From this point of view it mav be .said, with Iloltzmann (AT Th. i. 202-207), that the negative side of the conception is the p'orgivene.ss of Sins as the first condition of entrance into the King- dom, and that the positive side of it is the .active pr.actice of Uigliteousness with the peace and con- tentment which that practice brings.
(V.) Present or Future? — There can be no real question that the Kingdom is presented in both lights as present and as future. Strictly .speaking, die future is divided, and the notes of lime are 'Tccfold — i)resent, near future, and more distant future. Take, for instance, the following passages : Mt 12-s (= Lk ll-'i') 'If I by the Spirit of (iod cast out demons, then is the Kingdom of God come {((pittKref) upon you ' ; Mk V<' (= Mt 4'") 'The time is fultiUed, and the Kingdom of God is at hand ' (i777iKf>'); Mk9'll ■ There be .some here . . . which shall in no wise taste of death till they see the Kingdom of (iod come {i\r]\v8v7a.v) with power.' The oidy one of the.se passages about which there can be any doubt is the second (see above, p. 610), and even that belongs to the common groundwork of the Synoptic tradition, and it is supported by Mt lO'ii. If the latest of the.se dates still falls within the lifetime of the then generation, there is a group of parables (the Mustard Seed, the Wheat and Tares, the Drag-iu'l) which would seem at once to bring the Kingdom into the present, and to postpone its consummation.
These apparent inconsistencies are probably to be explained in the same way as others which we meet with. The future coming, the more or less distant coming, of which the Son himself does not know the day or the hour, is the eschatological coming of the current expectation, which, if we follow our authorities, we must believe that Jesus also shared. There was, however, a certain am- biguity even in this expectation as popularly held : it was not clear exactly in what relation of time the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of His Kingdom stood to the end of all things. And this ambiguity was necessarily heightened by the peculiar nature of the coming of Christ, and the conviction which gradually forced itself upon the minds of the disciples that there must needs be a double Coming, — one in shame, the other in triumph ; one therefore which for them was past, and another still in the future.
But, apart from all this, it will be apparent that
the more distinctive conception of the Kingdom a« the ' world of invisible laws ' by which God works is not subject to the same liuntations of time. In this sense it embraces the whole providential .scheme of things from the beginning ; though, as we have said, it is really a cosmos within the cosmos, and it lixs its culminating periods aiul moments, such as was above all that which dates from the Incarnation. The most characteristic expression of this aspect of the Kingdom would be the parables of the Leaven and of the Seed grow- ing .secretly.
(vi.) Iniriird iir Oi(tward ? — A like conclusion holds good for the (|Uestion which we have Ui'.'ct to ask ourselves: Are we to think of the Kingdom of God as visible or as invisible ? Is it an iidiueiiee, a force or collection of forces, or is it an insiitu- tioii ? We are familiar with the very common and often quite superlicial identihcation of the King- dom with the Church. Is this justitied ? .Many recent writers answer this question emphatically. No (list with relf. in lloltzmaini. XT Th. i. 2oh'). .\nd it is true that there are certain passages Ijy which it seems to be excluded.
Conspicuous iiinonir tliese art- tht' verses Lk 172"- 21 Ouk ipxtrai, rj S. T, 6. ftera jTapaTTipjjaeuji;, ov6i ipovtFLV, 'Ifioi' J»5«. rf ((C(t. tiov yap Tj &. T. 0. ft'Toi vtibiv iarit'. \ niajin'itv of Ifiiiiiti^- Geriiiiiri scholars, iticluditii.' Schurer ( />/> Praliyt. ./. ('. p. Istnnd Iloit/- Ttiatiii (Willi a slifjlit ino(lillcuti<in, 'in your reactri. tjilic Oic last words as mcaiiiii^' 'in \our midst.' ttie main ground tit-itif,' tliat they are n<ldrcsscd to tlic I'iiarlsces. Itnt Kicid seems (o luive shown t^Ot. Xttrr. at/, /in-.) tliat tills Interpretation is lexically untenahle ('no sound e.xamiilf 'J, and that the better rendering is in aiiimtM renfris.
But, on the other hand, parables like the Wlicat and the Tares and the Drag-net are most naturally explained of a visible community ; and there can be no doubt that the popular expectation was o a visible kingdom, such as that in which the sons of Zebedee sought f(U' a chief place.
If we keep to the clue which we have hitherto followed, the facts will be sutliciently clear. The Kingdom in its highest and most Christian sense is tlie working of 'invisible laws' which penetrate below the surface and are gradually progressive and expansive in their operation. But in this as in other cases spiritual forces lake to themselves an outward form ; they are enshrined in a ves.Sel of clay, liner or coarser as the case may be, not only in men as individuals but in men as a com- munity or communities. The society then be- comes at once a vehicle and instrument of the forces by which it is animated, not a perfect vehicle or a perfect instrument. — a lield of wheat miiiglecl with tares, a net containing bad tisli as well as giHid, — but analogous to those other visible institutions by which God accomplishes His gracious purposes amongst men.