{"id":19253,"date":"2019-09-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-09-11T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sugar-land-bible-church.local\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-073\/"},"modified":"2022-01-25T09:24:30","modified_gmt":"2022-01-25T15:24:30","slug":"the-coming-kingdom-073","status":"publish","type":"sermon","link":"https:\/\/slbc.org\/es\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-073\/","title":{"rendered":"The Coming Kingdom 073"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","book":[111],"series_event":[470],"sermon_service_type":[474],"speaker":[6],"class_list":["post-19253","sermon","type-sermon","status-publish","hentry","book-revelation","series_event-the-coming-kingdom","sermon_service_type-wednesday-evenings","speaker-dr-andy-woods","no-post-thumbnail"],"acf":{"sermon_title":"The Coming Kingdom 073","sermon_date":"20190911","sermon_month":"09","sermon_year":"2019","sermon_notes":7050,"sermon_slides":7051,"sermon_mp3":7053,"sermon_id":"911192236425475","series_or_event":470,"service_type":[474],"speaker":6,"books_of_the_bible":111,"chapter_and_verse":"5:5","sermon_transcript":"The Coming Kingdom #73\r\n\r\nIs the Kingdom in Revelation 5:5?\r\n\r\nDr. Andy M Woods\r\n\r\nSugarland Bible Church\r\n\r\n9-11-2019\r\n\r\nOpen your Bibles to Rev 5:5, we are in Chapter 20 of my book, The Coming Kingdom<\/u><\/strong>.\u00a0 I like to emphasize that my<\/em> book (The Coming Kingdom<\/u><\/strong>) isn't the important book; the Bible is.\u00a0 My book just organizes the information. We have been studying The Coming Kingdom<\/u><\/strong> and we are now at the very end tonight.\r\n\r\nWe are in this section where the view of the Kingdom that we are teaching is a postponed Kingdom.\u00a0 We are beyond the postponed Kingdom. We are now in the section that addresses the question of why so many people believe that we are now in the Kingdom.\u00a0 We have looked at passages from the ministry of Christ that supposedly teach that we are in the Kingdom; Acts, Paul, the general letters, and now we are in passages in the book of Revelation.\u00a0 These are passages that people go into repeatedly to argue that we are currently in the Kingdom.\u00a0 We are looking at each passage, trying to demonstrate that these passages do not teach that we are currently in the Kingdom.\u00a0 We have two passages left to cover:\u00a0 Rev 5:5 and 15:3.\r\n\r\nNotice Rev 5:5, \u201c\u2026and one of the elders said to me, \u201cStop weeping; behold, the Lion that is from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has overcome<\/u><\/strong> so as to open the book and its seven seals.\u2019\u201d\r\n\r\nNotice the expression, \u2018has overcome<\/em>;\u2019 Jesus has overcome.\u00a0 That expression is in the aorist tense, is a verb, meaning that it is something that has already happened.\u00a0 Thus, many believe that because Jesus has overcome, that the Kingdom has begun.\u00a0 That is the logic.\r\n\r\nDarrell Bock promotes this idea and makes the following statement concerning Rev 5:5: \u201cThe victory, or at least the decisive act, has already occurred.\u00a0 He is qualified to open the scrolls and the seals because of what he has already done as a Davidite [a descendant of David] \u2026The timing of Revelation 5:5 is critical, since it precedes the seal judgments and the Second Coming, so the text shows Jesus has his regal victorious status before He returns in Revelation 19.\u00a0 The portrait of these Revelation texts [not just this one, but the ones we looked at last week] is consistent.\u00a0 Jesus now rules in spiritual-salvific terms, in a new community that is part of the kingdom program, and in a way that inaugurates [a key word, inaugurates] Davidic promises. [His conclusion]: That kingdom exists alongside the kingdoms of earth.<\/u><\/strong>\u201d This is his view of the Church; that it is just another kingdom alongside any other kingdom of this world.\u00a0 We are trying to communicate in this study that this is not God's view of the Church.\u00a0 The Kingdom is yet future, but Darrell Bock believes that because Rev 5:5 says that Jesus has already overcome.\r\n\r\nThe response to this:\r\n
    \r\n \t
  1. As we read Rev 5:5, did you see the word, \u2018Kingdom?\u2019 The noun \u2018Kingdom\u2019 is not there.\u00a0 Did you see the verb \u2018to reign?\u2019\u00a0 No, it is not there.\u00a0 If John wanted to communicate that Jesus, through His first coming, had started some kind of spiritual Kingdom, he would have used the noun, \u2018Kingdom\u2019 [the Greek noun, \u2018basileia\u2019 <\/em>and the verb form of that noun is basileu\u014d, to reign].\u00a0 \u00a0<\/em>Does John use those nouns and verbs elsewhere in the book of Revelation?\u00a0 Yes, and very prominently.\u00a0 You will find the noun, and I don't know if it will do much good to read all of the verses, but Rev\u00a0 1:9; 5:10; 11:15; 12:10.\u00a0 In other words, John is really good at talking about the Kingdom when he wants to, but he doesn\u2019t do it in Rev\u00a0 5:5.\u00a0 The verb, \u2018to reign\u2019<\/em> is found in Rev\u00a0 5:10; 11:15,17; 19:6; 20:4 ( the latter verse is a big one because that is when the Kingdom begins in the 1,000-year Millennial Kingdom); Rev 20:4,6 and the kingdom continues on into the eternal state per Rev\u00a0 22:5.\u00a0 John is very skilled at using the verb \u201cto<\/em> reign<\/em>\u201d when he wants to, yet in Rev\u00a0 5:5, he does not use that word; he simply says, \u2018Jesus has overcome<\/em>.\u2019<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\nStan Toussaint, who I think has the correct understanding of Rev 5:5, says, \u201cBut this [Rev 5:5] does not prove a present spiritual form of the kingdom.\u00a0 Christ\u2019s death and resurrection have defeated Satan {we can all agree that satan is a defeated foe], but the kingdom is clearly future; this is especially seen in the Apocalypse.\u201d\r\n\r\nSo, the first response to Rev 5:5 doesn\u2019t actually say what Kingdom Now theologians think it says:\u00a0 it doesn\u2019t even mention Kingdom or \u2018to reign<\/em>.\"\r\n
      \r\n \t
    1. Jesus has not yet opened the seven-sealed scroll. He has the seven-sealed scroll per Rev 5, but He doesn\u2019t start opening it until Rev 6.\u00a0 That is very significant because the opening of the seven-sealed scroll is the instrument that God uses to evict satan from this world, and that scroll is closed in Rev 5:5; it isn't even opened yet.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\nYou may remember from our study in Revelation, we follow something called telescoping.\u00a0 See slide on Telescoping.\u00a0 <\/strong>We believe that the book of Revelation pulls out like a telescope meaning that the seventh seal contains the trumpets. \u00a0(See slide on Ultimate Exodus, Rev 11:15)<\/strong>. Seal seven initiates the trumpet judgments, and the seventh trumpet contains the bowls.\u00a0 In other words, the seventh trumpet starts the bowls.\r\n\r\nThis is the instrument that God uses to evict satan from the earth; that is why so many judgments in the book of Revelation read like the book of Exodus? See slide on Ultimate Exodus.<\/strong>\u00a0 So, there are sores<\/u><\/strong> in the sixth plague of Exodus and in the first bowl judgment in Revelation. \u00a0Rivers to blood<\/u><\/strong> in the first plague judgment in the book of Exodus and in the third bowl judgment in Revelation. Darkness<\/u><\/strong> is the ninth plague in Exodus and the fifth bowl judgment in Revelation. Frogs<\/u><\/strong> are the second plague in Exodus and the sixth bowl judgment in Revelation. Hail<\/u><\/strong> is the seventh plague in Exodus and the seventh bowl judgment in Revelation.\r\n\r\nDoes anyone recall why the paralleling?\u00a0 What is God doing in the book of Exodus?\u00a0 He is taking His people out of Egyptian bondage.\u00a0 They have been there for 400 years.\u00a0 What is going on in the book of Revelation?\u00a0 God is not merely taking a nation out of political bondage; He is taking the whole planet out of the bondage that it has been in ever since the fall of man.\u00a0 That is why when it looks, in Rev 5, as if no one is worthy to open the scroll, John starts to weep.\u00a0 You will see that around Rev 5:4 and later, but John is weeping because no one is qualified to open the scroll.\u00a0 The reason John is weeping is because if the scroll doesn\u2019t get opened, then satan is never evicted from the earth, and the world continues under satan\u2019s bondage.\u00a0 Wouldn\u2019t you cry at that prospect?\u00a0 Then John is heartened to realize that there is someone worthy to open the scroll:\u00a0 Jesus because He has overcome.\r\n\r\nMy point is that when you are in Rev 5, and it speaks of how the Lamb has overcome, you must understand that Rev 6 hasn\u2019t even started yet, and the process of eviction hasn\u2019t started yet since the process of eviction is initiated by the opening of the seven-sealed scroll, which has not yet transpired.\u00a0 It is, therefore, impossible to argue that the Kingdom has already started in Rev 5 before the seven-sealed scroll that launches the eviction process doesn\u2019t even begin to be opened until Rev 6.\r\n\r\nSince my background is in law, let me give you an analogy from the legal world that might help you with this.\u00a0 When someone is accused of a crime, there are basically two phases to the trial. The first is called the guilt or conviction phase where someone is tried by a jury of their peers, and they must be proven guilty of committing a certain crime beyond a reasonable doubt.\u00a0 If the jury\u2019s verdict is entered as guilty, then the person at that point becomes a convict.\u00a0 They're convicted of a crime.\u00a0 Typically, what happens, at least it worked this way in the state of California, is that then the person who is no longer accused but convicted of a crime, now comes before the court for sentencing.\u00a0 The judge must determine what sentence is appropriate.\u00a0 So, if you can understand this, that is basically where satan is now.\u00a0 He is living in between the conviction stage and the sentencing stage.\u00a0 He has been convicted, that is what is being spoken of in Rev 5:4, where it says that \u2018Jesus has overcome.<\/em>\u2019\u00a0 Satan has become convicted; he is a defeated foe; he is going down.\u00a0 It is just that the sentencing phase has not yet happened; he is still running the world system.\u00a0 The sentencing phase doesn\u2019t really start until the opening of the seven-sealed scroll.\u00a0 When you understand where satan is, then you can understand why he is so desperate to take down as many people as he can.\u00a0 He has been convicted but not yet sentenced.\u00a0 Put yourself in that position and consider what you would do.\u00a0 You would probably say, \u2018I've got nothing left to lose so I'm going to take as many to hell with me as I can.\u2019\r\n\r\nBecause satan is living between those two phases, it demonstrates why he is such a ferocious attacker on our lives and on the Body of Christ; why he works so hard to deceive.\u00a0 There is something that is open to us by way of salvation that is not open to him.\u00a0 He wants as few to enjoy it as possible.\u00a0 That is why you are in a spiritual conflict; as a Christian it is harder for you to do things that unsaved people can do \u2014 because there is a war in you constantly since you have a built-in foe who is on his way out.\u00a0 That is all Rev 5:5 is saying.\u00a0 It isn't saying that the Kingdom or the sentencing phase has started; nothing of the kind.\u00a0 It is saying that Jesus, through His death, burial, resurrection, and ascension, has laid the foundation in His first coming for what will transpire in the Second Coming.\u00a0 But in no way, shape, or form is it saying that the events of the Second Coming that involve the Kingdom and the sentencing of satan has already transpired.\r\n\r\nDo you believe that satan is a defeated foe?\u00a0 All these verses say that he is.\r\n
        \r\n \t
      • John 12:31<\/li>\r\n \t
      • John 16:11<\/li>\r\n \t
      • Colossians 2:15<\/li>\r\n \t
      • Hebrews 2:14<\/li>\r\n \t
      • 1 John 3:8<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\nJohn 16:11 says that the prince of this world has been cast out.\r\n\r\nColossians 2:15 teaches that satan is a defeated foe: \u201cWhen He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.\u201d\r\n\r\nHebrews 2:14 also says that satan is a defeated foe: \u201cTherefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, \u2026\u201d\r\n\r\nOne of my personal favorite verses that demonstrates satan is a defeated foe is in 1 John 3:8: \u201c\u2026the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning.\u00a0 The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil.\u201d\r\n\r\nIf you don't have as your model that the conviction stage having already transpired, the sentencing stage yet to come, then you may read all the above passages and others will be able to convince you that the Kingdom has started.\u00a0 Obviously, satan is a defeated foe; his defeat is spelled out in about seven phases in the Bible total.\r\n\r\nSee slide on Satan\u2019s Progressive Defeat<\/strong>:\u00a0 the fourth bullet point Cross (above references verses) <\/u><\/strong>is what Jesus did at His First Coming, and you will see in all the verses I just read.\u00a0 Jesus laid the groundwork for what is coming at His Second Coming:\u00a0 the sentencing of satan even though that sentencing hasn\u2019t yet transpired.\u00a0 But once that seven-sealed scroll is opened, then you start to see that we are no longer in the conviction stage that happened 2,000 years ago, but that we are now in the sentencing stage.\r\n\r\nIn the last three bullet points of above slide are the final three blows against satan involves not his conviction but his sentencing.\u00a0 He will lose access to heaven halfway through the Tribulation period per Rev 12:9. Apparently, he still has an ability to go into heaven as a fallen angel, not to worship and serve as he once did as a high-ranking angel, but to accuse and to communicate.\u00a0 If you don't believe that can happen, talk to Job about it when you get to heaven.\r\n\r\nMidway through the Tribulation period the privilege to go into God's presence and accuse (by the way, he accuses us day and night, which makes me happy that I have a good defense attorney in Jesus who has transferred His righteousness to me at the point of faith).\u00a0 If I didn\u2019t have that, I wouldn\u2019t be able to stand up under the accusations of satan.\r\n\r\nThen when the Millennial Kingdom finally starts, he will be bound for 1,000 years in the abyss.\u00a0 He is not in the abyss currently.\u00a0 Many people think satan is in hell right now, and nothing is further from the truth.\u00a0 He is running the world system as a convicted criminal who has not yet been sentenced.\r\n\r\nFinally at the end of the thousand-year Kingdom, per Rev 20:10, he will be thrown into the Lake of Fire, which will be the end of him, never to torment humanity again.\r\n\r\nThe reason that it says in Rev 5:5 that Jesus has overcome is not because those final three events have transpired, but because the fourth event has transpired, which has laid the foundation for satan\u2019s ultimate defeat.\u00a0 If you don't have this view then you have no way to harmonize the passages that teach, on the one hand, that satan is a defeated foe, and on the other hand, why he is the prince of this world; why he is still the god of this age; why he is still the prince and power of this air; why we must put on our spiritual armor?\u2014because we wrestle against him.\u00a0 Why is that he roams about like a roaring lion seeking someone to devour, and why does the whole world lie in his power?\u00a0 How could that be if all the above verses tell us that he is a defeated foe?\u00a0 If you don't understand how to harmonize those verses, you will be deceived into thinking that since he has already been convicted, he has already been sentenced.\u00a0 But if you have in your view that the conviction stage and a separate sentencing phase, with us living in between the two, then you have a framework to harmonize those verses that at first glance, appear to be contradictory.\r\n\r\nSo, there is no reason to interpret Rev 5:5 as saying that \u2018Jesus has overcome\u2019<\/em> and believe that the Kingdom has started.\r\n\r\nA third response to this idea that Rev 5:5 teaches that the kingdom has started is that the entire book of Revelation was originally written to the seven churches of Asia Minor.\u00a0 John is on Patmos at the end of the first century having been marooned there by Domitian, and the whole book is written to those seven churches in Asia Minor. \u00a0We have studied those churches.\u00a0 \u00a0Five of the seven churches are in a backslidden apostate condition.\u00a0 The only two churches who aren\u2019t apostate are Smyrna and Philadelphia; to every other church, Jesus said that He had something against them, and He names their sins.\u00a0 \u00a0What the churches of Philadelphia and Smyrna have in common is that they're both under persecution.\u00a0 A persecuted church tends to be a pure church.\u00a0 When are you most serious about your walk with the Lord?\u00a0 During times of prosperity or adversity?\u00a0 On the mountaintop experiences or in the valleys?\u00a0 When we are in the valleys, then we the tendency to pray and trust God more because we need Him.\u00a0 When things are rolling along fine, my mindset tends to be, \u2018God, I'll check in with you; I have things under control.\u2019\r\n\r\nSince two of the churches are persecuted, they are in fellowship with Christ, and five of the seven, for the most part, are not in fellowship with Him.\u00a0 The worst of the worst is the last church, Laodicea, where Jesus is portrayed as standing outside the door of the church, knocking, and wanting to enter.\u00a0 The very name Laodicea, per the commentary of William Newell\u2019s Commentary on the book of Revelation, \u201cThe name comes from \u02c6laos<\/em>, people, and dikao, <\/em>to rule:\u00a0 the rule of the people: \u2018democracy,\u2019 in other words.\u201d\u00a0 In other words, what is going on in Laodicea, is that they're having Christianity without Christ.\u00a0 It is a frightening explanation of what can happen to a church when it gets out of fellowship with Christ.\u00a0 The kind of maneuver that some pull is to make Laodicea \u2018all unbelievers.\u2019\u00a0 I see commentary after commentary explain it that way; it comes from some kind of Calvinistic lens \u2014 if they aren\u2019t persevering in good works, then they were never saved.\r\n\r\nI have a big problem with that view since in Rev 3:20, Jesus says, \u201cBehold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me.\u201d\u00a0 When Jesus makes that statement in 3:20, note that it is preceded by 3:19, \u201cThose whom I love, I reprove and discipline; <\/u><\/strong>therefore, be zealous and repent.\u201d\u00a0 Some fail to look at 3:19,20 together; they chop off 3:20 from 3:19 and say that everyone in Laodicea was unsaved.\u00a0 Looking at 3:19, Jesus says to Laodicea, the very worst church, \u201cThose whom I love, I reprove and discipline; \u2026\u201d<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0 What does the Bible teach about the disciplinary hand of God?\u00a0 The disciplinary hand of God is for the believer!\u00a0 Hebrews 12:6, \u201c\u2026for whom the Lord loves He chastens\u2026\u201d\u00a0 The unsaved world is not under the disciplinary hand of God.\u00a0 They're under the judgment of God, a totally different concept.\u00a0 One day experiencing His wrath is totally different than how He deals with us as His children, where He introduces momentary pain in our lives when we step out of line so that the next time to step out of line, we associate the momentary pain with that transgression, and we are less likely to step out of line.\u00a0 If we are less likely to step out of line, then we are less likely to destroy ourselves through sin.\u00a0 That is why the Lord brings chastisement upon us.\u00a0 It is like a kid who runs across the street without looking.\u00a0 Any parent worth their salt would discipline their child so the next time the child thinks about running across the street without looking, they will associate the pain of discipline with running across the street, and they won't do it.\u00a0 Then they aren\u2019t hit by the truck coming that doesn\u2019t see them.\r\n\r\nThat\u2019s how the Lord works with us; He doesn\u2019t work with unbelievers that way.\u00a0 So, those whom the Lord loves, the Lord disciplines.\u00a0 That is why there is so much in the book of Proverbs about how if you hate your children, you won't discipline them.\u00a0 Today, it is considered being a loving parent not to discipline their children.\u00a0 Just let the kids express themselves any way they choose.\u00a0 The book of Proverbs says to discipline your children.\u00a0 I'm not talking about child abuse or any such thing; I don't even know if I'm talking about spanking.\u00a0 We in our family, have used it before, but as a last resort only.\u00a0 If you won't do that for your kids, you're basically communicating to them to go ahead and sin and self-destruct; I don't love you enough to correct you.\r\n\r\nI've never disciplined my neighbor\u2019s kids, by the way; I have thought about it a couple of times.\u00a0 But I haven\u2019t done it because they don't belong to me.\u00a0 Likewise, if you don't belong to the Lord, He won't discipline you. But because these people did<\/em> belong to the Lord even in their rebellious state, He mentions discipline.\u00a0 The concept of discipline does not apply to an unsaved person.\u00a0 It is too convenient to take everybody in Laodicea and to say that they aren\u2019t saved; that totally ignores Rev 3:19.\r\n\r\nMy point is that if Jesus is standing outside the door of His church knocking and wanting to get inside the door, and many evangelists will use this as an altar call type of appeal by quoting \u00a0Rev 3:20 to the unsaved world, \u201cBehold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come into him and will dine with him, and he with Me.\u201d\u00a0 Billy Graham and so many others use that verse in that way, and a lot of people actually get saved via that verse, but that isn't really what that verse is saying, it is not<\/em> an evangelistic passage.\u00a0 If you want to preach evangelism, there are many other passages that are more appropriate:\u00a0 John 3:16.\u00a0 This is an invitation for fellowship to be restored through utilizing 1 John 1:9, \u201cIf we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us of all unrighteousness.\u201d\u00a0 Do this not to get saved but apply John 3:16 to get saved.\u00a0 Exercise 1 John 1:9 to restore broken fellowship, and what Jesus says to them here is \u2018I want to come in and dine with you<\/em>.\u2019\u00a0 Now here in America we have lost the art of dining.\u00a0 Dining in the ancient Near East and in the Grego-Roman world was all about intimacy.\u00a0 If you sat down to a meal with someone, it wasn\u2019t as though you are going through the drive-through, etc.\u00a0 You ate with someone because you wanted intimate fellowship with them.\u00a0 In the upper room, Jesus had the last supper with His disciples because He wanted intimate fellowship with them.\u00a0 So, Jesus is saying here that He wants fellowship with them because they\u2019ve fallen out of fellowship with them.\u00a0 He isn't calling into question their salvation.\r\n\r\nMy point is that if five of these seven churches are in an apostate condition and in the worst of the worst churches, Jesus is standing outside the door, does that sound like He is reigning in His Kingdom in those churches?\u00a0 To argue that He is reigning in His Kingdom through the church, based on Rev 5:5 is to totally and 100% ignore the context here.\u00a0 The entire context is a backslidden, apostate state.\u00a0 When the kingdom comes, this won't happen anymore because sin will be judged immediately.\u00a0 See that in Zech 14:16-18; Rev 20:7-9.\u00a0 This passage is talking about a totally different scenario where Christ is out of fellowship with His own people.\u00a0 That doesn\u2019t fit Kingdom conditions at all.\r\n\r\nMy problem with what they're doing in Rev 5:5, the overcoming; He overcame; therefore, the Kingdom has started.\u00a0 First, it doesn\u2019t say \u2018Kingdom\u2019 there; it doesn\u2019t even say \u2018to reign\u2019<\/em> there.\u00a0 Secondly, the eviction process beginning with the opening of the seven-sealed scroll hasn\u2019t even occurred yet.\u00a0 Third, a present reigning church in no way fits the context of Rev 2,3. \u00a0Those are points that are totally ignored by 'kingdom now' theologians.\r\n\r\nLet's go now to Rev 15 and look at the final text that we will examine in this class to disprove a present Kingdom.\u00a0 This verse is an easy one, and we have done these previously on Sunday mornings. \u00a0Revelation 15:3 \u2014 \u201cAnd they sang the song of Moses, the bondservant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, \u2018Great and marvelous are Your works, O Lord God, the Almighty; Righteous and true are Your ways, King of the nations!<\/u><\/strong>\u2019\u201d\u00a0 So, he is the King of the nations.\u00a0 If He is King of the nations, He must be ruling in His kingdom now, right?\u00a0 In response to that, I would say that 15:3 is followed by 15:4.\u00a0 See how important context is when studying the Bible?\u00a0 Observe not only what He says in 15:4 but also in which tense these verbs are.\u00a0 \u201cWho will not fear, O Lord, and glorify Your name?\u00a0 For You alone are holy; For all the nations will come [future tense\u2014h\u0113k\u014d<\/em>] <\/u><\/strong>and worship [in Greek, this is also future tense for proskyne\u014d<\/em><\/u><\/strong>] before You, For Your righteous Acts have been revealed.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0Yes, He is king of the nations, but He isn't ruling in the kingdom sense right now because the verbs of Him and the nations coming and worshiping Him are both put into the future tense.\r\n\r\nSo that ends that major section where we have gone through every single passage, and if you didn\u2019t catch it all, this is all archived all the way back to the life of Christ that some use that we are currently in the Kingdom.\u00a0 The conclusion is of ER Craven in 1874, who wrote a wonderful Excursus on the Basileia<\/em>.\u00a0 An excursus is an extended part of a commentary; there is a wonderful treatment there of the Kingdom.\u00a0 I have drawn many of his quotes, as you may have noticed, as we have gone through this, and he says, \u201c\u2026the passages which have been referred to as proving the doctrine of a present establishment\u201d and \u201cthose passages which, it is alleged, logically imply a present establishment of the Basileia<\/em>\u201d [Kingdom] \u2026 \u201cThere is no critically undisputed passage in the Scriptures which declares, or necessarily implies, even a partial<\/em> establishment [of the Basileia]<\/em> in New Testament times.\u201d\u00a0 When people argue that we are in the Kingdom, they say \u2018we are in the Kingdom\u2019 and then they will string together a bunch of verses with their addresses in parentheses.\u00a0 When you look at each verse individually, you discover is that the devil is in the details; none of the verses specifically communicate what they think that the verses say.\r\n\r\nSo that is the conclusion of this whole thing, and I could\u2019ve told you that at the beginning, but I'm more interested in teaching you not what<\/em> to think but how<\/em> to think.\u00a0 The day will come when you will be off somewhere else in another ministry, another country, etc., and you won't have me around.\u00a0 How will you stand on your own two feet?\u00a0 I must get you to a point where you can analyze this on your own.\r\n\r\nWe are finished looking at the biblical text indicating that the Kingdom started, and what we move into here, and we will just introduce this \u2014 this takes us to chapter 21 in my book, The Coming Kingdom<\/u><\/strong>, Miscellaneous Arguments<\/em>.\u00a0 These are three, and we don't have time to go through all of them.\u00a0 They aren\u2019t specifically text-based; they're more generic arguments that 'Kingdom Now' theologians use.\u00a0 Once we finish this, then we will be ready to get into the final part of the study, which I think will end at the end of this quarter, where we get into \u2018Who Cares<\/em>?\u2019\u00a0 Why does it really matter whether you believe if the church really is or isn't the Kingdom?\u00a0 Is this practical?\r\n\r\nWhat are the three miscellaneous arguments advanced by 'Kingdom Now' theologians?\u00a0 See slide on Three Miscellaneous Arguments Advanced by \u201cKingdom Now' Theology\u201d<\/strong>\r\n
          \r\n \t
        1. Alleged New Testament silence on a future kingdom<\/li>\r\n \t
        2. That the New Testament does not focus on the Millennial Kingdom but on the eternal state; therefore, they think that the New Testament changed the Old Testament and what it reveals about the Millennial Kingdom.<\/li>\r\n \t
        3. Some say that if you don't believe that Jesus is ruling in a kingdom over the Church, then He isn't doing anything. That is a failure to understand the present session of Christ which is a very active session.\u00a0 At the right hand of the Father, He is doing by my count, and you might be able to find even more than this, at least eleven things minimum.\u00a0 They have nothing to do with the Davidic Kingdom that is coming, so this idea that if we aren\u2019t now in the Kingdom, then Jesus isn't doing anything, is a fallacious idea.\u00a0 What some don't understand is that Jesus is Prophet, Priest and King.\u00a0 Prophet at the first coming, Priest presently after the order of Melchizedek; He is very active in that role; King second coming.\u00a0 Prophet, Priest, King.\u00a0 They are not keeping the three offices of Christ straight.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n \r\n
            \r\n \t
          1. Let's start with number 1 above: Alleged New Testament silence on a future kingdom<\/u><\/strong>.\u00a0 Tell me what kind of logical fallacy this is.\u00a0 Logical fallacy is fascinating to study\u2014errors in thinking logically.\u00a0 Bruce Waltke who had to leave Dallas Seminary, a brilliant Hebrew scholar, because he became a 'Kingdom Now' amillenialist, writes: \u201cNot one clear New Testament<\/u><\/strong> passage [hmmm, I guess we can't look at the Old Testament] mentions the restoration of Israel as a political nation or predicts an earthly reign of Christ before His final appearing.\u00a0 None depicts the consummate glory of Christ as an earthly king ruling over the restored nation of Israel.\u00a0 The silence is deafening.\u201d\u00a0 \u2018So, this Millennial Kingdom that you keep talking about, he can't find it in the New Testament, therefore, it must have been cancelled.\u2019<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\nAnother one by Gary DeMar, another 'Kingdom Now' theologian is essentially post-millennial, meaning that he believes that He is setting up the Kingdom now and then Jesus will come back later.\u00a0 So, Jesus is coming back to a world in apple pie order.\u00a0 He doesn\u2019t like all the talk about a future kingdom because he believes that we are in it.\u00a0 Nor does he like any talk about the nation of Israel, the restoration of the Jewish nation in the Millennial Kingdom because the Church is the new Israel.\u00a0 He says, \u201cWhere is this \u2018super sign\u2019 found in the Bible?\u00a0 Not in the New Testament<\/u><\/strong> [these guys are totally focused on the New Testament].\u00a0 There is not a single verse in the entire New Testament<\/u><\/strong> that says anything about Israel becoming a nation again.\u00a0 Nothing prophetic in the New Testament<\/u><\/strong> depends on Israel becoming a nation again.\u00a0 If Israel becoming a nation again\u2026\u201d [which is how we<\/em><\/strong> look at the reborn state of Israel; we<\/em><\/strong> see it as a precursor for God to get ready to fulfill His long-awaited Kingdom promises through the Jews primarily after the rapture] \u2026\u201d is such \u2018a significant sign,\u2019 then why doesn\u2019t the New Testament<\/u><\/strong> specifically mention it?\u201d\r\n\r\nAnother one:\u00a0 Colin Chapman from his book, Whose Promised Land?<\/u><\/strong>\u00a0 He says, \u201cWhen the New Testament writers like John had seen the significance of the land and the nation in the context of the Kingdom of God which had come into being in Jesus of Nazareth, they [the New Testament writers, that is] ceased to look forward to a literal fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies of a return to the land and a restoration of a Jewish state<\/u><\/strong>.\u00a0 The one and only fulfillment of all promises and prophecies was already there before their eyes in the person of Jesus.\u00a0 The way they interpreted the Old Testament should be the norm for the Christian interpretation of the Old Testament today.\u201d\u00a0 In other words, all the promises of the Old Testament concerning an earthly kingdom suddenly got thrown out because they had Jesus right in front of them.\u00a0 That is why, in his mind, the New Testament really doesn\u2019t mention the Millennial Kingdom.\r\n\r\nHere is an excerpt from The Knox Seminary Letter to Evangelicals. D James Kennedy, a well-known Presbyterian television pastor who has some wonderful teachings on the culture war and pro-life, etc., to his core, his church, and the school he started, are basically 'Kingdom Now' theologians.\u00a0 He may have some good things to say on the culture war, but eschatologically, we here at Sugarland Bible Church have a big difference of opinion with him.\u00a0 Interestingly, when the camera pans the audience of his tv program, I've observed several times, how many people who are seated there have Bibles open.\u00a0 Thousands of people, and I keep watching this beautiful choir with the camera spanning it all, and when they focus on the actual people in the pews, I can't find anyone with an open Bible. \u00a0He is up there talking about the culture war and pro-life and take America back.\u00a0 I'm not saying there aren\u2019t some good things in that, but he comes from a Replacement Theology, 'Kingdom Now' orientation, and he is a five-point Calvinist.\u00a0 This is what his school said on their website a few years back [of course, now he is dead,\r\n\r\nD James Kennedy, and as we like to say, he is with the Lord, so now he knows better]\u2026 \u201cInstructively, this same Simon Peter, the Apostle to the Circumcision\u2026\u201d [in other words, New Testament writer], says nothing about the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel in the land of Palestine\u201d \u2026[woops, I can't find Palestine in my Bible; he is calling it Palestine now.\u00a0 The term Palestine is an anti-Semitic slur because it was Hadrian after the time of Christ, after the Jews had been evicted from the land in AD 70, Hadrian, a Roman emperor in the second century, went into the land of Israel and cleaned up the whole place, trying to make it look as though the Jews were never there.\u00a0 It is identical to what the Muslims have done and still want to do to that land.\u00a0 They want to pretend as though there was never a Jewish civilization or population.\u00a0 That is why the Muslims are always getting upset with all these archaeological finds indicating that there was a David and other things indicating that there was indeed a Jewish civilization in that land going back to Abraham and Joshua, etc.\u00a0 So, when Hadrian went in there, he named the land Palestine and he was trying to humiliate the Jewish people in the second century AD by naming Palestine after one of their ancient enemies, the Philistines.\u00a0 The Philistines, in the Bible, hated the Jewish people.\u00a0 That is where Palestine originates.\u00a0 Even many study bibles, such as the MacArthur Study Bible, and to some extent the Ryrie Study Bible, will use the term Palestine.\u00a0 Realistically though, going through the Bible from stem to stern, as they say, and Palestine will never be found because it is a term of an anti-Semitic nature that came into existence after<\/em> the Bible was written.\u00a0 So, if you want to call that part of the world something, don't call it Palestine any more than you would call Judea and Samaria the West Bank.\u00a0 The West Bank is an invented term.\u00a0 The biblical designation of those areas they call the West Bank is Judea and Samaria.\u00a0 By the way, that bank is west of Jordan.\u00a0 Where is it relative to Israel?\u00a0 East.\u00a0 When you use the expression West Bank, you are using a term that is loaded from the Jordanian point of view.\u00a0 When you use the word Palestine, you are using a loaded term from an anti-Semitic point of view.\u00a0 Words mean things, so it is sad when evangelicals are not properly taught on this, and this vocabulary is thrown around without thinking anything of it.\u00a0 So, if you want to all that land something, don't call it Palestine; call it what the Lord Jesus calls it or what Matt 2:21 calls it, \u201cThen he [Joseph] arose, took the young Child and His mother, and came into the land of Israel.\u201d\u00a0 That is the designation for that territory, not Palestine.\u00a0 The fact that he uses Palestine shows you where he is coming from.] \u2026\u00a0 \u201cInstructively, this same Simon Peter, the Apostle to the Circumcision, says nothing about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel in the land of Palestine\u2026No New Testament writer foresees a regathering of ethnic Israel in the land, as did the prophets of the Old Testament after the destruction of the first Temple in 586 B.C.\u201d\r\n\r\nBruce Scott of Israel My Glory<\/u><\/strong> magazine correctly responds to Chapman and Gary Burge of Wheaton College who teaches 'Kingdom Now' theology. Understand that when you send your kids to Wheaton College, the same college that Billy Graham graduated from, they will be taught aggressively Replacement Theology from people such as Gary Burge.\u00a0 Bruce Scott responds to Gary Burge: \u201c[They] (referring to this argument that the New Testament never mentions the Millennial Kingdom or Israel\u2019s future, which is an error as I will show you, but let's pretend that the New Testament never does say anything about a future Millennial Kingdom or a future restored Israel.\u00a0 What kind of argument or logical fallacy is that?\u00a0 It is an argument from silence<\/em><\/strong> where you pretend like silence on something is the same as a negation. Bruce Scott calls out Gary Burge on this by saying): \u201c[They] use a fallacious argument from silence to prove their point.\u00a0 They falsely assume their position on the holy land is true simply because the New Testament writers spoke so infrequently of God's land promises to Israel and Israel\u2019s restoration to its land.\u00a0 On one occasion, when confronted about his argument from silence, Gary Burge [the Replacement Theology, 'Kingdom Now' theologian] countered, \u201c\u2018It is such a loud silence.\u2019\u201d\u00a0 I don't think their handling of the New Testament is right; there are references to Israel's future in the New Testament, but let's pretend that the New Testament never says a single word about the restored Israel.\u00a0 That is what you call an argument from silence; a logical fallacy, where it is assumed that silence on something is the same thing as the negation.\u00a0 That is what is happening in all these quotes by Waltke, Damar, Chapman, and Knox.\r\n\r\nTo communicate what an argument from silence is, I was a professor at a local Bible college for seven years, and I would hand out a syllabus at the beginning of class which would tell the students when the final exam would be.\u00a0 It gave the date for when they\u2019d be responsible for taking the final exam.\u00a0 Now, let's pretend that I handed out that syllabus and then fifteen weeks of a semester elapsed, and I never mentioned the final.\u00a0 Then it comes time to take the final exam, and there are students who don't show up for the test and consequently receive a lower grade.\u00a0 Their response to me was, \u2018Yeah but during the semester you never mentioned the final and since you never mentioned it, I didn\u2019t think I had to take it.\u2019\u00a0 Wait a minute, \u2018Did I ever at any point say that you didn\u2019t have to take the final?\u2019\u00a0 No, we never heard that.\u00a0 \u2018So, you are assuming that my silence on it somehow negated what the syllabus said.\u2019\u00a0 That is basically called an argument from silence.\u00a0 What all the above referenced quotes do not have, assuming that they're right on silence, which I don't believe they are, they have nowhere in the New Testament that calls off the Millennial Kingdom.\u00a0 It says that everything you have studied in the Millennial Kingdom has been called off.\r\n\r\nArnold Fruchtenbaum says \u201cFurthermore, the New Testament does not have to mention something specific from the Old Testament to maintain that the Old Testament promise is ongoing.\u00a0 What the author [Replacement theologian] needs is a clear statement that says all the Land Promises have been fulfilled in at least a spiritual way, but this does not exist in the New Testament.\u201d\u00a0 Because it does not exist, they have to appeal to alleged silence.\r\n\r\nPaul Feinberg says, \u201cWhy should something that is clearly a matter of Old Testament revelation have to be repeated<\/em> in the New Testament for it to have continuing validity?\u00a0 Should not the very opposite be the case?\u00a0 Should not the promises of the Old Testament be regarded as still in effect unless the New Testament states otherwise?\u201d\u00a0 <\/em>\r\n\r\nThese guys are coming up with their own set of rules and here are the rules that they have arbitrarily come up with:\u00a0 You can't just appeal to the Old Testament to develop a future Kingdom coming to the world through Israel.\u00a0 You can't just have it there; you have to have it in the New Testament.\u00a0 If you don't have it twice, then it is not valid.\u00a0 That is akin to Adam and Eve standing before God as the human race was plunged into sin since they ate from the forbidden tree, telling God, \u2018Well, you only told us one time not to eat from the tree of knowledge; if you had told us twice, we would have taken it seriously.\u2019\r\n\r\nEven before we get into the New Testament data, I want you to see the fallacious thinking that is going on here.\r\n\r\nWe will continue 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