The process started off in the month of May with each senior pastor nominating someone (besides themselves) that they thought would be a good National Director. The top 13 candidates (men and women) were then asked if they felt God calling them to the position. Of those 13, four of them felt compelled to walk forward – leading to a three month application and review process with the National Board, who would then choose a final candidate.The last phase of the nomination process is a movement wide confirmation of the nominated National Director by each of the local churches.

It is too this last phase of the process that I would like to draw your attention as the National Board has proposed Phil Strout as the next Vineyard USA National Director.

As he awaits the final confirmation for the local churches within the movement, Phil has posted a video introducing himself and sharing his heart for the Vineyard. I would highly recommend everyone (inside or outside the Vineyard) to watch this video as I believe it caries a message for the church in general.

Namely, Phil outlines his three main focuses:

• Presence of God – We are a people of the presence of God. It is not about sound doctrine, gifts of the Spirit or good works (even though those are good and necessary things); it is about being in His presence and walking with Jesus daily.

“Dont seek power. Seek His presence. The power is found in His presence…”-John Wimber

• Proclamation – We are to join with God in His mission by proclaiming the words of Jesus while doing the works of Jesus. The two go hand-in-hand – if you do one without the other, you become imbalanced and reduce the Gospel message of Jesus Christ.

• Practical – It takes everyone following Jesus and working together to live out this life. Or, to borrow the words of Alexander Venter, to “do church.”

oh…and as a side note, it was pretty cool to hear Phil reference both George Ladd and Derek Morphew, two of my top favorite theologians.

In addition, Isaiah 43 declares that when “the LORD, your Holy One, Israel’s Creator, your King” comes He will “remember your sins no more” (Is 43:15, 25 New International Version). The Gospel texts show that Jesus of Nazareth, unlike any of the previous prophets of Israel, publically forgave the sins of the people without referring to the Temple sacrifices (Mt 9:5-6; Mk 2:5-10; Lk 5:20-24; 7:48; Jn 8:11). In effect, Jesus was simultaneously declaring Himself God while demonstrating the fact that the Day of the Lord or the Kingdom of God had come among men forever.

If the above is true, then it leaves the modern reader in a conundrum for it would seem that Jesus taught two contradictory ideas: one, that the active rule and reign of God, known as the Day of the Lord, has come among men as foretold by the prophets; and two, that the looked for Day had not yet come, but was coming. Did Jesus really teach both of these ideas? Or did we misinterpret the meaning of the phrase “kingdom of God”?

Luckily the disciples had the same conundrum because they asked Jesus to explain himself and his parables about the Kingdom of God in Matthew 13:10-12 (also Mk 4:10-12 and Lk 8:9-11):

And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him.”  (New American Standard)

While this passage may seem to skirt around the question at hand, in reality it does give us a clue to what Jesus is talking about in his parables. The term “mystery” in the Bible does not simply refer to something unknown or mysterious, but to “something which has been kept secret through times eternal but is now disclosed” [Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom, 52].  In other words, Jesus was telling his disciples that the Kingdom of God was coming into the world in a way unforeseen by the prophets of old.

Instead of only being a one-time earth-shattering event, the Kingdom of God is like a newly planted field of wheat among which the enemy scatters weeds among the good seed. When the farmer learned about the weeds, he told his servants to leave the field alone – allowing the wheat and weeds to grow together until the time of harvest when they shall be separated. As Jesus himself explained, the field is this world into which the Kingdom of God has come. However, instead of destroying the rule of evil in one major event, the Lord Almighty chose to allow evil (the weeds) to grow along side His chosen people (the wheat) until the Second Coming of Christ (Mt 13:24-30, 36-43) [George Eldon Ladd, The Presence of the Future, 231-232].

This is the mystery of the Gospel: that Jesus came to destroy evil, sin and death, while proclaiming that the rule and reign of God (i.e. the Kingdom of God) has come, is coming; is near, and yet is delayed [Morphew, Breakthrough, 57-68].  Once understood, this simple, but profound, understanding of the Kingdom of God will change the way in which the Gospel, nay the entire Bible, is read. Jesus Christ’s central message was one of end-time proportions, forcing His followers to live in the tension of the here and not yet.

————————————————————-

Bibliography

Atlantic Baptist University, “Psalms of Solomon 17,” Atlantic Baptist University, http://www.abu.nb.ca/courses/NewTestament/Hebrews/PrimReadPsSol.htm (accessed December 11, 2009).

König, Adrio. The Eclipse of Christ in Eschatology: Towards a Christ-Centered Approach. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1989.

Ladd, George Eldon. The Gospel of the Kingdom: Scriptural Studies in the Kingdom of God. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1959.

———-. The Presence of the Future. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1974.

———-. A Theology of the New Testament. rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1993.

Love, Rick. Muslims, Magic, and the Kingdom of God: Church Planting Among Folk Muslims. Pasadena, Calf: William Carey Library, 2000.

Morphew, Derek. Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom. 1991. Reprint, Cape Town, South Africa: Vineyard International Publishing, 2006.

Schweitzer, Albert. The Kingdom of God and Primitive Christianity, Trans. L.A. Garrard, Ed. Ulrich Neuenschwander. New York: The Seabury Press, 1968.

Williams, Don. Start Here: Kingdom Essentials for Christians. 2006. Ventura, California: Regal.

Wright, Nicholas Thomas (N.T.). Surprised by Hope. New York: HarperCollins, 2008.

However, there are others teachings of Jesus that do not seem to fit with the concept of the kingdom being the active rule and reign of God. In these teachings, Jesus talked about the coming of the “kingdom of God” as if it was something that was coming soon, or something that had already come. In order to understand how these passages fit within the above definition of the kingdom of God, we will need to turn to the Old Testament writings.

Within the Old Testament there is a duality where God is described both as currently being the king of world and as some day in the future being king over the world. Psalm 103:19 states that the “The LORD has established his throne in heaven, and his kingdom rules over all” (New International Version). Yet, Obadiah 1 talks about the “day of the Lord” when God will become King of Israel and punish all those who do not follow Him.

This duality continues throughout Jewish intertestamental literature as seen in the first few verses of Psalms of Solomon 17:

O Lord, you are our king for ever and ever, For in you, O God, does our soul glory. How long are the days of man’s life upon the earth? As are his days, so is the hope (set) upon him. But we hope in God, our deliverer; for the might of our God is for ever with mercy, and the kingdom of our God is for ever over the nations in judgment.

In this passage, the writer starts off confirming that God is king at that moment in history before shifting gears and talking about the coming kingdom of God, which would bring salvation to Israel and judgment to all the nations of the earth.

In Daniel 2, God gives King Nebuchadnezzar a dream that is interpreted by the prophet Daniel foretelling of a divine “kingdom” that will destroy all earthly kingdoms and “endure forever.” Similarly in Daniel 7, the prophet himself is given a dream where “one like a son of man” establishes an “everlasting kingdom.” In other words, there would come a day in which God would redeem His people, punish all the evil nations of the world, and establish His kingdom or rule over all the earth.

Jesus’ proclamation that the “kingdom of God is near” (Mt 4:17; 10:7; Lk 10:9; 10:11) was a warning to all of Israel to get ready because the “day of the Lord” was at hand. It echoed Amos 5 where the prophet tells Israel to repent of their evil ways and turn back to God before the judgment of the Lord came upon the earth. John the Baptist declared the same message in Mark 1:15 (also Mt 3:2): “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!” (New International Version)

However, Jesus did not stop there – he went on to declare that the “kingdom of God has come” (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). That is to say that the future kingdom of God prophesied by Daniel and the prophets of old has come among men. To that extent, it is no accident that Jesus’ favorite name for himself was the “Son of Man”, which would have brought back memories of Daniel’s prophecy concerning the “kingdom” of God [Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 58.]

Note that while I am going to save the full bibliography until the end, I will try to include references throughout the journey so that you (and all the copyright lawyers out there) will know where I gathered my information.

Blessings

————————————————————-

The Gospel texts declare that the central message of Jesus Christ was the “kingdom of God” (Mt 4:17; 9:35; Mk 1:14-15; Lk 4:43). Unfortunately, the phrase is not defined in the Gospel texts as the Biblical writers most likely assumed their readers would already know the meaning of the phrase. This leaves the modern reader in the predicament of having to define the phrase based upon the Old Testament writings, Jewish intertestamental literature, and the particular contexts in which Jesus used the phrase. Accordingly, this paper will seek to briefly define the phrase the “kingdom of God” and look at its impact on the teachings of Jesus.

The most logical place to start when defining a phrase is with the definitions of the words used in the phase. The writers of Luke and Mark used the Koine Greek words “βασιλειαν του θεου,” or, if using Latin characters, “Basileia tou Theou.” The last word of the phrase, “Theou,” is fairly simple and straight forward, meaning “God.” The writer of Matthew, on the other hand, substitutes the word “ουρανων” or “heaven” for “God” as they were writing to a primarily Jewish audience which does not like to directly refer to or mention God’s name [George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 61.].  The use of the phrase “kingdom of heaven” in Matthew is exactly the same as the way Mark and Luke use the words “kingdom of God.” As such, we can assume that if we discover the meaning of one phrase, the other will follow.

Having defined the last word of the phrase “Basileia tou Theou,” let us turn our attention to the first word of the phrase. The Greek word “basileia” can be used to describe the geographical realm over which a king rules [George Eldon Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom, 18-19.].  This can be seen in the words of Jesus when he talks about entering into the “kingdom of heaven” as if it was a physical realm into which people can enter (Mt 7:21; 8:12; Mk 9:47; 10:23; Lk 18:24). Or, in Mark 13:8 where Jesus says, that “nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom” (New International Version).

“Basileia” can also be used to refer to the authority or rule of a king over his people. Jesus’ parable of the ten minas in Luke 19:12-15 is a good example of this use of “basileia.” In this parable, “basileia” has been translated as “kingly power” (Revised Standard Version) or “appointed king” (New International Version) [George Eldon Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom, 21].  Both translations carry with it the view that a “kingdom” is less of a physical realm and more of the rule or reign of a king.

In the Old Testament, this view of the rule and reign of God can be found through the Hebrew word “malkuth” as the idiom “kingdom of God” is not used [George Eldon Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom, 19-20].  For example, Ezra 8:1 talks about the return of Israel from Babylon “in the kingdom” or “rule” of Artazerxes. II Chronicles 12:1 uses the word to describe the rule of Rehoboam over the nation of Israel. In both cases the word “malkuth” is translated as “basileia” in the Greek Septuagint, giving greater weight to the concept of “basileia tou Theou” being the active rule and reign of God versus simply being a physical or spiritual realm into which one enters.

It was all very confusing… I guess that is why in the end, I decided to follow Jesus’ advice to His disciples in Mark 9:40: “whoever is not against us is for us.” (i.e. As long as the Gospel was going forward, I would let God sort out the details.)

For years, I lived in this tension – sometimes leaning towards the egalitarian side (ie. man and women are equal in both role and essence); sometimes toward the complementarian view (ie. men and women are equal in essence but differ in roles).

Then I heard that Derek Morphew (a Kingdom Theologian that I trust and respect) just wrote a book about “going beyond the Complementarian/Egalitarian debate”…  My inertest was peaked and I bought the book, “Different But Equal”, as soon as I could.[@more@]

The Book: “Different But Equal: Going Beyond the Complementarian/Egalitarian Debate”

One of the “un-written rules” of reading a book is to always read the author’s bio and introduction. These two things will tell you a lot about how the author is going to approach the subject matter (another rule is to check the publication date as it will give you some context for the material…).

This book is no different.

In his introduction, Morphew lays out a few foundational points that impact his view of Scriptures, which in turn affect his understanding of the women in leadership debate. The first foundational point is an understanding of how the Hebrew / Biblical worldview is different from the Western Greek / Logic worldview. Namely, under a Biblical worldview one can hold too two seemingly contradictionaries points without having to choose between them (examples: God’s sovereign vs man’s free will; the kingdom now, but not yet).

The second foundational point is the eschatological nature of Jesus’ life and ministry.

After laying the foundation, Morphew then proceeds to look at the underlying presuppositions behind both the Complementarian and Egalitarian viewpoints. Namely, he goes back and looks at the Church’s view of the Trinity. Yelp, the Trinity.

You see, a lot of folks hole to that the members of the Trinity are subordinated to each others. Ie. there is a hierarchy beginning with God the Father and ending with the Holy Spirit with Jesus the Son in the middle. This doctrine, called Subordinationism, claims that while each member is Trinity is equal in essence, they are different in role. Hence, male and female are equal in essence, but different in role.

The other view of the Trinity states that all three members of the Trinity are equal in both essence and role. A lot of Egalitarians take this view as it allows them to claim that male and females are always equal. However, as Morphew points out, there is the tricky part of the incarnation and mission of the Son Jesus in which Jesus, a man, was both simultaneously “equal and non-equal” with God the Father and the Holy Spirit. As such, it may also be that male and female are also “equal and non-equal”….

And the book goes on – looking at monism (God in everything), Feminist Theology, the household codes of Paul, the Creations arguments and so forth. Way, way, too much information to list out here…

However, I will share a little bit of Morphews conclusions as I thought they were helpful my understanding of the issue. To start with, let us look at the below chart:

This would be how an Egalitarian worldview: God created the world with mail and females as equals; after the fall, sin enters the world and there is a patriarchal dominance; then Jesus comes and resets everything back to the before fall creation equality.

However, there are some things in this view that leaves my head spinning and, frankly, doesn’t make sense.

Then there is the Complementarian view.

This view states that in the beginning there was equality in humanity (or essence) but male leadership in role; after the fall, patriarchal dominance took hold – yet even within the fallen world, the true nature of equality in humanity but male leadership continued to be practiced by those of the Faith. At the end of the age, all of humanity will be restored to this way of life.

Again, there are some things in this view that does not make sense. It seems that one has to explain away one verse or another in order to hold a Complementarian or an Egalitarian view…

This is why I was excited to hear of a third way – one that uphold the Scriptures and yet allows God to work through whom He wants too.

In this view, you see that there is a Biblical foundation for a for an equality in humanity (or essence) but male leadership in role worldview in the original garden. After the fall, sin entered and twisted the male leadership into dominance. However, with the eschatological nature of Jesus’ life and ministry, we see the Age to Come enter into this Present Evil Age. This eschatological event brings the equality (essence and role) of the New Age into the Present.

Yes – the New Heaven and Earth is going to be different and better then the original garden, for why God just visited Adam and Eve in Eden, He is going to live with us on the New Earth.

In conclusion, both the Complementarian and Egalitarian viewpoints are correct. And since we live in the tension of between the ages, we must listen to God and decided which view fits our situation, family, culture, and church.

The only option not available to us is condemning others for not following the path we choose. We must allow God to work in their lives and remember that there are Biblical support for both.

Adrio Konig is Professor of Systematic Theology at the University of South Africa, Pretoria. (note that this bio was written in 1989 when the book was written…I don’t know what he is doing now)[@more@]

Since I have not read the book yet (it may be a while as my homework is pilling up…), here is a brief review by Ray S. Anderson of Fuller Theological Seminary:

Konig is persuasive and provocative. His bilibical and historical approach to systematic theology stays close to the pulse beat of the divine heart which we encounter in the Christ for us, in us, and with us. Eschatology has to do not with the last things but with the person of Christ, who is the first and last One.

With this book Konig has pointed the way forward for a whole new generation of theological studies. This book combines critical dogmatic inquiry with careful exegetical work in the finest of the tradition in biblical theology. The result is a book on eschatology which is irenic in tone, relevant to contemporary issues, and surprising in its simplicity. This book will inspire pastors to preach once again with conviction on the eschatological themes essential to Christian life and faith. It might also put eschatology back once again into the theological curriculum.

With a review like that, I can hardly wait to read it!! 

1. The Prophetic Promise of the Kingdom (Part 1 & 2 combined)
   
2. New Testament Coming of the Kingdom
3. Sons of The Kingdom
4. Bringing in The Kingdom

Morphew, as you may remember, is the author of the book Breakthrough as well as a theologian and director of the Vineyard Bible Institute in South Africa. In these lectures, he lays out the basics for Kingdom Theology in a very simple but in depth way.

I STRONGY recommend all five of these lectures – you can download them now and listen to them later if you want. In fact, you can also download the Morphew’s Power Point presentation for each of the lectures.