of them (a clear case is the Lord’s Prayer Lk 11: 2-4).318

‘Now after John the Baptist was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the

Gospel of God, saying, “the time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the Gospel!’ (Mk 1:14-15). The Gospels summarize the preaching of

John the Baptist and of Jesus in the same words, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is

317 Ibid., 141. Cf. Reich Gottes und Kirche im Neuen Testament (1929), 36.

318 Ibid., 141.

155

at hand” (Mk 3:2; 4:17). Ladd states emphatically that John the Baptist and Jesus carried the same message: “The proclamation of an imminent eschatological event, the immediate fulfillment of the apocalyptic hope of the visitation of God to inaugurate the kingdom of God in the age to come.”319 He basilia tou Theou, “the kingdom of God” occurs most frequently in the central portion of Mark’s Gospel (Mk 9: 47-10:25). The passage anchors in the passion of Christ coupled with corrections meted out to the disciples. This portrays how intimately the kingdom of God and discipleship are intricately linked. Hence in the Gospel of Mark, the kingdom of God deals with the passion of the Lord and discipleship. For that matter, human response to the kingdom of

God cannot be glossed over. Strikingly, for six consecutive times, He basilia tou theou,

“the Kingdom of God” is the object of active verbs and human beings are the subject.

This is a vivid indication of human response. More significantly, God is an actor, but a hidden one. According to Boring, “Mark understands human beings to be passive recipients of the kingdom of God in that cluster of sayings where the kingdom of God is linked with “enter the kingdom” is equated with “inherit eternal life” (Boring 139).320

The Gospel of Matthew teaches the ethical principles to those who belong to the kingdom of heaven. In Matthew, the meaning of the kingdom of heaven refers to eschatological kingdom of heaven where the reign of God is portrayed. Strikingly, it refers to the awesome dominion of God (Mt 28: 18; 1 Cor15: 25). It also refers to a specific place for the chosen people (Mt 5:5:3, 10; 7:21). Entering the kingdom of

319 George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom:The eschatological of Biblical Realism (New York, Evanston, and London: Harper and Row, 1964), 238. Cf. N.A Dahl, StTh. V 1952], 106.

320 Ibid., 238-240.

156

heaven does not achieve status or a certificate, but becomes a member of a believing community. This community hosts staunch believers of the Lord Jesus Christ who have both received the salvation of the Lord and have been redeemed of their Adamic sins and their personal sins. Thus, the latter sense of the kingdom of heaven signifies both present and future aspect. The kingdom of God has already come is notified in (Mt

12:28). At the same time it will be inhabited at the parousia (Mt. 13: 24-30) where there will the final judgment, sinners will be bundled up and burned, while the elect will inherit life everlasting. In the eschatological kingdom of God, believers who wield the authority and power of God will reign with Jesus Christ in his new kingdom.321

Matthew’s genealogy describes the beginning of “new” Israel as the fulfillment of that covenant. This has happened in Christ Jesus. It is the purpose of his ministry. Thus the purpose of Jesus ministry can be summed up as, “Bring the kingdom of God and call his people into true worshipping body in order for them to inherit the kingdom of

God. Hence, the “new” Moses theme is subordinate to the theme of the new Israel. In

Jesus the two traditions of the covenant, Abraham and Moses become one. David

Holwerdda elucidates the following:

321 G.C.D. Howley, F. F. Bruce, H.L. Ellison, A New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1969), 156-157.

322 David Holwerda, Jesus, and Israel: One covenant or Two? (Grand Rapids: Earmans, 1995), 33.

157

In the Gospel of Luke the teaching on the kingdom of God principally occurs in the central segment, that the journey narrative which is clearly linked with discipleship.

One of the most important interrogations posed among Lukan readers is eschatology; the so-called Parousia does not emerge to be the major motif of the writing. The component actually dilates on the prediction but it was actually prepared after the passion, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ. Thus before the death of Jesus he exhibited leadership dexterity by training his disciples as kingdom workers. They were to perceive the kingdom of God coming in authority. “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” (Acts1:8). A similar event is recorded in Acts

The Lord’s Prayer and The Kingdom of God (Mt. 6: 9-13)

The Lord’s Prayer is so vital for the survival of the Church because it constitutes a formidable resource foundation for catechism in the kingdom of God. For example,

Tertullian recognizes the Lord’s Prayer as a summary of the entire teaching of faith and morals, “a brevarium tortius Evangelii” (a breviary of the whole Gospel). It is one of the core dogmatic texts in the Church. Zinzindorf in a similar tone affirms that the Lord’s

Prayer is a prayer of the regenerated, of those who are born “from the Holy Spirit” It is also a new form of prayer, which is appropriate for the new covenant. It commences with the statement that the Father is fully aware of the needs of the supplicants, and praying for the reign of the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, over the earth and

158

heaven (vv.7-8).

The word “Father” or “ancestor” is derived from the Hebrew expression “ab.” It is used as the address of small and adult children to their fathers. It was a respectful and honorable address to even the matured.323 In Jewish prayer, there are many derivatives of the address of God as Father, such as abii “my father”, or abiinu “our Father”.

Therefore, ab in this context is characterized by the central idea of fervent relationship, a rapport of intimacy, and the loving kindness of God324. That applies to every person especially “those who are born of the Spirit of God” (Gal 4:6; Mark 14:36). Scripture states, “For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you receive the spirit of sonship, and by him we cry Abba Father” (Rom 8:15). Thus, the

Lord’s Prayer is a prayer of the children of God that is the citizens of the New Israel. It absolutely confirms the covenantal relationship between God the Father and us, his children.

The petition that God’s name be honored or “hallowed” is deeply rooted in the

Old Testament. Isaiah 40:25; 43:15 exhort all believers to hallow the name of God to the ends of the earth. Nevertheless, it is often God’s people who desecrate his name (Lev

22:32; Deut 32: 51 consequently, he always intervenes and honors his own name profaned by men (Is 29: 23-24; 48:11; 52:5-6; Ezek. 36: 23-27; Ps 79: 9). It is closely related to the Jewish Kaddish, which was concluded at the end of the synagogue

323 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), 105.

324 Page H. Kelley, Biblical Hebrew: An Introductory Grammar (Grand Rapids, Michigan, William B. Eerdmans, 1992), 6.

159

worship. It states, “May his name be glorified and honored as holy in the world, which he created according to his will.”325 The petition from the Kaddish demonstrates that the first two petitions in the Lord’s Prayer are the same: God’s name will be honored

(hallowed) when his kingdom comes.

The second petition of the Kaddish explicates, “May he establish his kingdom in your lifetime and in your days and in all the ages of the whole house of Israel soon and in the near future.”326 In consonance with the Kaddish, the second petition refers to the time when the world will become the kingdom of God, and of the Messiah, and he will reign for all eternity, because salvation, power, and sovereignty belong to God (Rev

11:15; 12:10). Even though Christians await the eschatological rule and the reign of

Jesus, he has also promised the kingdom to men and women in the present age.327

Hence in the second petition, the worshipper is supplicating that the Messiah will be a reality in his own life and at the same time is waiting patiently for that day when” He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (Rev 21:4)328

The third petition explicates that God will should be done, as men carry it out just as the law is enacted and men and women carry its precepts (Mt. 5:18). All the Gospels speak of executing God’s will (Mt. 7:21; Mk 3:35; Lk. 12:47-48’ John 7: 17). It must be

325 Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975), 150.

326 Ibid., 151.

327 Ibid., 152.

328 Ibid., 152.

160

emphasized that it is only people who do God’s will can be persuaded of Jesus’ messianic message on the kingdom of righteousness. They vehemently object to antinomianism and cling fervently to righteous deeds. The triumph of God’s will and reign is envisioned in the expression, “on earth as it is in heaven.”329 Furthermore, to be human implies the acceptance of responsibility under God’s sovereign authority and according to his will (Gen 1:26-28).

“Kingdom come” as used in the model prayer plays a significant role in Biblical theology. Even though the replica in Jewish prayer affirms God’s sovereign rule in the present age, Jesus comprehends the coming of the Kingdom as a dynamic and powerful event. Furthermore, “ Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” indicates that it is primarily the work of God, and having his will to be orchestrated in our midst is laudable for our spiritual, physical, and intellectual advancement in the kingdom of God.

Christians can fully participate in the kingdom of God by constantly practicing righteousness. The word of God asserts, “But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well” (Mt. 6:33).

Only three things are commanded to be asked: daily food; forgiveness, and deliverance from temptations (vv14-15). He is Yahweh-Jireh who provides all our needs and satisfies all our hearts desires. The term “daily” preceding “bread” is a translation of the Greek word epiousion. This literally implies “above essence” accentuating the body of Christ as a living bread (John 6:51). Scholars also describe the “daily bread” as the authentic word of God, which provides spiritual nourishment for Christians (Mt. 4:4).

329 Ibid.,153.

161

Above all, Christians must be sustained on daily basis and thus requires necessary supplies for sound living. 330 Out of these necessities, the second is of paramount importance to righteous living. Forgiveness is one of the cardinal values of Jesus’ entire ministry. It was Jesus who incurred the displeasure of being a friend of tax collectors and sinners (Mt 11:19), who called Matthew to be his apostle (9:9), and who promised the kingdom to pagans. The forgiveness granted once and for all is to include actions, words, thoughts, and feelings of ours by which we have hurt or ignored others. Our relationship to God can be healthy and emanate glory and growth only when our relationship to men exhibits the features of agapeo “love” or phileo “Love” and where there is surpassing and unconditional love, there is always forgiveness.331 In Matt. 6:12, lexical item “sins” is d translated as opheima which is also aptly described as “debts.”

Another Greek term used to describe “sins”, or “debts” is paratoma, which literally connotes “false step”, “lapse”, or “slip.” As a result, asking for forgiveness blots out our transgressions, and what seems to be faulty in our lives will be corrected.332

Temptation, which was so virulent during the time of Jesus as we have fathomed the deep meaning of the temptation of Jesus Christ in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke was a benchmark for Jesus to include it in the prayer as a means of righteous living.

Temptation had the capacity of derailing their future hope and commitment to Christ. In

330 Archbishop Dimitri Royster, The Kingdom of God: The Sermon on the Mount (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1992), 83.

331 Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975), 153.

332 Archbishop Dimitri Royster, The Kingdom of God: The Sermon on the Mount (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1992), 85.

162

Judaism, the seventh petition of the Eighteen Benedictions reads, “Look upon our misery and guide our cause and deliver us for your name’s sake” which corresponds to

Jesus teaching that our father will “deliver us from the evil one.”333 In “The High priestly prayer” recorded in John 17: 15, Jesus prays that God will continually extricate his loyal disciples from the evil one. It is also a prayer that will assist us to experience the fullness of life unharmed by Satan and his cohorts.334 In addition, God’s sovereignty is the doctrine that gives meaning and substance to all other doctrines. Asking for the sovereign will to be done is in direct consonance with the indelible word of God. Arthur

Pink educates, “to say that God is sovereign is to declare that he is the Almighty, the possessor of all power in heaven and earth, so that none can defeat his counsels, thwart his purposes or resist his will.”335

Peter’s Confession (Mt. 16: 13-20), The Baptism, and Transfiguration of Jesus

(Mt. 17:4-5; Mk. 9:6-7; Lk. 9:34-35)

Peter’s confession of the sovereignty of Jesus was the first confession recorded by the Gospel writers in reference to the Messiah and his disciples. The verses 18 and

19 state, “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and

222 Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975), 223.

334 Archbishop Dimitri Royster, The Kingdom of God: The Sermon on the Mount (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1992), 84.

335 Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God (Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1928), 20.

163

the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” The passage dilates on Peter’s righteous confession and Jesus reaction and affirmation of his call to lay the foundation of the Church. The word “Peter” could either be interpreted as petros or Petra in Greek. In this context, however, petros is the word used whose semantic representation is a stone. Thus, there is a stone imagery used by Jesus. The rock refers to the formidable foundation of the Church. In Eph. 2:20 the apostles and prophets constitute collectively the foundation of the Church (Cf. Rev. 21:14). Eduard Schweitzer assertively declares that the semantics of the word Peter is pure only in Aramaic where kepha implies both meanings.336

Petra on the other hand primarily refers to Peter, Peter’s confession, and Jesus.

Nevertheless, theological reflections strongly support the view that the rock refers to

Jesus Christ of Nazareth. In 1Peter 2: 4-5, the writer, the apostle Peter expounds on the validity of the stone, which refers to Jesus. The Church is been described as God’s spiritual house. To ascertain the indispensable nature of the messianic hope and foundation for humanity, peter quoted several Old Testament texts to support the idea of the living stone, which were familiar to his ardent Jewish readers (Ps118: 22; Is 8:14;

28:16). Peter’s avaricious readers would have comprehended the living stone to be the nation of Israel, but Peter applied the image of “stone” to Jesus Christ. Peter

336 Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975), 336.

164

demonstrates that the Church does not annul the Jewish heritage but fulfills it. Peter actually, depicts the Church as a living, spiritual house, with Christ as the foundation and cornerstone and each believer a stone. Eph. 4:15-16 confirms that Christ is the

Head of the Church and believers constitute the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament. 1Cor 3: 11 declares, “For no one can lay any Foundation other that the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.” Robert H. Gundry believes that

Peter represents all disciples including those who are weak and those who are apostatized. Thus, in Matthew 7: 24, “This rock” refers to the words of Jesus Christ. The reusing of those words in Matthew 16: 18, points away from Peter to those same words as the foundation of the Church. The two words, petros, “detached stone”, and Petra “ bedrock” maintain their Greek connotations while Jesus will build only on the firm bedrock of his law (Mt. 5:19-20; 28:19) not on the loose stone Peter.337 Robert H.

Gundry further elucidates, “ The identification of “this rock” with “these my words” provides a beautiful natural lead into the portrayal of Peter as a Christian scribe who uses keys –Jesus words, and binds and looses things, that is, prohibits and allows various kinds of conduct and disciplines Church members according to the law of

Christ.”338The gate of Hades is a poetic language for the power of death (Is 38:10). The congregation of the new covenant will persist into the age to come despite all the efforts of the powers and principalities of darkness to destroy it. Nothing can decimate the kingdom of God because Jesus delivered a devastating and deadly blow to Satan and his cohorts on the cross.

337 Ibid., 334.

338 Ibid., 334. 165

The baptism of Jesus in Mark 1:9-11, and the transfiguration of Jesus Christ in

Mark 9:2-8 were events that brought about a magnificent infilling and out pouring of the

Holy Spirit on him. At the baptism, he received an immeasurable amount of the Holy

Spirit making him valiant and invincible in his ministry as he proclaimed the kingdom of

God. The baptism of Jesus in the synoptic gospels is followed immediately by the temptation in the wilderness. However, Jesus like Paul became fully aware that God called him on the occasion of divine vision. Justin Martyr and the gospel of Ebionites subscribe God’s utterances to Jesus at his baptism with the enthronement of King David in Psalm 2:7 “this day I have begotten thee.” The term agapetos denoting “beloved” also conveys the semantic representation of “doomed to death” since the term is literally translated in the Hebrew Bible, yahid, meaning “only child”, “uniqueness”, solidarity”. It is actually used in a context of an only child who is either in recent times died or just about to die, (cf. used of only son and only daughter, Gen 22:2,12,16; Jer. 6:26; Judges

11.34).339 At the transfiguration, Jesus manifested celestial power beyond the comprehension of humanity. Biographers have been grappling with the pictorial representation of his transfiguration. Morton Smith forcefully declares, “ If is difficult to believe that a man’s disciples saw him transfigured while he was still alive, it is yet more difficult to believe that they saw him so after he had been arrested, crucified, and buried.”340 Morton Smith concluded his discussion on the transfiguration of Jesus by indicating that Jesus experienced mystical ascents in lifetime. He alluded to scriptures such as John 3:13, which declares, “Nobody has ascended into heaven except the one

339 Ibid., 343.

340 Ibid., 343. 166

who has descended from heaven, the son of man.” For that matter, Jesus the savior of the world has some semblance to shamanism341. Segal on the other hand has recognized that the word used for transfiguration has the same connotation as the one

Paul used to describe the systematical transformation of his converts into full-fledged

Christians.342 Segal employed the heavenly journey motif to explain the transfiguration to readers. In view of this, Jesus had the ability to transform himself into an angelic being by donning angelic clothes as a manifestation of shamanism.

According to Robert H. Gundry, the use of Rabbi “teacher” in Mark 9:5 changes to kurios “Lord” in Matthew 17: 4 to emphasize Jesus’ Lordship. This is parallel to Mt.

16:22 where Matthew turned Peter’s rebuke of Jesus into confessing of Jesus as Lord.

The statement, “If you wish” places high premium on the Lordship of Jesus. Thus, in the kingdom of God Jesus is recognized as the Lord of all Christians. Some scholars postulate that Peter’s proposal to construct tents alludes to the festival of tabernacles

(Lev. 23:42).343 Evangelist Mark proposes that Peter’s suggestion to build up tents for

Jesus, Moses, and Elijah is a showdown of massive ignorance to fear. According to

Robert H. Gundry, Mark believes that the statement implies Elijah and Moses are equal to Jesus because the kingdom is at hand with the awesome power of God. For Mark the coming of the kingdom with power is undeniably awesome and terrifying344

341 Ibid., 243.

347 Ibid., 243.

343 Ibid., 343.

344 Ibid.,, 344.

167

Nevertheless, in Matthew’s Gospel, the transfiguration has different connotation and interpretation. For him, Jesus Christ represents the new Moses. Even though he is the new Moses, he is greater and has more impressive power than, Moses because he is Lord over all the earth. Matthew depicts his disciples of gaining grounds in their knowledge of him and the kingdom of God. Peter addressing Jesus as “Lord” is authenticated as recognition of Jesus as a New Moses, a statement that is a characteristic of a faithful disciple.345 The striking comparison between the shining of

Jesus’ garments like the light and the light likeness of the cloud of God’s presence

(panim) demonstrates Jesus’ deity in the Kingdom of God.346 As a deity he must be worshipped, and be exalted above all gods. He is the architect, and supreme commander of the universe. As consequence, a true disciple must recognize the glazing and electrifying garments as awesome presence of God amongst his people. The verb

“overshadowed” is an indication of the importance of the cloud as indicating divine presence, the Shekinah glory of God. The kingdom of God therefore is filled with God’s glory, and is made explicit to all loyal Disciples of Christ. This is parallel to the cloud that covered Mount Sinai to emanate the awesome presence of God amongst his people

(Ex. 24: 15-18; Ex. 40: 34-38; Num. 9: 15-22; 1 Kings 8: 10-11; 2 Macc. 2: 8. The cloud and the fire were not merely natural phenomena; they were the vehicle of God’s presence and the visible evidence of his acts in the middle of his people347. This is an

345 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew:A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), 344 Cf. Peter addressed Jesus “Lord” in Mt. 14: 28, 30.

346 Ibid., 344.

347 Ibid., 344.

168

archetype of true fellowship and relationship with God. The gathering of Christians must provoke divine presence, engulfing the entire community of worshippers to experience his deliverance, love, and care. The overshadowing cloud of divine presence made the engulfment superior to a tent crafted out of vegetative materials.

The transfiguration voice in Mt. 17: 5 resonates with the Baptismal voice in Mt. 3:

17. However, Mark and Luke do not have the expression “in whom I am well pleased.”

Matthew inserts it to ensure that it is parallel to the baptismal statement. The voice confirms the proclamation of Jesus’ divine Sonship of the royal Messiah and the endowment of the servant of the Lord with the Spirit of the Lord.348 The emphases on the opening of heaven and the proclamatory character of the Father’s declaration serve to exalt Jesus over John the Baptist, Moses, and Elijah. The Father’s final statement,

“Hear Him” comes from Deut. 18:15. The injunction to adhere to Jesus alludes to his ethical teaching because he is the Messiah and the overlord of the kingdom of God.

God commands all people, especially; the redeemed of the Lord to take up their cross and follow him.349

348 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), 344. Cf. 2 Peter 1: 17-18 states, “For we received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my son whom I love; with him I am well pleased. We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.” See Gundry, Use of Old Testament, 36-37.

349 Acts 3:22-23 declares, “For Moses said, The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people. In my reading of the Gospels, I fathom that listening and obedience to the words of Jesus is the righteous ways required of us all.

169

Universality of Grace in Luke, the Miracles of Jesus, and the miracles of Paul in the Kingdom of God

Jesus’ proclamation of the Kingdom of God embraces every race, every tribe and tongue. The chain of slavery and the dividing wall that separated Jews from Gentiles is broken to pave way for all embracing kingdom of God( Eph.2:14).350 Luke makes it clear that God’s dealings with the world are universal. Luke gives a detail and comprehensive report on Jesus ancestry back to the very beginning of human race, to the first person to be created by God, Adam (3:38). Jesus came for the salvation of humankind including the gentiles. The angels for instance, announced that peace was for everyone who received the salvation message of Jesus (2:14). Simeon, the high priest also dilated on

Jesus’ birth as “a light of revelation to the gentiles” (2:32). Luke is the only Gospel writer who, made allusions to the Old Testament gentiles, who massively received the grace of God. A classic example of these is the widow of Zarephath, and Naaman the Syrian

(4:25-27). The queen of the south and the men of Nineveh, all gentiles, will disgrace

Israel because of their lack of spiritual discernment (11:32).351 According to Luke Jesus is the savior of the world, it is in view of this that he states, “and The Spirit of the Lord is on me because he has anointed me to preach goodness to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor (4:18-19).

350 Ephesians 2: 14 asserts, “For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility.” Our hostility against each has been decimated with the proclamation of the kingdom of God. Every tribe, tongue and language can have access to the Father or the Kingdom where the sovereign commander is. We are all being built into a holy temple with Christ as our cornerstone (Eph2.20).

351 Glen H. Stassen & Gushee P. Gushee, Kingdom Ethics: (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity, 2003), 44. 170

Luke’s gospel portrays the significant role that women play in the ministry of

Jesus as He proclaimed the Kingdom of God. Jesus bestowed incredible respect and dignity on women in his ministry. While he was virtually unknown by the rabbis of his time, women clamored around him wherever he went. Even though the other gospels record the important role of women in his ministry, nevertheless, Luke emphasizes this.

Luke highlights thirteen godly women not described by the other Gospel writers. In the

Gospel of Luke women play prominent roles in the conception, birth, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus352. Luke records the praise of Anna at the presentation of Jesus in the Temple (2:36-38), and raising of the widow’s son at Nain (7: 11-17). Jesus extends a warm welcome and godly fellowship to a sinful woman (7: 11-17). Jesus accepted

Mary for unquenchable desire to know God and allowed her to “sit at his feet” as a beginner (10:38-42). He heals a crippled woman of her infirmity (13:10-17). Luke and

Mark record the poor widow putting her scanty treasure into the Temple’s collection box.353 The implication is that women should be allowed to serve as their male counterparts in various capacities in the 21st century Church, be it evangelical,

Pentecostal, reformed Church, protestant or the Catholic Church.

Revolution of grace in the kingdom of God is made manifest in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. Jesus was the friend of many sinners during his lifetime. Many of them clamored around him and desired to be part of his company. On the contrary, legalists found him shocking and nauseating. Jesus had a secret of being the friends of

352 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction (Downers Growth, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1990), 103.

353 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 160. Cf. Luke 23:49; 23:55-24:11.

171

many people. “You can know a person by the company he keeps” goes the old adage.

He exhibited compassion for those who were ostracized socially.354 It is recalled that

Jesus had a capital meal with Simon the leper. In those days, there were strict laws that enforced the stigma of leprosy. Authorities and laws of the land compelled leprosy victims to live outside city walls and yelled “unclean” whenever they approached another person. Yet Jesus being the savior of the world vehemently ignored those legalistic rules and reclined at a table with the stigmatized Simon the leper. During the course of the meal, an infamous woman anointed Jesus’ feet with a jar of perfume wiping his feet with her hair and tears, yet another sinner, needed deliverance from

Jesus Christ. These and many other downtrodden, the outcasts, and the stigmatized became intimate with Jesus Christ. Jesus in no doubt was a friend of sinners in the

Kingdom of his father. Hence, the kingdom of God is a place of total acceptance into the community of believers, no matter one’s social classification, racial affiliation, or tribal belonging. It is an encompassing call to all people. It is only those who accept the kingdom of truth who will reign with Christ both now and at the parousia. Essentially, it is only those who willingly and joyfully accept the Savior, who will bask in the glory of the kingdom.355

Jesus also had a sumptuous meal with tax collectors. In Luke chapter nineteen, the ostracized Zacchaeus had to climb a tree to have a full view of Jesus because there was a multitude clamoring around Jesus and Zacchaeus was dwarfish in stature. The

354 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction (Downers Growth, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1990), 103.

355 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 185.

172

tax collectors in Palestine during those days collected taxes on commission basis, beefing up their purses with whatever monies they extorted from their fellow Jews. The

Jews hated them and regarded them as traitors who were serving the interest of the

Pagan Roman Empire. The word publican became synonymous with robber, brigand, murderer, and reprobate. A tax collector’s evidence at a law court was considered invalid. Their monies could not be used for charity work since they amassed their wealth illegally. However, Jesus defied every odd and went to have a capital dinner with

Zacchaeus shrugging off the poignant criticism of the Pharisees and the crowd. Jesus declared, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick”. At least, Jesus in his ministry accepted a dinner invitation from a prominent Pharisee. Jesus in his lifetime, while he was operating in the kingdom of God rescued the adulterous from premature death, since they law demanded the execution of an adulterous person by stoning

(John8:1-11). He had unrelenting sympathy for the prostitutes, tax collectors, and other known sinners. They all responded to the call of Jesus for the forgiveness and repentance of sin. C.S. Lewis states, “prostitutes are in no danger of finding their present life so satisfactory that they cannot turn to God: The proud, the avaricious, the self-righteous, are in that danger.”356

As healer, he carried the landmarks of an exorcist as illustrated in the Gospel of

Mark 1:21-27. Jesus cast out unclean Spirit by sternly rebuking the spirit to leave the victim’s system. He also taught the people in the synagogue as one who had an incredible authority and not like scribes. Jesus used two most important words in this

356 Ibid., 156-160.

173

incident. First, the word epitiman “rebuke” corresponds to the Hebrew or Aramaic word

“giar”. This word occurs 28 times in the Bible, 21 of them referring to the annihilation of the enemies of God. The second word epitimesen “be silent”, “to muzzle” occurs once in the Septuagint (LXX) as a translation of the Hebrew in Deut. 25:4, where it refers to the muzzling of an ox. This expression is also used by Paul in 1 Tim 5:18). Several passages exhaustively explain the power and authority that Jesus exercised over demons in his proclamation of the kingdom of God. Biblical passages that allude to his authority over demons are Mark 4: 35-41; Mark 1.12-23; Luke 10: 17-20.357

Accordingly, Jesus in his ministry performed unfathomable miracles in the

Kingdom of God. The Transfiguration of Jesus and raising up a twelve-year-old girl were undeniable miracles. Jesus performed his first miracle at a wedding in Cana, turning water into wine. Apart from the miraculous activity of changing water to wine, Jesus also healed several people, ranging from the blind, the lamed, the crippled, and to his own death and resurrection. Jesus was the master physician in his teaching, preaching, and proclaiming the kingdom of God. The Greek word therapeuein can imply “to serve” as well as “to heal.” In recapitulating Isaiah’s prophetic pronouncement, Matthew states,

“He took our infirmities and bore our iniquities” ( Mt. 8:16-17; 1sa. 53:4). The miracles that Jesus performed are termed deeds of power, dynameis, and plural of dynamis.358

Jack Dean Kingsbury believes that the use of the term dynamis is in connection with

357 Ibid., 156.

358 Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew as Story (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), 68.

174

God (Mtt.22:29) and can be used as a metaphor for God (Mt. 26:64).359 Even though leprosy individuals suffered as much as any other people suffering from diverse kinds of diseases, they suffered too much pain not from the disease, but from the pain of rejection imposed on them by the community and the society.

Jesus bestowed words of integrity and faith on some of the recipients of healing.

For instance, Jesus commended the paralytic who was given access to Jesus through the roof. When Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic friends, he said, “Take heart, son: your sins are forgiven.” Outstanding faith never failed to impress Jesus. Jesus is the master physician and for that matter, he never met a health problem in the Kingdom of

God that he could not solve, a birth defect he could not reverse, and an evil spirit he could not exorcise. Jesus also multiplied five loaves of bread and two fishes to feed the five thousand people in a wilderness. The story of Lazarus enshrined in John 11 is heart wrenching for his sisters Martha and Mary but revealing, comforting and messianic focused in the end. Martha was crying, and Mary was also crying but Jesus was moved with tears, and “deeply moved in spirit, and troubled”, he raised up Lazarus from the dead after he was buried for four days. In summation, the kingdom of God is a domain for the manifestation of the miracles and wonders of God through his only begotten son,

Jesus Christ.360

359 Ibid., 68.

360 Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four, Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005), 479.

175

Unvaryingly, Paul’s message was the crucified Christ, first to “Jews as a stumbling block to Gentiles as folly.” (1 Cor. 1:23). He used the word “dunamis, which is translated “power”. It has several connotations in the New Testament. It is often associated with pneuma translated “spirit” especially by Luke and Paul. Luke speaks of

Jesus as returning to Galilee “in the power of the spirit” (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38). Paul began his career as a wonder-worker, performing dunameis “miracles”. The pneuma and dunameis are the means and ways chosen by God to authenticate his sovereign dominion in the calling of Paul as an indubitable apostle to the Gentile nations (Acts

2:22). Luke used the same word in describing Jesus’ healing powers (Luke 5:17; 6:19) as well as his power over unclean spirits Luke 4:36; 9:1).361

In terms of spiritual gifts, or Charismata (1 Cor. 12: 28) Paul distinguishes the gift of miracles, dunameis from that of healing, iamata.362 Summing up the work of Paul in the city of Ephesus, Luke states, “God continued to perform extra ordinary miracles with

Paul as his instrument, so that handkerchiefs or aprons were carried away from his body to the sick, and diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them (Acts

19:11-12). One significant aspect of Paul ministry was that he had the charisma to perform wonders as well as healing the sick as illustrated above.

361 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 157.

367 Ibid., 157-158.

176

The Believer, and Spiritual Warfare (Ephesians 6: 10-17)

One of the most important themes unraveled to Christians of all generations in the book of Ephesians is the instruction on spiritual warfare in the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is not just an arena of joy, peace, and tranquility. It also involves the fiercest conflict that confronts believers in every passing minute of their lives. The author, Paul has spent a considerable amount of time deliberating on the need for believers to be aware of the spiritual battles that confront them as they sojourn in the kingdom of God. When writing to believers in the Church of Ephesus he lays emphasis on our struggles, battles, challenges, and conflicts in this present world. He asserts that our contention is not provoked against fellow human beings but unrelenting battle against supernatural beings. Believers are encouraged to adorn the spiritual armor that will fortify them to vanquish the enemy in the ensuing battle. The enemy, Satan, and his cohorts are on twenty-four hour duty every day deceiving and trying to deceive believers to forsake the path of righteousness. In order to maintain the victory that Christ won for us on the cross of Calvary we must make a concerted effort in putting on the full armor of God prescribed for all believers in Ephesians chapter 6: 10- 17. Biblical scholars have proven beyond every shade of doubt that life was more a daunting task for the ancient

Christians than the contemporary believers. According to William Barclay, life was much more terrifying for the ancient people than it is for today. They believed implicitly in evil spirits, who filled the air and were determined to work men harm.363 Similarly, Maxie D.

Dunnam states that Demons, devils, and evil spirits haunted every corner of the ancient

363 William Barclay, The letters to the Galatians and the Ephesians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,1976), 182.

177

world. The whole universe was a battleground.364. Paul having been informed of these

Greek mythologies and demons he challenges all believers to put on the full armor of

God but foremost, they must be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might.

Be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might and Putting on the full armor of God that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil ( Eph. 6:10-11)

The apostle entreats his audience to be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might. Paul is exhorting them to find their strength in the Lord. They need to draw constantly upon the power they already possess through their union with Christ. To be strong in the Lord is further explained by the phrase, “and in the power of his might.”

Power denotes an active force, whereas might denotes a passive force, inherently possessed whether exercised or not. To be strong in the Lord denotes that the believer needs to be made aware that the battle is for the Lord himself who has already dealt a ．．．．．．．．．．．．． deadly blow to the forces of evil.365. The things that are commanded are impossible to perform without God’s strength and grace. We need his strength and power to overcome our enemies, our flesh, and Satan. We need his strength to adorn the doctrine of Christ with holiness and integrity. Even though we are weak and can do ． nothing of ourselves, his grace is sufficient for all things.366The call “to be strong” in the face of a severe battle is prototype of Old Testament scriptures, the most obvious refers

364 Maxie D. Dunnam, The communicator’s Commentary: World Books (Texas: WACO, 1982), 239.

365 Willard .H Taylor. Beacon Bible expositions: Galatians and Ephesians (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1982), 209.

366 Henry T. Maham. Bible class Commentary (England: Evangelical Press, 1991), 68.

178

to Joshua, who was commanded “to be strong and of good courage” (Joshua 1: 6-7, 9).

Correspondingly, David also found strength in the Lord when the Amalekites invaded

Ziklag (1 Sam 30:6). When the remnants returned from the Babylonian captivity, God declared, “I will make them strong in the Lord ( Zech. 10:12).367

The verse 11 gives a picture of a Soldier standing firm in battle. Paul having been arrested a number of times by Roman soldiers and having also witnessed the soldiers in combating positions is fully aware of the dress code of the Roman combatant in his era. The believer lives in the world of evil. Evil powers and evil people surround him. The believer also has his armor and therefore Paul takes the Roman soldier and contextualizes him into Christian terms. This world is not the friend of grace or God. Not only is sin around us, but also sin is within us. The Christian life is a race to be run (Heb.

6:12; 2Tim 4:7). We need strength and help to stand up against all of the deceit and strategies of Satan, who is the greatest enemy of Christ and his people. God has provided armor for his people and weapons to be used against Satan, sin, and error.368.

We do not Wrestle Against Flesh and Blood, therefore Take up the Full armor of God ( Eph. 6:12-13)

This verse portrays that we are not contending against physical opponents. Frail, moral men are not our enemies. Our battle is against wicked spirits, who inhabit the

367 Peter T. Obrian, The Letter to the Ephesians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1999), 461. Peter T. obrian further elucidates that the apostle might have been thinking of Is. 40:26 as he wrote Eph. 6:10 since the terms kratos and lochuos are related to this Old Testament passage, and hence the author is indebted to Isaiah for his terms and metaphors.

368 Henry T. Maham. Bible class Commentary (England: Evangelical Press, 1991), 69.

179

supernatural sphere and who deal in lies, pride, idolatry, covetousness, lust, deceit, self- righteousness, and all manner of sin against God. The Greek word for wrestle is pale meaning “to struggle”, “to fight”, and “to combat.” The forces threatening Christians as they live out their lives in Christ are not only those, which arise out of human context, but also those emanating from the supernatural evil order. Human ingenuity and strength are woefully in adequate to withstand the advancement of these powers of evil.369 Thus, the Bible aptly describes the opponent as spirit beings and not flesh and blood, (pros aima kais ark). “In heavenly places” suggest the realm of spiritual conflict.

No matter how spiritually stable, reverential, and prayerful God’s people might be, they are never immune from the attack by the wicked spiritual forces.370

The spiritual battle is pros tas archas “against the principalities, and pros tas exousiai “against the powers.” This designates the demons according to the powers or ranks which resonate with the classes of angels where principalities are classified in the higher rank than the exousiai “powers.”371 The next clause states, pros tous epouraviois

“against the World rulers in heavenly places” is a condensed explanation of the World expanse and its ethical quality. The world rulers are superhuman, and they are super- terrestrial enemies. Strikingly, principalities, the powers, and the rulers of the world belong to this “darkness.” The World rulers refer to kosmoskrator, connoting the World

369 Peter T. Obrian, The Letter to the Ephesians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1999), 463.

370 Ibid., 463.

371 Ibid., 463.

180

Ruling gods.372 They are spirit beings that have part of the kosmos “world” under their control. They wield territorial dominance in some part of the kosmos. In rabbinic writing, these spirits are referred to as angels of death. That is the kosmos “world”, and people who are not born again are subject to them. Semanticists believe that the World tyrants is better a term than the World rulers.373 Accordingly, the devils are called kosmoskratores because their dominion is felt everywhere in the world except the kingdom of God where Jesus is the supreme commander, and sovereign Lord over the universe. The clause, “The spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places” describes all the powers of evil vigorously working in the unseen hierarchical order under the auspices of the archenemy, Satan. A spiritual host in Greek is pneumatikos, pertaining to evil spirits, or “the forces of evil.” These spirits are not friendly or sympathetic; they exhibit ponerias “wickedness” towards humankind, especially believers who are called to live above reproach.374 The word implies “wickedness”,

“baseness”, “maliciousness”, “viciousness”, “spitefulness”, “ferociousness”, and

“sinfulness.”

If Satan stood valiantly against Jesus after he fasted forty days and forty nights, employing all sorts of diabolical maneuvers to lure Jesus into gross disobedience to his

Father, then nobody is immune from his venomous attacks. He tried to ensnare Jesus with food (Mt. 4:3-4). He also took Jesus to the Temple top and tried to deceive him to

372 Ibid., 463.

373 Ibid., 463-464.

374 Ibid., 463-464.

181

test God in disobedience (Mt. 4-7). He also led Jesus to the mountaintop and requested him to worship him (Mt. 4: 8-11). Satan is a defeated foe. We only need to lace up our boots of morality and beef up our spiritual forces to ward him off our domain. Having been exposed to the realities of spiritual warfare, Paul therefore exhorts his readers to be prepared by wearing “the whole armor of God.” It is very clear that the armor of

God provided is adequate for the battle. To withstand implies, “a stand against great opposition.” It is imperative for the Christian to prepare adequately for both active and passive style of defense in order to secure a safety. The Christian soldier must be active, and passive in praying, attacking, defending oneself from the malicious attack of the enemy. The Greek word for “take up” is amalambon, meaning the Christian warrior must take up the armor of God always as we sojourn in the kingdom of God.375 It is an imperative, demanding all regenerated believers to obey. Refusal to take the armor of

God would result in dire consequences of trauma, defeat, sicknesses, impediment to the proclamation of the Gospel of peace, and absolute lack of peace and victories. “The whole armor” translates the Greek word panoplia that can either, mean “splendid armor” or “complete armor.” Some scholars suggest a public display of the qualities of truth, righteousness, peace, and faith.376 Nevertheless, some suggest that the element of completeness seems more appropriate since Paul is concerned in this passage to call Christians to depend upon God’s power for victory over wickedness.

The armor has no protection for the back. The expectation of Paul is that the Christian has no defense anyhow if he retreats from trusting the Lord. The evil Day may be taken

375 Ibid., 464-465.

376 Ibid., 164.

182

to mean “ the present age” or the particular day when the military powers of “the heavenly places” attack, which even though vanquished by Christ still wield power to exercise over a world that does not avail itself of the fruits of Christ’s victory.377 Since

Satan is involved in surface-to-surface spiritual missile attack against Christians, believers need a missile defense system that will protect and equip them to assault the enemy and defend themselves from his aggressiveness. The only way to achieve this is to don the full armor of God. Like the soldier or the marine, the Christian is commanded to be combat-ready at all times. Therefore, the expression, “to withstand” anthistemi in

Greek signifies “setting”, “oneself against”, “oppose”, and “resist”.”378 So taking up the full armor of God will prepare the believer in the kingdom to resist the enemy successfully. The opposition is great and ferocious, and the conflict is imminent. It is only when believers take up the full armor of God that they can “stand their ground.”

That is they must resist the adversary aggressively, stand up against him, and totally repulse him.

The evil day on the contrary connotes worsening of situations and circumstances. When the enemy attacks and things seem to get out of control leading to the worst of all situations then there is appearance of the evil day. Actually, the evil day is a day of trial. It is the day that, enemies will make their assault. Nevertheless, this is not the eschatological conflict before the Second Advent. The attack of poneros (the

377 Willard .H Taylor. Beacon Bible expositions, Galatians and Ephesians, (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1982), 210.

378 William Barclay, The letters to the Galatians and the Ephesians, (Westminster Press 1976),183.

183

evil one) is pre-imminent, and moral evil is combat-ready to launch the fiercest attack against believers. After having ketargazomai “achieved”, “accomplished”,

“overpowered”, “subdued”, and “conquered”, and after proving victorious over every daunting problem, then the believer must stand his ground against the virulent attacks of the archenemy and his cohorts. Paul dilates on a desperate combat in which the soldier exhibits excellence in the performance of his duties, and still strives on when his cause seems to be doomed to failure. The Christian similarly is to stay strong in battle, when he runs outs of energy.

Girding the Waist with truth, Putting on the breastplate of righteousness, and Proclaiming the Gospel of Peace (Eph. 6: 14-15)

Scholars have proven that the girdle was a belt and its most immediate and practical use for a soldier was to gird or hold his tunic so that he could move about freely without any obstruction. Alternatively, the girdle was worn around the loins providing a frame for, free and vigorous action. The idea is that the girdle was the bracer up, or supporter of the body, therefore truth is fitted to brace up and to gird us for constancy and firmness. It also provided an abode to hang his sword. The imagery here is that truth holds together all other virtues and makes them effectual. The belt was not mere adornment of the soldier, but it adequately prepared the soldier to fashion out the

Amory appropriately. Even though the girdle was not part of the armor, it was required to be properly fitted before the armor could be adorned. It was highly ornamented and served as a saved haven for transportation of money, the sword, the pipe, and

184

stationary. Truth is to be understood here not as the gospel in the objective sense but the gospel as been lived by faith. The Christian soldier lives in truth, faithfulness, loyalty, and sincerity. Righteousness refers to the right conduct or practice. In Isaiah 59: 17, the prophet pictures God as putting on “righteousness as a breastplate and a helmet of salvation upon his head.” The breastplate of dikaiosune (righteousness) suggests the protecting quality of holiness. William Barclay writes that when a man is clothed in righteousness he is impregnable.379 Righteousness energizes the believer’s heart and renders it inaccessible to the hostile activities of the devil and demons. For the believer to vanquish the whims and caprices of the enemy, holiness is required. Satan fears holiness and crumbles in the face of a holy Christian. The clause, perizonnumi (having girded), implies, “gird about, and gird oneself”.380

Moreover, Sandals in the ancient times were the sign of one equipped and ready to move. The sandals were to preserve the foot from danger and to shelter the capability of his march, most probably to make the combatant dauntless in battle. It has been said that the attention given to the soldiers’ boots was the secret of the Roman conquest.381 Christians are enjoined to have the principles and discipline of the Gospel of peace so that they can remain valiant in the day of battle with the adversaries. The shoe in Paul’s opinion is to allow the Christian soldier move with agility, briskly, and fight

379 Ibid., 183.

380 Ibid., 211.

381 Maxie D. Dunnam, The Comentator’s Commentary: Word Books, (Texas:WACO, 1982), 241. 185

gallantly against the enemy.382 The Greek word is hetoimaisia, which implies

“readiness, preparation” for euaggelion tes eirenes, “the Gospel of peace.” The sign of a

Christian is that he is ever ready and eager to undertake a journey of righteousness to share the word of God with others who have not heard it.383 It is a known fact that the military boots, stood out as one of the most significant aspects of the armory of the

Roman soldier. They were designed for long marches over both smooth and rugged terrains. The believer may encounter a number of difficulties in spreading the gospel but the gospel lays a solid foundation in our faith in Christ. The Christian soldier must possess a dauntless missionary zeal, a call that signals the preparedness, or readiness to proclaim the Gospel of peace everywhere. Since according to the prophets, peace was to form an essential part of the messianic hope and kingdom, Christian ideology fathoms eirene “peace” as synonymous with messianic salvation.

The shield of faith and the Helmet of Salvation ( Eph. 6:16-17)

In ancient warfare, the soldier or marine had a problematical task of defending himself against every missile that his foes threw at him. The shield was a double-ply, oblong wooden shield worn by the heavily armed combatant. It covered the entirety of his body, measuring two and half by four feet, and curved on the inside. It protected the warrior from the most dangerous of all ancient weapons, the fiery dart.384 Therefore, the

382 William Barclay, The letters to the Galatians and the Ephesians, (Westminster Press 1976), 182.

383 Maxie D. Dunnam, The Comentator’s Commentary: Word Books, (Texas:WACO, 1982), 242-243.

384 Ibid.,242-243.

186

shield was designed to stop the dart and extinguish the flame. Thus, marines and soldiers seriously regarded it as one of the perilous weapons used in battle. The heads of the darts or arrows were covered with flax or hemp fiber, soaked in pitch, and then set on fire before they were thrown. It was so easy for wooden shields to be set ablaze.

To prevent the shields from burning they were covered with hide and were long enough to protect the whole body. The Greek word, sbennumi meaning, “To quench”,

“extinguish”, and “put out something” symbolically, fiery darts is apt for explanation.

Whenever the fiery darts collided with the shields, their points blunted, and their flames extinguished leaving the soldier unharmed. Since burning arrows had double potency of piercing and setting the soldiers on flames, they were considered metaphorically, as the fiercest weaponry used by Satan. He constantly throws missile in the form of fiery darts against the soul of the believer; who if unprotected by the shield of faith would soon perish. It is common experience of believers that at times undesirable thoughts, lack of faith, unholy attitude toward the word of God, blasphemous utterances and activities, skepticism, and malignant thoughts crowd the mind and souls of the believer, which cannot easily be disentangled. These are often allusions to the relentless attacks by

Satan, which if not checked will plunge the believer in a very precarious situation. Faith in this regard is a shield protecting the believer against both visible and invisible attacks.

Furthermore, Paul has a longing for Isaiah who sees God as “a helmet of salvation upon his head” (59:17). The Greek word for helmet is perikephalalia and sword is translated as machairan. Hence when the Christian soldier has taken his stand, well-girt with breastplate, shoes, shield, he still needs helmet and sword to accomplish his military task in the kingdom. Just as the soldier receives the helmet and 187

sword from the armor-bearer, the Christian soldier amalabete (takes, receives) his gifts from the Lord. The helmet in itself is salvation, thus salvation, soterios is of messianic

“salvation” and Christ is the one who mediates it. The helmet guides the center of life.

The sense and hope of salvation transcends life beyond the comprehensibility of human imagination because it protects the combatant from assaults of the evil one aimed at his zeal and righteousness in the kingdom of God. As the helmet defends the head from the fiery punches of the devil, a well-founded hope of salvation preserves, protects and gives us victory over the enemy on the day of conflict. Maxie educates that the helmet does not provide protection for the carrier, but is a symbol of God’s power and readiness to save others. Paul pictures this helmet of salvation put on by the Christian soldier, as the guarantee of divine protection and ultimate deliverance. He declares that salvation is not only forgiveness of past sins, it is strength to overcome, even conquer, present and future sins.385

In addition, the word of the spirit is aptly described as the word of God and that word “is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12).

Willard declares that the sword is the property of the spirit, and is the written word of

God, the Holy Scriptures. It is the spirit who inspired the word of God and who now interprets the word to believers. All the other weapons are meant for defense but the sword of the spirit is a defensive weapon. Wesley comments, “We are to attack Satan, as well as secure ourselves; the shield in one hand, and the sword in the other.

385 Ibid., 212.

188

Whoever fights with the power of hell will need both.”386 Paul is exhorting all believers to put on the whole armor of God in order to overcome the enemy in our warfare with him.

We should be able to vanquish sin, flesh, and the wiles of the enemy by finding our strength in the word of God and depending totally on him.

Conclusion

Chapter 3 has unraveled to us the significance of the beatitudes in the kingdom of God. They are the foundation stone for Christian living and Christian ethics.

Comprehending them is a roadmap to achieving spiritual maturity, and the right application of the beatitudes will enhance holiness, righteousness, prayerfulness, and meekness and Christological principles in the kingdom. Dikaiosune, “righteousness, justice”, eleemon “merciful” are so important when studying the beatitudes. In Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom, he healed several sick and reintegrated the outcasts into the Jewish society. The Greek word therapeutic connotes “to serve” or “to heal” implies that Jesus consciously served the people by healing them of their infirmities. He also devoted a considerable amount of time exorcising demons and setting captives from satanic harassment and bondage. The Greek word epitiman means “to rebuke.” Jesus used this word in a number of places in his healing and deliverance ministry.

Furthermore, Peter’s confession has been deliberated on as Jesus affirmed that he was going to build his Church on the firm foundation of the word of God and not on petros,

“detached stone.” In the Lord’ prayer, opheima “ sins, debts” or paratoma, “sins, debts,

386 Willard .H Taylor. Beacon Bible expositions, Galatians and Ephesians, (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1982), 212.

189

false step, slip” as well as epiousion “ bread” which implies “above essence” indicating that the body of Christ is a living bread are also given an-in-depth analysis. As far as spiritual battle is concerned, etymological studies of expressions such as pneuma,

“spirit”, pale, “to struggle, to fight, to combat”, exousiai “powers”, kosmos “world”, kosmokrator “world rulers”, kosmokratores “the devil” are illustrated. Other expressions that are given serious attention in the discussion of spiritual warfare are amalabon, “take up”, panoplia “complete armor, splendid armor”, athistemi “setting oneself against, oppose, resist”, poneros “evil one”, ketargazomai “achieved, accomplished”, perizonnumi “having girded”, hetoimaisia “readiness, preparedness”, and sbennumi.

190

CHAPTER 4

OVERVIEW OF LOS ANGELS AS A CASE-STUDY OF ETHICAL ISSUES

Chapter 4 judiciously deals with ethical issues confronting Christians in the kingdom of God in the Twenty-First century. To comprehend properly the attitude of 21st century Christians in selected communities and cities in California, research questionnaires were distributed to 500 respondents in Los Angeles area forming about

10 to 20 miles radius from the city center. Two hundred and fifty questionnaires were administered solely to married couples while the other half was administered to unmarried persons regardless of gender, race, economic status, and social classification. It must also be emphasized that 85% of the questionnaires were administered in Canoga Park, California between June and December 2011. The cardinal objective of the research was to collate views on abortion, Divorce,

Homosexuality, Drug abuse, Corruption, Bestiality, and Psyche consultation.

These moral issues have become problematic for majority of believers in the contemporary American societies as well as other communities and societies around the World. It is therefore imperative to ascertain biblical methods of addressing such cancerous activities in the Church. To achieve the desire objective in receiving the right answers, questionnaires were administered to Professed Christians regardless of race, gender, and social classification. The ages of those who responded to the questionnaires ranged from 18 to 65.

Major sections include (1) a table showing data analysis, (2) Biblical response to abortion, (3) Biblical response to homosexuality, (4) Syncretism, Idolatry, and Biblical 191

response, (5) Bestiality in the kingdom and Biblical response, (6) Drug addiction and

Biblical response, (7) Divorce and Biblical response. A conclusion will be given at the end of the chapter.

Table 1.0 shows statistics in percentages of Both married and unmarried persons who ever or never committed abortion, abused drugs, engaged in homosexual acts, acquired money illegally, consulted a psyche, and had sexual intercourse with an animal.

Table 1.0 showing detailed Statistics

Married Couples Unmarried persons

Ever committed Never committed Ever committed Never committed abortion 80% abortion 20% abortion 66% abortion 34%

Ever bused drugs Never abused Ever abused Never abused 70% drugs 30% drugs 45% drugs 55%

Ever engaged in Never engaged in Ever engaged in Never been homosexual acts Homosexual acts homosexual acts engaged in 95% 5% 75% homosexual acts 25%

Ever acquired Never acquired Ever acquired Never acquired money illegally money illegally money illegally money illegally 85% 15% 45% 55%

Ever consulted a Never consulted a Ever consulted a Never consulted a psyche 75% psyche 25% psyche 84.5% psyche 15. 5%

Ever had sexual Never had sexual Ever had sexual Never had sexual intercourse with intercourse with intercourse with intercourse with an animal 35% an animal 65% an animal 14.5 % an animal 85.5%

192

Abortion and Biblical Response

Table 1 gives a brief account of respondents on abortion. Out of the 250 married couples surveyed, 80% of this number believed they ever committed the sin of abortion or assisted someone else to cause abortion. The unmarried persons recorded 66% of those who ever obtained abortion or helped a family member or friend to commit a transgression of abortion. This portrays that out of the 250 married couples that were administered the questionnaires, 200 people of this group ever committed an iniquitous activity of abortion. Out of the 250 unmarried peoples surveyed, 160 were caught in the web of aborting babes summing up to 200+160= 360.

According to Guttmatcher Institute, one out of three American women causes abortion by the time she attains the age of 45. Fifty-eight percent of women of reproductive age having abortion are in their 20s. Sixty-one percent have either one or more children. Eighty-five percent are unmarried and 69% are economically disadvantage. Seventy-three percent report a religious affiliation, a majority of whom are

Christians and Catholics. The statistics further indicate that 36% of women obtaining abortion are white non-Hispanic, 30% are black non-Hispanic, and 25% are Hispanic, and 9% percent are others.387

Guttmatcher further illustrates that in 2008, there were 6.4 million pregnancies to

62 million women of reproductive age, that is between 15 and 44 in the United States.

Sixty percent of these pregnancies resulted in live births and 19 % in induced abortions.

387 www.guttmatcher.org/pubs/sfaa/californi ( Accessed December 31, 2011), 1.

193

Fifteen percent of this number resulted in miscarriage. In California, 897, 700 of the 7,

680, 396 women of reproductive age were pregnant in 2008. Sixty-one percent of these pregnancies resulted in childbearing, while 24% experienced induced abortions.388Guttmatcher further affirms that in 2008, 1.2 million American women committed transgressions of abortions, producing a rate of 19.6 abortions per 1000 women of reproductive age. This statistics virtually remained the same from 2005 when the abortion rate was 19.4 abortions per 1000 women of reproductive age slated between 15 and 44. Likewise, in 2008, 214, 190 women committed iniquitous acts of abortions in California, resulting in a rate of 27.6 abortions per 100 women of reproductive age. The rate augmented 2% since 2005. Abortions in California represent

17.7 % of all abortions in the United States, representing one of the highest states where the heinous removal of fetuses is glossed over.389

It must be reiterated that on January 22, 1973, the supreme court of America ruled 7 to 2 majority decision to permit abortion under unfavorable circumstances. This historic decision is referred to as Roe versus Wade (1973) that legalized abortion on the basis of trimester system. Currently, most antiabortionists consider this decision to be obsolete. This law intended to limit abortion progressively. Nevertheless, a variety of legal, cultural, economic and practical reasons, abortion became available on demand.390 Since 1973, over 43 million pregnancies have been aborted in the United

388 Ibid., 2.

389 Ibid., 2.

390 Glen H. Stassen & David. P Gushee, Kingdom Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 232.

194

States of America. Worldwide statistics indicate that about 1.5 billion women in the world are of childbearing age that is between the ages of 15 and 45. Each year there are about 26 million legal and an estimated 20 million illegal abortions in the world.

Worldwide, there are about 126, 000 abortions every day. Most abortions by far occur in the developing world.391

According to Glen H. Stassen & Gushee P. Gushee, “abortion involves taking a life before it has the opportunity to see the light of the day; it comes upon its victim without warning and without the victim’s consent. It forecloses all of life’s possibilities.”

Historically, Assyrians, Babylonians, Sumerians, and the Hitities considered abortion a heinous crime. Furthermore, Church Fathers as well as the early Church fought vehemently against the abortion of pregnancy since engaging in such an act amounted to barbarism, crude, and abomination in the sight of God. For instance, the apostles’ teaching (didache) asserted that abortion and infanticide were murder and outrageous.

The attitude of the Church towards abortion cannot be glossed over. In the early

Church, abortion was absolutely forbidden. On a similar note, the Roman Catholic

Church has played a pivotal role in the defense of unborn babies for centuries. In the late 19th Century, it was ruled that under no circumstances should abortion be permitted. Similarly, the Anglican Church in 1965 published a lengthy report on abortion.

The Archbishop of Canterbury in an address to convocation discussed the document in

1967. The Archbishop agreed that abortion could be carried out under the category of

391 Pam Koerbel, Abortion: A division of Scripture Presses Publications Inc, (USA, Canada, England, 1986), 58.

195

risk to life or mental or physical health of the mother. Other classifications included risk of a deformed or defective child, conception after rape, circumstances where the bearing and upbringing of the child would prove highly difficult for the mother.

Having discussed statistical analysis of the research, and having considered the role of the Church as well as historical scrutiny on abortion, it is appropriate to consider biblical position on the subject matter. Psalm 127: 3-5 declares, “Sons are a heritage from the Lord, children a reward from him. Like arrows in the hands of a warrior are sons born in one’s youth. Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them. They will not be put to shame when they contend with their enemies in the gate.” Every child born to its parents is an inheritance from Yahweh, and glossing over such an injunction, and consciously engaging in iniquitous activity of aborting babes will provoke curses in magnitude proportions.

In addition, scriptures abound with sanctity of human life and how it should be protected and revered by all. God is the only one who has the mandate to exterminate life because he is the ultimate source of life. Luke 1: 41 states, “When Elizabeth heard

Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy

Spirit.” The verse 44 declares, “As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.” The Child leaping for joy in the mother’s womb is an indication that life had already started and the unborn baby, John the Baptist had already developed sensory motor features and breathed like any other person. Aborting such a personality would have amounted to murder.

196

Dramatic and supernatural events surrounding the conception and birth of Jesus

Christ signify that God abhors abortion. Scripture declares, “But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, Joseph son of David do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins” (Mt. 1:20-21). The angel of the Lord declared to Joseph that Mary’s conception was an orchestration of divine will and she would give birth to a son, and not to an “object.” The fact that the identity, social, religious, Spiritual as well as political function of Jesus was acknowledged before he was born is an authenticated fact of God’s refusal of abortion in any form.

Moreover, scriptures have made it abundantly clear that it is God, who opens and closes the womb of the woman, and thus is supreme over conception. This is vividly illustrated in Gen 29:33; 30:22; and 1 Sam 1:19-20. As a supreme commander of the universe and the ultimate source of life, when the womb of a woman is opened, God expects conception to take place followed by the promise of multiplication. Hence it is an abomination to ignore this divine command and plunge ourselves into divine retribution, social chaos, spiritual quagmire, and psychological trauma by committing a transgression of murder in the form of abortion. Similarly, David declares, “Surely I was sinful at birth, and sinful from the time my mother conceived me” (Ps. 51:5). The Bible incisively states, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” It was God, who formed the prophet Jeremiah in the womb of his mother. As soon as God initiated the conception of

Jeremiah in his mother’s womb, he instantly became a person in the sight of God and 197

the angelic hosts. It would have been abhorrence of all evils to attempt exterminating such a divinely orchestrated pregnancy. This accentuates that aborting a baby is an assassination of God’s creation. It is evil of all evils and is forbidden by God. If God did not want humanity, no woman would have conceived. Other scriptures that vehemently oppose gruesome removal of a fetus are Ex. 21:22; Ps. 139:13; Gen. 1:27; 25:22-23;

Judges 13:2-7; Is. 49:1, 5; Gal. 1:15. It is therefore appropriate to salvage 21st century believers from the grip of abortion as the research data analysis has proven that a majority of respondents committed the sin of abortion and some are still engaged in this act. The implication is that 21st century believers are grossly involved in the canker worm of abortion. Due to lack of sound biblical teaching and education, a majority does not view it as sin. They can only be extricated from this perilous moral evil by consciously studying the word of God. This in my view and the opinion of many scholars will assist them to receive divine counseling and guidance in their moral choices. If the

Holy Spirit were able to empower Jesus to resurrect from the grave, conquering death and making a public show of the enemy, he would likewise empower the repentant sinner to subdue all moral problems including willful abortion.

Homosexuality and Biblical Response

The results in Table 1 indicate that 95% of married couples agreed that they have ever engaged in homosexual acts while 75% of unmarried persons surveyed, established that they have ever involved in such acts. This therefore means that out of the 500 respondents, 425 people have ever been involved in homosexual activities, 198

constituting 85% of the total number of people surveyed. The results depict that homosexual activity among Christians in these communities is very high. The implication is that a number of people sojourning in the kingdom of God tend to equate homosexuality with heterosexual activity, thereby missing the most significant biblical injunctions on homosexuality. What then is biblical response to this cankerworm ebbing its way into very fabric of our societies as far as kingdom ideologies are concerned?

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, “homosexuality is sexual orientations to persons of the same sex or sexual activity with another of the same sex.” Thus, homosexuality is being engrossed in love and being engaged in sexual relationship with the same sex or gender. The Greek term malakoi “soft” refers to effeminate while a number of scholars would argue for the translation “dissolute”. However, in the Greco -

Roman world, it was a designation for catamites, men, or boys who were selected and commissioned for sexual use, playing the receptive, feminine role. The Bible describes them as “Boy prostitutes” or “male prostitutes”. The term malakoi may refer to pederasty or male prostitution. The scholarly debate nevertheless, is centered on the term arsenokoitai (literally, “those who have coitus with other males”), usually translated as

“sodomites” or “homosexuals”.392

392 Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1997), 529. R.Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) would postulate that the New Testament writers virulently opposed pederasty, which was the only model of homosexuality in their contemporary culture. P. Coleman, Christian Attitudes to Homosexuality (London: SPCK, 1980), especially from 120ff authenticates that male prostitution is forbidden. The argument that arsenokoitai means male prostitutes was developed by J. Boswell, Christian, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (Univ of Chicago, 1980), 335-53. The NABR translates the term “practicing homosexuals” to correlate with Roman Catholic theology that homosexual orientation is not sinful but homosexual practice is. I do agree that homosexuality is an abomination unto God. Even the American Constitution stipulates that marriage is a union between a man and a woman.

199

In Rom 1:26-27, apostle Paul explicates that homosexual relations just like being engaged in unwarranted sexual relationship outside the domain of monogamous marriage are sacrilegious and undesirable before God and before holy people of God.

Comparing with other sins listed in Rom 1:28-31, it is an abomination to be consciously engaged in such an irreligious activity (Lev 18:22). Scripture attests, “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads” (Lev 20:13). It is gross disrespect for God’s law and deliberate twisting of God’s gracious gift of marital intimacy that God created for both procreation and for enjoyment within the confines of heterosexual marriage (Gen 2: 24; Prv. 5:15-19; Mt 19:4-6; 1Tim 4: 3-5). The components arsen and koimasthai are found in Lev. 18:22; 20:13, which vehemently forbid having sexual relations with another male. Raymond E. Brown asserts, “The fact that in 1 Cor. 6:16 Paul cites Gen 2:24, “The two will become one flesh” suggests that his condemnation of fornicators and homosexuals in 1 Cor. 6: 9 is rooted in God having created male and female in the divine image (Gen 1:27) and ordained that they might be united together in marriage.”393

It must be highlighted that by the period Paul penned the Book of Romans, he had observed homosexual addicts being converted to the Christian faith leaving behind their past ungodly lifestyle (1Cor 6: 9-11). Homosexuality, like premarital or extramarital sexual relationship is not unpardonable. Even those who are seriously addicted to the practice of bestiality can be pardoned if they repent of their sins, and transgressions.

393 Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1997), 530.

200

The supernatural force that ushered in a miraculous manifestation of God’s glory at the resurrection of Jesus will in the same manner empower them to forsake their addicted lifestyle and embrace the warm and delectability of the word of God. The empowering of the Holy Ghost will break every chain of enslavement in their lives so that they will live immaculate lives that will be pleasing and acceptable to God (Rom 8:11). Having accentuated this, I would want to make a clarion call to all homosexual addicts to make a concerted effort to imbibe the word of God daily, and with the help of the Holy Spirit and sound biblical counseling, they are capable of overcoming this perilous moral problem confronting 21st century believers in the kingdom of God.

Illegal Acquisition of Money and Biblical Response

Data analysis of the survey conducted to the five hundred respondents affirmed that 85% of the married couples who were administered the questionnaires consented that they have ever acquired money illegally. On the contrary, 45% of the unmarried persons assented that they willfully amassed wealth illegally. Meaning that, 325 people out of the 500 respondents concurred plainly that they had ever been involved in financial malpractices or malfeasance. The implication is that the respondents and several other believers, who professed Christianity as their sole religion exhibit high- level moral corruption in financial misappropriation, and cheating, all aimed at accruing wealth without the slightest apprehensiveness in their diabolical deeds.

201

The Bible has several passages that deal with wealth acquisition in the kingdom of God. A man’s social and religious integrity is often measured in money matters. One of the magnetic forces that plunges humanity, nations and kingdoms into the pit of life is failure to appreciate the might of money. Money is as powerful as a biological warhead, which is capable of decimating the very core of every human endeavor. Scripture vividly states that if we are not trustworthy in handling little valuables, God would not entrust to us immeasurable magnitude of divine blessings ( Lk. 16: 10-13). Exegetically, the word used for money in this context is mamoras, which comes from Aramaic word mammon.

The three words pistos, “faithful”, pisteusei, “entrust” and alithinon, “true” are derivations of the Aramaic root word ‘MN. Scholars hypothesize that mammon was frequently used most probably because it had already been recognized as a word with a negative nuance.394 In the Tagnum, mammon refers to “dishonest profit”, which refers to a merchant, who acquires wealth by exploiting a vulnerable situation of another person.

The word mamoras occurs three times in verse 13, in verses 9 and 11. In both instances it refers to “dishonest” (adikia or adikos) accentuating the negative connotation of mamoras.395 In verse 13, the Greek word used in this context is douleno,

“serve” meaning “to be enslaved”, or “be controlled by.” Highlighting on this point, the

French Philosopher Jacques Ellul asserts that Jesus personifies mammon as “a sort of god” acting as a magnetic force competing severely with God to annex our souls.396

394 J. Brian, www.crossmarks.com/brian/Luke16xl.hyn, (Accessed December 26, 2011), 1.

395 Ibid., 1.

396 Ibid., 2.

202

Money actually is a tyrannical master and if not properly handled would lead to irreligious activities on our part. Wealth promises power, control, and luxury but fails to guarantee a peaceful heart. Because corruption emanates poisoning of the heart and that further leads to total spiritual bankruptcy. The Pharisees considered their wealth to be a sign of God’s approval of their hypocritical activities. Nevertheless, God detested their wealth because it caused them to abandon true spirituality. Furthermore, the Bible declares, “People who want to be rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people eager for money have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs” (I Tim. 6: 9-10). Greed leads to all kinds of problems including marital instability, robbery, taking advantage of the weak, exploitation of labor leading to blowups partnerships. Scripture authenticates, “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Mt. 6:21). Money is a barometer for measurement of our commitment to God. The way we appreciate it, spend it, and acquire it signifies what we truly are. Money has the power to control. It is an idolatrous super-power that can derail the believer from being faithful to God. Hebrews 13: 5 states “Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have because God said, Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you.” Proverbs 13: 11 asserts, “Dishonest money dwindles away, but he who gathers money little by little makes it grow.” Despite the implication of high-level corruption revealed in the respondents, giving their cares to Jesus will salvage them from moral bankruptcy.

Scriptures incisively declares, “Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you”

(1Pet.5:7).

203

Syncretism, Idolatry and Biblical Response

The research analysis in Table 1 illustrates the percentages of people who conceded that they have ever consulted a Psyche and continued to engage in such activities because their shepherds failed woefully to educate them on biblical methods of discerning their future. Seventy-five percent of the married couples agreed to ever conferring with a psyche while 84.5% of the unmarried believed ever consorting with a psyche. Major reasons pertaining to the repudiation of Biblical principles to adopting and adapting ungodly methods of finding solutions to their problems are numerous. In view of the economic meltdown, coupled with marital instability, joblessness, and a myriad of factors confronting Twenty-First century believers, majority of believers are compelled to seek advice constantly from a psyche. Thus, the number of married couples who ever consulted a psyche is 187.5 and the number of unmarried persons conceding to ever consulting a psyche is 211.25 totaling 398.75 of people who obtained spiritual guidance from a psyche. The implication is that despite high tend out of pastors, and seminarians, a greater proportion of Church members still resort to a psyche and other mediums for solutions of 21st century problems.

Since the Bible is the ultimate authority for all Christians, it is crucial for us to discover what the Bible commands. Primarily, the Bible accentuates absolute monotheism. Scripture authorizes, “You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them” (Ex. 20: 3-5).

According to John H. Sailhamer, “other gods” is taken to mean “idols”. Thus, idolatry is

204

prohibited absolutely in the kingdom of God.397 Correspondingly, after Jacob had a theophanic encounter in Gen. 35:1-5, he ordered his household to get rid of all foreign idols. Idols were considered by a majority in the Jewish society as good luck charms.

Earrings were not bad per say, but were worn as good luck charms to ward off evil spirits. Jacob on the contrary believed that it was sacrilegious as a true Israelite to have idols in his possession. Hence, his family members as well as his close associates were compelled to consecrate themselves from pagan influences. Likewise, Samuel exhorted the Israelites in I Sam. 7:3 to get rid of the foreign gods and the Ashtoreths in order to commit their lives to Yahweh alone. The Israelites obeyed and destroyed their Baals and Ashtoreths and served Yahweh alone. Baal was believed to be the son of El, the supreme deity of the Canaanites. He was venerated and upheld as the god of thunder and rain controlling vegetation and agriculture. Ashtoreth was the goddess of love and war. She was called Ishtar in Babylon and Astante or Aphrodite in Greece. She was also upheld as the goddess of fertility. The Canaanites believed that coitus between

Baal and Ashtoreth would magically rejuvenate the earth and make it more fertile and hospitable. These pagan influences made the Israelites to believe that they could resort to them for political, social, and national solutions. Samuel exhorted them to rid themselves of such undesirable and sacrilegious objects and anchor their faith in

Yahweh alone. Idolatry is making anything more significant in our lives than God-the creator of heavens and the earth. Actually, it is described as anything that wields power, and has the fervor to convert our hearts from God to adoring such a personality or

397 John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch As Narrative (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1992), 283.

205

object. It is a major source of temptation that plunges the soul, and mind of the individual into deception, confusion, false security, and pretentious belief.

Additionally, the worship of gods or idols in the form of psyche consultation in the contemporary American societies as well as other Christian communities around the world will engender God’s judgment. For instance, the worship of the golden calf in Ex.

32: 32-33 provoked God’s wrath against the Israelites. He wanted to wipe them off the surface of the earth but Moses intervened on behalf of the community of God’s people.

Nevertheless, they suffered a plague, and out of it, 3000 people perished. Similarly, in

Num. 25: 1-16, the worship of Baal of Peor, and uncontrolled prostitution with the

Midianite women provoked divine wrath against the Israelites. The Israelite judges slain

24,000 of tribe’s men who indulged in the worship of Baal peor. Jeremiah 1:16 reiterates a similar sentiment by declaring, “ I will pronounce my judgments on my people because of their wickedness, in burning incense to other gods and in worshipping what their hands have made.” Just as the people chose to follow false gods, many contemporary believers worship false “gods” in the form of materialism, sexual immorality, psyche and voodoo consultation, wielding of amulets, pride, rude, racism, tribalism, jealousy, corruption, and wrongful application of power. It is in view of this that the Bible commands all believers to eschew dabbling with idols in any form. “Do not make a covenant with them or with other gods. Do not let them live in your land, or they will cause you to sin against me, because the worship of other gods will certainly be a snare to you” (Ex. 23: 32-33). Sound counseling, sound biblical teaching and exposition couple with koinnoinia (brotherly fellowship) will help the apostatized person to be restored to divine fellowship. 206

Bestiality and Biblical Response

Table 1 is an empirical evidence of statistics of respondents who agreed that they have ever committed sexual acts with animals. Out of the 250 married couples interrogated and administered the questionnaires, 35% of them conceded that they have ever engaged in bestiality while 14.5% of the unmarried couples surveyed believed they have ever had an amorous relationship with an animal. A summation of the number of both the married and the unmarried people who ever committed bestiality and continue to engage in such acts is 123.75. The statistics indicate that sexual bankruptcy is not orchestrated only among humans, but the animal kingdom has been invaded by the sexual prowess and exploitation of humankind. Majority of people who indulge in such unwarranted behavior are professed Christians or evangelicals.

Zoophilia, from the Greek word zoion, “animal”, philia, “friendship” or “love” is the practice of coition between humans and non-humans, commonly referred to as bestiality. People who engage in zoophilia are called zoophiles, homosexuals, or simply zoos. Zoophilia may also refer to as zoosexuality.398 Thomas Aquinas, the mediaeval Catholic philosopher believed that out of the unnatural sexual sins and crimes committed by man, the most grievous, unwarranted, abominable, and unacceptable religious and social behavior was the sin of bestiality.399

In the Mosaic covenant, the stipulations of the law vehemently protested against sexual union between human species and any creature of the animal kingdom, be it

398 www.wikipedia.org/zoophilia.htn ( accessed on December 31, 2011), I.

399 Ibid., I.

207

domesticated or wild animal. Frankly, under the law such barbaric act deserved lynching of the culprit by stoning. Thus Leviticus 18: 23 asserts, “Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.” This injunction was promulgated because of the influences of pagan nations. For instance, Egyptian women were morally loosed and hence indulged themselves in orgies, in the form of bestiality.

The type of beasts that were erotically attracted to their women were the mare, cow, or ewe, or any other beast, small or great, whether tamed or wild, even fowls were included in the list.400

Having comprehended the power to be attracted to such ungodly behavior of pagan practices, the law instructed that no woman must pose before a beast, and exhibit lascivious or obscene behavior and solicit the beast for coitus in any form. Four- footed beasts were considered the most vulnerable to human sexual invasion. For a woman or a man who is created in the image of God, having the intellect of God, and having the attributes of God to engage in such animalistic behavior is shocking, detestable, and unfathomable. It baffles every human endeavor and cannot be grasped easily by the imagination of the human mind. For the chosen people of Yahweh to solicit such unnatural amalgamation intercourse is most atrocious and astounding. Hence, the law sternly warned them to eschew adopting and adapting such undesirable pagan practices. In Egypt, goats were venerated and women consciously engaged in coition

400 www.bible.cc/leviticus/18:23.htn (accessed on December 29, 2011), 1.

208

with such imbeciles (Lev. 18:7). The mixture of humans and animals; a blending of different kinds of God’s creatures is gross perversion of divine order.401

Homogeneously, Exodus 20:19 strictly forbid bestiality because it is so repugnant to the order of divine creation. It is empirical to all that beasts are satisfied, and controlled by natural instincts. It is therefore a display of gross enormity of abominable orchestrations pursued by the deviant and perverted man who is endowed with high- voltage intellectual impetus, and with the most fortified, vibrant and dynamic faculty of

God’s entire creation. It is lamentable that such a high esteemed creature of God should indulge in beastly behavior by engaging in sexual intercourse with an animal.402 In consistent with the Mosaic Law, Deuteronomy 27:21 reiterates, “Cursed is anyone who has sexual relations with any animal. Then all people shall say, Amen.” Equivalently,

Leviticus 20:15-16 reechoes, “If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal. If a woman approaches an animal to have sexual relations with it, kill both the woman and the animal. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” In the Gentile nation of Canaan, their cultural as well as their religious practices were replete with sex goddesses, temple prostitution, and gross bestiality. Their decadent religious practice wielded the potency to influence anyone who came into contact with it. Nevertheless, God was building up a formidable nation to trumpet the message of redemption to the entire world. He did not endorse the

401 www.bible.cc/leviticus/18:23.htn (accessed on December 29, 2011), 2.

402 www.biblebrowser.com/exodus/22:19.htn (accessed on December 29, 2011), 1.

209

Israelites to adopt and adapt the Canaanites cultural practices and slide into orgies, and debauchery. Hence, he outlawed every sexual sin including bestiality.

Drug addiction and Biblical Response

Drug addiction statistics in table 1 above is heart wrenching and alarming.

Seventy percent of married couples who were administered questionnaires considered that they have ever abused at least a drug. Only 30% declined they ever have abused drugs. Invariably, 45% of married couples who responded to the questionnaires revealed that they have ever abused some drugs. Fifty-five percent on the contrary stated they had never abused drugs. The results portray that out of the 500 people surveyed, 287.5 people have ever abused some form of drugs. They were all Christians who were affiliated to Churches or being clergies of a Church.

Research has proven that America constitutes 5% of the World’s population but its citizens consume 65% of all drugs produced in the World. Types of drugs commonly abused are Alcohol, Hallucinogens, Inhalants, Marijuana, Opiates or Narcotics,

Sedatives, Amphetamines, Cocaine, Crack, and Tobacco. The Department of

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services conducted a national household survey in 2001 to ascertain the extent of drug use in families and communities. Deductive conclusions on the following were pervasive and are still prevalent in households. The survey concluded that marijuana was the most commonly used illicit drug.

Approximately, American youths aged 12 or older consume alcohol sporadically. Eighty-

210

one percent of binge and heavy alcohol consumers are employed. Ten and half percent of children and adolescents aged 12-17 were current drug users. Furthermore, more than 1 in 10 Americans reported driving under heavy influence of alcohol at least once annually. Cumulatively, an estimated 16.6 million Americans age 12 and older were categorized as people who depended or abused alcohol or illicit drugs in 2001, constituting 7.3% of the population. A majority of whom were Christians and Catholics, and 1.4 % of the American population age 12 and older received some sort of drug- abused related treatment. Two million Americans are addicted to cocaine, which affects them socially, psychologically, mentally, and some of them find it extremely difficult to maintain a job.403

Scriptures declare, “Who has Woe? Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has complaints? Who has needless bruises? Who has bloodshot eyes? Those who linger over wine, who go to sample bowls of mixed wine. Do not gaze at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup, when it goes down smoothly! In the end it bites like a snake and poisons like a viper. Your eyes will see strange sights and your mind imagine confusing things” ( Prv. 23: 29-33). Consistently, scripture declares in Eph. 5: 18 “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.”

Unswervingly, 1 Cor. 6:19-20 asserts, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought a price. Therefore honor God with your body.” In the Old

Testament, God dwelt in the Mosaic tabernacle as well as in King Solomon’s temple. In

403 Santiago Galaz, Securitas Security Services USA: A Handbook for Drug-Free Workplace,( 2012), 8.

211

the same dimension, the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity dwells in the soul, spirit and body of a genuine believer. As the temple and its valuable articles were consecrated and set apart for the service of God in the sanctuary, so the body of a

Christian is sanctified and is set aside for the sole purpose of serving God. It is therefore abominably scandalous, shameful, disgusting, and unimaginable for the Christian’s body to be used for drugs and to be indulged in gross sexual promiscuity. The Greek word hieron represents a magnificent structure and connotes “holy, hallowed, sacred, consecrated or belonging to or connected with or is a dwelling place of gods.” In the

New Testament, hieron was designated to the complex structure of the Jerusalem temple. Another important word is naos. In the Greek culture, it was referred to as “the dwelling place of gods.” An archetype of a pagan god is recorded in Acts 17:24 and an instance where naos refers to a true God is recorded in Mt. 23: 16. It describes a place where a deity was worshipped. Zechariah, for example ministered to God in naos (Lk.

1:9). Actually, naos refers to the temple proper comprising the inner sanctuary, composed of the outer room, the Holy of Holies and the innermost places. Jesus used naos to refer to his body as a temple in John 2:19-21. Paul extends the connotation of naos to embrace the Christian body in 1 Cor. 6:19.404 In the city of Corinth, there was a temple of Aphrodite, in which there was gross enormity of sexual promiscuity as fornication was regarded as consecration and not desecration. Notorious prostitutes conglomerated at the temple as “priestesses” of Aphrodite, to lure men “worship” the goddess by fornication.405 Paul having been imbued with massive proportions of the

404 www.perceptaustin.org/1 corinthians-619-word (accessed January 25, 2012), 1.

405 Ibid., 1. 212

Corinthian culture exhorted the believers to eschew such ungodly behavior. In affirming the presence and functions of the Holy Spirit in a believer, D.L. Moody states the following:

I think it is clearly taught in the Scripture that every believer has the Holy Ghost dwelling in him. He may be quenching the Spirit of God, and he may not glorify God as he should, but if he is a believer on the Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost dwells in him. But I want to call your attention to another fact. I believe today, that though Christian men and women have the Holy Spirit dwelling in them, yet He is not dwelling within them in power; in other words, God has a great many sons and daughters without power.406

Correspondingly, John Calvin asserts, “As the soul does not live idly in the body, but gives motion and vigor to every member and Part, so the Spirit of God cannot dwell in us without manifesting Himself by the outward effects.”407 Harmoniously, Martyn

Lloyd-Jones declares, “That is why fornication should be unthinkable in a Christian. God is in us, in the Holy Spirit: not an influence, not a power, but a person whom we can grieve.”408 We must emphasize that the temple of the believer must not be abused with drugs, fornication, adultery, homosexuality and other forms of ungodly activities.

Scripture declares, “Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will” (Rom.12:1-2). The Greek term for “brothers” is adelphoi

406 Ibid., 2.

407 Ibid., 2.

408 Ibid., 2.

213

and its singular form is adelphos. Thus, its morphological structure is adelphus meaning

“womb” literally, connoting “one womb.” Therefore, adelphos is a fervent fellowship of believers as they unite as a family of God to worship him in truth and in spirit “John

1:12). In Rom.12: 1-2. Paul is referring to regenerated believers who are catapulted into the kingdom of God in Christ by grace through faith and not to his unregenerate recalcitrant and rebellious Jewish brothers 409 Additionally, the metaphor living sacrifice is worthy of explication. The sacrifices in the Torah were meant for the atonement of sins. Nevertheless, Christ came to offer a grand sacrifice once and for all for humanity. The metaphor is applicable to us and is enjoining us to offer our bodies as a living sacrifice to God (Rom. 15:16), and “a spiritual priesthood also, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” Hence, we should not allow drug addiction, homosexuality, immorality, murder, homicidal tendencies and activities to dominate out minds, bodies and soul. The Greek term parakaleo whose morphological structure is para =beside + kaleo= “called aloud” also employed in Rom.

12:8; 15:30; 16: 17 literally denotes “to call to one side.” Parakaleo is often employed to urge or encourage one to pursue a particular course of behavior or conduct. It is possible Paul had the classic Greek use of parakaleo in mind when he was penning this epistle to the Romans, where the commander urged his marines to be strong in spirit and in mind as they were about to embark on a fierce battle. Thus, parakaleo in

409 www.perceptaustin.org/romans/-12-word (accessed January 25, 2012), 1.

214

Rom. 12:1 implies, “I appeal, beseech, exhort, plead, beg of you” to be wholly devoted to God by offering our bodies in holiness to him.410

Table 2.0 Views of Respondents on Divorce

Married Couples Unmarried persons

Divorce is Divorce is not Divorce is Divorce is not permitted 90% permitted 10% permitted 46.5% permitted 53.5 %

Divorce and Biblical Response

Table 2.0 is a resume of statistics of the views of respondents on Divorce. The analysis illustrates that 90% of respondents believed that it was permissible to divorce as kingdom citizens, while 46.5 % of unmarried couples strongly believed that divorce was permissible in the Church and in the kingdom of God. This also postulates that 225 married couples and 116.25 of the unmarried persons had a strong belief and conviction that couples should be sanctioned to divorce, culminating into a colossal number of

341.25.

At this juncture, it is essential for us to reemphasize what was discussed in the introduction regarding divorce in America. According to Divorce Guide, current divorce statistics in America is estimated at 50%. Accordingly, The Americans for Divorce

Reform estimates that most probably, 40% or possibly 50% of marriages will end in

410 Ibid., 2.

215

divorce in the coming years if current trends continue. It is also documented that the divorce rate in America for first time marriage is 41%; the divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%; and finally, the divorce rate for third marriage is 73%.411

Furthermore, 3.6% to 5% of marriages fall on rocks every year culminating into gross enormity of adults who have experienced the canker worm of divorce at some point in their lives. The state with the highest per capita divorce is Nevada with 6.4% divorce rate. It must be emphasized that couples in other states who are having debilitating experience in their divorce procedures are mandated to expedite their divorce procedures in Nevada. District of Colombia had the lowest divorce rate with just 1.7 % divorce rate in the last year.412 According to Divorce Guide, African Americans occupy the highest position in divorce classification with 11% rate, followed by whites with 10% rate, and Hispanics are placed 3rd with 8% rate of divorce. In conjunction with this, 85% of children with behavioral problems are from divorced homes while 71% are High

School dropouts. Only 63% of American children grow up with both biological parents, the lowest in the Western world.413 The implication is that divorce in the American society as well as societies around the world has become a norm and a formative part of diverse cultures. The following Biblical discussion will help rescue perishing souls from pandemonium of life and spiritual bewilderment.

411 http: www.divorceguide.com/USA/divorce information/divorce-statistics in the USA.html (accessed October 23,2011), 1.

412 Ibid., 1.

413 Ibid., 2.

216

Scripture educates, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery” (Mk10: 11-12). Divorce and remarriage cause adultery in that the freedom to end one’s marriage in order to start another one can create vulnerability to the temptation to covet another man’s wife” (Ex 20).414 The scripture educates that if a woman puts away her husband in the form of elopement from him, leave him by consent, and be married to another, she commits a transgression of adultery, and it will be no excuse for her to say that it was the consent of her husband. The man is admonished equally with similar terms if he divorces his wife and marries another woman. Divorce does not nullify marriage. Wisdom and grace, holiness and love, prayer, devotion, service to God, reigning in the heart will make those commands easy.

Similarly, Rom. 7: 2-3 elucidates that the Mosaic Law did not make provisions for a wife to divorce her husband. On the contrary, husbands were endorsed to divorce their wives by giving them a certificate of divorce. This provision was tolerated because of the hardness of their hearts. Jesus replied to the Pharisees, “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law. But at the beginning of creation, God made them male and female” (Mark 10:5). Thus, Jesus does not advocate divorce, he is totally against it because it breaches the order of creation, and plunges a myriad of people into spiritual, psychological and financial woes. It is not permissible in the kingdom of God to divorce except engineered by gross disobedience of the vow of chastity or marital unfaithfulness ( Mt. 5: 32; 19:9). In 1 Cor. 7:39, Paul educates that a

414 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom of Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 283.

217

woman is bound to her husband as long as she lives. Remarriage after divorce is not permissible, except reconciliation. Correspondingly, the husband is not mandated to marry another woman but to pave the way for marital reconciliation if he divorces his wife (1 Cor. 7:10-11). Luke 16:18b stipulates a similar injunction, that a man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. Mal. 2: 16 asserts, “I hate divorce, says the Lord of Israel, and I hate a man’s covering himself with violence as well as with his garment.” The expression “violence” and “garment” is described as a metonym, whereby the Israelite man breaking up a covenantal institution with his legal Jewish wife is covering himself with a garment of divorce as an empirical evidence of disobedience to the law of God. For Yahweh, divorce is always violent and always leaves deep scars of emotional trauma and spiritual famine in the hearts of its victims. The orchestrators of divorce are absolutely abhorrent to Yahweh. Research has proven that in the 21st century America, more than 51 % of marriages in the Church end up in divorce.

Therefore, Mal. 2; 16 is making a clarion call to kingdom citizens to eschew divorce because God hates it.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is imperative for us to highlight the research findings deliberated in the chapter. People who agreed that they have ever committed a transgression of abortion or helped some else to orchestrate such an abominable act constituted 360.

The data analysis has revealed that homosexuality is on the rise with 425 out of the 500 respondents conceding to indulging in such abominable act. Due to materialism spurred on by self-aggrandizement motives, financial malfeasance among believers is soaring

218

with 325 of them conceding to ever acquiring money illegally. Neo polytheism in the

American culture in the form of psyche consultation is constantly on the increase with

398.75 agreeing that they have ever consorted together with a psyche. Bestiality, which is abhorrent and unnatural, is embraced by some believers making up 123.75. Actually, they have all concurred that the sin of bestiality is habitual. Drug addiction is found out to be problematic among many believers with 287.5 being abusers or addicts of some sort of drugs. As a result of lack of pastoral care and counseling, 341.25 of respondents believed that couples must be allowed to divorce at the slightest provocation without giving due cognizance to biblical principles. All these moral issues are addressed using exegetical, and interpretive methods indicating that the Bible abhors such gross enormity of immorality but can be helped through sound biblical teaching and pastoral care.

219

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Kingdom of God and its implications to Twenty-First Century Believers is discussed thoroughly, unraveling the significance of the study to my readers. The

Kingdom of God is defined in various Biblical contexts and by a number of biblical scholars as they all concur on the general statements on the significance of the kingdom of God. A wide spread consensus among scholars on the kingdom of God affirms that the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central theme. Substantial proportion of

Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom of God was recorded in the synoptic Gospels is authenticated by biblical scholars and expositors. Jesus believed that the kingdom of

God was both present and future. The kingdom also refers primarily to God’s rule and reign, and the kingdom presence was felt through the proclamation and activity of Jesus

Christ. Modern and postmodern scholarship is quite unanimous with the notion that the kingdom of God was the watershed and epicenter of the message of Jesus (Ladd,

Theology, 57). See also, Chilton, 1; Jeremias, New Testament Theology, 96; Perrin,

Rediscovering, 64. There is copious evidence of connection between Jesus and John the Baptist (Mt.3:2; 4:17; Mk.1:14. Only Matthew records that Jesus’ preaching about the kingdom of God was a building of a historical, theological and a biblical bridge between the Old dispensation and the New. Furthermore, the employment of “the kingdom of heaven” or “the Gospel of the heaven” represents Jewish idea of kingly governance as an expectation of the final restoration. Luke declares emphatically that

220

Jesus’ ministry begins with the coming of the Spirit that ushers in a new era of redemption as it was prognosticated in Isaiah 61:1-3.

In defining God, three important lexical items are found to be connected to his name. El represents “the mighty”, “the strong”, “the prominent”, “valiant”, “fortitude”,

“strength” and “vigor.” It occurs more than 250 times in the Old Testament. Another significant name is Elah, an Aramaic form of “idol” or “god.” In the Old Testament apocalyptic Book of Daniel, Elah is designated to “gods” and to the true God. Elohim on the other hand is considered by grammarians as the plural form of El. In biblical terms, Elohim is a Trinitarian plural form. It is found 2570 times in the Old Testament, and out of this colossal number, 2300 times of the name is designated to the true God.

It is referred to as “the strong one”, “ the foremost one”, “ to be in front”, “ the pace setter”, the initiator” “the one, one has recourse in distress”, “ the one who gives guidance and providence in times of need.” In conjunction with EL, Elah, and Elohim, is Eloah, another term for God occurring 57 times in the Old Testament. Yahweh is a common appellation of God in the Old Testament occurring 5320. It denotes, “God is active and self-existence.” In the New Testament, he is referred to as Theos, meaning

“the strong one” or “the mighty one.” Affiliated to this awesome divine mane is Yahweh-

Tsebbaoth, an appellation designated to God as the commander of the angelic host and the armies of God who surround the glorious throne of God with melodious songs in worship of him. They also embark on spiritual warfare for the people of God. Yahweh- raah is designated to the expression “The Lord is my shepherd.” The term shepherd was highly esteemed in the peasant Israelite community as the shepherd was regarded as the protector and provider of pasture for the sheep. The term came to be referred to 221

leaders, priests, prophets, and kings of the Israelite community. In the New Testament

Jesus is often referred to as the Chief shepherd, and all minsters, deacons, bishops, evangelists are all titled under-shepherds. The Hebrew expression for “king” is melekh which most of the time is designated to “god” or “idol.” Thus, all Semites were very conversant with the notion of “king”. They fervently believed that it was the melekh who protected them from venomous, and ravenous animals, and their enemies as they fed their herds sumptuous pasture. Hence, the call of Abraham, the appearing of God to

Moses in the burning bush, and the various theophanic encounters in the scorching desert was a melekh working with his people in his kingdom. Consistently, basileia is the Greek term for Kingdom, as Jesus Christ came proclaiming the kingdom of God

(basileia tou theou). The Hebrew lexical equivalent is malkuth, meaning the reign of a king and the realm over which he reigns.

The Abrahamic call and its unconditional promises are discussed clearly in this dissertation. His call in Gen. 12:1-3 places high premium on his manifold blessings. He will be made into a great nation, God will bless him, God will make his name great, God will bless those who bless him, God will curse those who curse him. His blessing will be international, embracing all people on earth. In Gen. 15:1-21, God made the Land promise to him. It declares, “On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, To your descendants, I will give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates- the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites,

Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.” In this chapter, Abram demonstrates unflinching faith in God, and scripture declares, “Abram believed the Lord, and he credited to him as righteousness.” Tsedaqah ( righteousness) was a foundation 222

stone on which all these blessings would come to fruition, even though the Abrahamic covenant was unconditional. Gen.17:1-8, God changed Abram’s name to Abraham, and

Sarai was changed to Sarah. A change in name meant a change in destiny, a change in prosperity, and a guarantee of fruition of covenantal promises. God reiterated that he had made him a father of many nations, he would make him very fruitful, he would birth nations out of him, and kings would be his descendants, his covenant with Abraham was an everlasting one for generations to come. Abraham and descendants were to serve God only, and the whole land of Canaan was to be given to him and his descendants. These promises were passed down to Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and to the people of Israel. They were conferred on Isaac in Genesis 26: 2-5. Jacob and Joseph received the promises and Abrahamic covenant in Gen. 28:13-15, and Gen. 48: 3-4; 50

:24 respectively. The implication is that since we are seed of Abraham, the promises and covenant blessings are passed to all kingdom citizens. While the Abrahamic covenant was unconditional, the Mosaic covenant was conditional. The covenant called for total obedience and its primordial purpose was to separate Israel as a special people of Yahweh to serve and worship him in holiness. The covenant was perceived as a fulfillment of the manifold promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Moses was the undisputed, versatile, anointed leader and mediator of the covenantal promises. God consorted together with him on Mount Sinai, and he carried those words to the community of Yahweh people and their response was communicated back to God through the same personality (Ex.19:3-15).415 Furthermore, the Davidic covenant was

415 John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative,(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1992), 282.

223

unconditional that called for the messianic birth and descent to be the root of king David and Judah where his reign will endure for life everlasting.

The expression the stump of Jesse implies the humble beginning of the Messiah bypassing all the ostentations of the Davidic dynasty to a glorious manifestation of the king of all kings. The qualification for his kingship will operate on the premise of an endowment of the Spirit, giving him true divine qualities as he is established firmly in his fear of God. The rudimentary characteristics of his messianic rule will be righteousness

(tsedaqah), which in practical dimension is the enforcement of justice (mishpat) for the poor and the meek. Isaiah 11:6-9 postulates beyond the current bondage and trauma to the coming of the Messiah, who would be God in the flesh, the Lord Jesus Christ. His sovereign reign will be characterized by immeasurable peace and figuratively will be like the Garden of Eden, permeated with the peace and tranquility of God. Likewise, foreigners, Gentiles, and the proselytes will be invited to join the people of Yahweh in worshiping of God in truth and in spirit of the living God. Deutro-Isaiah and third Isaiah are replete with God inviting all nations and kingdoms to be part of the messianic kingdom416 This implies that in the 21st century Church there must not be discrimination against people of different races, tribes and languages.

The beatitudes are blessings and in Latin they are beatitudines, or benedictions. The Latin adjective for “blessing” is beatus, which means “happy,

416 Barry G. Webb, The Message of Isaiah, ed. J.A Motyer (Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1996), 75.

224

fortunate, or blissful”417. Even though the beatitudes are elucidated properly in the

Gospel of Matthew 5:3-12, evangelist Luke records them in a slightly different way in chapter 6:22. Thus, the spiritual character of the messianic kingdom is prioritized in the beatitudes intertwined with poetical parallelism. As far as textual criticism is concerned, the beatitudes pose no problem, except verse 9 where the

Vulgate and many other ancient authorities omit the pronoun autoi, ipsi; probably a merely accidental ommission. In Aramaic, the word poor is 'ányâ (Hebrew 'anî), denoting “bent down, afflicted, miserable, and poor” while meek is synonymous with the same root, 'ánwan (Hebrew 'ánaw), bending oneself down, humble, meek, and gentle.” Some grammarians and etymologists would attach to the word poor the sense of humility. Others think of "beggars, congregating before God” humbly acknowledging their need of Divine assistance and redemption.418 The believer must also mourn for his own depravity and for the sins and miseries of others as well as the world’s lackadaisical attitude towards kingdom ideologies. On the contrary, “hunger and thirst” demand moral, religious, social, political, and personal perfection in order to experience justice of the Lord. Those who are merciful towards their neighbor will receive mercy of the messianic kingdom. Purity of heart, which is the center of human emotions, is desirable to become an acceptable citizen of the messianic kingdom. The peacemakers are those who seek to foster peace with neighbors, in their communities, and to ensure absolute peace in global dimensions. Believers must also be made aware that as they

417 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture [Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002], 127. For discussion on the term “blessed” or makarios, see BAGD, 486-87; BDAG, 610-11.

418 Glen H. Stassen & David P. Gushee, Kingdom of Ethics (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003), 41-44.

225

seek righteousness in the kingdom of God, they will be severely persecuted as they wait for the sovereign rule of the messianic kingdom at the parousia419

The dissertation has also spilled so much ink on the parables of Jesus. A parable is defined as a succinct story, in prose or verse, which illustrates one or more instructive principles, or lessons, or (sometimes) a normative principle. It is termed as parabole in

Greek as “an illustration, a comparison, or an analogy”, usually orchestrated in a discourse, employing well-abreast every day happenings or events to unearth a moral or spiritual truth.420 The parable may exhibit some characteristics of a similitude where the emphasis is placed on the recurring character ( Mt.11: 11-13; 17: 7-10}. It is also referred to unquestionable reality where the theological and biblical connection is rendered explicit, either than being suggestive in analogical renditions ( Mt. 10:25-37;

12:16-21; 18:9-14). The allegorical method of interpretation claimed a superior position in which the Church interpreted the parables. Nevertheless, the Antiochene school,

Luther, and Calvin protested vehemently against this method of delineating the parables. They did not succeed in overcoming the wide spread use of allegorical interpretation. Even though the Reformers’ protest against the Fourfold meaning of scripture and was acknowledged by the clergy, and scholars as correct, when it came to the parables, they had the alacrity for the deeper or allegorical connotation of the text.

It was not until 1888 that the twine that bound scholarship to allegorical interpretation was broken to pave way for a new dimension of parabolic designations. Adolf Julicher’s

419 Ibid., 41-44.

420 Encarta, 1.

226

work on the parables was a magnus opus demonstrating that the parables were far from being interpreted as allegories. Instead, he delineated a parable as a similitude which has only a single point of comparison ( tertium comarationis). Each parable is therefore a single picture seeking to portray a single object or reality, thus the metaphors that characterize a parable only give local coloring for the single point or reality, which the picture is seeking to portray.421 The following parables are illustrated in this dissertation for the readership of the intellectual world: The parable of the four soils, ( 1) The parable of the tares, (2) The parable of the mustard seed, (3) The parable of the yeast, ( 4) The parable of the treasure and the pearl, ( 5) The parable of the net, (6) The parable of the ten virgins, (7) The parable of the loaned money, ( 8) The parable of the workers paid equally, ( 9) The Samaritan problem, and the parable of the Good Samaritan.

Actually, the spiritual kingdom of Christ is the epicenter of his proclamation of the coming kingdom in the canonical Gospels. His kingdom is mediatorial governance where God through him has unsurpassable compassion for humanity, as he brings redemption to people through faith in God. God’s spiritual kingdom is the reign of God in the hearts of men and women empowering the regenerated to grow through the process of sanctification. Sanctification is a process of Christian growth through which the Holy

Spirit makes us grow like Jesus (2 Th. 2”13). Our calling actually is to make us like

Jesus (Rom. 8:29). His kingdom, which is Spiritual, must be discerned spiritually (1 Cor.

2:9-16). In the New Testament, the term “kingdom”, “kingdom of heaven” and “ kingdom of God” are synonymous and are used interchangeably. Mark 1: 14 and Mt. 4:23 record

421 Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus, (Philadelphia, Pennyslvania: Westminster Press,1981), 53.

227

“ kingdom”, while only evangelist Matthew employs the term “ kingdom of heaven.” The

Greek term basileia tou theou refers to “ the kingdom of God.” The Hebrew expression for “ the kingdom of heaven” is malkuth hashamayim, while its Greek equivalent is basileia ton Ouranon. Strikingly, in the Gospel of Mark, the term basileia tou theou occurs in the central portion of the master piece ( 9: 47-10:25) where the passion of

Christ is intricately related to discipleship. For six consecutive times he basileia tou theou is the object of active verbs and human beings are the objects. This is an indication of human response, and more essentially, God is the hidden actor. Mark succinctly comprehends human beings to be passive recipients of the kingdom of God.

In that group of utterances he basileia tou theou is linked with eisechomai 10:23-25, “ enter the kingdom”which is equivalent to “ inherit eternal life.” In the Gospel of Matthew, however, the kingdom of God has already come, as well as referring to its eschatological appearance. It demands acceptance because judegement awaits the recalcitrant and evil doers. The kingdom will grow in the hearts of men and women which demands absolute commitment, and total renouncement of the mammoth (

Mt.13). Like the Gospel of Mark, the teaching on the kingdom of God in the Gospel of

Luke occurs in the middle portion in “The journey narrative”, equally linked with discipleship. Most scholars perceive the occurrence of the kingdom of God in the middle section as “passion prediction.”

Jesus in his lifetime healed the sick in miraculous fashions (Mark. 1:32-34;

Lk.4:40-41; Mt. 8:16-17). For instance in Capernaum, the Synoptic Gospels dilate on

Jesus’ activities. Mark elaborates that the “whole city” was gathered at the door as a result of Jesus’ messianic activities. Luke records that Jesus laid his hands on the sick 228

and restored many to good health, while Matthew reports that demons were cast out by a word of rebuke from Jesus. Matthews identifies Jesus’ work as a messianic hope for the lost and the sick as fulfillment of Isaiah 53:4, which states, “Surely, he took our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.” He ushered them into the kingdom by delivering them from their maladies. Anchoring our discussion on Isaiah 53, Jesus goes beyond physical healing to embrace spiritual healing for despondent souls.422 Jesus also healed a man with dropsy at the house of s synagogue ruler is a staunch Pharisee (Lk.14:1-6). The event took place on a Sabbath as the Pharisees were there watching, if he would violate the

Sabbath law. He posed them a question as to whether it was lawful to heal on the

Sabbath and failure to reply to his interrogation made him to proceed in healing the man. This event mirrored other Sabbath healings ( Lk. 6:6-11; 13:10-17; Mt. 12:9-14;

Mk. 3:1-6).423 Similarly, in Luke 17: 11-19, Jesus healed ten lepers when they pleaded with him to show them mercy. Jesus instructed them as he did to some lepers earlier, to obey the law and show themselves to the priests. As they turn to embark on their journey to the priest, they were healed instantly. Other instances where lepers were instructed to avail themselves for priestly inspection are the following: Lev.13:19, 14:1-

11; Lk.5:12-16; Mt. 8:1-4; Mk. 1:40-43.424 The scope of Jesus’ miraculous activity in his ministry must be emphasized. Mark records nineteen miracle events, with addition of a few summaries. Matthew goes beyond this number to add two more, the healing of the

422 Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002), 105.

423 Ibid., 277.

424 Ibid., 290.

229

official’s son in ( Mt. 8:5-13), and catching a fish with a coin in its mouth for the purpose of paying taxes ( Mt.17:24-27). Luke also has twenty miracles events and three summaries. Two are somewhat compatible with Mathean pedagogical presentations

(Lk. 7:1-10; 11:14), and six are absolutely unique to his work. The recording of a magnitude proportion of fish harvest ( 5:1-11), restoration of the widow of Nain’s son to life (7:11-17); crippled woman healed on the Sabbath ( 13:10-17); man with dropsy healed on the Sabbath (14:1-6); ten lepers healed ( 17: 11-19); replacement of the severed ear of the high priest’s servant ( 22: 51). On the other hand, John’s Gospel records eight miracles.425

In addition, the participation of Jesus in John’s mode of Baptism was an identification and endorsement of the prophets’ call for national and international redemption. The theophanic pronouncement from Heaven was a bilateral conversation between Jesus and God, considering evangelist Mark’s description. Frankly, John the

Baptist was an irrefutable witness to divine encounter on the day of Jesus’ baptism

(John 1:29-34). It was at the baptismal event that God endorsed Jesus as his distinctive, perpetual, and anointed mediator. Justin Martyrs and the Gospel of Ebionites subscribe God’s utterances to Jesus at his baptism with the enthronement of king David in Psalm 2:7, and a servant personality, as the use of Isaiah 42:1 educates. The auditory confirmation of Jesus and the anointing by the Spirit marks Jesus out as a unique, and as messiah-Christ agent of God.426 Harmoniously, the transfiguration of

425 Ibid., 611.

426 Ibid., 563.

230

Jesus manifested unfathomable divine power that could hardly be grasped by human imagination. The similar voice authenticating Jesus as the son of God and as valiant and invincible personality bringing social, spiritual, religious, physical, national and international redemption to all people.

Additionally, spiritual warfare is given an in-depth analysis in the third chapter. C

H Spurgeon states assertively, “There are no fair-weather soldiers in God’s army. All must endure difficulty. Our courage must be tried and proven. God’s ships never go to sea without being tested, and only when their seaworthiness is proven do they go on longer voyages. Unless you have been through a great trial, you cannot help those who are in great difficulty.”427 Thus, “be strong” endunamoo (present imperative) in Eph.

6:10 is used in the Septuagint to describe Gideon’s battle against the Medianites (

Judges 6:34). This battle that confronts believers in the kingdom of God is the severest, the fiercest, the most daunting, and thus believers must be strong in the Lord in order to subdue the devil in all dimensions of life. Strength kratos denotes demonstrated supremacy or authority that is put forth in combat. Kratos epitomizes the application of might (ischus). Kratos is power to overcome resistance or whatever stands in the way.

Peter Obrian discussing Christian accountability of sojourning in the world from extraterrestrial dimension declares, “The moral issues with which he deals, are not simply matters of personal preference, as many within our contemporary and postmodern world contend. On the contrary, they are essential elements in a larger

427 www.perceptaustin.org/1 Ephesians-619-word (accessed February 3, 2012) ,1.

231

struggle between the forces of good and evil.”428 Also donning on God’s panoply is the only way that the believer can overpower the caprices and attacks of the enemy. The full armor is an embodiment of instruments used for defensive and offensive warfare against the devil and his cohorts, which was dressed up by a fully armed foot soldier.

The appropriate manner of donning the armor will fortify the believer-soldier to “stand up against the schemes of the devil .” In verses 11,13, and 14, the Apostle employs the lexical item of “standing”, “standing firm”, or “ withstanding” various derivations of the verb form to portray the combat-readiness of the Christian-soldier in spiritual warfare.

The verb in Greek is ystemi, “stand” and the NIV renditions are: stenai “ stand against”, antistevai “stand your ground” and stete “ stand firm”. 429. The word used for “struggle” is pale found no other place in the New Testament. It is used of a popular wrestling game in Asia Minor in cities such as Ephesus, Smyna, Pergamum.430 According to

Peter T. O’ Brien, the term “world-rulers of this darkness does not appear in the LXX or elsewhere in the New Testament. The term world-rulers appears in the second century A.D in astrological and magical traditions in relation to the planets and their influence in human affairs, and to gods such as Sarapis and Hermes.”431

Kosmokratores “ world rulers” depict the sun and other planets, and galaxies in later

428 Peter T. Obrian, The Letter to the Ephesians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. eerdmans, 1999), 457.

429 Ibid., 463.

430 Ibid., 465.

431 Ibid., 467.

232

Mandaean Gnosticism.432 “The evil day” refers to a critical day in the believer’s life where his or her contention with demons and principalities get to the worst. It also refers to a period prior to the parousia where Satanic opposition to believers reaches its zenith. The Christian must also carry the Gospel of peace to the whole world. With the shield of faith, the Christian-soldier is fortified to dismantle the armory of Satan and his allies. The helmet of salvation and the word of the Spirit describe believers’ knowledge in the word of God and its right application to ward off satanic attacks433. Furthermore, the questionnaires administered to 500 people in California regarding moral issues have been seriously discussed. The statistics indicated in tables 1 and 2 reveal startling results in the area of abortion, homosexuality, bestiality, illegal acquisition of money, and Divorce. The findings indicate that a greater proportion of Christians leaving in these areas are bankrupt and have adopted a laissez-faire attitude towards biblical issues.

Even though the dissertation has discussed into detail the significance of the beatitudes, further research is required to lay bare other Christian virtues for 21st century believers. The poor in spirit, those who mourn, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and blessed are those who are persecuted are discussed fully in the dissertation. However, it must be recommended that some salient Christian virtues could not be elaborated on and need to be given rapt attention in further biblical

432 Ibid., 467.

433Ibid., 467.

233

research. Virtues such as courage (andreia), temperance or modesty (sophrosyne), prudence (phronesis), faith (pisis), hope (elpis), love ( agapeo, phileo),Generosity, magnificence, high-mindedness, wisdom (sofia), gentleness, truthfulness, wittiness, holiness, prayerfulness, godly fellowship ( koinnonia) must be given premium in further Biblical research. Even though the data analysis of the questionnaires administered to the 500 respondents indicate moral decadence in the sphere of abortion, drug addiction, bestiality, illegal acquisition of money, and divorce, further research is needed to elaborate on the following domains: Age specific, Race specific, Economic status, and Gender specific of respondents when it comes to the enumerated kingdom ideologies. In addition, apart from the selected cities in California where the research work of chapter four was conducted, more scholarly work is recommended for metropolitan cities in America, as well as other cosmopolitan cities across the globe. The dissertation, The Kingdom of God and Its

Implication to 21st Century believers is worthy of reading. It is the foundation stone for the reenactment of kingdom ideologies in the 21st century. It is a masterpiece for emulation and for pedagogical purposes for all kingdom citizens.

234

APPENDIX

SOME FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD

THE PARABLES

1.The parables of Jesus are fundamentally centered on the kingdom of God. They expose both earthly and Heavenly truths to the disciples of Jesus and to 21st century

Believers. The following parables are so significant for the understanding of kingdom virtues. The parable of the unforgiving debtor (Mt.18:21-35), The parable of the two sons (Lk. 15:28-32), The parable of the wicked tenants (Mt.21:33-46; Mk.12:1-12;

Lk.20:9-19), The parable of the wedding Feast (Mt.22:1-14; Lk.14:15-24), The parable of the rich fool (Lk.12:13-21), The parable of the Lost sheep (Lk.15:1-7),

The parable of the lost coin (Lk.15: 8-10), The parable of the prodigal son

(Lk.15:11-32), The parable of two men who prayed (Lk. 18:9-14), The parable of the

Persistent widow (Lk. 18:1-8), The parable of the king’s ten servants (Lk.19: 11-27).

KINGDOM OF GOD AND THE LAW

The law in the Old Testament was referred to as the Torah. It was principally referred to the first five books of the Bible, but later expanded to embrace the entire Old

Testament. In the Gospels however, the law is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Even though the believer is extricated from the curse of the law, positive righteousness and dimensions of the law must still be the benchmark of the believer. The law in the Old Testament was a vehicle through which man was led to God’s grace. Jesus Christ is the way of the law. 235

The principal objective of the law has been fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The biblical implication of fulfillment by definition includes an effect of cessation. Scripture affirms,

“Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.”(Rom10: 4). For instance, the sacrificial law has certainly ceased (Mt.28: 51;

Heb10: 20). It must be emphasized that the covenant projected in the law has never been ceased, even though the method of interpreting the law has partially been abandoned. For instance, the statement, “ you have heard” (Mt. 5:21-48) demonstrate the effect of comprehending the fuller meaning of the law and its cessation. For

Matthew, one must have a righteousness that surpasses that of the scribes and the

Pharisees (Mt. 5:20) in order to enter the kingdom of heaven.

QUESTIONNAIRES

Chapter four of the dissertation was carved out of Questionnaires administered to respondents in the City of Los Angeles in California. The following questions were posed to respondents: (1) Is it allowed for participants of the kingdom of God to divorce? Yes or No? If yes, briefly state why? (2) Is it allowed for participants of the kingdom to practice homosexuality? Yes or no? If yes how often? (3) Do you do drugs?

If yes how often? (4) Does the kingdom of God permit abortion? Have you ever caused abortion or helped someone else to commit the sin of abortion? If so, how often? (5)

Have you ever acquired money illegally? Yes or no? If yes how often? (6) Have you ever consulted a psyche? If yes how often? (7) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an animal? If yes how often?

236

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archbishop Dimitri Royster, The Kingdom of God: The Sermon on the Mount New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1992.

Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1928, seventh Reprint 1998.

Barry G. Webb, The Message of Isaiah, Edited by J.A Motyer, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1996.

Bruce Chilton, Pure Kingdom: Jesus Vision of God, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996.

C. Hassell Bullock, Encountering the Book of Psalms, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001.

Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002.

David Holwerda, Jesus and Israel: One Covenant or Two? Grand Rapids, Michigan: Earmans, 1995.

Dennis P. Hollinger, Choosing the Good: Christian Ethics in a Complex World, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002.

Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1990.

Edmond Clowney, The Messege of 1 Peter [Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1988.

Eduardo Shweizer, The Good News According to Matthew, Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1975.

Elwell A. Walter Robert W. Yarbrough, Encountering the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 1998, 2005.

G. R. Beastley-Murray, Jesus and the Kingdom, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996.

G.C.D. Howley, F. F. Bruce, H.L. Ellison, A New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1969).

237

George Elton Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The Eschatology of Biblical Realm, New York: Harper &Row, 1946, Reprinted in 1958.

Glen H. Stassen and Gushee P. David, Kingdom Ethics, Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003.

H.P Ruger A. Alt, O. Eibfeldt, P. Kahle ediderant, and R. Kittel eds, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: Stuttgarttensia, Vierte verbesserte Auflage, 1990.

Henry T. Maham, Bible Class Commentary: England: Evangelical Press, 1991. http://www.gaymarriageresearch.com/gay/facts-statistics 2011.

J. Brian, www.crossmarks.com/brian/luke16xhyn.

J. Kerby Anderson, Moral Dilemmas (Nashville,Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 1998).

Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew as Story: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Fortress Press, 1986, Reprinted in 1988.

Jack Graham, Lessons from the Heart, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Library of Congress, 2001.

James kalas, Jesus and the Power of Satan: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1952.

James Luther Mays, Psalms Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1994.

James Stuart Candlish, The Kingdom of God:Biblically and Historically considered, Edinburgh: T and T Clark, 38 George Street, 1884.

Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, Oxford: Oxford Press, 1947.

John Bright, The Kingdom of God: Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1981.

John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1992.

K.. knight and Nihil Obstat, Catholic Encyclopedia: Elohim, 1909, Reprinted 2003.www. newadvent.org/cathen/05393.ahtn

Lambert Dolphin, Names of God: Old Testament (The Hebrew Scriptures,or Teach) http://www.ldolphin.org/Names.html.

238

Luis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996.

Maxie D. Dunnam, The Comentator’s Commentary: Word Books, Texas:WACO, 1982.

Merriam Webster, Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Springfield Colorado: 1983.

Miles Van Pelt and Pratico D. Gary, The Vocabulary Guide to Biblical Hebrew,Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2003.

Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology: Volume Four, Church, Last Things, Minnesota: Bethany House, 2005.

P.H Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Page H. Kelly, Biblical Hebrew: An Introductory Grammar, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1992.

Pam Koerbel, Abortion: A Division of Scripture Presses Publications INC, USA, Canada, England: William E. Eerdmans, 1986.

Pat Alexander, A lion Hand Book: The World’s Religions [Sutherland, Australia: Lion Publishing, 1982 and Reprinted in 1994.

Pazmino Robert, Foundational Issues in Christian Education, Michigan: William B.Eerdmans, 1988.

Peter T. O’ Brien, The Letter to the Ephesians Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1999.

Ray E. Baughman, The Kingdom of God Visualized, Chicago: Moody Press, 1972.

Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, New York: Doubleday, 1997.

Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1982.

Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus, Philadelphia: Pennsylvania, 1981.

Santiago Galaz, Securitas, Security ServicesUSA: Handbook for Drug-Free Work Place, 2012.

239

Senior Pastor, www.smithvillechurch.org/html/abraham.

The America Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Edited by Beth Anderson, Benjamin W. Fortson IV, Steven R. kleinedler, Hanna Schonthal. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000.

Todt Heinz Eduard, Kirche Ethik, Diedrick Bonhoeffer, S.Entscheidungen in den Krisenjahren 1929-33.

W.D Davis and Dale Allison, A critical and Exegetical commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew, Vol 1, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988.

Walter Brueggemann, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1998.

Willard H. Taylor, Beacon Bible Expositions: Galatians and Ephesians, Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1982.

William Barclay, The Letter to Galatians and Ephesians, Philadelphia: Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1976. www.bible.cc/leviticus/18:23htn. www.biblebrowser.com/exodus/22.19htn. www.divorceguide.com/USA/divorce information/divorce- statistics in the USA.html. www.guttmatcher.org/pubs/californi. www.perceptaustin.org/1 corinthians, Ephesians, Romans/ -12/-619-Word. www.wikipedia.org/zoophilia.htn.

240

VITA

DOMINIC ADUA NYAABA

Born in the year 1966 in Tamale, Ghana, Dominic A. A. Nyaaba completed his Bachelor of Arts Degree at the University of Ghana in June 1998 with a combined major in French and Linguistics, obtaining Second Class Honors. He received the master of Divinity Degree in June in 2006 from International Theological Seminary and in June 2012 received the PhD in Biblical Studies from Newburgh Theological Seminary, Newburgh, Indiana. Dr. Nyaaba is currently the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Winning Life Prayer Ministry in Los Angeles, California.

241