{"id":19230,"date":"2018-09-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2018-09-19T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sugar-land-bible-church.local\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-050\/"},"modified":"2018-09-19T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2018-09-19T05:00:00","slug":"the-coming-kingdom-050","status":"publish","type":"sermon","link":"https:\/\/slbc.org\/es\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-050\/","title":{"rendered":"The Coming Kingdom 050"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","book":[87],"series_event":[470],"sermon_service_type":[474],"speaker":[6],"class_list":["post-19230","sermon","type-sermon","status-publish","hentry","book-luke","series_event-the-coming-kingdom","sermon_service_type-wednesday-evenings","speaker-dr-andy-woods","no-post-thumbnail"],"acf":{"sermon_title":"The Coming Kingdom 050","sermon_date":"20180919","sermon_month":"9","sermon_year":"2018","sermon_notes":6081,"sermon_slides":6082,"sermon_mp3":6083,"sermon_id":"91918189102","series_or_event":470,"service_type":[474],"speaker":6,"books_of_the_bible":87,"chapter_and_verse":"17:20-21","sermon_transcript":"Andy Woods\n\nThe Coming Kingdom\n\n9-12-18\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Luke 17:20-21\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lesson 50\n\nOpen your Bibles to Luke 17, verses 20 and 21.\u00a0 Some people have said that was a lot of new information on Sunday, concerning Revelation 3:10.\u00a0 The problem is that I wrote an article on that and the problem is the more you learn about something the more you want to share it with every\u00adbody else whether they want to hear it or not.\u00a0 So if the information was a little bit too much or overwhelming I did make some copies of that article on Revelation 3:10 on the name tag table so you might want to get that and read it just to sort of assimilate what we talked about.\u00a0 I think there\u2019s about 20 or 25 of them out there and if we run out we\u2019ll just put some more out so don\u2019t worry about that.\n\nSo let\u2019s take our Bibles and open theme to Luke 17:20-21.\u00a0 And we\u2019re continuing our study on kingdom, as you know, in chapter 16 of the book I wrote.\u00a0 And as you know the first part of the study has been what does the Bible say about the kingdom?\u00a0 We\u2019ve carefully explained the Old Testament and New Testament, that the kingdom is an actual physical geopolitical reality and it was offered to Israel on a silver platter in the first century.\u00a0 They rejected the offer so the kingdom has been postponed and it\u2019s going to be reestablished in a future time with a future generation of Israel.\u00a0 In the meantime God is at work through the church and we are the inheritors of the kingdom or the sons of the kingdom.\n\nBut many, many people say no, we\u2019re in the kingdom now and I went through the problems with that.\u00a0 The basic problem is you have to change the Old Testament definition.\u00a0 So the moment we move away from postponement into the kingdom is happening now, and by the way, if\u00a0 you want the fancy-dancy word for that it\u2019s called realized eschatology.\u00a0\u00a0 So realized eschatology means that the eschaton has already started and so that\u2019s another way of saying kingdom now theology.\u00a0 \u00a0And some are kind of flirting with realized eschatology and they call themselves inaugurated eschatologists, so the kingdom has partially started now. And the major problem with that is you have to change the definition of the kingdom, as we talked about.\n\nBut why are there so many people that believe in realized eschatology?\u00a0 So we started going through the passages that people use to argue for kingdom now or realized eschatology and the first section of verses we\u2019re looking at are verses from Christ\u2019s ministry, and I\u2019m trying to give you an explanation for those and show you how each of those fit a postponement model better than a realized or inaugurated eschatology model.\n\nSo here are the passages in Christ\u2019s ministry that we\u2019ve gone through and the last couple of weeks we were together we were looking at Luke 17:20-21.\u00a0 So let\u2019s remind ourselves of those verses.\u00a0 I just want to make a few more comments on this passage before we move on over to the Nick at Night discourse which is John chapter 3, Nick at night, Nicodemus conversing with Jesus at night.\n\nBut before we do Nick at Night just a couple more comments on Luke 17:20-21.\u00a0 Now you remember what this says: \u201cNow having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, \u2018The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; [21] nor will they say, \u2018Look, here it is!<\/em>\u2019 or, \u2018There it is!<\/em>\u2019 For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.\u201d\u201d\u00a0 So that verse is probably the number one verse you get from people that believe in realized eschatology; they all quote that verse.\u00a0 We were making three responses to kingdom now theologians\u2019 use of that verse.\n\nThe first thing we pointed out is this verse does not say what everybody thinks it says; it does not day the kingdom is within you.\u00a0 And I gave you several reasons for that but a lot of your Bible versions, like the NCV, [New Century Version] basically say God\u2019s kingdom is within you so Jesus is in our hearts and the kingdom is inside of us.\u00a0 And that is not what that verse is saying, what it\u2019s saying is it\u2019s in your presence, not inside of you, it\u2019s in\u00a0 your presence, it\u2019s in\u00a0 your midst because who was there speaking those words?\u00a0 Jesus Christ!\n\nAnd then last week as we were working through this I was trying to show us all that you can handle that verse through the offer of the kingdom framework.\u00a0 So one of the things to do is to get the big framework down and then try to figure out where each of the pieces of the puzzle fit.\u00a0 So the offer of the kingdom framework is the kingdom was offered to Israel.\u00a0 So what he\u2019s saying there, and I gave you the quotes from several scholars and so forth validating this. What Jesus is saying there is not the kingdom is inside of you, what He\u2019s saying is it\u2019s within your power of choice because Jesus was present and had that generation received the King on the King\u2019s terms the kingdom of God cold have been a reality.\u00a0 So it really was a unique opportunity for that generation.\n\nAnd of course, the rest of the story of the Gospels is He came to His own (the Jewish people) and His own did not receive Him. \u00a0[John 1:11, \u201cHe came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him.\u201d]\u00a0 So the story is how that offer was turned down and when that offer was turned down the kingdom went into postponement and God began to work with a different group of people called the church. So you can explain Luke 17:20-21 through that framework. \u00a0[Luke 17:20-21, \u201cNow having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, \u2018The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; [21] nor will they say, \u2018Look, here it is!\u2019 or, \u2018There it is!\u2019 For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.\u201d]\n\nAnd according to Luke 21:31 that offer will be re-extended following the rapture of the church to a future generation of Israel.\u00a0\u00a0 [Luke 21:31, \u201cSo you also, when you see these things happening, recognize that the kingdom of God is near.\u201d]\u00a0 So when you put your doctrine of the kingdom together you can\u2019t just look at one verse, which is what everybody is doing today in their inaugurated or realized eschatology, you\u2019ve to look at all the verses, including Luke 21:31.\n\nAnd at this point I was really tempted to move on to something else but I wanted to give you one more possibility for Luke 17:20-21.\u00a0 I personally hold to view number two there, that\u2019s what I usually use to explain Luke 17:20-21 but there is a third possibility I at least wanted to make you aware of and that\u2019s this:\u00a0 When Jesus said \u201cthe kingdom of God is in your midst\u201d He was speaking of something totally completely future, even though He uses the present tense there.\u00a0 Let me kind of unpack that if I could, briefly, for you.\u00a0 If you go to Luke 17:22 what you see is that generation is rejecting the offer because Jesus says right in that midst He says, \u201c\u2018The days will come when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it.\u2019\u201d\n\nAnd if you go down to verse 25 it says, \u201cBut first He must suffer\u201d Jesus speaking of Himself, \u201cmany things and be rejected by this generation.\u201d\u00a0 So the rejection was already happening and because the rejection was already happening Jesus starts to outline, not a present manifestation of the kingdom but something completely future.\u00a0\u00a0 And He probably is thinking of Daniel 2:35 and verse 44 where the stone, remember this from Sunday morning, that when we were in Daniel the \u201cstone cut without human hands\u201d instantaneously strikes the feet of the statue and crushes the statue which represents Gentile empires and the stone cut without human hands is God\u2019s kingdom.\u00a0 And then that stone, when it crushes the statue grows and grows and grows until it fills the whole earth.\n\n[Daniel 2:35, \u201cThen the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed all at the same time and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.\u201d\u00a0 Daniel 2:44, \u201cIn the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever.\u201d]\n\nAnd Jesus, as His offer is being rejected He could very well be talking about something completely future, the instantaneous establishment of the king when the day arrives when the nation of Israel receives Him as their King.\u00a0 And that could be the explanation as to why He says the kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed.\u00a0 [Luke 17:20, \u201cNow having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, \u2018The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed;\u2019\u201d]\u00a0 In other words, when it comes it\u2019s going to come spectacularly instantaneously and immediately.\n\nAnd I don\u2019t know if we have time to read all the verses but down in verses 23 and 24 He describes it as coming like lightning.\u00a0 It says in verses 23 and 24, \u201cThey will say to you, 'Look there! Look here!' Do not go away, and do not run after them.\u00a0 [24] For just like the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day.\u201d\n\nSo he\u2019s describing here a completely future reality of the instantaneous establishment of the \u00a0kingdom, analogizing it to the coming like lightning.\u00a0 We have lightning in the sky here quite frequently where we live and you see how suddenly it comes, instantaneously.\u00a0 And that\u2019s what the kingdom is going to be like once it comes. That\u2019s why you can\u2019t confuse it with today because what God is doing today is He is gradually constructing His church.\u00a0 He\u2019s been doing that for two thousand years; as people are getting saved they\u2019re being added to the temple, using the metaphor of the temple where holy stones, holy bricks within that temple, the gradual construction.\u00a0 But not so the kingdom; when the kingdom comes it\u2019s going to be instantaneous.\n\nAnd unbelievers of that time are going to be completely taken off guard.\u00a0 That\u2019s why its analogized to the flood. If you go down to verses 26 and 27 of Luke 17 it says, \u201cAnd just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man,\u00a0 [27] they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.\u201d\u00a0 So they had pushed God out of their minds and so when the flood came it just took everybody off guard.\u00a0 Noah probably seemed like the biggest fool in the world building this giant ark there sitting in his driveway while everybody else is having a great time and laughing and hooting it up and ridiculing Noah.\u00a0 And it seemed like a big joke\u00a0 until the flood hit and then it wasn\u2019t so funny anymore, right?\n\nSo that\u2019s how the kingdom is going to come, it\u2019s going to come instantaneously, just like the floodwaters came. And it\u2019s going to be just like it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah.\u00a0 If you go down to verses 29-33, \u201cbut on the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. [30] It will be just the same on the day that the Son of Man is revealed.\u201d\u00a0 He says, [31] \u201cOn that day, the one who is on the housetop and whose goods are in the house must not go down to take them out; and likewise the one who is in the field must not turn back. [32] Remember Lot\u2019s wife.\u201d\u00a0 Remember she became a what?\u00a0 Pillar of salt.\u00a0 And verse 33 says, \u201cWhoever seeks to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life<\/em> will preserve it.\u201d\n\nSo you see, what Jesus is describing here as the nation is rejecting Him, He\u2019s outlining the circum\u00adstances through which the kingdom will come one day.\u00a0 It\u2019ll be instantaneous, it\u2019ll be like lightning; it\u2019ll be like the flood, and it will be like the sudden fire and brimstone that hit Sodom and Gomorrah.\u00a0 And consequently unbelievers, people that have pushed God out of their minds, will be completely taken off guard.\n\nVerses 34 -36 talks about unbelievers in that time.\u00a0 He says, [34] \u201cI tell you on that night there will be two in one bed; one will be taken and the other will be left.\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0Now a lot of people think this is the rapture here but you see, when you study this in context what you learn is the flood waters came and took them all away.\u00a0 So here\u2019s a question: who was taken away in the flood waters, believers or unbelievers?\u00a0 Unbelievers.\u00a0 So in this case, being taken away, is it a good thing or is it a bad thing?\u00a0 It\u2019s a bad thing.\u00a0 When we talk about the rapture, which ends the age of the church, is being taken a good thing or a bad thing?\u00a0 It\u2019s a good thing!\u00a0 So a lot of people will confuse these verses with the rapture of the church but this in context is not talking about the rapture of the church.\u00a0 It\u2019s talking about judgment coming upon unbelievers.\n\nIt says, [35] \u201cThere will be two women grinding at the same place; one will be taken and the other will be left.\u201d You\u2019ve got to remember being \u201ctaken\u201d here is like the flood, which is a bad thing.\u00a0 And then it says in verse 36,\u201dTwo men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left.\u201d\u00a0 And this ruins a lot of good movies that you watch.\u00a0 I grew up with the Thief in the Night<\/em> movie series, and they took all these verses and applied them to the rapture.\u00a0 The problem is while I strongly believe in the rapture I don\u2019t think this is what Jesus is talking about here.\u00a0 He\u2019s not talking about the rapture, He\u2019s talking about judgment, taking unbelievers away.\u00a0 How do I know that?\u00a0 If you look at verse 37 it says, \u201cAnd answering they said to Him, \u2018Where, Lord?\u2019\u201d in other words, where are they being taken and look at the answer, \u201cAnd He said to them, \u2018Where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered.\u2019\u201d\n\nSo it\u2019s talking about the corpses of people in judgment being piled so high that the beasts of prey will come and gorge on these corpses.\u00a0 So this is not speaking of a blessing being taken, right?\u00a0 It\u2019s speaking of judgment.\u00a0 So I wouldn\u2019t throw a rapture doctrine in here at all, although it\u2019s commonly done and people, when they throw the rapture doctrine in here usually just quote part of the verse, they don\u2019t give you the whole judgment context.\n\nBut all of this to say that as the kingdom is being rejected by first century Israel Jesus starts to outline how the kingdom is going to come one day once the nation accepts Him.\u00a0 Unbelievers will be caught off guard.\u00a0 It\u2019ll be just like it was in days of Sodom and Gomorrah.\u00a0 It\u2019ll be just like it was when the flood waters hit the earth.\u00a0 It\u2019ll be like the flashing of lightening.\u00a0 It\u2019s going to come so fast there\u2019s not going to be any signs to be observed because it\u2019s going to be instantaneous, just like that!\u00a0 Stone cut without human hands that suddenly strikes the feet of that statue and the statue crumbles, the empires of man crumble and the statue grows and grows and grows till it fills the earth.\n\nAnd so it\u2019s completely possible here that Jesus is outlining, as He\u2019s talking, of a completely futuristic reality.\u00a0 That\u2019s the whole context of this.\u00a0 And that\u2019s why it says there in verse 21, \u201cThe kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed\u201d now watch the tense of this verb, \u201cnor will they say,\u201d what tense is He speaking of there?\u00a0 Future tense, \u201cnor will they say, \u2018Look, here it is, or there it is!\u2019 For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.\u2019\u201d\u00a0 He\u2019s speaking here according to this view that I\u2019m giving you, of a completely futuristic reality.\u00a0 And you say well, where did you get this idea from. Well I got it from the scholar that I keep quoting, from 1874 named E. R. Craven and he has an excursus on the Basileia,<\/em> what\u2019s the word for Basileia<\/em>?\u00a0 Kingdom, he has a great excursus, meaning kind of a digression on the kingdom in his revelation commentary, and it\u2019s one of the best I\u2019ve ever read.\u00a0 That\u2019s why I keep quoting him.\n\nHe says here, \u201cDoes it not become manifest that this passage, so far from teaching the doctrine of a present establishment of the Basileia, must be numbered amongst those that connect the establishment with the Second Advent?\u201d\u00a0 [Excursus on the Basileia<\/em>,\u201d in Revelation of John, J. P. Lange (New York: Scribner, 1874), 97.]\u00a0 And everybody is trying to find a present establishment of the kingdom here but if you look at the whole context Jesus is being rejected by first century Israel and He starts outlining a completely futuristic reality.\n\nWell, if all of that is true, then why does He speak in the present tense in Luke 17:20-21.\u00a0 Why does He say \u201cThe kingdom is,\u201d present tense of the Greek verb eimi<\/em>, why does He say \u201cThe kingdom is in your midst.\u201d\u00a0 In other words, if it\u2019s a future, completely future reality why is He speaking here in the present tense?\n
    \n \t
  1. R. Craven, who\u2019s advocating this idea, gives some answers to that. Number 1, when the Pharisees originally asked the question of Jesus, having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, were the Pharisees asking the question in the future tense or the present tense? They were asking the question in the present tense, right?\u00a0 And having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming they thought it was going to come right then and there.\u00a0 So Jesus responds, \u201cBehold, the kingdom is in your midst\u201d in the present tense.\u00a0 That\u2019s why He\u2019s speaking in the present tense.\u00a0 They asked the question in the present tense and He\u2019s following polite rules of conversation, He answers the question in the present tense.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nBut according to E. R. Craven\u2019s view you shouldn\u2019t mistake the present tense for Jesus communicating that the kingdom of God is here now.\u00a0 So E. R. Craven says, and I\u2019m sorry for reading these quotes to you, I tried to cut them down believe it or not, and I know he wrote in 1874 but his thinking is so good it\u2019s hard for me to just cut it out.\u00a0 He says, \u201cIn the E.V.\u201d that\u2019s an English translation, \u201cthere is a difference in tense between the question of the Pharisees and the answer of Jesus\u2014they are \u00a0asking, when the Basileia should<\/em> come, and He answering, it cometh<\/em> not with observation, it is<\/em> within you\u2014which necessarily implies a declaration of then existing establish\u00adment. This difference is altogether unauthorized\u2014both the question and the answer are in the present; the question of the Pharisees should be translated \u201cwhen cometh (erchetai<\/em>) the kingdom of God?\u201d The question was asked in the vivid dramatic present; it manifestly had reference to the future; it would be in defiance of every conceivable law of language to suppose that our Lord, in following the lead of His questioners, intended to indicate a different tense. The question and the answer are but illustrations of that law proper to all languages, but pre-eminently to the Greek.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [E.R. Craven, \u201cExcursus on the Basileia<\/em>,\u201d in Revelation of John, J. P. Lange (New York: Scribner, 1874), 96.]\n\nIn other words, Jesus is just using good manners.\u00a0 They ask the question in the present tense, He gives them an answer in the present tense.\u00a0 But that\u2019s not to be confused with Him teaching that the kingdom is present now.\u00a0 That\u2019s E. R. Craven\u2019s point.\n\nOne other quick point on this is the following:\u00a0 Biblical languages sometimes use the present tense to depict, not a present reality but a reality that is absolutely certain future certainty or a reality that can come to pass any moment.\u00a0 And this is sort of confusing for us as English speakers because when we use the present tense, we typically use the present tense to communicate a present reality.\u00a0 But that\u2019s not the way Greek functions.\u00a0 Many times Greek does use the present tense to communicate a present reality but that is not always the case.\u00a0 And God saw fit to record the revelation of the New Testament in the Greek language, so that means to understand the Bible properly we have to have some kind of facility with New Testament Koine Greek.\n\nAnd in New Testament Koine Greek, and actually also in Hebrew, your Old Testament, Hebrew Bible was recorded in Hebrew and a little touch of Aramaic in there as well, biblical languages use the present tense many times to communicate a present reality but it doesn\u2019t always mean a present reality.\u00a0 It could mean a reality that is so certain you speak of it in the present tense, not to communicate that it\u2019s here but to communicate that it is certain or that it is coming to\u00a0 pass at any moment.\u00a0 And that\u2019s what Jesus could be doing here in Luke 17:20-21 when He says the kingdom is in your midst.\u00a0\u00a0 He\u2019s not saying it\u2019s here, He\u2019s saying its establishment is 100% certain even though this generation is rejecting it.\u00a0 This generation rejecting Me is not going to throw off God\u2019s plan and program whatsoever.\u00a0 And He explains the future establishment of the kingdom, as we\u2019ve talked about in this context, but in the process He uses the present tense to show how certain the coming of the kingdom is.\n\nSo biblical languages sometimes use the present tense to describe certainty.\u00a0 Now why is that?\u00a0 One reason is God is outside of time.\u00a0 God is timeless.\u00a0 So today is Wednesday; in order for Thursday to come, in order for me as a human being to get into Thursday I\u2019ve got to wait for Wednesday to become Thursday (unless I have the ability to predict the future or something).\u00a0 Until Thursday comes I really don\u2019t know what\u2019s going to happen on Thursday because I\u2019m still stuck in Wednesday.\u00a0 Some of you wish it was Friday, right, or better yet Saturday\u2026 or better yet, Sunday, what about that.\u00a0 What about that?\u00a0 Now does God have to wait for Thursday to come to discover what\u2019s in Thursday?\u00a0 No, He\u2019s not bound by time like we are; He\u2019s outside of time.\u00a0 So God can speak things that haven\u2019t happened yet from the human point of view as if they\u2019ve already happened because God is timeless.\n\nThat\u2019s why 2 Peter 3:8 says, \u201cBut do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.\u201d\u00a0 And people get real bogged down on this and they try to analogize this to the creation days; this has nothing to do with the creation days!\u00a0 Or they try to come up with a seven thousand year existence of the universe and all of these things they start reading into the passage.\u00a0 The only thing this is saying, and by the way, it\u2019s a paraphrase from Psalm 90:4; it\u2019s not even a quote, it\u2019s a paraphrase from Psalm 90:4.\u00a0 [Psalm 90:4, \u201cFor a thousand years in Your sight Are like yesterday when it passes by, Or as a watch in the night.\u201d]\n\nPsalm 90, to my knowledge, is the oldest psalm in the psalter, 150 Psalms, and does anybody know who wrote Psalm 90?\u00a0 Moses.\u00a0 Moses wrote Psalm 90, the oldest psalm in the psalter and Moses, way back when the Mosaic time period\u00a0 would be, I don\u2019t know, 1400, Exodus was what, 1446, something like that.\u00a0 Moses said \u201cwith the Lord a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day.\u201d What\u2019s it saying?\u00a0 It\u2019s saying God is outside of time.\u00a0 To God tomorrow is today and yesterday is today because we\u2019re stuck in Wednesday and we just got out of Tuesday but to God Wednesday and Tuesday are all one animal because He\u2019s not limited by time and He already knows what\u2019s coming on Thursday.\u00a0 So that\u2019s why He\u2019s telling me with your future just trust Me, I already see it; you don\u2019t see it but I see it.\n\nSo many times in the Bible when God speaks the tense is given, not from the point of view of man but it\u2019s from the point of view of God.\u00a0 For example, I don\u2019t know if you\u2019ve been studying Joshua lately, remember Joshua went to defeat Jericho and remember the instructions He was given?\u00a0 March around Jericho seven days, and blow the trumpet on the seventh day and the walls will tumble around Jericho.\u00a0 Before the Israelis even went into that assignment and into that battle do you know what God said?\u00a0 \u201cThe LORD GOD said to Joshua\u201d the leader of the nation of Israel at that time, \u201cSee, I have given Jericho into your hand, with its king and the valiant warriors.\u201d\u00a0 [Joshua 6:2]\n\nSo before they fought or before they followed God\u2019s instructions the battle had already been won and God says it\u2019s already been given into your hand.\u00a0 Why is that? \u00a0Because God can see the future because to God the future is today because He\u2019s not bound by time.\u00a0 So when you see the present tense in the Bible, especially narrated from the perspective of God, it doesn\u2019t always mean a present reality from humanity\u2019s perspective; it means a certain reality.\u00a0 And biblical languages function a lot like this.\u00a0 For example, do you remember Romans 8:29-30?\u00a0 \u201cFor those whom He foreknew,\u201d this is talking about the different phases of our salvation, \u201cFor those whom He foreknew He also predestined to become<\/em> conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; [30] and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.\u201d\n\nSo God foreknew\u00a0 us, past tense.\u00a0 God predestined us, past tense.\u00a0 He called us, past tense.\u00a0 He justified us,\u00a0 past tense.\u00a0 Now are you glorified right now?\u00a0 You all don\u2019t look very glorified.\u00a0 [Laughter]\u00a0\u00a0 I don\u2019t think I look very glorified either.\u00a0\u00a0 But you\u2019ll notice that \u201cwhom He justified, He also glorified,\u201d which tense?\u00a0 Past tense, even though it hasn\u2019t happened yet.\u00a0 We\u2019re not in glory yet.\u00a0 See our salvation, the phases of our salvation are so certain\u2026 and by the way, this is a brief digression, this is why it\u2019s impossible for people to lose their salvation once they have it, because you\u2019re already on a fast track to glory as far as God is concerned tomorrow is today, it\u2019s already happened and God can speak of it as a certain reality even though in fact, in point of fact in actuality it hasn\u2019t happened yet.\u00a0 So you\u2019ll notice that the tense is past for the past phases of our salvation as well as the future phase of our salvation, despite the fact that the future phase of our salvation has not been executed yet.\n\nSo that\u2019s why you\u2019ve got to be very careful about biblical tenses.\u00a0 A lot of times the tense is narrated from the perspective of God communicating certainty not actual in fact reality from humanity\u2019s point of view.\n\nHere\u2019s another example: I had a student at the Bible college (called College of Biblical Studies where I worked for seven years) ask me about this one time in class, I didn\u2019t really know how to answer it at the time.\u00a0 Jude 14 says, \u201cIt was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam,\u201d now a lot of people are trying to fit extra genealogies into the genealogies of Genesis 5 and11, they say there\u2019s missing names there because they\u2019re trying to stretch the genealogies out so that it accommodates old earth evolutionary thinking.\u00a0 The problem is Jude, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit says that Enoch was which generation from Adam?\u00a0 The seventh generation, and you go back into Genesis 5 and you can just count backwards and it goes to seven.\u00a0 So there is no missing generations in the genealogies in Genesis 5 and Genesis 11.\n\nSo way back yonder, in Genesis 5, Enoch, who as you know was translated into heaven prior to the flood, he\u2019s kind of like a prototype of the church, translated into heaven through the rapture before the seven year tribulation period comes.\u00a0 Enoch, way back in that time made a prophecy about the Lord\u2019s return in the Second Coming and Enoch said, \u201cBehold, the Lord\u201d what? \u201ccame\u201d what\u2019s the tense there?\u00a0 Past tense, \u201cBehold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones,\u201d now is that prophecy, has it happened yet?\u00a0 Has the Lord come \u201cwith many thousands of His holy ones\u201d?\u00a0 Not yet, that\u2019s the Second Coming, when He comes back to this earth with the resurrected church and also the angels.\n\nSo that\u2019s a future reality but you notice that Enoch\u2019s prophecy puts it in the past tense and makes it look like it already happened.\u00a0 Now how could Enoch do that?\u00a0 Because he was prophesying under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit; God is outside of time, He\u2019s not bound by time and He can communicate things yet future from the human perspective as if it already happened and sometimes the tense is changed just to show us how certain the event it.\u00a0 So this student asked me this question in class and I really didn\u2019t know how to answer it but now I think I have a better answer. She said if it\u2019s a future prophecy why does the verb put it in the past tense?\u00a0 And the correct answer, had I had my wherewithal at the time would have been it\u2019s being narrated from the perspective of God who is timeless, who is outside of time.\n\nSo if all of this is true this is how to understand Luke 17:20-21; the kingdom is in your midst, it\u2019s not saying it\u2019s presently here.\u00a0 What it\u2019s saying is, in a context where he\u2019s describing the future coming of the kingdom he\u2019s saying it\u2019s certain.\u00a0 So this would be an example in Greek of what is called the futuristic present.\u00a0 Dan Wallace, a well-known Greek grammarian of our day, I had him as a professor, says this:\u00a0 \u201cThe present tense may be used to describe a future event, though. . . . it typically adds connotations of immediacy and certainty....The present tense may describe an event that is wholly<\/em> subsequent to the time of speaking,<\/u>\u201d like the coming of the kingdom, like the second coming of Christ, \u201calthough as if it were present.<\/u>\u201d\u00a0 [Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament with Scripture, Subject, and Greek Word Indexes<\/em> (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 535-35.]\n\nSo when Jesus says the kingdom of God is in your midst it may be an example of what we would call a futuristic present, certainty not actual in fact reality.\u00a0 [Luke 17:21, \u201cnor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.\u201d]\n\nSome examples: here\u2019s an example of the futuristic present, 1 John 2:17, \u201cThe world is passing away\u201d that\u2019s a present tense verb, \u201cThe world is passing away and\u00a0also<\/em>\u00a0its lusts; but the one who\u00a0does the will of God lives forever.\u201d\u00a0 Now you notice that the verb is in the present tense.\u00a0 John made that statement two thousand years ago. He said \u201cThe world is passing away.\u201d\n\nNow here we are in 2018, has the world passed away?\u00a0 I mean, I\u2019m still able to touch the ground, are you?\u00a0 The sun still comes up every morning, even on cloud hangover days the sun is there.\u00a0 I mean, the world hasn\u2019t passed away for 2,000 years.\u00a0 So if the world hasn\u2019t passed away for 2,000\u00a0 years why would John, back in the first century say that the world is passing away?\u00a0 He\u2019s saying it\u2019s passing away because it\u2019s absolutely certain it\u2019s going to end.\u00a0 He\u2019s not describing an in fact reality at that point in time; he\u2019s describing something that\u2019s absolutely certain.\u00a0 And that\u2019s how Jesus could be using the expression \u201cthe kingdom is in your midst.\u201d\u00a0 Not an in fact reality from the human perspective but something that\u2019s absolutely certain.\n\nHow about your resurrected body, are you in your resurrected body right now?\u00a0 Do you guys ever look in the mirror?\u00a0 I look in the mirror, it\u2019s sort of depressing isn\u2019t it?\u00a0 As a matter of fact, I go get my hair cut over at Super Cuts quite frequently and the lady cuts my hair and I look down at the ground and I see all this gray hair on the ground and my first instinct is well that obviously couldn\u2019t be my hair because my hair didn\u2019t use to be gray like it is now.\u00a0 But now it\u2019s graying, it\u2019s a hard reality to accept because it didn\u2019t used to be that way, at least I\u2019ve got hair, some of you are a little disadvantaged and the light from the ceiling is beaming off of\u00a0 you right now, and I won\u2019t mention any names.\n\nBut the reality is we\u2019re not in a resurrected body now but Paul puts the resurrection body that we don\u2019t have\u00a0 yet in the present tense. Did\u00a0 you notice that?\u00a0 1 Corinthians 15:42-44, \u201cSo also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body,<\/em> it is raised an imperishable body;<\/em>\u201d see the present tense there?\u00a0 \u00a0[43] it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; [44] it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is\u201d present tense of eimi<\/em>, by the way, that\u2019s the same verb used in our passage, Luke 17:20-21, the kingdom is in your midst, \u201cIf there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.<\/em>\u201d\u00a0 So the resurrection both that\u2019s coming is in the present tense just like our current decaying body is in the present tense.\u00a0 So obviously when you look in the mirror you say well, I don\u2019t have that resurrection body yet.\n\nSo if that\u2019s true how could the Scripture put it in the present tense?\u00a0 It puts it in the present tense because it\u2019s an example of the futuristic present.\u00a0 It\u2019s certain\u00a0 you\u2019re going to get the resurrection body.\u00a0 In fact, from God\u2019s perspective, who is not bound by time, you already have it and you\u2019re already in glory.\u00a0 And so the biblical writers often use the present tense to communicate absolute certainty.\n\nThat\u2019s why some of you, when we were in Matthew 13,\u00a0 you might remember way back when, and we went through the parables in this class, of the interadvent age, some of you kind of stumbled over it because I was trying to argue that the kingdom, even in these inner advent parables is a future reality and some of you asked me well, why does it say, for example, like verse 31, \u201cthe kingdom of heaven IS\u201d present tense, \u201clike a mustard seed which a man took and sowed in his field.\u201d\u00a0 Why is the present tense used in verse 47 of Matthew 13?\u00a0 \u201cAgain, the kingdom of heaven is,\u201d present tense of eimi<\/em> again, \u201clike a dragnet cast into the sea\u2026.\u201d\n\nWhy does it keep saying \u201cthe kingdom of heaven is,\u201d \u201cthe kingdom of heaven is,\u201d \u201cthe kingdom of heaven is\u201d?\u00a0 He keeps saying that over and over again because he\u2019s describing something that everybody knew was going to be a certain reality one day.\u00a0 So that\u2019s why if you\u2019re building your theology completely off the present tense, which is what kingdom now theologians are doing in Luke 16:20-21.\u00a0 [Luke 16:20, \u201cAnd a poor man named Lazarus was laid at his gate, covered with sores, [21] and longing to be fed with the crumbs which were falling from the rich man's table; besides, even the dogs were coming and licking his sores.\u201d]\u00a0 They\u2019re not really understanding the sophistication of biblical tenses and biblical languages and they\u2019re not really understanding the sophistication of a timeless God who can speak future realities as if they\u2019re present because from His perspective they are present because they\u2019re absolutely certain.\n\nNow here\u2019s another E. R. Craven quote just to show you my source where I\u2019m getting this idea from.\u00a0 And I put these quotes up here not to bore you to death but to show you that I\u2019m not just up here making things up; I\u2019m following a well-trodden path that many scholars have gone down.\n\nCraven says, \u201c\u201c[Pre-eminently to the Greek, by which a certain future may be represented by a verb in the present;\u201d which is what I\u2019ve been trying to explain, the futuristic present, a future certainty in other words, \u201cillustrations may be found, Matthew . 26:2 (after two days is<\/u> the feast of the Passover, and the Son of Man is<\/u> betrayed, etc.);\u201d there in Matthew 26:2 he says \u201cthe Son of Man is betrayed.\u201d\u00a0 Now that\u2019s earlier on the Passion week, I think it\u2019s even before the Passion week if memory serves, but it\u2019s prior to His crucifixion.\u00a0 It\u2019s prior to His betrayal yet He says here, quoting Jesus, in the present tense, \u201cthe Son of Man is<\/u> betrayed,\u201d\u00a0 yet it hadn\u2019t happened yet.\u00a0 Well why speak of it in the present tense?\u00a0 Because it\u2019s certain, that\u2019s why.\u00a0 The betrayal of Christ and the crucifixion of Christ was a decree of God that was going to happen.\n\nSo Jesus speaks of it as certainty and He uses the present tense to communicate that certainty, not the fact that it had already happened or it was happening right there when he spoke those words.\u00a0 That\u2019s how our glorification is spoken of, that\u2019s how the coming kingdom is spoken of, that\u2019s how your resurrection body is spoken of, because it\u2019s communicating certainty because it\u2019s narrated from the perspective of a timeless God.\n\nHe uses another example, which I already gave you, 1 Corinthians 15:42-44, \u201cit is sown in corruption, it is\u201d he says concerning the future resurrection, \u201c raised in incorruption.... To the conclusion that the language of our Lord must be understood as having reference to the future, it may also be remarked that we are shut up by the following considerations: The supposition disconnects His words from the immediately-following address to the disciples, whilst\u201d there\u2019s that Old English, \u201cwhilst the contrary supposition brings them into manifest and beautiful connection therewith, and with His other utterances in this connection may be considered that class of passages which\u2026 \u2026are regarded as teaching the doctrine of a present Basileia from their use of the present verb when mentioning it.\u201d\u00a0 See, he\u2019s attacking that idea.\u00a0 He\u2019s saying just because Jesus says the kingdom is in your midst doesn\u2019t mean the kingdom is actually in their midst because the whole context of it is the current rejection of Him by the nation and the future establishment of the kingdom like lightning, and yet that coming establishment is so certain that Jesus could speak of it in the present tense through the use of a futuristic present.\n\nIn other words, what He\u2019s telling the Pharisees is you guys aren\u2019t slowing down God\u2019s program one iota,\u00a0 you just go ahead and betray Me, you go ahead and do what your little petty human mind wants to do and you turn Me over to the Romans for execution, and you think you\u2019ve won the day. \u00a0The fact of the matter is you haven\u2019t stopped anything, in fact, you\u2019ve just ushered in one of the greatest blessing, if not the greatest blessing the human race has ever received\u2014the payment of the sin debt of the world!\u00a0 And\u00a0 you think you\u2019ve stopped the kingdom of God from coming?\u00a0 It\u2019s still just as certain, it\u2019s just not going to happen immediately.\u00a0 So He uses the present tense to communicate certainty.\n\nHe says, \u201c(Reference is not now had to those in which there is taught in the context that apparently requires the hypothesis of a present kingdom\u2014each of these receives an independent consideration). These passages are: all those parables which thus refer to the Basileia, Matthew 13:31,\u201d which we looked at a second ago, \u201c38, 44, 45, 47, etc.; also Matt. 11:11; Romans 14:17. These, it is admitted, are all consistent with the hypothesis of a present kingdom; but, under the rule set forth under the preceding head, they are all grammatically consistent with that of a certain\u201d what establishment? \u201cfuture establishment.\u201d\u00a0 [Excursus on the Basileia<\/em>,\u201d in Revelation of John, J. P. Lange (New York: Scribner, 1874), 96-97.]\n\nNow why do I have to go back to 1874 to find minds like this?\u00a0 Because no one today talks like this.\u00a0 I mean, I\u2019ve got to go back into the annals of history to even discover such a view is there because everybody today is saying well, He said it in the present tense, therefore Jesus is reigning in the kingdom now.\u00a0 All of my peers and the ones who taught us, with very few exceptions, all taught it that way.\u00a0 And yet to me it\u2019s so exciting to get past modern day scholarship and go back to some of these hidden minds of the past, brilliant minds, that could give you a different perspective.\u00a0 In fact, my dissertation advisors started getting mad at me on my doctoral dissertation at Dallas Seminary because I was quoting people like this.\u00a0 I was quoting people from prior centuries because I thought that was where the light was.\u00a0 And I was reprimanded on more than one occasion and they told me if you can\u2019t quote someone within five years\u2019 time of ours they\u2019re not worth quoting.\u00a0 That to me is so sad because if you cut yourself off from the older commentaries you\u2019re cutting yourself off from so much wisdom and wealth of knowledge.\n\nAnd in fact, I think this is one of the reasons that the present generation is so ignorant of so many things, because they\u2019re in academic situations where they\u2019re being only forced to reference contemporary scholarship.\u00a0 There is this mindset that if it\u2019s not contemporary scholarship it\u2019s not worth anything.\u00a0 And that in logic is what we call the recency fallacy where you assume that if something is new it must be true.\u00a0 Well guess what?\u00a0 There\u2019s a lot of recent things floating around that aren\u2019t true at all and there\u2019s a lot of old stuff out there that\u2019s completely solid. And I was reprimanded and the dissertation advisor would say well we know more, that\u2019s kind of an authority base that they all used, \u201cwe know more than what preceded us.\u201d\u00a0 So therefore you cut yourself off from the past.\n\nWell, I would say this, I think that as humanity has gotten further and further away from man\u2019s original relationship with God I don\u2019t think we\u2019ve gotten smarter; I think the opposite has happened.\u00a0 I think our intellectual capacities have deteriorated.\u00a0 You go back to what people were doing just after the fall,\u00a0 you have Cain and his descendants forging tools.\u00a0 What does it say there back in Genesis 4:22, out \u201cof bronze and iron.\u201c\u00a0 [Genesis 4:22, \u201cAs for Zillah, she also gave birth to Tubal-cain, the forger of all implements of bronze and iron; and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.\u201d]\n\nHave you ever stopped to think about that?\u00a0 They were working with bronze and iron simultaneously. Doesn\u2019t secular anthropology teach that first there was the bronze age, I don\u2019t know how long that lasted, followed by the iron age, (if I\u2019ve got the order right).\u00a0 In other words, humanity didn\u2019t get really smart to discover later metals and what we\u2019re learning here in our Bible is that they had both simultaneously at the dawn of human history.\u00a0 Cain was building a city; Noah was building an ark, and don\u2019t tell me that didn\u2019t take some kind of knowledge of engineering and aerodynamics and all that kind of stuff.\u00a0 And I think what\u2019s happened is we\u2019ve gotten further and further away from God our intellectual capacities have deteriorated.\u00a0 In fact, at this church I put a test that were given to 5th<\/sup> grades 4th<\/sup> graders, 8th<\/sup> graders back in the 1800\u2019s, basic grammar school exams, and to be honest with you I look at those questions, out of eleven questions I could answer two of them off the top of my head, yet back in the day this was considered common place, common knowledge.\n\nAnd so this idea that you can only quote people recently because we know more, frankly I don\u2019t but it, I think when you cut yourself off from the past you remove yourself from an awful lot of wisdom.\u00a0 For example, what\u2019s everybody debating today?\u00a0 Judge Cavanagh, right, I remember watching this whole battle take place. And what\u2019s everybody upset about?\u00a0 Are you going to respect Roe vs. Wade?\u00a0 Are\u00a0 you going to respect settled law, forgetting the fact that Roe vs. Wade was handed down in 1973, is there no constitutional history in the\u00a0 United States of America prior to 1973?\u00a0 I mean, do we have the War of Independence and then we had 1973?\u00a0 What happened between 1776 and 1973?\u00a0 And they\u2019re all worried about are you going to uphold Roe vs. Wade, are you going to uphold settled law?\u00a0\u00a0 Let me tell you something, as someone who\u2019s gone through law school and studied the Roe vs. Wade decision, the Roe vs. Wade decision trashed settled law, it completely trashed it!\u00a0 And now they\u2019re all worried about respecting settled law?\u00a0 They sure weren\u2019t worried about it in 1973 when Roe vs. Wade was overturning history in this country, from 1776 up to 1973.\u00a0 How did I get off on all that stuff?\u00a0\u00a0 The point is, E. R. Craven I think has a valuable insight here and he should be listened to.\n\nSo all of that to say, and we didn\u2019t get into John 3 tonight, we\u2019ll start that nest time, and I will be here Wednesday, I know there\u2019s a rumor I won\u2019t be here Sunday, that\u2019s just a rumor and Alex Garcia, I think is teaching this Sunday, so it\u2019s not a rumor.\u00a0 He\u2019s a good preacher so don\u2019t play hooky.\u00a0 Play hooky when I\u2019m here, don\u2019t play hooky when our guests are here, that\u2019s not good manners, right?\u00a0 Amen!\u00a0 Can I get an amen to that?\n\nWe didn\u2019t get into John 3 tonight, we will be getting into it on Wednesday, the following Wednesday, but I just wanted to give you insight into Luke 17:20-21, how do you handle that from a futuristic kingdom perspective?\u00a0 Number 1, it\u2019s not saying the kingdom is within you.\u00a0 Number 2, if you like the offer of the kingdom framework it could be Jesus saying the kingdom is in your midst meaning if you enthrone Me the kingdom will come.\u00a0 And then there\u2019s a third possibility here that Jesus could be describing a reality that\u2019s completely future, despite the fact that He\u2019s using the present tense, because it would be an example of the futuristic present.\u00a0 And that\u2019s the point that\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 E.R. Craven is making and he\u2019s saying when you look at the whole context of Luke 17 it\u2019s talking about a future establishment of the kingdom.\n\nSo the next time we reconvene we\u2019ll be doing John 3:3-5, the Nick at night discourse where Jesus says you have to be born again to enter the kingdom of God, you have to be born again to see the kingdom of God; is that saying that the kingdom is present now.\u00a0 Is that what Jesus is saying?\u00a0 We\u2019ll look at that next time.","series_sermon_number":""},"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t