Introduction

Before providing an overview of exactly what my beliefs are concerning the Kingdom of God, I would like to present seven scriptures which I believe Christadelphians have either misread, downplayed, or overlooked. For each scripture, I have a simple question to accompany it.

One: Psalm 110:1

What does Psalm 110:1 mean?

“Yahweh said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” (Psalm 110:1)

It is the most cited verse in the New Testament, and was clearly very significant to the apostles. They saw it as teaching the ascension of Christ to heaven (Acts 2:33-35, Mark 16:19, 1 Pet 3:22, Eph 1:20, Heb 1:3).

But does not the verse also tell us for how long Christ would remain in heaven? When does he return?

“...until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”

The Messiah will remain in heaven “until” his enemies are subdued under his feet. Christadelphians teach something different — that the Messiah will return and then subdue his enemies under his feet. They believe Christ will leave his seat before he has been granted his footstool. But this destroys the imagery of the verse. Footstools are for seated individuals, not those who have left their seat.

Two: 1 Corinthians 15:25

Why did Paul reference Psalm 110:1 in 1 Corinthians 15:25?

“But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming, then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:23-28)

Two things are quite certain:

1. Psalm 110:1 is about Christ in heaven, at God’s right hand.

2. 1 Corinthians 15:25 is about Christ reigning as king.

Note the parallel between the verses:

“Sit at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”

“He must reign until he has put all enemies under his feet.”

Psalm 110:1 depicts a ruler seated in heaven, not on earth. Why, then, would Paul reference this passage to depict an earthly reign? Also, why did he speak in the present tense – must reign – rather than the future tense – will reign? Did Paul believe Christ was already reigning?

Another related question. Under the Christadelphian interpretation of this chapter, death is first swallowed up in victory when the saints are immortalised (v54), and then destroyed again one thousand years later (v26). Judging by his language choice, is it just possible that Paul thought v26 and v54 were the same event?

Three: Matthew 4:17

When was the kingdom of heaven at hand?

“From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17)

“That time” was somewhere in the vicinity of 30 AD. Thus, the kingdom of heaven was at hand in the early first century. “At hand” means close. As near as your hands. It was almost upon them.

How, then, can Christadelphians claim it wasn’t at hand?

According to Robert Roberts, the statement is simply a “full and formal invitation to the kingdom,” not the arrival of the kingdom itself. I wish I could engage more meaningfully with this view, but it simply has no connection with what the text says. For example, the statement “Get ready, because the show is about to begin” is completely different to “Buy tickets because the show is coming in two thousand years.”

John Thomas asserts that the phrase refers to the “royal majesty” approaching – that is, the coming of the Messiah. Similarly, other Christadelphians explain that Christ “represented” the kingdom or was “the kingdom in the germ.” But if Matthew had intended to speak of an individual who represented the kingdom, he could have said “the king (ὁ βασιλεύς) has approached,” or “the Christ (ὁ χριστός) has approached,” or even “the Lord (ὁ κύριος) has approached.” Instead, he said:

“Repent, for the kingdom, or divine rule (ἡ βασιλεία) has approached.”

Moreover, Basileia (βασιλεία) is feminine in Greek, so I find it difficult to believe that Matthew was referring to a man, Christ Jesus. The most logical conclusion is that Matthew believed the kingdom itself was on the brink of being inaugurated. The divine rule was about to begin. That is simply what the text says.

(Note that I am not claiming to know Greek, apart from what my Bible software will show me. This is a logical argument based simply on Matthew’s word choice, and it works just as well in English).

Four: Hebrews 7:17

Is Christ a Melchizedek Priest?

“For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.” (Hebrews 7:17)

As every Christadelphian knows, a Melchizedek priest is both a king and a priest. Is Christ currently a melchizedek priest? If he is, then is he also currently a Melchizedek king? You cannot have one without the other.

Perhaps this is why Hebrews 8:1 emphasises the royalty of Christ’s status:

“Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.” (Hebrews 8:1)

Five: 2 Samuel 7:12

Will David be sleeping with his fathers when Christ is crowned king?

“And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.” (2 Samuel 7:12)

The text is clear that David’s son would be set up as king whilst David was “sleeping with his fathers,” or, as Peter put it, “dead and buried” (Acts 2:29). (Indeed, this seems to be partly why Peter harps on about it). Christadelphians, on the other hand, believe David will be resurrected before Christ takes his throne.

Note also that 2 Samuel 7:16 does not say “thy kingdom shall be established before thee.” The KJV reads this way, but the LXX, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NLT, and many others, do not. As we have seen, David was not going to be sitting on the sidelines watching his kingdom being established, because the prophecy explicitly says he would be dead. The NASB reads, for verse 16:

“Your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever.” (2 Samuel 7:16, NASB)

Six: Revelation 1:5-6

Are we currently kings and priests?

“And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.” (Revelation 5:10)

This verse (in chapter 5) is widely believed to be a prophecy about our glorious status in the future kingdom of God. The problem is that the first chapter of Revelation says much the same thing, but it is not a prophecy of the future:

“Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.” (Revelation 1:5-6)

I merely point out that this is in the past tense.

Seven: Daniel 7:13-14

When was Christ given the kingdom?

“I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” (Daniel 7:13-14)

Importantly, the Son of man does not go from the Ancient of Days; he comes to Him. This is the ascension of Christ, not the Second Coming. Upon arrival in heaven, he is given glory, dominion, and a kingdom, with the expectation that all nations would come to serve him.

My Scriptural Case

In this document, I will not be focusing on answering objections, or considering counterpoints, but rather presenting the positive case for what I believe. In order to follow the intent of God’s word as fully as possible, I have chosen six key passages to expound: Genesis 1, Matthew 13, Psalm 110, 1 Corinthians 15, Acts 2 and Isaiah 42. In limiting myself to just six important chapters, I am hoping to avoid the trap of simply cherry picking verses I like. Instead, I will be following the argument of entire sections and chapters, whilst drawing from a variety of cross-references to supplement my points. Please note, therefore, that there are dozens of chapters that could serve this purpose equally well.

Note also that the argument flows as a whole, and must be taken as a whole. Sampling one section to the exclusion of others may give an incomplete or slanted perspective of my beliefs, leading to unwanted confusion.

God’s Purpose With Creation (Genesis 1)

In Genesis 1, God created heaven and earth in six days. Each act of this creation began with a divine statement – “God said”, or similar – and concluded with confirmation that the act was complete – “and it was so”, or similar.

Only one act of creation lacked the “and it was so” statement.

“And God said, Let there be light” (v3)	“And there was light.” (v3)
“And God said, Let there be a firmament” (v6)	“And God made the firmament” (v7)
“And let it divide the waters from the waters.” (v6)	“And divided the waters” (v7)
“And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered” (v9)	“And it was so” (v9)
“And let the dry land appear” (v9)	“And it was so” (v9)
“And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass” (v11)	“And it was so” (v11)
“And God said, Let there be lights” (v14)	“And God made two great lights” (v16)
“And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly” (v20)	“And God created great whales” (v21)
“And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature” (v24)	“And God made the beast of the earth” (v25)
“And God said, Let us make man in our image” (v26)	“So God created man in his own image” (v27)
“And let them have dominion…” (v26)	?

The last divine statement, that of man having dominion over the creation, was never actually completed. Rather, man was simply commissioned and blessed to achieve it:

“And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” (v28)

This verse does not signify the completion of the creative act, since it is given as a command. (Moreover, it was many years later before anyone could claim that Adam had been fruitful or multiplied). So if God had to command Adam and Eve to be fruitful, multiply, and have dominion over the creation, then it follows that this cannot have been already completed within the six days of creation. This is a divine command that remains to be obeyed.

But as surely as God spoke everything else into existence in Genesis 1, so too this command will be done. Man will have dominion, and fill the earth.

Why was mankind in particular tasked with filling the earth? Why not the blue whale, or the bald eagle? God tasked man with this commission because man alone has the capacity to truly reflect God. This is why God stamped his own image and likeness upon us. It was because when the earth is filled with men and women, it has the capacity to truly bring glory to him.

Has this ever been fulfilled?

There are many kingdoms and empires that have had “dominion”. And mankind has certainly been fruitful, and multiplied. But the true question is: have we reflected the image and likeness of God in doing so? The answer is emphatically no. Since the fall in Genesis 3, mankind has been laden with corruption, violence, and immorality of every kind. We have not, on the whole, risen above the level of the beasts.

Take Nebuchadnezzar, for example. As Daniel said, “the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all” (Dan 2:37-38). The language here is very similar to Genesis 1:28. So did Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom fulfill God’s purpose?

Surprisingly enough, it did not. It is only two chapters later that we see that Nebuchadnezzar, whilst exercising dominion over “the beasts of the field”, was no better than the beasts himself. “He was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen”, says Daniel 4:33, as if in answer to our question.

Even if man manages to achieve dominion, it is vanity unless he reflects God’s image and likeness in doing so. He must rise above the beasts.

What hope do we have, then, for fulfilling God’s command in Genesis 1:28?

Our hope is in Christ. Paul tells us that Christ “is the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15). When we put on Christ, therefore, we take on his image, so that when God looks at us, he sees his son. More than this, the love of Christ transforms our lives so that we bring forth the fruit of the Spirit, so that the world is leavened with our good works, and we do rise above the beasts (1 Jn 4:19, Gal 5:22-25, Matt 5:16).

It follows that those who are in Christ can fulfill the command of Genesis 1:28. A world full of believers in Christ is a world that does reflect the image and likeness of God, because when God looks at the world, he sees their representative, the man Jesus Christ.

Christ, therefore, is the one who will conquer the world; not Nebuchadnezzar, or Alexander the Great, or anyone else.

“He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.” (Psalm 72:8)

On the basis of Genesis 1:26-28, therefore, I believe that Christ will achieve dominion over the ends of the earth, and this will mark the completion of God’s final act of creation.

Now, all Bible-believers agree this, even Christadelphians. The real question is how and when this will happen.

How God’s Purpose Will Be Fulfilled (Matthew 13)

We cannot consider Christ’s dominion without considering the kingdom of God. And Christ tells us what his kingdom is like by giving us a series of parables beginning “the kingdom of heaven is like…” The parable of the mustard seed is one such parable, and it is essential to grasp the principle of this parable if we want to truly understand the kingdom of God.

The principle of the mustard seed parable is quite simple. The kingdom is initially very small – as imperceptible as a mustard seed. Over time, however, it grows from the smallest of seeds to become the largest of trees.

This teaches that the kingdom of God is a thing that slowly grows in size, the same way that a tree grows. It is not a magic bean that makes an oak tree immediately appear. It does not arrive like a thief. It grows and grows until the birds of the air – the Gentile nations – lodge in its branches.

The record says that the man planted the seed “in his field” (v31). God’s field must undoubtedly refer to Israel, to which he sent their lowly Messiah. He was planted in this field by being born in a manger in Bethlehem. Throughout his life, he certainly was considered “the least”, even dying a criminal’s death that made him the mockery of all. In the book of Acts, his followers were ridiculed, abused, and martyred.

By becoming followers of Christ, therefore, we become ‘in him’, and therefore in his kingdom. As Paul says:

“Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” (Col 1:13-14)

As more and more people come to Christ, the kingdom grows like the mustard seed. In his own words, Christ said:

“The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.” (Luke 16:16)

As the progress reports in Acts show us, the kingdom continued to grow, slowly but surely, as men and women were baptised into Christ. The seed was germinating into a small plant. And over time, this plant has continued to grow, to the point where the whole world has heard of the man Jesus Christ – a thing many would have thought impossible in the year 30 AD.

And yet, today, the tree is still comparatively small. It has a lot of growing to do.

Only once the kingdom has grown to eclipse all other trees – when Christ has achieved dominion over the ends of the earth – might we then say that the parable of the mustard seed has been fulfilled.

On the basis of this parable, therefore, I believe that the whole world will be filled with the kingdom of God, and that this will happen slowly but surely, beginning from the moment it was ‘planted’ in Israel in the first century.

The Reign of Christ (Psalm 110)

There are moments when you hear a scripture that you thought you knew so well, and it strikes you differently. You hear it as if for the first time. Like any Christadelphian, I knew Psalm 110:1 by heart, but somehow the basic meaning of the words escaped me. Now that I see it, I wonder how I ever missed it, or how anyone has ever missed it.

Why? What does it say?

“Yahweh said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” (Psalm 110:1)

Christ will be in heaven, at the right hand of God, “until” his enemies are made his footstool. This is not an ‘interpretation.’ This is simply what the text says. And the New Testament confirms this:

“But he, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until his enemies be made a footstool for his feet.” (Hebrews 10:12-13, NASB)

The phrase “from that time onward” is redundant unless to indicate that his enemies will be made a footstool for his feet “from that time onward”.

Thus, Christ’s enemies will be conquered by the time he returns from heaven, and any theory that claims this will happen after he returns must contend with Psalm 110:1.

Some have claimed that the verse should be understood as: “sit at my right hand until [the time when I will] make your enemies your footstool.” However, this destroys the imagery of the verse. Footstools are for seated individuals, not those who have left their seat. Why would God give Christ a footstool after getting up? The whole point of a footstool is to make a seated person comfortable!

Moreover, we must understand the fact that Psalm 110 is a coronation Psalm, which was often sung at the coronation of Jewish kings. When a king began to reign, he symbolically ‘sat at God’s right hand’. The Messiah-King also would sit on his throne, at the right hand of God, from which he will rule over his kingdom. But he would literally sit at God’s right hand, in the heavens.

In defence of this, notice the kingly language all throughout the Psalm. “Sitting” is a kingly act – this is evident from a number of passages in the Old Testament:

• We can compare 1 Kings 3:6 (“hast given him a son to sit on his throne”) with the parallel record in 2 Chronicles 1:8 (“hast made me to reign in his stead”) to understand that “sit” and “reign” are often equivalent terms in this context.

• In 1 Kings 22:19 we see the king, Yahweh, “sitting on his throne”, whilst “all the host of heaven stand by.”

• The fact that kings site makes it particularly extraordinary that the venerable old David chose to “stand up upon his feet” at the end of his life (1 Chron 28:2). The symbolic act fitted well with David’s subsequent acknowledgement of the inadequacy of his kingship (1 Chron 28:3-4).

For the rest of the psalm, the language is similarly kingly: “rod” (v2) is translated “sceptre” in many other versions; “Zion” (v2) invariably has kingly overtones in the Bible; “ruling” (v2) is what kings do; “enemies” (v2) and “people” (v3) are what kings have; “power” (v3) is what kings wield; “Melchizedek” (v4) was a king-priest; “kings” (v5) are battled by other kings; “judgement” (v6) is what kings administer.

Clearly, when David penned the words of this Psalm, he had the reign of the Messiah in mind. He believed that to sit at God’s right hand meant to reign as king. Whilst this is all implied in the Old Testament, the New Testament explicitly states that Christ is currently sitting on a throne:

“I also overcame, and am set down with my father in his throne.” (Revelation 3:21)

“We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.” (Hebrews 8:1)

“Jesus… is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” (Hebrews 12:2)

The reason why Christ sits on God’s throne in heaven is because he was always promised the throne of David (Lk 1:32), which always was God’s throne (1 Chron 29:23). When the people desired an earthly king, they had rejected the heavenly throne of God, and brought it down to earth (1 Sam 8:7). But God had always intended for heaven to be the place of his throne, and earth the place of his footstool (Isa 66:1). In fact, the earthly throne was conclusively discontinued in Jeremiah 22:28-30.

So Just as David’s son ascended to heaven (a thing that was considered ridiculous by many), so David’s throne ascended to heaven (a thing still considered ridiculous by many). In reality, that is the place where it was always meant to be, since it is God’s own throne.

The fact that Christ is currently reigning on God’s throne agrees well with the fact that Christ currently has a kingdom, a thing undeniable:

“Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear son.” (Colossians 1:13)

“Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear.” (Hebrews 12:28)

“I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ…” (Revelation 1:9)

On the basis of Psalm 110:1, therefore, I believe that Christ is currently reigning on his heavenly throne, and that he will continue to reign there until his enemies are made his footstool.

The Second Coming of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:22-28)

Having just considered Psalm 110:1, we now take a look at one of the many New Testament scriptures that quotes that verse, providing an inspired commentary on it. If you had any doubts about my previous statements (about Psalm 110:1 being a reference to the heavenly reign of Christ), Paul lays those doubts to rest in this chapter.

He references the verse, changing one crucial part:

“For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.” (1 Corinthians 15:25)

Instead of saying Christ must “sit at God’s right hand”, Paul simply says Christ must “reign.” This is because the two phrases are equivalent! Hence, Paul’s use of Psalm 110:1 confirms beyond any doubt that the verse refers to the reign of Christ.

Note that Paul does not say “for he will have to reign, till he has conquered all his enemies.” He uses the present tense, implying: “he must continue to reign, till he has conquered all his enemies.” This strongly implies that Christ’s reign is current.

But I intend to take a deeper dive into this chapter, because it has some very useful and foundational content. In the midst of a flurry of false doctrine concerning the resurrection, this portion of Paul’s letter to the Corinthians is intended to reiterate the basics of the gospel message that he had given to them (1 Cor 15:1-4). Central to the gospel, he argues, is the resurrection of Christ, which is the only hope for believers’ own resurrections in the future (v12-19). Indeed, Christ’s resurrection is just the “firstfruits”, implying other resurrections later to come (v20). Just as Adam caused death, Christ will be victorious over death in the resurrection (v21-22).

When will this resurrection and victory over death take place? When Christ comes again (v23). But Paul wants to prove that this is when the resurrection and victory over death will be, which he proceeds to do in the next verses (v24-26).

Now, the difficult part about Paul’s argument here is that he is working backwards. He effectively says: “The resurrection is at the return of Christ (v23b), because that’s when he has delivered the kingdom to God (v24a), because that’s when he has put down all rule and all authority and power (v24b), because Psalm 110:1 says he must reign in heaven until all enemies are under his feet (v25) and death is the last of those enemies (v26).”

It is difficult to get the argument in one go; but the crucial thing to note is that Psalm 110:1 is used as proof that the victory over death is at the return of Christ. Paul argues that death, the last of the enemies mentioned in Psalm 110:1, will be conquered at the conclusion of Christ’s reign – when all his enemies are made his footstool.

If we look at Paul’s argument in reverse order, it becomes a little clearer: since Psalm 110:1 says Christ will reign until all enemies are under his feet, and since death is the last of those enemies (v25-26), the resurrection and victory over death will occur when Christ relinquishes his reign to God (v24). This will occur “at his coming (v23).

To summarise the argument one more time:

• Christ reigns in heaven (as per Psalm 110:1).

• During this reign, he subdues all enemies, with death being the last enemy.

• Christ’s Second Coming will mark the resurrection of believers, and the destruction of death, the last enemy.

• After this victory, Christ will deliver the kingdom to God, having “put down all rule and all authority and power.”

On the basis of 1 Corinthians 15:22-28, therefore, I believe that Christ’s Second Coming will be at the conclusion of his reign, the time when all enemies will have been abolished, and the resurrection will take place. I believe that the return of Christ is when he will deliver the kingdom back to the Father, and God will be all in all.

The King Promised to David (Acts 2)

This chapter is undeniably pivotal in the purpose of God, not least because it is the first time the gospel is preached after the ascension of Christ. As Jews from every corner of the world flocked to Jerusalem, the apostles received the gift of the Holy Spirit and began to speak the gospel in languages they had never learned. Peter, taking the initiative, uses the opportunity to preach to them about Jesus. Since they were Jews “dwelling at Jerusalem” (v5,14), they had no doubt heard of his death and disappearance not two months before. Hence, the questions on every lip were, “Who was he?” and “Why was his tomb empty?”

These questions Peter would answer in Acts 2:22-36.

He first identifies Jesus as a man who God approved by “miracles and wonders and signs” (v22). Many of those present would have witnessed those miracles, so his words had weight. He then castigates the Jews for being responsible for his crucifixion (v23), and proceeds to claim that he was actually resurrected by God because death had no hold on him (v24)!

Such a claim would require proof. The Jews envisaged their Messiah as a man like Judas Maccabaeus – one who would take up the sword and deliver them from the Romans. They balked at a Messiah who would willingly die at the hands of his enemies, and they had even less clue about a resurrection.

A resurrection? Where do the scriptures talk about that? Peter tells them, by quoting Psalm 16:

“For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.” (Acts 2:25-28)

He goes further, proving that David was not the subject of the Psalm, even though he wrote the Psalm, because “he is both dead and buried” (v29). A man who is dead and buried has certainly “seen corruption.” No, David was a prophet, and he prophesied of his son, the Messiah (v30). This is who would be resurrected.

Peter then loosely quotes Psalm 132:11 and 2 Samuel 7:12 to make an interesting argument:

“Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.” (Acts 2:30-32)

Peter’s repeated reference to the “raising up” of Christ is crucial. Allow me to paraphrase the end of v30 and the beginning of v31 so it is clear:
“When God swore to raise up Christ to sit on his throne, David responded by prophesying about the resurrection of Christ.”

Peter knew what he was doing when he said “he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne” and then quickly followed up by saying “this Jesus hath God raised up.” He was claiming that Christ was already “raised up” to David’s throne.

As I said, Peter quotes a combination of Psalm 132:11 and 2 Samuel 7:12:

“Yahweh hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.” (Psalm 132:11)

“And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.” (2 Samuel 7:12)

No doubt Peter knew both scriptures well, and he saw no problem with merging them a little. Note that the key phrase “raise up” is taken from 2 Samuel 7:12, and Peter interprets it as the resurrection of Christ.

Now, in what way did Christ’s resurrection allow him to sit on David’s throne? Peter goes on to explain:

“Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord Said unto My Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool.” (Acts 2:33-35)

You see, it was after Christ’s resurrection that he was given “all power in heaven and earth”, and exalted to sit on the right hand of God. His resurrection enabled this. That is why Peter can claim that Jesus’ resurrection and ascension to sit on God’s throne was the fulfilment of the promise to David that Christ would be raised up to sit on his throne.

To conclude his remarks, Peter adds to his initial identification of Jesus as simply “a man.” He states that “God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” In actual fact, Jesus had already been both Lord (Matt 15:22) and Christ (Matt 16:16). So clearly, there is some new sense in which the titles are applied to him after his ascension to the throne of David. I suggest that every Jew in the audience knew Peter was claiming that Jesus was now reigning as King. In proof of this, let me first quote Acts 5:31, in which Peter makes an equivalent statement:

“Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.” (Acts 5:31)

In chapter 5, “Prince” and “Saviour” are substituted for “Lord” and “Christ”. So it is clear that Peter viewed the exaltation of Jesus as coincident with his becoming the ultimate ruler and saviour. Furthermore, both words – “Lord” and “Christ” – were deeply associated with kingship in the minds of the Jews (see Mk 15:32, Lk 2:11, 23:2, Psa 45:11 etc). Moreover, you may remember that when they had looked at his accusation, “This is the King of the Jews”, they ridiculed it by saying “let him save himself, if he be Christ” (Lk 23:55). The implication is that the “Christ” is the King of the Jews. To be “made Christ” (Acts 2:36), therefore, is to be ‘made king.’

Thus, although Christ was born to be the king on David’s throne, Peter’s pronouncement in Acts 2:36 confirms that he has now actually taken up that position. He is now actually king, rather than simply king-elect.

Why then does Peter not use the term “king” in Acts 2:36? To the Jews, the words “Christ” and “Lord” meant more than just “king”. To them, the Messiah was both a king and a saviour, encompassing so much more than just rulership.

We have a perfect example of this in Luke 23. When talking amongst themselves, the Jewish elders of the people asked Jesus “are you the Christ?” (Lk 22:66-67). A few verses later, they take this accusation to Pilate, claiming that Jesus said “he himself is Christ, a king” (Lk 23:2). Note how they translate the word “Christ” into a term that Pilate would understand – “a king”. Pilate does understand this, and so asks Jesus an equivalent question: “are you the king of the Jews?” (Lk 23:3).

It is interesting that, later in the book of Acts, the apostles quote Psalm 2 as being fulfilled in their times (Acts 4:24-30). The psalm is a vivid depiction of God’s king versus the kings of the earth, and the prayer identifies these “kings of the earth” as “Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel” (v27). Using the language of the psalm, they had “set themselves against Yahweh, and against his Messiah” (Psa 2:2). We are told later in the Psalm that the Lord would “have them in derision” (v4) because he had “set his king upon his holy hill of Zion” (v6). Now, we know that the immediate context of this is the resurrection of Christ, because in Acts 13:33 we are told that Psalm 2:7 was said to Christ at his resurrection. The picture this psalm gives us, therefore, is of the Messiah facing opposition from the kings of the earth, then being resurrected and set up as king in “Zion”, to deal with them.

When considered Biblically, the designation of “Zion” as the place where the Messiah rules is a strong confirmation that his rule is in heaven. Consider, for example, Hebrews 12:22:

“But ye are come unto the Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and ekklēsia of the firstborn, which are written in heaven…” (Hebrews 12:22-23)

In this chapter, the writer says:

• “Ye are” (already) come unto Mount Zion.

• He then describes it as “the heavenly Jerusalem”, and “the ekklēsia”.

• Clearly, ekklēsia is physically on earth, but it is “enrolled in heaven” (NASB).

Hence, the believers dwell spiritually in “heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Eph 2:6). In the book of Ephesians, Paul emphasises the fact that we occupy the same “heavenly places” as where Christ currently sits, namely, “at God’s own right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:20). I mention this all to show that “Mount Zion”, as Paul uses it, is ultimately not a physical location, but rather “the heavenly places” from where Christ reigns at God’s right hand, and where we are “enrolled” (Heb 12:23) as “citizens” (Phil 3:20).

However, this is not just a New Testament idea. In fact, it is impossible to read the prophets, and especially the book of Isaiah, without realising that “Zion” is ultimately a spiritual city:

• Isaiah 28:16 says Christ is both the cornerstone and foundation of Zion. Such imagery is clearly not meant to be taken literally. We also have explicit New Testament commentary on this verse, stating that it is already fulfilled (1 Pet 2:6-8). This means Christ has already been laid as the cornerstone of Zion.

• Isaiah 60:14 explicitly defines Zion as a city made out of people: “they shall call thee, The city of Yahweh, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel.”

• In Isaiah 66:8, we are told that Zion travails and brings forth children, which is behaviour distinctly atypical of a literal city. It also should make us think of Galatians 4:26, where we are told that “Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”

So when David wrote Psalm 2:7, he was inspired by the Holy Spirit to indicate that the place of Christ’s rule was both “in heaven”, and “in the midst of his brethren” – because his brethren dwell in the heavenly places with him.

On the basis of Acts 2, therefore, I believe that Christ is currently reigning on the throne of David in fulfilment of the Davidic promises.

The Obedient Servant (Isaiah 42)

The reason I have chosen to comment on Isaiah 42 is because it is easy to understand, and it draws a straight line of progress between Christ’s mortal ministry and the time when “he has set justice in the earth” (v4). I invite you to read the first four verses and see this for yourself:

“Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.” (Isaiah 42:1-4)

The first thing to understand is that v1-3 is quoted as being “fulfilled” in Matthew 12:17-21. In other words, it is a description of Christ’s first advent and ministry. When we consider the phrases that are used, this makes a lot of sense:

• Verse 1 mentions God “delighting” in him, and putting his spirit upon him: when Christ was baptised, he received the Holy Spirit, and God declared “this is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased.” Right from that moment, his ministry was destined in the providence of God to “bring forth judgement to the nations.”

• In verses 2-3, we have an apt description of his ministry and character, down to the moment of his gentle submission to crucifixion. He was not violent, or argumentative, and he made no attempt to be famous (quote the opposite, see Matt 12:15-16); the only weapon he wielded was the word of God, with which he would “faithfully bring forth justice” (v3, NASB).

The next verse is quite fascinating because, like Psalm 110:1, it is another “until” verse. It specifies for how long Christ will go on with this non-violent, self-effacing attitude:

“He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgement in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.” (Isaiah 42:4)

Hence, these verses draw a straight line of progress between Christ’s first advent and his conquering the world through the word of God. There is no room in these verses for a cataclysmic, fire-breathing intervention that will wipe the earth clean and start afresh. No, in my books that would definitely constitute “quenching smoking flaxes” and “breaking bruised reeds.” And Isaiah says he would not fail or be discouraged in his meek attitude until the earth is full of God’s law.

However, the question remains: how can the earth be conquered by a man who will “not cry out or raise his voice”? The answer comes later in the chapter.

After v4, the text interludes with a statement by Yahweh about the fact that He is the creator (v5), emphasising his almighty power – the same power he will give his servant, to bring light to the Gentiles (v6) and to free the prisoners of sin and death (v7). The next set of verses extol the glory of Yahweh (v8,12), and command even “the end of the earth” (v10) and “the wilderness” (v11) to sing praises. This harkens back to the fact that the “nations” will “bring forth judgement” (v1), and that judgement will be “set in the earth” (v4), all at the behest of God’s meek and quiet servant.

But again, we must ask, how will this all happen? How will the servant “set justice in the earth”, so that the end of the earth sings the praises of God?

The answer is v13-25. Although Christ’s approach is physically non-aggressive, Yahweh is working behind the scenes in a spiritual war (v13). This is the only way to reconcile the facts presented in these verses: Yahweh is simultaneously at war with the nations (v13) and converting them to sing his praises (v10-12) and doing it through someone who wouldn’t even break a bruised reed (v3).

How can you convert people if you are at war with them? The answer is: that’s what spiritual warfare is.

There is a lesson here. For example, take a next-door neighbour who doesn’t believe in God. Are you at war with him? Not literally. But he does not believe the Bible, and he doesn’t think he’s living in sin. He sees no need for repentance, or to turn to Christ for forgiveness. In so doing, like every other human being since the fall (except Christ), he has declared a spiritual war on God. And if you want to be the agent that God uses to win that war, you cannot get physically aggressive, or throw a Bible at him. You can only fight a spiritual battle with a spiritual sword.

Paul is very clear about this:

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Ephesians 6:12)

“For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses.” (2 Corinthians 10:4, NASB)

When God physically destroys a nation, such as Israel in 70 AD, it is not because he cannot convert them spiritually – as if he was left with no other option. No, Paul tells us that God, in his wisdom and sovereign foreknowledge, is sometimes “willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known” through the destruction of “vessels of wrath prepared for destruction” (Rom 9:22). Note that they were “prepared for destruction”, and thus were destroyed. This is why, in the case of the forty-second generation of Israel, God himself “blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart” (Jn 12:40), “let at any time they should be converted” (Mk 4:12). They were a vessel prepared for destruction.

In the case of the Gentiles, on the other hand, we are explicitly told that “they will hear” the gospel (Acts 28:28). In the long term, the nations (as a class), including Israel, are vessels prepared for glory.

On the basis of Isaiah 42, therefore, I believe that Christ is continually waging a spiritual war to convert the nations to the law of God, and that he will not fail or be discouraged until this is accomplished. I also believe that, as servants of God ourselves, we must follow his example and fight the spiritual war against the world, recognising that we can only win by using the spiritual armour of God.

How and When?

Having given you this background through briefly expounding these six chapters, it is necessary to assemble all the parts into a coherent whole. I will now piece these parts together, and bring new texts to bear upon the subject, each of which will glue the others into position.

We will start at the start of the kingdom.

In about 26 AD, both John the Baptist and Jesus the Messiah were preaching that the kingdom of heaven was “at hand” (Matt 3:2, 4:17). Whilst there have been many attempts to explain this statement away, it remains perfectly clear. Those who attempt to explain it away must ask themselves: if John had wanted to convey that the kingdom was about to be established, how could he have made it any plainer? Every Jew in his audience who had grown up learning about the coming kingdom and Messiah would have known exactly what he meant.

So if the kingdom was “at hand” in 26 AD, then when was it established?

A clear reading of Acts 1-2 will show that Pentecost was when “the things pertaining to the kingdom” began to be fulfilled. These are the “things” that Christ had taught his disciples about for forty days after his resurrection (Acts 1:3). 

Now, note what Christ instructed his disciples to do: “wait for the promise of the father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For… ye shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit” (v4-5). Clearly, when he says “ye have heard of me”, he is referring to the forty days they had just spent together. From this, we conclude that during those forty days, Christ taught them about the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

It is essential to note that immediately after the record talks about this, it says “when they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (v6). So there is a direct connection between:

1. “Speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (v3), 

2. Promising the outpouring of the Holy Spirit “not many days from now” (v4-5), and

3. Some days later the disciples “therefore” ask if this is when the kingdom will be established.

It is one thing to simply ask “Is this the moment when the kingdom will be established?” It is an entirely different matter to ‘therefore-ask’. The fact that they ‘therefore-asked’ whether this was the moment of the establishment of the kingdom creates a direct causal link between v5 and v6. In other words, the disciples understood that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was central to the establishment of the kingdom.

Christ responds in v7-8, but does not answer exactly when it would happen. He simply reiterates that the Holy Spirit would come upon them. This is why, as we have already seen, Peter would claim that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was evidence that Christ was reigning as king (Acts 2:33-36). It is also why Peter called the ekklēsia “a royal priesthood” (1 Pet 2:9), quoting Exodus 19:6 – “a kingdom of priests.”

At the end of Acts 2, thousands of Jews became baptised believers in Christ, the first major growth of the mustard-seed kingdom. To be more precise, there were “about three thousand” converts, the same number who had died at the time the law was given, when Israel had been made “a kingdom of priests” (see Ex 19:6, 32:28). The scriptures are telling us that this is the antitype, when the true Israel has been made “a kingdom of priests.”

These Jews who converted in the first century formed the prophetic “remnant” of Israel, which formed the backbone of the restored “kingdom of Israel” (see Rom 11:5, Isa 1:9, 4:3 etc). The disobedient majority were slain or dispersed in the Jewish-Roman wars: they had no claim to be the ‘people of God’ and would therefore be cut off (Rom 9:8, Jn 8:39). From now on, membership in the “kingdom of Israel” had nothing to do with race or location, and everything to do with one’s relationship with Christ (Gal 3:26-29, Eph 2:11-16), who is the true Israel (Isa 49:1-3). This subject could be addressed in much greater depth, at another time.

Note how the pattern of the true Israel of God mirrors that of Old Covenant Israel:

• Just as God gave his Spirit to enable the tabernacle to be built, he gave the Spirit-gifts to the apostles to establish the ekklēsia as a “kingdom of priests.”

• Assisted by the gifts of the Spirit, the apostles preached the gospel “to every creature under heaven” by around 60 AD (Col 1:23). But this was only equivalent to spying out the promised land, and the world remained yet unconquered by the gospel. Be that as it may, they had ensured that the ekklēsia reached a state of maturity, at which point the scriptures were complete, the apostles died, and the charismatic gifts ceased (1 Cor 13:8-13).

• By 70 AD, after a wilderness-probation of 40 years, the ekklēsia had experienced its own exodus and wilderness wanderings, in which an entire generation had died (cp Matt 23:36, 24:34, Num 14:29).

• The task that lay before the people of God now was to conquer the promised land, that is, the entire world (Rom 4:13). They must use the sword of the spirit (Heb 4:12), armed with spiritual armour (Eph 6:13-17), ready for a spiritual war.

• But with the spirit-gifts and apostles gone, it would not be easy. Like Israel in the time of the Judges, history shows that the ekklēsia fell into idolatry and impurity many times, requiring reformers to pull them out of it. The rise of Christendom in the Roman state, whilst better than pure Paganism, was nonetheless a doctrinal nightmare. But even as the Papacy exerted its corrupt grip on the world, the gospel was slowly having an impact. Over time, the name “Jesus Christ” became the most well-known and influential name in history.

Now, whilst it is true that Christianity has historically been racked with impurity, we must remember that Old Covenant Israel was often much worse. Indeed, the default of mankind is total depravity, and anything which rises significantly above that must have been influence by the gospel. Like the times of the Judges, there have been many noble efforts to reform the Christian faith, whether that be William Tyndale having the Bible translated and printed, or Martin Luther opposing the Papacy, or the Puritan movement emphasising a godly way of living.

There have been many rises, and many falls; many highs and many lows; many deaths and many resurrections. But as we scan the course of history, and as believers continually suffer through deaths and resurrections, we see that the world is being slowly permeated with Christianity.

And what impact has this had? Well, let’s see:

• Christianity was the first to institutionalise care for the poor and widows as a fundamental aspect of its communal life.

• Christianity is why we have hospitals. 

• Christianity is why infanticide was banned in Rome in the 4th century.

• Christianity is why universities were invented, leading to better education.

• Christianity is why we have advanced medicine and science.

• Christianity is why slavery was abolished in many places around the world, including the United States of America.

• Christianity is behind the modern-day push to abolish abortion.

As one historian writes:

“Christians were the first people in history to oppose slavery systematically. Early Christians purchased slaves in the markets simply to set them free. Later, in the seventh century, the Franks..., under the influence of its Christian queen, Bathlide, became the first kingdom in history to begin the process of outlawing slavery. ...In the 1200s, Thomas Aquinas declared slavery a sin. When the African slave trade began in the 1400s, it was condemned numerous times by the papacy.”

In saying these things, I am in no way endorsing everything that has been done in the name of Christianity, let alone the Papacy. What I am doing is demonstrating the influence that the gospel has had on the world, however imperfectly it has been believed and obeyed. If you can name something good in the world, you can probably trace it back to Christianity, which in turn traces back to the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), which in turn traces back to the death and resurrection of Christ. To deny this is to deny scripture, and history.

I do not claim that there is a smooth upward curve of progress that will lead to the consummation of the kingdom. It is more like climbing a jagged mountainside than walking up a flight of stairs. The world may take one step back and two steps forward, but in the long term, it is much better than it was.

Would you prefer to live now, or 500 years ago? Would you prefer to live 500 years ago, or 500 years before that? This is the perspective we should have. It is a perspective that day-to-day newspapers cannot provide.

Christadelphians often bemoan the treacherous immorality of the world, as they should. But the reality is that immorality is not new. The briefest look at history will confirm this. The only novelty is that some modern nations do have a modicum of Biblical law and governance, which is historically unheard of. That is what is worthy of notice. That is what has changed.

Now, the consistent testimony of the scriptures concerning nations is that those who practice unrepentant immorality will come to ruin. This may be through war, or internal demise. Either way, it will be the result of the world fighting itself, not by believers taking up a literal sword.

We can see this from prophecies and types.

• In 2 Chronicles 20, for example, the army of Jehoshaphat stood by and praised Yahweh, whilst their enemies turned on each other, and the battle was won by God (2 Chron 20:22-25). That’s how we win battles.

• When Gideon’s meagre army of 300 men stood around the Midianite camp and blew their trumpets, crying “the sword of Yahweh and of Gideon”, we are told that “Yahweh set every man’s sword against his fellow” (Jdg 7:20-22).

• In Psalm 149, the saints have the honour of executing judgement on the nations through the “high praises of God” being in their mouth as a two-edged sword (Psalm 149:6-9 cp Eph 6:17).

Through this means, therefore, sinful nations will be judged by their own wickedness and ultimately come to an end. True, this could be seen as one step back. But then another, better nation will rise to take its place, moving the world two steps forward. We must think long-term. Over time, we are told, as the kingdom of God permeates the world more fully (like leaven, or a mustard seed), “nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore” (Isa 2:4). But note that this is a result of the nations learning the law of God (Isa 2:3). You cannot have the former without first having the latter. And it is our job to teach the nations God’s law (Matt 28:19-20, Psa 149:6-9).

We are, more than likely, in the early days of the kingdom of God. There are likely thousands of more years to come, during which time, chapters like Psalm 72 and Isaiah 65 will come to fruition. Christ will have dominion over the entire earth (Psa 72:8); world leaders will worship him (Psa 72:10-11); the creation will be restored to its former glory (Psa 72:16); all nations will call him blessed (Psa 72:17). Lifespans will increase drastically, the beginnings of which we have already seen (Isa 65:20); crime will be dealt with (v21).

Almost all of the things Christadelphians look for after the return of Christ will occur before the return of Christ (although they will continue after his return also); and it will happen through the influence of the gospel on the world, and through the leadership of reformers who wield the sword of the spirit. When we suffer for the gospel today, we are purchasing a better world for our children tomorrow.

And so, “Christ must reign until all enemies are put under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25), a thing to be accomplished through his people (Psa 110:1-3). Once this has been accomplished, Christ will return to earth to eliminate the final enemy that we can do nothing about: death (1 Cor 15:23,26). He will resurrect the dead and judge the righteous and the wicked (2 Cor 5:10). The righteous will “put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:51-53), and the wicked will be destroyed and eternally condemned (Jn 5:29). This is when Christ will hand back the kingdom to the Father, having put down “all rule, and all authority and power”, and God will be “all and in all” (1 Cor 15:24,28).

I should mention one final thing. On the basis of Revelation 20:7-10, I believe there will also be a final apostasy just prior to the return of Christ. Although the world, as a whole, will have come to Christ through the gospel, there must still be a minority who are Christians in name only. They organise an uprising, but are immediately destroyed, probably by the return of Christ itself. Revelation is a can of worms that I have chosen not to open in this document, but this statement is necessary for the complete timeline.

Conclusion

In this discussion, I have not covered everything that could be covered, or proved everything that could be proved. But I do believe I have presented the facts concerning these notable scriptures accurately, and in a way that cannot be dismissed lightly. I am very confident in my understanding of these chapters; this means that whilst there are still areas of the Bible where my knowledge and confidence needs work, I know the view I have presented is true because of how irrefutable these bedrock chapters are.

Of course, it is easy to throw “what-about-this-verse” statements around, but we should be more interested in the basic, overall teaching of the most important chapters of scripture. Upon this basis, any and every verse has a satisfactory answer. The view I have presented begins with core, fundamental chapters like Genesis 1, Psalm 2, Acts 2, Psalm 110, 1 Corinthians 15, and the teachings of Christ. As such, it is a view that mirrors Biblical emphasis. Rather than piecing together a verse here and a chapter there, it follows the arguments of entire sections of scripture, as the writers themselves intended.