(This is a Summary of the Chapter entitled “Kingdom of God”,
from Gary North’s book “Unconditional Surrender”. It is actually entitled
‘Conclusion’ for the chapter, but it accomplishes the same thing. I find that
having an overview, before we dive into the details, gives us a better
perspective when we sort out the specifics in the chapter. We will begin that
process in the next Study.
There is a lot of confusion among Christians on the subject
of the ‘Kingdom of God’. What, when, who are some of the questions. Please read
and absorb what the author is concluding in this summary. We will start in the
next Study to dig through the details. Remember, the Bible is our standard for
proof. When you see a scripture reference, be sure to check it out yourself.)
The
kingdom of God is comprehensive. It involves the inner life of man, as
well as the environment around man. Both social and natural environments are in
view. There can be no zones of neutrality. No area of life can be segregated from the rest, and
marked as a neutral zone between God's kingdom and Satan's kingdom. Every area
of life is going to be part of one or the other kingdom. Therefore, Christians are called to serve
as ambassadors of Christ and as subduers of the earth, throughout the earth.
Did Christ exempt any area of the face of the earth from His gospel? Or did He
tell His people to preach the gospel everywhere? We are commanded to disciple all nations (Matthew
28:18-20). But this inevitably means that all nations are under the
requirements of the law, for they are all in need of Christ's redemption - His
buying back from the curse of the law.
Is the
law partial? Is the law anything but all-encompassing? Are men not
totally in need of spiritual deliverance because of the comprehensive nature of
the law's demands? The
law is comprehensive, Christ's deliverance is comprehensive, and God's kingdom is
comprehensive, in time and on earth. If this were not true,
then men would not be required to repent, in time and on earth. If they fail to
repent before they die, or before Christ returns in judgment, then they must
become permanent salted sacrifices, burning on God's awful altar,
forever (Mark 9:49). The comprehensive nature of God's punishment should
testify to the comprehensive claims of God's law, and the comprehensive scope
of God's kingdom, in time and on earth. To argue in any other way is to minimize the extent of
Christ's sacrifice on the cross, to lessen its significance, and to lessen its
cost to our Lord.
Any social movement which is serious about changing the
shape of history must have at least two features. First, it must have a
doctrine of the possibility of positive social change. If men don't believe that history can be
changed through concerted effort, then they are unlikely to attempt to change
very much. Second, it needs a unique doctrine of law. Men need to
believe in their ability to understand this world, and by understanding its
laws, change its features. In other
words ,they need a detailed program for social change.
There is
another feature of a successful program of social reconstruction which is
usually present, and which is undeniably powerful: the doctrine of predestination. The doctrine of historical inevitability
strengthens the souls of those who are convinced that "their side" is
going to win, and it weakens the resistance of their enemies. A good
example in the Bible is the optimism of the Hebrews under Joshua, and the
pessimism of the people of Jericho (Joshua 2:8-11).
Where have we seen a fusion of
all three elements? Where have we seen simultaneously the doctrine of
predestination, the doctrine of the possibility of positive social
change, and the doctrine of law? In the 20th century, we have seen all
three doctrines espoused by the three most powerful social and religious
movements of our time: Marxian communism, modern science, and (in the final
decades of the century) militant Islam. All three have a dynamic of history
and believe that external affairs can be controlled by elites. All three
have a doctrine of world conquest and evangelism. All
three, therefore, are religions, for they espouse distinct (and morally
mandatory) ways of life.
The war is on. The two major participants
recognize this war. Too many contemporary Christians have not seen it, or else
they have misinterpreted its implications for themselves and the church.
The war is between Jesus Christ and the more militant forms of anti-Christianity,
especially those that proclaim their versions of all three doctrines.
All three
doctrines need to be held for maximum leverage in this world of religious
conflict. The doctrine of
predestination can lead to social impotence if it is coupled with pessimism
concerning the long-run triumph of the church, in time and on earth. Those who
hold both the doctrine of predestination and an eschatology of earthly,
historical defeat have a tendency to turn inward, both psychologically and
ecclesiastically. They worry too
much about the state of their souls and the state of the institutional church
and not enough about the state of the kingdom of God in its broadest sense.
Such a theology is guaranteed to produce defeat, and we should expect such
theologies to remain backwater views of back water groups, as they are today
and have been in the past.
The question is therefore not
"predestination vs. no predestination." The question is: "Which
predestination?" The question is: "Whose predestination?"
God's? Modern science's? Islam's? Marxism’s?
The battle
for world supremacy will be waged among the competing predestinarian worldviews.
Everyone else is simply going along for the ride. Will it be the sovereignty of
God or the sovereignty of man?
