Preaching Christ the King
This Sunday, the concluding of the liturgical yr, is Christ the male monarch, and comes immediately earlier Advent. It is a slightly odd festival, since one of the key themes of Appearance is not the anticipation of Christmas, but the anticipation of Jesus' return as king; the Latin adventus is a translation of the Greek parousia (i Thess ii.19, iii.xiii, iv.xv, five.23 and through the NT) which ways the coming of the king or emperor to be nowadays in the midst of his people.
The readings set in the lectionary are Daniel 7.ix-x,thirteen,14, Psalm 93, Revelation ane.4b-eight and John 18.33-37. The psalm is a relatively straightforward exaltation of God every bit king in creation, and connects with God's sovereignty in creation which is delegated to humanity, male and female person, made in his epitome, created and called to do dominion as God's vice-regents. The only hitting thing about this is that it is Yahweh, Israel'southward ain god, who is sovereign over the globe, and to this extent State of israel is making an exclusivist claim in relation to the gods of the nations.
The reading for Daniel is more circuitous—but hugely significant for our agreement of Jesus and our reading of the New Testament. Daniel is very much a book of ii halves, and after the narrative first half (albeit including visionary dreams within the narrative), it feels in chapter 7 as though nosotros have entered a strange new world. In fact, the ii halves correlate pretty well; the vision of the statue in chapter 2 is a symbolic representation of iv human empires, catastrophe with the Romans, all of which are destroyed by the stone 'not cut past human being hands (Dan 2.34)' which is the kingdom of the God of heaven (Dan 2.44). These four kingdoms (Western farsi, Greek, Seleucid and Roman if my memory serves me—I am mid-Atlantic every bit I write) correspond to the iv beasts of Dan 7. (Run across John Goldingay's How to Read the Bible for a handy chart illustrating this.) But as the four-fold statue has been destroyed by the stone, so the 4 beasts are stripped of their authority, and ultimately slain, to make manner for the kingdom that is given to the 'one like a son of man' (Dan 7.14). (An advisable vocal to sing this Dominicus includes in the chorus 'His kingdom will not pass away, Oh Ancient of Days' taken straight from this passage.
The dream of Dan ii, miraculously known and interpreted by Daniel, and his vision in the night of Dan 7 share a fundamental theme. The kingdom of God that is to come is like the kingdoms of this world—information technology has an impact on them—merely is also not like the kingdoms is this world, in that its origin is not in the will of human being beings and their lust for power, simply an expression of the only and righteous rule of God which will never terminate. This is rather important for interpreting the reading from John 18. John is distinctive in including this detailed dialogue between Jesus and Pilate. In that location is no need to recollect information technology was made up past John, since we know that in that location were followers of Jesus in the majestic household [link to other post]. And, like other passages in John, it is full of 'reality effects'—so much and so that is was used verbatim as the script for this scene in Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ.
Just the phrase of Jesus 'My kingdom is not of this globe' (John 18.36) is often taken to mean that his kingdom is other-worldly, in the sense of being ethereal, or spiritual, and somehow detached from the realities of culture and politics and the nitty-gritty of everyday life. This cannot in fact be the instance; even if John is the 'spiritual gospel', it is likewise the one most earthed in reality, depicting as information technology does a Jesus who is hungry and thirsty, lone and bawling, and cleaved and bleeding on the cross. And information technology cannot exist the case in the lite of Daniel 2 and seven; 'not of this world' in John corresponds theologically to 'non made past human hands' in Daniel 2. As Jesus makes articulate in the second half of the verse, the 'other-wordly' distinctive about his kingdom is its origin—from the will of his Father in sky. It does have a very real impact on the human world—as Pilate is nigh to discover.
(It is also worth noting the interesting pun in the Latin Bible, Jerome's Vulgate, which was the primary translation in utilise until the Reformation. 'What is truth?' in John xviii.38 because 'Quid est veritas?' which is an anagram in Latin of 'Est vir qui skillful'—'The man who stands before you'.)
It is a shame that the lectionary omits verses 11 and 12 from the Dan seven reading, since these are the verses which clear the interaction betwixt the earthly, human kingdoms and the kingdom that has come from God. The reason for the omission is, I suppose, to avoid all the bad-mannered linguistic communication of beasts and what they mean—only the result is a sense that the kingdom of God doesn't make contact with earth, and that is quite a high price to pay.
There is a second characteristic of the reading from Daniel is the term 'son of man'. The phrase is used extensively in Ezekiel, where it is God's customary address (93 times) of the prophet, and emphasises his frail mortality—hence the common English translation 'mortal man'. The phrase likewise comes in Ps eight.iv, traditionally rendered:
What is human being that yous are mindful of him,
the son of homo that y'all should consider him?
Modernistic translations turn this into the generalised 'humankind', which retains the meaning hither, merely loses the connection with other occurrences of the phrase.
The phrase is Jesus' favourite way of referring to himself, coming as it does 78 times in the gospels (Matthew 28, Mark 14, Luke 25 and John xi times). There has been much scholarly ink spiiled in debating the meaning and significance of this term, but Jesus appears to use it with a number of unlike sense:
- Just as verbiage for 'I' (Matt 11.19)
- As a reference to his humanity and humility (Matt 8.twenty)
- Specifically with reference to his being handed over and his crucifixion (Marker 8.31, Matt xx.18)) and his resurrection (Matt 12.40)
- By contrast, information technology is also a title related to Jesus' authority (Matt 9.6, 12.8)
This last point is crucial, and has ii OT ideas backside it. The first comes from the theme of creation and humanity as God'southward vice-regents which is alluded to in Ps 8. In that sense, Jesus is the Ideal Man, an idea re-expressed by Paul in his language of Jesus as 'second Adam' (Romans five.12–17 and 1 Cor 15.45).
But the 2d idea is from our Daniel 7 reading—the one like a son of man comes to the Ancient of Days on his throne and receives from him an everlasting kingdom and authority. It is articulate from Dan 7.27 that this human figure stands for the 'holy people of God', that is, Israel set free from oppression by her enemies (compare Luke 1.71–75!). And even so Jesus takes over this term to claim that he himself has fulfilled the destiny of God's people—Jesus himself is 'recapitulating' the story of Israel, and where they failed in disobedience, he remained obedient. It is the same idea behind some of Matthew's 'fulfilment' verses, such as his use of Hos 11.1 in Matt ii.xv, and Jesus' re-use of Isaiah'south vineyard parable (Is 5.i–7) in Marking 12.i–9.
Understanding this is crucial to making sense of the 'picayune apocalypses' in Matt 24 and Mark 13; the 'coming of the Son of Man' (Matt 24.30, Marker thirteen.26) is not his parousia to earth from one Thess four–5, just his coming (Gk erchomenos) to the Ancient of Days from Dan seven.13. Information technology represents not Jesus' return to earth, but his vindication in the resurrection, exaltation in the ascension, and power of the kingdom shared by the outpouring of the Spirit on his people at Pentecost. And, of course, all this will happen 'before this generation passes abroad' (Matt 24.34, Mark xiii.xxx). (For more detail, including on Stephen'due south vision of exactly this in Acts 7.56, see my other posts on Matthew 24 and Mark 13.) It is also worth noting how Matthew in particular ties the thought of 'Son of Man' with Jesus purple, kingly power; in Matt 25.31 the Son of Homo takes his throne, and without further announcement in Matt 25.34 becomes 'the King'.
The reading from Rev i picks upwards all these ideas, and (as is typical of Revelation) makes what is largely implicit in the gospels explicit and plain to see. Dissimilar God's people, Jesus has remained a faithful witness through trial and temptation. He is the firstborn from the expressionless—the commencement of a new kind of humanity. Every bit king he is the ruler of the kings of the world, and then 'king of kings' (Rev 17.14 and xix.16). He is sovereign over the power of sin, so is the one able to ready us free from slavery to sin and offer us freedom in the promised land of his grace, past his expiry. And he has fulfilled God's original intention for his people to be a kingdom of priests (Ex 19.6). It is shame this reading does not continue on to the end of the chapter, since the vision of Jesus here combines features of the vision of the Ancient of Days in Dan 7 with features of the vision of the angel in Daniel 10. Jesus (John tells u.s.a.) is both the messenger from God but besides the presence of God himself, a paradox that tin merely be solved past locating information technology in something like the understanding of God equally Trinity.
All this still leaves us with one rather large unanswered question: if the idea of Jesus as king is and then important in the NT, how come it rarely surfaces in Paul's writings? I was waiting at the drome with an eminent group of NT scholars, and so I asked them. Later a brief word, the consensus was: 'That'due south a very good question!' (Well washed to Ian J for asking it.) Here are some possible answers.
- For Jews, the idea of expecting a coming king is very specific—it is the hope of a king like David, sitting on his throne and restoring his kingdom. For the gentiles in Paul's audition, this pregnant wouldn't be present in the aforementioned way.
- In the New Testament, the word for 'male monarch' and 'emperor' are the aforementioned word. It is not articulate that Paul would have wanted to advise that Jesus was an alternative emperor for the Roman Empire, non least considering of the theological human relationship between the kingdoms highlighted in a higher place.
- One important thought about Jesus as king is that he brings peace. For a Jewish audition, this involved deliverance from their enemies, but (again) this thought does not interpret in the aforementioned fashion to a Gentile audience.
- The ideas of a king with a kingdom is a political metaphor that doesn't have a particularly strong communal dimension. In Paul, we find the unifying and communal metaphor of God's people as the body of Christ.
Having said that, the language of 'kingdom' is not enPaul does in fact talk of Jesus reigning. In English, our word male monarch comes from German 'König' whilst our verb 'reign' comes from the Latin regnum and ultimately from male monarch, king. In Greek and Hebrew, however, the noun and verb are 'cognate'—they come from the same root. So a rex kings, or a reigner reigns, depending on which way you cull to go. For Paul, that Jesus is Lord (rather than Caesar) is the bones Christian confession (Romans x.9, 1 Cor 12.three), and although his reign is presently subconscious and confined, one day 'every knee will bow' (Phil 2.10, using Isaiah 45.23's linguistic communication of the sole kingship of God) and 'he must reign until all his enemies are put under his feet' (1 Cor 14.25). In instance you didn't recollect this was important, the verb 'to reign' comes 7 times in the Volume of Revelation!
I hope that gives you plenty to preach—perhaps more than than ane sermon—on the idea of Christ the King this Lord's day. You might also like this well-known meditation on Jesus every bit rex edited from a sermon by the Pentecostal Dr S M Lockridge.
Follow me on Twitter @psephizo
Much of my work is washed on a freelance footing. If you accept valued this postal service, would y'all considerdonating £1.twenty a month to support the production of this blog?
If you enjoyed this, do share it on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo. Similar my folio on Facebook.
Much of my piece of work is done on a freelance basis. If you take valued this postal service, yous can make a single or repeat donation through PayPal:
Comments policy: Good comments that appoint with the content of the post, and share in respectful fence, can add together real value. Seek first to empathize, then to be understood. Brand the most charitable construal of the views of others and seek to learn from their perspectives. Don't view debate as a conflict to win; accost the argument rather than tackling the person.
Source: https://www.psephizo.com/biblical-studies/preaching-christ-the-king/
0 Response to "Preaching Christ the King"
Postar um comentário