What Is the Kingdom of God? (Part 1)

Sometime around AD 30 a Jewish peasant named Jesus (Yeshua in his native Aramaic) began preaching a revolutionary message about the “kingdom of God.” This preaching kicked off his public ministry of healing, exorcisms, and teaching, including clashes with the authorities—ultimately leading to his death and resurrection.

 This kingdom that Jesus proclaimed was rooted in ancient Jewish expectations of God’s direct rule as an alternative to the dominant Roman empire, which controlled the land of Israel by force and oppressed its people; but this kingdom was also meant to be an alternative to the reign of the corrupt puppet “king of the Jews” (at the time, Herod Agrippa), who governed at the pleasure—and under the authority—of the Roman empire.

Jesus’s Opening Proclamation of the Kingdom of God

The Gospel of Mark tells us that Jesus came from his home town of Nazareth in the northern province of Galilee to the Jordan River, where he was baptized by his cousin John and confirmed as God’s “son” (a messianic title) by a voice from heaven (Mark 1:4–11). Jesus was then led by God’s Spirit into the Judean wilderness for a time of fasting and testing in preparation for his mission (Mark 1:12–13). Then, after John was arrested by the Judean authorities, Jesus came into Galilee proclaiming the good news (or “gospel”) of God (Mark 1:14). His announcement was terse and to the point: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and trust in the good news” (Mark 1:15).

God, in other words, has begun to reign in a way not previously seen. In response to this good news, radical change is required (this is what “repent” means) and trust (the positive side of repentance) is called for. The implication is that Jesus’s listeners needed to switch allegiance from all other regimes to the kingdom of God.

Matthew’s Gospel has an even more compact version of Jesus’s opening message: “From that time, Jesus began to proclaim, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near’” (Matthew 4:17). Matthew uses the phrase “kingdom of heaven” (which alludes to God’s universal reign—from heaven—over all the earth) in place of “kingdom of God” (something he does in other places too), while using “repent” as a shorthand for the pair “repent” and “trust.” He also introduces Jesus’s announcement by noting that this fulfilled an ancient prophetic expectation from Isaiah 9 that a light would dawn on the people of Galilee, who had been waiting in the darkness of oppression (Matthew 4:12–16, citing Isaiah 9:1–2).

The Problem of Monarchy/Kingdom

The “kingdom of God” is central to the teaching of Jesus; this term (or variants, including “kingdom of heaven,” “my kingdom,” “his kingdom,” “the kingdom,” “my Father’s kingdom”) occurs over one hundred times in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Yet this talk of a “kingdom” of God is often troubling to modern people. Isn’t the very idea of “kingdom” an oppressive idea? Apart from the gender-specific nature of the term, perhaps enshrining male dominance, we are aware of the abuses of various monarchies throughout human history. Indeed, “kingdom” merges too easily into “empire,” a top-down system of oppression and injustice, which needs to be resisted rather than celebrated.

In order to grasp the significance of the kingdom of God in the preaching of Jesus (and, more generally, in the Bible), we need to take seriously the ancient historical context in which Jesus and the biblical writers lived. Not only were monarchies the dominant form of political governance, but they were typically oppressive regimes, ruled by kings, emperors, or their deputies (called governors or a host of other terms) who typically guarded their own privilege, at the expense of the masses over whom they ruled. The point is that political systems of the ancient world were generally oppressive kingdoms. So what was required to challenge the abusive use of power was an alternative kingdom—one that operated on significantly different principles

Once, when some of Jesus’s disciples expressed their desire for places of privilege in the coming kingdom (Mark 10:35–37), Jesus called them all together and explained that a reversal of typical power roles was required: “You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all.” (Mark 10:42–44) And he went on describe his own mission as follows: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).

So there will be a reversal of power dynamics in the kingdom of God. But beyond that, what did Jesus mean by this term?

This is the first installment of a longer piece I am writing on the Kingdom of God for a volume of essays introducing Christianity to a broad, international audience (to be published by Routledge). The second installment can be found here. Stay tuned for more installments.

How Should We Interpret Biblical Genealogies? (BioLogos Interview and Blog Posts)

I was recently interviewed for an episode of the Language of God podcast. The topic was the genealogies in Scripture, particularly in Genesis and Matthew, about which I had just written a series of blog posts.

This is the description of the podcast that BioLogos posted:

At first glance, biblical genealogies appear to straightforward family trees, the kinds we see on ancestry.com that map out the precise relationships between parents and offspring, tracing back as far as we can go. But is that how the genealogies in the Bible are supposed to be read? It turns out there’s a lot more going on in the genealogies than just that straightforward accounting. Bible scholar, Richard Middleton, shares with us some of the historical context that helps us to see the genealogies as another part of the story of God’s creation.

You can access the podcast on the BioLogos podcast page.

Or on Apple podcasts. Or Spotify. Or Stitcher. Or Google.

The interview is based on blog posts that that BioLogos asked me to write on biblical genealogies (posted in July and August, 2021). They actually asked for one blog post, but I got so into it that wrote a four-part blog post addressing the genealogies in Genesis 4–11 (parts 1 and 2) and the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1 (parts 3 and 4).

The series was entitled “How Should We Interpret Biblical Genealogies?”

You can access the four-part blog post at these links:

I learned a whole lot writing them (and had a lot of fun too). I hope you enjoy them.

There are interesting follow-up comments following the first three of these blog posts on the BioLogos Forum.

You can access the comments for Part I here.

You can access the comments for Part II here.

You can access the comments for Part III (with some comments on Part IV) here.

My Amazing Faculty Colleagues Presenting at the Society of Biblical Literature 2020

I am privileged to teach at a Seminary that is associated with a liberal arts college. I have wonderful faculty colleagues at both institutions.

Northeastern Seminary is on the campus of Roberts Wesleyan College (in Rochester, NY) and while they are formally separate institutions, there is much practical overlap and collaboration between both the institutions and the faculty.

Of late, there have been joint meetings of the Seminary faculty with the faculty of the Department of Religion and Philosophy at the College. And, although faculty members find their home primarily in either the Seminary or the College, some of us teach in both institutions.

Here I want to highlight some of my faculty colleagues (in both institutions) who are presenting papers at the 2020 annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, which is being held virtually this year (the first time in this format since I began attending in 1991).

Fredrick David Carr Presents on December 8

My colleague in New Testament, Fredrick David Carr, will present his paper on December 8 in a session on Healthcare and Disability in the Ancient World.

David’s paper, called “Experiencing Changes and Changing Experiences: Pauline Transformation and Altered Sensory Capacities,” addresses the apostle Paul’s account in Philippians 3:1–11 of how his sense of identity changed after he was confronted by Christ (which moved him from being a persecutor of the church to the status of apostle).

In his paper, David examines the changes experienced by those who receive cochlear implants, including new relationships and a different sense of selfhood, to “shed light onto the experiential and subjective dimensions of the transformations that Paul describes in Philippians 3,” including his sense that what he previously viewed as “gain” is now counted as “loss.”

Kristin Helms Presents on December 10

My colleague in Old Testament, Kristin Helms, will present her paper on December 10 in a session on the Literature and History of the Persian Period.

Kristin’s paper, called “The Roaming Eyes of Yahweh in Zech 4:10b and the Context of Persian Religions,” examines the background of the strange image in Zechariah’s fifth vision of a lampstand, which is identified with the “eyes of YHWH” roaming through the earth.

In her paper, Kristin examines competing suggestions for where Zechariah got his image, and ends up suggesting that it is drawn not only from the network of persons in ancient Persia known as “the eyes and ears of the king” (suggested by some scholars), but also from the portrayal of Mithra in Persian religion, who is “associated with fire, light, and eyes that roam throughout the earth for the sake of seeking out injustice.” She apples this background to Zechariah 4:10b, suggesting that the text uses this imagery “to encourage the people that YHWH, the Emperor of the cosmos and maintainer of justice, is at work to bring about a hopeful, purified future.”

Josef Sykora Presented on December 2

My colleague in Old Testament, Josef Sykora, presented his paper on December 2 in a session on Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible.

Josef’s paper, called “A Different Kind of Crusade: Jesus’s Commissioning of His Disciples in Luke 10:1–24 as Reworking the Rules for Warfare in Deuteronomy 20:10–14,” examines the parallels and divergences between the texts in Deuteronomy 20 and Luke 10, to see if it is plausible that Jesus is intentionally drawing on the ancient rules of warfare.

He insightfully demonstrates that both Deuteronomy and Luke give similar instructions to those who are sent out, including an offer of peace to those they encounter and two possible outcomes depending on the responses of those they meet. Yet while Luke’s Gospel presents a battle with the powers of evil and the disciples are parallel to Israel’s soldiers, the texts diverge in that in Luke it is God and not the disciples who bring judgment.

My Own Paper Presented on December 1

Although I was scheduled to give a paper at SBL in a session on the Theology of the Hebrew Scriptures, the organizers decided to postpone the session until next year, when (hopefully) the SBL will meet in person (in San Antonio, TX).

However, I did present in the Institute for Biblical Research (an affiliated organization, which meets under the umbrella of the SBL), in a session on The Relationship between the New Testament and the Old Testament.

My paper, initially called “Herod as Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar: A ‘Political’ Reading of the Prophets in Matthew’s Infancy Narrative,” examined the way that Matthew’s Gospel cited Old Testament texts from the Prophetic books to address the political situation at the time of Jesus’s birth. The actual paper I gave had a slightly different title from what was listed in the program, since I adapted it to the timeframe I had for presentation.

The paper I presented was called “Herod as Pharaoh? Jesus as David? Matthew’s ‘Political’ Reading of the Prophets in the Infancy Narratives” (click here for the paper). I suggested that when we read Matthew 1–2 as a “feel good” story for the Christmas season, we miss the astute sociopolitical critique of the Jerusalem power structure that Matthew intended by his use of quotations from Hosea 11:1 and Micah 5:2 (with a line from 2 Samuel 5:2 spliced in). There is nothing sentimental about Matthew’s portrayal of the newly born king of the Jews, who would be a very different sort of leader not only from Herod, but also from David of old.

My Upcoming Presentation on December 7

I also have a short presentation coming up on December 7 (tomorrow) in a session on Science, Technology, and Religion at the American Academy of Religion (which meets in conjunction with the SBL).

This session is devoted to a recently published book, called The T&T Clark Companion of Christian Theology and the Modern Sciences, ed. by John P. Slattery, Bloomsbury Companions (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2020).

Everyone who contributed a chapter in this book was invited to give a brief presentation on their chapter. Of the many who contributed chapters, eight of us, along with the editor, agreed.

As part of this session, I will give a short explanation of my chapter, called “The Genesis Creation Accounts.”

I recently wrote a blog post (here) on the book and my article.

If you are registered for the AAR-SBL annual meeting, you are invited to attend any of these session that interest you.