Assess the nature of the kingdom as it is presented in Luke's gospel. Show how Luke's presentation differs from Jewish expectations

Authors Avatar

Kingdom of God

Assess the nature of the kingdom as it is presented in Luke’s gospel.

Show how Luke’s presentation differs from Jewish expectations

One of Luke’s main interests in Jesus was his preaching on the Kingdom of God.  As Luke was arguably a gentile, he wanted to prove to all people that the Kingdom was present and that everyone is welcome to become a member.  However what Luke wrote about the kingdom in some areas did contradict the Jews expectations.  For example, Jewish understanding of the kingdom was that a divine rule would be the counterpart of the earthly kingship.  This goes back to Old Testament when the prophet Samuel first anointed the first Jewish King Saul, as so was King David.  The anointing of a king meant that they would represent God’s rule and would be regarded as God-sent.  

Jewish understanding of the kingdom increased significantly after Israel lost her independence in C6 BCE.  Concepts of King and Messiah emerged during the inter-testamental era.  The heavenly hosts of angels would defeat the devil and his armies and heaven would literally be created on earth.  Essenes took particular interest in this belief as they searched for liberation and the coming of the kingdom of God. Another concept consists of no war.  However gentiles would realise that there is no other saviour than Israel’s God, and would thus worship ‘God’ and acquiesce to the Jews.

Jesus’ concept however of the Kingdom differed to that of the Jews as to them, the Kingdom of God would be much more earthly.  As in Mark 1:15, ‘the Kingdom of God has arrived’.  Jesus thus believed the kingdom to be a present reality in himself and his ministry ‘the kingdom of God is within you’ (Luke 17:21).  However there have been three suggestions about the real meaning of eschatology.  Futurist eschatology embrace Jesus’ teachings as a meaning that God’s kingdom will come in a tangible form at a time that is still in the future.  This can be rectified as the ‘parousia’. According to Albert Schweitzer, who first popularised this idea meant however, that Jesus held the same expectations as many Jewish apocalyptic writers of his day.  He suggested that Jesus believed God would intervene immediately in the affairs of humanity and that his own life’s work would be the divisive climax that would come within Jesus’ lifetime.

Join now!

However C.H. Dodd contradicted Schweitzer’s theory on ‘futurist eschatology’

and introduced his theory on ‘realised eschatology’.  According to Dodd what Jesus was really saying was that the new society had arrived in his own person through his teachings thus Jesus’ teaching is ‘inaugural eschatology’.  The coming of Jesus is thus the coming of God’s eternal reign.  

Miracles are much easier to understand if they are regarded as signs that God was creating a new society right there and then.  To put these miracles into context, according to 1st century Jewish thinking, if one was ill, it was either ...

This is a preview of the whole essay