(k) Although these officials were necessary for the working of the monarchical government, which probably always tended to obliterate the old land- marks of the tribal system, with its semi-inde- pendent elders (these are still mentioned under the monarchy, 1 K 20', 2 K 23'), yet by the very sever- ance of tlie ruling class from the soil it tended also to increase the aill'ercnce between class and chuss. The Mosaic legislation, though perha|is hardly suitable for great commercial enterprises, was admirably fitted lo maintain coni])arative e<iualitj', but the rule of the king in both N. and S. Israel pro<luced crying injustice on the part of the rich and misery lor the poor (e.g. Am 2"- ', la 5", Jer 5^, Mic3").
VI. Lastly, it may be notice<l briefly that the king, both oy success and by failure, played an important part in preparation for the future. His success showed the neccs'<ity for organizjition ami concentration : his failure, in his degeneiatioii from the nearly ideal David to the worthless Zetlekiabi re- lieved, thotigh tho crown tem|>orarily was, by godly representatives), showe<l that a kingdom lui such and aliine was an inell'ectual prot4.'ition. A wholly ideal David was hoped for (ICzk 34" 37*), and in duo time given. Hut U'fore thin the title of kiuf; was borne by members of the llasmonienn dyn.usty from Arislobulus I. (B.C. 10&-1O4) to Aristobuliu u.
m
KINGDOM OF GOlJ
KINGDOM OF GOD
(Ii.C. 63), nnd by Horod the Great from B.C. 40 to B.C. 4. See separate articles on these names.
LiTKRAFUBB. — Kesides the ordinary IIiHlories of the Jewish People, and Dic'ioiiaries, Duly be [iientioned Beiizinger, Ueth runfi-hf ArchaoUfjic (Lcipziir, 1S94); Nuwauk, Li/trlmch der Url,riuschnl ArchuohuiK (Leipzig, ISDl) ; JlcCurdv, 11 1'il (1894-96, gg 27-<la, 611-638). A. LUKVN WILLIAMS.
KINGDOM OF GOD, OF HEAYEN [^a<Ti\ela toC deov, Tuf ovpafd'v). — The importance of the place which this idea of the kingdom of Uod holds in Scripture, and especially in the teachiuj; of Jesus ; the new prominence it has come to assume in recent years in theology (since Kant and Schleier- maclier, particularly in the school of A. RitschI, but also among theologians generally, e.g. Lipsius, (Josterzee, Maurice) ; and the attempts which have been made to find in it the supreme and controlling notion of Christian dogmatics, as well as of Chris- tian ethics, — all render it desirable tliat full and careful consideration should be given to this leading thought ol .iie Christian religion, and that the attempt should be made to present its biblical aspects in as complete a form as possible, in their relations to each other, and to the other elements of Christian truth. Little inquiry is necessary to convince us that this idea enters vitally into the whole te.xlure of revel.ation, has its root in the fundamental ideas of the OT, is paramount in the earihly teaching of our Lord, receives further development — with sjiecial reference, however, to its cscliatological side — in the apostolic writings, and presents points of deepest interest to students lioth of doctrine and morals at the present day. Our task, then, in this article will be — following the natural biblical development of the subject — to exhibit first the general features of the OT pre- paration for the Christian doctrine of the kingdom of God ; then to set forth the teaching of Jesus on this vital topic ; and, finally, to compare with this tlie doctrine of the Epistles and other NT writings. By pursuing this course we may hope to arrive at a notion which shsill be helpful in enabling us to judge of the place and value of this doctrine in theology and ethics, and to form a correct estimate of past and current misapprehensions and mutilations of the idea.
I. OT Doctrine of the Kingdom of God.— 1. To reach the time idea of the kingdom of God in OT we must go farther back than the point from which a start is usually made — the theocratic con- stitution at Sinai. As in all the spheres of the Divine operation, grace invariably presupposes vature, so is it in this. The real basis for the idea of the kingdom of God is already laid in the Creation hi.story. The doctrine of Scripture, in its oldest as well as in its later parts, is here entirely uniform. The one God — the God who afterwards entered into covenant with the patriarchs, and as J" brought Isr. out of Egypt, and formed it into a people for Himself — is the Almighty Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator, Lord, and Ruler of all things, animate and inanimate. The Creation narrative in Gn 1, with its delegation to man of ' dominion ' over the creatures (cf. Ps 8), already lays down this doctrine, and the second history of Creation (Gn 2'"'-) is equally explicit. No limit is set in these creation histories to the absolute power of God. As H. Schultz says: 'When God, the possessor of heaven and earth (Gn 14"-^), can make everj'thing good, that is to say, finds nowhere any hindrance in anything already in existence, which, having its origin in some other being, is antagon- istic to Him (Gn 1") ; and when to His word ' Be ' comes the willing ' And it was ' ; in other words, when matter obeys the Divine command like a willing servant, it is assuredly tjiken for granted that everything, even this chaotic matter which