I don’t think I need to tell you that in the days which we live (2018), much of Christianity is looking for an “earthly” Messianic kingdom to yet be established. While they would admit that the kingdom has been received (at least to some degree) today in a “spiritual manner”, they are quick to insist that the kingdom will yet be consummated in an “earthly manner” some time in our future.
In other words, the majority of Christianity is awaiting the “second coming” of Jesus to consummate the kingdom of God and establish a physical geo-political rule and reign on the earth. However, by looking for a future-to-us establishment of the kingdom, they are overlooking the fact that the first century Church did receive the Messianic kingdom that they were anticipating in the first century.
Please read this again: The first century Church did receive the Messianic kingdom that they were anticipating in the first century.
The truth is, that the kingdom of God was both initiated (AD30) and consummated (AD70) in the first century in fulfillment of both Old and New Testament prophecy. And, if we can demonstrate this fact by scripture, the “kingdom-futurist” will be faced with the task of explaining the following.
- If kingdom received in AD70 was not the “eschatological” (final) kingdom, what was the significance of the saints receiving that kingdom?
- Why was the “receiving of the kingdom” in AD70 not the consummative (final) arrival of the kingdom as prophesied in both Old and New Testaments?
But, before we put the kingdom-futurist on the hot seat, let’s begin by establishing the initiation of the Kingdom of God in AD30.
AD30-KINGDOM INITIATION
Not surprisingly, even the staunchest of futurists will readily admit that the kingdom of God was initiated at the ascension of Jesus in fulfilment of 2 Samuel 7:12-13, Psalm 2 and Psalm 110. The scriptures leave no room to doubt this fact.
Acts 2:30-35
“And so, because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one of his descendants on his throne, he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that He was neither abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh suffer decay. “This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses. Therefore, having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear. For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”’
Peter says that the resurrection and ascension of Jesus fulfilled the promise that God made to David to give to his “Seed” his throne and kingdom (2 Samuel 7:12-13). As a result, this also fulfilled the prophecy of God’s Messiah ruling from Zion (Psalm 110). This is undeniably the inauguration of Jesus as King, and the initiation (the beginning) of the establishment of the kingdom of God.
Paul shares some similar thoughts….
Acts 13:32-34
“And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you’ As for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay, He has spoken in this way: ‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David.
Paul likewise says that the resurrection and ascension of Jesus meant that God had enthroned His King in Zion (in the New Jerusalem) fulfilling Psalm 2. Through the resurrection, God had given Jesus the “sure blessings” of David, which points again to the fulfillment of 2 Samuel 7:12-13.
For Peter and Paul, the Messianic kingdom of God had been initiated in AD30 through the resurrection, ascension, and enthronement of Jesus, the rightful King of Israel. Thus, having established the time of “kingdom initiation” (AD30), let’s now establish the time of “kingdom consummation”.
AD70-KINGDOM CONSUMMATED
The entire book of Hebrews is in a sense a contrast between the two covenants. In chapter 12 the writer of Hebrews encourages his struggling and persecuted Jewish readers to remember that they had come to a New and better Covenant in Jesus Christ.
Hebrews 12:18-19,22-24
For you have not come to a mountain that can be touched and to a blazing fire, and to darkness and gloom and whirlwind, and to the blast of a trumpet and the sound of words which sound was such that those who heard begged that no further word be spoken to them…. But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than that of Abel.
As they were leaving behind the Old Covenant mountain which “could be touched” and “shaken” (it was earthly), they were metaphorically ascending their New Covenant mountain which could neither be touched nor shaken (it was heavenly).
Hebrews 12:26-28
And His voice shook the earth then, but now He has promised, saying, “Yet once more, and I will shake not only the earth, but the heaven.” This expression, “Yet once more,” denotes the removing of those things which can be shaken, as of created things, so that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we receive a kingdom which cannot be shaken…”
I believe that the immediate covenant-context in Hebrews 12 is enough to clearly identify what is being shaken, and what is remaining in verses 26-28. However, when we take into consideration what the writer has said previously in his letter regarding the two covenants, we are literally forced to interpret the “things which can be shaken” as the Old Covenant order, and the “things which cannot be shaken” and were thus “remaining” as the New Covenant order – the new creation. Let’s consider those things.
Recall Hebrews 8:13 where the writer says that the Old Covenant was “growing old” and “ready to vanish away”.
“When He said, “A new covenant” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear”
Notice the present tense of this verse, the Old Covenant was at that time in the process of becoming obsolete. In the “covenant context” of both Hebrews 8 and 12, is it not both contextual and logical to say that what was “being shaken” in Hebrews 12:27, was the Old Covenant of Hebrews 8:13 which was “ready to vanish away”?
The answer becomes even more obvious when we also consider Hebrews 10:9.
“Then He said, “Behold, I have come to do your will”. He takes away the first in order to establish the second”.
Notice again that this verse was written in the present tense. Hebrews 10:9 says that the Lord was at that time “taking away” the first (covenant), in order to “establish” the second (covenant). So again, in the “covenantal context” of both Hebrews 8 and 12, it is not both contextual and logical to say that what was being “removed” in Hebrews 12:27, was the Old (first) Covenant of Hebrews 10:9 which was being “taken away”?
And, wouldn’t what was “remaining” in Hebrews 12:27, be the New Covenant of Hebrews 10:9 which would be “established” when the Old (first) Covenant was taken away?
Can you see the connection, especially since all three texts (Hebrews 8:13, 10:9, and 12:26-28) were spoken in a covenantal context? Now, consider one more verse which was also spoken in a covenantal context, and how it parallels Hebrews 12:27.
2 Corinthians 3:9,11 (NKJV)
For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory…. For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.
It is universally agreed that in 2 Corinthians 3, Paul is contrasting the “glories” and the “ministries” of the two (Old and New) Covenants. Notice again the present tense of this text. Verse 11 plainly teaches that the Old Covenant (which had glory) was at that time in the process of “passing away”, and the New Covenant (which was much more glorious) was “remaining”.
Please take the time to compare this text with Hebrews 12:27. Once again, in the “covenantal context” of both Hebrews 12 and 2 Corinthians 3, is it not both contextual and logical to say that what was “being removed” in Hebrews 12:27 was the Old Covenant of 2 Corinthians 3:11 which was “passing away”?
And, wouldn’t what was “remaining” in Hebrews 12:27 be the New Covenant of 2 Corinthians 3:11 which was likewise “remaining”?
The below charts are a powerful demonstration that all four texts (Hebrews 8:13, 10:9, 12:26-28, and 2 Corinthians 3:11) refer to one and the same “covenantal transition”, when the Old Covenant was passing away, and the New Covenant was being established in order to remain forever.
| OLD COVENANT | NEW COVENANT |
| Hebrews 8:13 – was growing old, ready to vanish away | Hebrews 12:28 – was being received (as the kingdom) |
| Hebrews 10:9 – was being taken away
Hebrews 12:27 – was being removed |
Hebrews 10:9 – was being established
Hebrews 12:27 – was remaining |
| 2 Corinthians 3:11 – was passing away | 2 Corinthians 3 – was remaining Hebrews 12:27 – was remaining |
| Hebrews 12:26-27 – was being shaken | Hebrews 12:27 – could not be shaken |
| OLD COVENANT | HEBREWS 12:26-27 |
| Was ready to vanish away, was being taken away – Hebrews 8:13, 10:9 | Was being removed (v.27) |
| Was passing away – 2 Corinthians 3 | Was being shaken (v.27) |
| NEW COVENANT | HEBREWS 12:26-28 |
| Was being established – Hebrews 10:9 | Was being received (v.28)
(as the kingdom) |
| Was remaining – 2 Corinthians 3:11 | Was remaining, could not be shaken (v.27) |
When the Old Covenant which was being shaken had served its prophetic purpose in redemptive history, it would be completely removed so that the New Covenant which could not be shaken, would remain forever. This is what I call “covenantal transition”. And notice, the result of the removal of the Old and the remaining (the establishment) of the New, would be the coming (receiving) of the kingdom.
Hebrews 12:28 (NKJV)
“THEREFORE, since we are receiving a kingdom which cannot be shaken…”
The word “therefore” makes the receiving of the kingdom the RESULT and the PURPOSE of the establishment of the New Covenant. In other words, as they were receiving the New Covenant (and its promises), they were receiving the Kingdom of God.
Therefore, when they received the established New Covenant in AD70, and the full application of its promises, they received the consummated Kingdom of God. According to Hebrews 12, to possession the New Covenant and its promises, is to receive the eternal kingdom-inheritance.
This is the message of the book of Hebrews, indeed, the entire New Testament. When the Old Covenant had been shaken and removed, and the New Covenant fully established to remain, then the Hebrews (Israel according to the flesh) and the grafted in Gentiles would receive the anticipated Messianic Kingdom of God. This happened historically when the Old Covenant and the entire “Old Covenant world” (Jerusalem and Judaism) were shaken and removed through the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman armies as the judgment of God in AD70.
Now, this is where things get interesting and perhaps confusing for the kingdom-futurist. To rephrase a point we made above:
If the “receiving” of the kingdom through the establishment of the New Covenant in Hebrews 12:28 was not the final coming (arrival) of the kingdom that was initiated at Pentecost, then what was it? And, what was its significance for the body of Christ? I mean no disrespect to the “kingdom-futurist”, but if you do hold to a paradigm of a future earthly kingdom, please seriously consider what follows.
The prophet Daniel prophesied that the kingdom was to come in the “last days” (Daniel 2:28), which would be the days of Rome – the fourth beast in Daniels’s vision – and at that time, the “saints would possess the kingdom”. (Daniel 2, 7)
Jesus arrived in the last days (Hebrews 1:1) when Rome (Daniel’s fourth beast) was in power (Luke 2:1-2), and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was “near”. (Mathew 4:17)
Jesus not only proclaimed that the kingdom was “near”, he promised that it would arrive in “power and glory” at his return (second coming) in the first century, before all his contemporary generation had died. (Mathew 16:27-28)
Jesus even taught that the kingdom would be taken from Old Covenant Israel and given to “another people” in fulfillment of Daniel 7:18,22. He said that this would happen when the unfaithful Jews were judged and destroyed for their murder of the prophets and himself. (Mathew 21:33-45)
Then, after his victorious resurrection over sin and death, Jesus ascended to the right hand of the Father to receive the Davidic kingdom and to initiate His kingdom-reign in fulfillment of 2 Samuel 7:12-13, Psalm 2, and 110.
10 days later, the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the nation of Israel so they would be “clothed with power from on high” (Luke 24:49), which initiated the kingdom-restoration of Israel (Isaiah 32:15). It also further confirmed to Israel that they were in fact living in the last days (Acts 2:15-17), and that the kingdom would soon be established and received according to the prophet Daniel.
Years later, Paul the apostle taught that the baptism of the Holy Spirit and its manifestations, was the “pledge” (the guarantee down-payment) that they would receive the fullness of their kingdom-inheritance (Ephesians 1:13-14, 4:30, Mathew 25:31-34) within their lifetime, just as Jesus had promised. (Mathew 16:27-28, Luke 21:28-32).
Then, after years of kingdom-anticipation, the writer of the book of Hebrews tells his readers that when the Old Covenant would be fully removed and the New Covenant fully established, they would “receive” the kingdom of God (a direct quotation and fulfillment of Daniel 7:22 and Mathew 21:43).
Therefore, since the Old Covenant has been fully removed, and the New Covenant fully established, the kingdom of God has already been received. The fact is according to Hebrews, wherever you place the removal of the Old Covenant and the establishment of the New, is where you must place the arrival and reception of the Messianic kingdom of God.
Amazingly, somehow the kingdom-futurist has separated the receiving of the kingdom by the saints in AD70 from the entire “kingdom progression” laid out in the New Testament. They admit, Jesus promised it to his disciples in their lifetime, initiated it in his ascension, guaranteed it by the Spirit, and confirmed it through the mouth of many witnesses (apostles).
But…… They say the kingdom which came and was received in AD70 was not “the real kingdom”. The kingdom came yes, but it was not the one which was initiated, promised, guaranteed and confirmed. It’s not the kingdom that the entire Church was actually expecting. To which I say, then what kingdom came in AD70?
The doctrine of an established and consummated Messianic kingdom in AD70 coincides perfectly with the time statements and prophecies in the book of Daniel concerning the kingdom. Furthermore, it fulfills Jesus’ promises (prophecies) to return to establish and consummate His kingdom within the lifetime of his disciples, thus validating Jesus as a true prophet and the risen Son of God. It also validates the inspired words of the apostles and writers of the New Testament, who simply reiterated what Jesus and the prophets had said would take place, and when.
Finally, this doctrine also honors the covenantal “time-frame” that the Holy Spirit was given as a down-payment and guarantee (pledge) of their full kingdom-inheritance. The Holy Spirit was given as a sign that the kingdom had been initiated, and as a guarantee (pledge) that it would be consummated within a one-generation time-period, just as Jesus had promised (Acts 1:5, Luke 21:20-22,28-32).
Yet, even in the face of this overwhelming evidence (which is but a tiny sampling), many kingdom-futurists remain unwilling to acknowledge that the receiving of the kingdom in AD70 was the establishment of the Messianic kingdom, and the full application of the New Covenant blessings. The receiving of the kingdom in AD70 as the fulfillment of the prophesies of Daniel and the fulfillment of the “second coming” and kingdom-prophecies of Jesus, just doesn’t fit in their paradigm, so unfortunately, they hold out for a future “earthly kingdom” which does.
We have accomplished what we had set out to do in part 1 of this article. Therefore, the kingdom-futurist is faced with the task of explaining the following:
- If kingdom received in AD70 was not the “eschatological” (final) kingdom, what was the significance of the saints receiving that kingdom?
- Why was the “receiving of the kingdom” in AD70 not the consummative (final) arrival of the kingdom as prophesied in both Old and New Testaments?
Although some may say that what has been written above has served this purpose, in part 2 of this article I will demonstrate definitively and irrefutably from scripture, that the receiving of the kingdom in AD70 as taught in Hebrews 12 was in fact the final and eschatological arrival (coming) of the King and his Kingdom.
Continued in Part 2
Dan Dery
Titus 1:9