By George C. Stewart

In February and March of 1989 I had a two-part article published in the Restoration Herald entitled: “The Kingdom of God as the Church, the Millennium.” In April of the same year the Herald published a rebuttal by a Christian church minister (we will refer to him as KN). I offered to answer KN in the Herald but the editor declined the offer. The article below is an edited version of what I submitted to the Herald and to KN. Since KN’s understanding of eschatology is the basic dispensational view, I will address this subject to both KN and dispensationalists in general.

Dispensationalists believe the church is not the kingdom of God, and that the kingdom will be ushered in as an earthly one-thousand-year reign of Christ following the “rapture” and “tribulation.”

It seems to me that the dispensationalists’ basic mistake—on this subject—is the failure to recognize that heaven, in effect, is a continuation of the kingdom established at Pentecost. Paul wrote to Timothy: “The Lord will deliver me from every evil deed, and will bring me safely to His heavenly kingdom; to Him be the glory forever and ever. Amen” (2 Timothy 4:18). Peter wrote: “for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you” (2 Peter 1:11). From this we can see there is the present reality of the Kingdom of God, which continues into eternal kingdom. God spoke through Daniel that this kingdom would be eternal (Daniel 2:44). See the graphic at the end as a summary of the dispensational view and my view.

As one argument against the church being the kingdom, KN says, “Frequently the Scriptures talk about the kingdom of God as something that is to be inherited.” Certainly there is a sense in which the kingdom has not been realized in its fullness. But our “inheritance” is in heaven not in an earthly kingdom. When God determines to have the marriage of the Lamb (Revelation 21:1f) Christ will return and all in Christ will receive the full inheritance. However, that inheritance is already ours (Ephesians 1:3, 11), and the Holy Spirit has been given to the believer as a seal and down payment (Ephesians 1:1-14).

KN thinks that because Jesus said Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the prophets are to be in the kingdom constitutes proof that He is referring to an earthly kingdom. However, because the church on earth is the kingdom of God on earth does not limit God's kingdom to the church. Certainly God rules in heaven now, and will continue to rule over the redeemed (the church) after the Lord's return. Those of the Christian dispensation shall surely be with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Matthew 8:11) in the presence of God forever. Does the author expect Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to be reincarnated and live on earth for a thousand years, as the First Century Jews apparently thought Elijah (and others) would be (see Matthew 16:13-14)?

KN (and other dispensationalists) thinks Christ's reference to the apostles sitting on thrones and judging Israel (Matthew 19:28) presents a problem for one believing the church is the kingdom. He denies that “the regeneration” spoken of in this text can refer to the new birth (John 3:1ff). Certainly that is the only regeneration spoken of in the New Testament. Can anyone find any other New Testament teaching of a “second opportunity” after death where one is saved by the grace of God? To claim that the reference to inheriting eternal life in Matthew 19:29 proves that the “regeneration” of 19:28 cannot be the Christian experience is to deny the many biblical references to the fact that in Christ we already have the assurance of that eternal life (see Ephesians 1:3-14; Colossians 1:13). First John 5:11, 13 states emphatically that we already have eternal life! Jesus Himself stated that “He who believes in the Son has eternal life” (John 3:36). See also John 5:24; 6:47, 54; 17:3. Again the mistake of many is to fail to understand that the future is a continuation of that which begins when we become a part of Christ and His church. Titus 3:5 uses the same word to speak of the “regeneration” that takes place at baptism. (This is the only other place the word is used in the New Testament.) While many take Matthew 19:28 to refer to a future period it does not follow that that period will be a literal earthly rule of Christ and the apostles.

Many believe it refers to the judgment and heaven. Again, do the dispensationalists expect the apostles to be reincarnated to live in an earthly kingdom? I believe there is a more biblical understanding of this text, which fits the Christian period (church/kingdom). Peter says that Christ now sits on the throne of David (Acts 2:29-36). As to the apostles' role, we know that Jesus promised that during the church age what they “shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,” and whatever they “shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19; 18:18). That certainly implies authority and judgment. Then Paul says the one body of Christ (the church), composed of Jews and Gentiles, is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the Cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20). It seems to me that their apostolic role is continuing over “the twelve tribes of Israel” (the church) through the revelation of God (New Testament) and their first century work of establishing the church and guiding it to maturity.

With reference to Matthew 13:40-43 KN says, “Surely no one would presume that the church is in mind here, since the 'end of the age' is what Jesus is talking about (v.40).” I see no problem here. When the Bridegroom returns for His Bride (the church) at the “end of the age” there will be a separation of wheat and tares, and the Bride will “shine forth as the sun,” as Jesus “delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father” (1 Corinthians 15:24).

KN calls the words of Matthew 25:34 “curious,” and says they cannot apply to the church. Again, this is simply a failure to accept the fact that the church (on the authority of God) has no end (Daniel 2:44; Matthew 16:48). The invitation to “come… inherit the kingdom” is the invitation to the wedding feast of the Bridegroom and Bride (church). See Revelation 19:9. It is our entrance into heaven, and the culmination of our hope. It is clear from Matthew 25 that this invitation is to those who faithfully served the Lord while on earth (present dispensation). Does KN expect these to return to earth to inherit an earthly kingdom? It seems this requires a lot of reincarnations, which the Bible never supports.

KN’s problem with Mark 9:47 is the same as addressed previously: he has fixed his mind on a future literal earthly kingdom and cannot see heaven as a continuation of the church. Certainly heaven will be more glorious than the church's present status, but that is part of the promise to a faithful church—God's people. That is the inheritance for which we have already received a down-payment (Ephesians 1:14).

It seems to me that KN has before him the solution to Christ drinking the fruit of the vine in His Father's kingdom (Matthew 26:29), yet will not accept it. He rejects this being a promise that Jesus is present at the Lord's Table in a spiritual sense. Yet haven't Christians from the First Century believed that Christ is present in the communion service in one sense or another? 1 Corinthians 10:16 speaks of “sharing in the blood of Christ” and “sharing in the body of Christ.” While this is understood in a spiritual sense, it does, nonetheless, speak of a special communion with our Lord at His table. R. C. Foster said, “Jesus declares He is not to partake of it again until the coming of the kingdom on the day of Pentecost when He will share the communion with us each Lord's Day” (Studies in The Life of Christ: The Final Week, p.165).

As to the question of “eating the Passover” (Luke 22:12ff) Jesus does not say He will partake of the Passover in the kingdom, as He did concerning the Lord's Supper (Matthew 26:29). Concerning the Passover, He says, “I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God” (Luke 22:16). The Passover was “fulfilled” in Christ's sacrificial death (John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:7). Christ's words concerning the Passover (Luke 22:16, 18) do not require a future sharing. Why would He re-introduce, either in the church or some future earthly kingdom, an Old Testament practice, which He has already fulfilled according to God's eternal plan?

KN, and dispensationalists in general, think 2 Timothy 4:18 cannot refer to the church. However, when heaven is rightly seen as a continuation of the eternal church (kingdom), we understand this verse as a reference to the culmination of that which Christ died for. Certainly Paul says nothing here (or elsewhere) about an earthly kingdom.

Finally, KN’s interpretation of Acts chapter one, leaves more questions than he answers. He says there are three things wrong with understanding the apostles to still be confused about an earthly kingdom. His first two points are really one and the same: that to suppose that the apostles misunderstood “the nature of the kingdom seems impossible” since Jesus had taught them for 40 days since His resurrection. Does the author forget that Jesus had taught the apostles for 3 ½ years and they certainly had many misunderstandings right up to His crucifixion? KN seems to think, however, that after Christ's resurrection He taught the apostles in such a way that they could not possibly be confused. There is no evidence for that assumption. The promise of the Holy Spirit, who would lead them into all truth, had not yet been fulfilled. When this promise was fulfilled at Pentecost the apostles never again talked about an earthly kingdom. Even after Pentecost the apostles did not understand that the kingdom was to include Gentiles until God gave Peter a special vision (Acts 10). KN’s third point (from Acts 1) is that Jesus did not ridicule the apostles for asking about the time of establishing His kingdom. Maybe not, but He certainly did not give them an answer. And that surely lends no support to the idea of a future earthly kingdom. Besides, why would Jesus be teaching the apostles about an earthly kingdom, to come some thousands of years later, when He needed to prepare them for their immediate role in the church?

For forty days the resurrected Lord taught the Apostles “things concerning the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3). Thus, when the Apostles preached Christ they taught the reality of the kingdom of God being present in the first century. Philip did this. In Acts 8:12 we read: “But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike.” When Paul met with the Ephesian elders he referred to his “preaching the kingdom” (Acts 20:25). A quick concordance check will show many more examples of how the New Testament preachers and writers taught that the church and the kingdom of God are synonymous.

I do not believe the passages presented by KN are “problem passages” as he says. I believe the problem is in his pre-set idea of a literal earthly kingdom yet future.

As Paul pens this last chapter (2 Timothy 4), during the last chapter of his earthly life, his physical condition is not as comfortable as during his first Roman imprisonment (Acts 28:30-31; 2 Timothy 4:13, 16, 21). Yet, his primary focus is not his cloak, but his leaving the temporal for the eternal. He may have remembered that he had written “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Romans 8:18), and “For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain” (Philippians 1:21). So—truly—both the kingdom of God and the Christian life are a continuum—for we have already passed out of death into life” (1 John 3:14).