He Will Reign Forever: A Biblical Theology of the Kingdom of God by Michael J Vlach

Author:Michael J Vlach [Vlach, Michael J]
Language: eng
Format: azw3
Publisher: Lampion Press
Published: 2017-02-28T16:00:00+00:00

1Stanley D. Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew (Portland, OR: Multnomah, 1980), 124.

2Ibid.

3Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 145.

4Robert L. Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism, 88.

5In Luke 19:41–44 Jesus indicated that blessings could have occurred for Israel, but since Israel did not believe, judgment would come.

6Mark Saucy, “The Kingdom-of-God Sayings in Matthew,” Bibliotheca Sacra 151 (1994): 182–83.

7The one clear exception to this would be Jesus himself.

8Toussaint, Behold the King, 150.

9See Matthew 23:35–39. Jesus links the present generation of Israel with the killings of the prophets throughout history showing an inter-generational connection.

10Ibid., First, he points out that the verb has no object. Second the use of harpadzo for “take it by force” indicates a violent snatching. Third, the feminine pronoun “it” “shows that the kingdom is that which is being seized.”

11Robert H. Mounce, Matthew, New International Biblical Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991), 104. Commenting on Matthew 11:12, in connection with the parallel account in Luke 16:16, Kümmel states, “So Matthew 11.12 must have the meaning: since the appearance of the Baptist until the present moment the Kingdom of God is being violently assaulted and violent men wish to rob it.” W. G. Kümmel, Promise and Fulfillment, 122–23.

12C raig L. Blomberg, Matthew, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 188.

13Turner writes, “It is best to understand this difficult passage . . . as teaching the difficult truth that John in prison is learning: the kingdom will not immediately judge God’s enemies but will itself be oppressed by them for a time until God vindicates himself and his people.” David L. Turner, Matthew, Baker Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 295. Turner lists Herod the Great, Herod the Tetrarch, and the religious leaders as enemies who do violence to the kingdom (see 294). Luz says, “it is most natural to think of the opponents of John and Jesus who take away the kingdom by force. The general formation includes both political opponents (Herod Antipas) and the religious establishment.” Ulrich Luz, Matthew 8–20 (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2001), 141. See also, Matthew W. Bates who believes Matt 11:12 and Luke 16:16 are veiled references to Herod Antipas. “Cryptic Codes and a Violent King: A New Proposal for Matthew 11:12 and Luke 16:16,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly (2013): 74–93.

14Toussaint, Behold the King, 153.

15Ibid.

16“He [Jesus] did not condemn the crowds because of political or national notions about the kingdom. Instead, His condemnation was because they had failed to meet the spiritual demand of the kingdom by repenting.” Mark Saucy, “The Kingdom-of-God Sayings in Matthew,” 185.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.