Prophet, Priest, Prince, and the Already, Not Yet: A Theology of the Kingdom of God in Dialogue with Dispensationalism and P. T. Forsyth

By TK Dunn

Using the enigmatic theological expression of P. T. Forsyth, TK Dunn explores how a holistic and comprehensive interpretation of the threefold office of Christ undermines three critical areas of dispensational theology: the literal hermeneutic, disdain for the church catholic, and a convoluted interpretation of the end times focused on ethnic, corporate Israel. Interacting with liberalism as Forsyth's foil, and using the exegetical analysis of Scripture by G. E. Ladd, Dunn argues that the kingdom of God is not the human-driven utopia dreamed of by liberal scholars nor a dystopic, disconnected future realm exclusively for ethnic, corporate Israel; rather, the kingdom must be understood as the dominion of Christ's reign over a redeemed people who order their lives according to his gospel. Access to the kingdom, therefore, is open to all who are redeemed by the priestly work of Christ, submit to the king's constitution, and thereby live according to the prophetic proclamations of kingdom life.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Release date: Jul 27, 2023
• ISBN: 9781666760729

TK Dunn

TK Dunn is associate professor of history and theology at CIU. He lives in Columbia, South Carolina, with his wife, Yesenia, and dog, Wellington.

Book preview

Introduction

The doctrine of the kingdom of God is presented by Christ (in its New Testament form) for the first time in relation to his ministry, where he proclaims: The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news (Mark 1:15). Elsewhere, he states that the kingdom is present before the very eyes of his listeners (Luke 17:21); that he is able to demonstrate the power of the kingdom (Luke 11:20); and that the kingdom has come near to his disciples (Luke 10:9) so that they may utilize his power to expand the kingdom (Matt 28:18–20). He also speaks in terms relating to the future rather than the present, such as in Luke 8:1: he is bringing the kingdom (this may explain why he refuses to be made king at the hands of the people) (John 6:15). There is an otherness to the nature of the kingdom in John 18:36 where he states: My kingdom does not belong to this world. Such seemingly different, and apparently contradictory, presentations of the kingdom inevitably lead to confusion: Is the kingdom here or is it coming? Is it now, was it during the incarnation, or is it yet to arrive?

If the kingdom is solely an earthly experience, the nature of obedience, discipleship, and religious endeavours tend to focus on earthly things such as political activism and social action to bring or cultivate the presence of the kingdom. The agency that will bring the kingdom will be human effort. Such was the general thrust of Liberal theology during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.¹ If the kingdom is a purely future reality (either during an earthly millennium or after the Parousia), the nature of the believer’s attention will be primarily future rather than present; what happens in this age may be preparatory, and therefore not negligible, but this era will have less attention and importance than the age to come. The arrival of the kingdom, according to this schema, is solely God-ordained: humanity does not experience the kingdom in this age and therefore cannot bring the kingdom nor expand it; the kingdom remains purely other, for a different age.²

There has been increased discussion concerning the nature of the kingdom of God without engagement with these historic traditions.³ Focus on the kingdom within ecclesial and political contexts has arisen from a popularization of Dispensationalism and Zionism in the United States.⁴ Although there is often little acknowledgement of this in terms of its attempt at arising only from a biblical basis, this development builds upon the foundation of academic work undertaken during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries by theologians attempting to grapple with the nature of the doctrine of the kingdom of God in light of the Industrial Revolution, German Liberalism, Modernism, and even the First and Second World Wars.⁵ This discussion has become more pronounced as Dispensationalism has increased its market share of the Evangelical world within the United States.⁶ Dispensationalism, as a theological system, has a nuanced doctrine of the kingdom of God that shapes the adherent’s political outlook through a very narrow eschatological lens of interpretation.⁷ This thesis will analyze this Dispensationalist interpretation of the kingdom of God through a hermeneutical framework established by P. T. Forsyth (alongside G. E. Ladd’s biblical exegesis), and engage with three critical areas in which that interpretation leads to theological error: hermeneutics, the reign of Christ, and the relationship between the church and Israel.⁸

Definition of Eschatological Terminology

Dispensationalism is a system of theology that specifically engages with eschatology (the study of the end times) and ecclesiology (the study of the church).⁹ Christian eschatologies are typically millenarian or amillennial: either they anticipate a physical, millennial reign of Christ over the earth, as prophesied in Revelation 20, or they interpret that passage to mean that Christ’s reign is not exclusively a future, earthly reality.¹⁰ Millenarianism can be further divided into two positions: postmillennialism and premillennialism. Postmillennialists believe that humans will be instrumental in bringing about this kingdom on earth, after which Christ will return, whereas premillennialists argue that Christ’s return will come first, and he will establish his rule on the earth for one thousand years before the final judgement.¹¹

There are three primary divisions within Dispensationalism (although there are always exceptions to the rule that a broad analysis cannot cover).¹² The first generation of Dispensationalist thought, propagated by Darby and Scofield, is the most radical departure from otherwise relatively mainline orthodox Protestant doctrine.¹³ The second generation, led by Ryrie and Pentecost, took the initial critiques offered against their movement and sought to answer them by faithful study of Scripture, and they defend their territory against outsiders as well as the new, third, generation: Progressive Dispensationalism. Progressive Dispensationalists tend to sit much closer to New Covenant Theology than the other expressions of Dispensationalism.

The main area of change or disagreement between these three divisions relates to the purposes of God. In Classical Dispensationalism, God is often portrayed as pursuing two different purposes for the peoples of God: one is a heavenly purpose, and one is an earthly purpose.¹⁴ The distinction focuses upon the two peoples of God: Israel and the church. The church receives the heavenly purpose of God, which is to say they will go to heaven, whereas Israel will inherit the earth.¹⁵ Modified Dispensationalists tempered the stark contrast between the destinies of these two entities whilst maintaining the strong difference: Israel and the church are distinct anthropological entities.¹⁶ The nature, the work, and the responsibilities of these two groups are different, but in this schema their eternal reward is the same.¹⁷ Progressive Dispensationalists deny that the church is to be seen as an anthropological entity at all: Neither a race of humanity . . . nor a competing nation alongside Israel.¹⁸ This movement maintains the distinction between the church and Israel but acknowledges that there is one people of God.¹⁹ These differences are nuanced and do not affect the grand scheme of Dispensationalism as a system: the ideas unique to Dispensationalism remain unique when contrasted with other Protestant movements.

Despite this evolution, there are three key points upon which all Dispensationalists agree, and which therefore separate Dispensationalism from other Protestant positions: they all adhere to a rigid use of what is called the literal hermeneutic;²⁰ they all maintain that the kingdom of God as promised to the Israelites in the Davidic Covenant is a wholly future reality for ethnic, corporate Israel and is not something that the church can participate in because the church is a spiritual entity;²¹ and they all hold to a strong distinction between the church and Israel.²²

For clarity, this thesis will primarily interact with Modified Dispensationalism as articulated by proponents such as Ryrie, Pentecost, and Vlach. The reasons for this are threefold and revolve around questions of significance for the context into which this thesis might speak. Firstly, Classical Dispensationalism is no longer significantly promoted in churches because Modified Dispensationalism reworked the excesses of the first generation’s exegetical errors. Secondly, Progressive Dispensationalism is still a developing theological system that continues to be articulated through critical engagement within the broader Evangelical academy. The implications of this thesis will indeed have repercussions on Progressive Dispensationalism, but only as they are brought into the current discussion in an ongoing dialogue. Thirdly, this thesis will focus primarily on interacting with Modified Dispensationalism because it is adherents to this view that one will most frequently encounter and who are most staunchly opposed to granting legitimacy to any alternative view.²³

One of the primary concerns that this branch of Dispensationalism deals with is how the believer prioritizes their time and energy. Obedience to Christ is expected, but a special emphasis was always placed on evangelism, or soul-winning, due to the imminency of Christ’s return.²⁴ A focus on the present is important only as that focus leads to reading the signs in our time that will show where we are at in the biblical prophetic calendar of the end times. Politics, therefore, occupies a significant place in these conversations because of the literal interpretation of certain passages in the Old Testament that, it is argued, could be identified as being worked out in history now.²⁵ Dispensationalists, however, remain avid students of Scripture because they desire to understand the world in which they live through the lens of an eschatological interpretation of history, and therefore any dialogue must require a deep knowledge of the biblical text as well as doctrine. The irony is that although Dispensationalists are students of Scripture, by employing the Dispensationalist literal hermeneutic they can be less biblically literate with regards comprehension of the texts.

The Nature of This Thesis

It is the contention of this thesis that the current reappraisal and study of the kingdom of God is deficient in one significant way: it lacks a coherent theological foundation for the kingdom that addresses the entire work of the promised Messiah as prophet, priest, and king (the munus triplex) as presented in the typological revelation of these Old Testament offices. This thesis will argue that the kingdom of God needs to be understood in light of the messianic calling of Christ as the One who fulfils the munus triplex. The kingdom is often addressed in terms of monarchy due to its being the kingdom of God: much is (rightly) made of the kingship of Christ. This has led to the kinds of (theo-)political engagements for which Dispensationalists have become known. However, the kingship of Christ is only one of the three aspects of the messianic calling that are essential for the founding, establishing, and proclaiming of the kingdom. Because Christ is the Great High Priest, his atonement enables repentant believers to become citizens in the kingdom now, in this age; yet, as Christ is also the king in absentia, ruling through the prophetic proclamation of his word, the kingdom remains a future hope also when he will reign from the throne on a renewed earth. Further, it will be maintained that the kingdom is simultaneously present and future: it is already here and is also yet to come. An inaugurated eschatology is advocated, drawing on the work of Forsyth (and Ladd), and stands as a bridge between realized eschatology and the various futurist positions, of which Dispensationalism is a major advocate.

In this thesis, it will be argued that Dispensationalism fundamentally misinterprets the nature, timing, and scale of the kingdom of God because it divides this threefold office of the Messiah into distinct parts, or operations, of the Messiah, rather than understanding the nature of Messiah’s rule as a cohesive Christ-event that established then, continues now, and secures forever the kingdom. It will, firstly, be argued that the hermeneutical method of biblical interpretation employed by Dispensationalists, the literal hermeneutic, results in exegesis that is driven by presupposition and dogmatics. Positively stated, this thesis will argue that the clearest interpretation of Scripture results in an inaugurated eschatological understanding that naturally flows from christological hermeneutics. With regard to its literal hermeneutic, Dispensationalism presents a method of interpreting Scripture that denies the New Testament the opportunity to explain the Old Testament in a manner that may have been hidden from, or misunderstood by, the original recipients.²⁶ The literal hermeneutic instead demands that the Old Testament must be understood, primarily, through the lens of the original audience. When interpreted in this light, it is argued that the promises YHWH made to Israel largely remain unfulfilled and therefore must yet be fulfilled to ethnic, corporate Israel because God made them to Israel and God is not a liar.²⁷

This thesis will counter that interpretation by presenting Forsyth’s method of hermeneutics, which is Christocentric. In this interpretive schema, Forsyth argues that the entire canon of Scripture must be understood and interpreted through the focal point of Scripture: Christ and the Christ-event. Only through such an interpretation can one begin to understand the soteriological work of God through Christ that was foretold to, and through, Israel, but fulfilled in, and by, Jesus as the messianic prophet, priest, and king. The implication for the kingdom of God is that Old Testament prophecies are reoriented to be interpreted through Christ who is the True Israel rather than in relation to the nation of Israel. Only by inclusion in Christ (either as a Jew or as a Gentile) can one become a citizen of the kingdom.²⁸

It will, secondly, be argued that the reign of Messiah has begun with the Christ-event and therefore the kingdom has been established and continues in this present age in anticipation of the final consummation in the age to come. Forsyth’s interpretation of the nature of the kingdom will be presented through his christological hermeneutic and will show that a holistic understanding of the Christ-event requires accepting that the kingdom was founded and established by the first coming of Christ through his ministry, miracles, passion, and resurrection. It will be contended that the Dispensationalist concept that the kingdom is reserved only for ethnic, corporate Israel during a future millennium is derived from an incoherent use of the literal hermeneutic and places too much emphasis on an Old Testament eschatological hope which refuses fully and adequately to accept that the king has come in Christ to establish his kingdom for Jew and Gentile alike. The kingdom is not a future reality only for the Jewish people but is a present reality for all who will believe and a future certainty for all who have believed.

The third area of analysis will be Dispensationalism’s contention that the church and Israel are separate entities. This thesis will argue that such a distinction is hermeneutically unbalanced and unwarranted. This idea of a sharp distinction was developed by J. N. Darby as a repudiation of the increasingly political denominationalism of his day. Such denominationalism was, in his view, irrevocably compromised; thus, he developed the Brethren assemblies as a movement that was in many ways anti-church.²⁹ For Darby, the church was an aberration in God’s plan, brought about by the rejection of Christ’s offer of messianic kingship during his first coming, and, by his time, the church was so compromised by the world as to be an inherently evil, earthly, institution. Further, Darby argued that Israel is an earthly entity whilst the church is a spiritual, or heavenly, entity, and therefore the earthly promises of God for the earthly people of Israel cannot apply to the spiritual body of the church (which has become compromised). In contrast, by utilizing the christological hermeneutic espoused by Forsyth, this thesis will argue that there is only one singular people of God, albeit in two expressions, who have entered the kingdom through the work of the atonement. The priestly work of Christ is the atonement which makes citizenship for any person possible. Although Israel was indeed given promises by God, they have been manifested in the one True Israel, Jesus, so that the Jew enters the kingdom through the Jewish Messiah and the Gentile, also, enters the kingdom by being in Christ which means to become Israel.

To make this case, it will be asserted that Forsyth’s interpretation of the kingdom of God offers a more robust vision of what the Messiah came to establish: a kingdom founded upon the threefold office of the Messiah that is already dynamically present and active in this world, and yet is a kingdom that is still to come in its finality (the consummation). Consequently, it will be suggested that interpreting the kingdom through the lens of the messianic munus triplex is a necessary hermeneutical lens for understanding how the kingdom impacts this world presently as preparation for perpetuity.

Forsyth’s doctrine of the Messianic Kingdom of God, as it will be called in this thesis, will reshape the conversation concerning the nature of the kingdom as it pertains to the ethic of the Christian life as revealed by the prophetic office of Jesus, the presence of the king’s reign, and the primacy of the substitutionary atonement of the Great High Priest. By contrast, it will be shown that Dispensationalism either denies or diminishes those three aspects whereas Forsyth offers a heightened awareness of Jesus as the Christ and the efficacy of the Christ-event which establishes his kingdom: the cross and resurrection.

Motivation for Studying this Topic

This thesis seeks to provide the American church, and especially Evangelical-Fundamentalists,³⁰ with three things: firstly, it is hoped that this thesis can provide the current academic reappraisal of the kingdom of God with a holistic understanding of the kingdom through a deeper awareness of how the kingdom is established by a Messiah who is simultaneously, and always, prophet, priest, and king. This articulation will subsequently provide Evangelical-Fundamentalism with a greater understanding for how the church is to live, now, in this age, even as we await the consummation of the age to come.

Secondly, this thesis aims to engage this subculture’s unwillingness to consider an eminent theologian whose prescient genius is often overlooked on the assumption that he lacks a Biblicist analytical prowess, something that could not be further from the truth. American Evangelical-Fundamentalists have glaring gaps in their libraries due to the scrutiny of sources on the basis of Biblicism. The prophetic voice of P. T. Forsyth is more important than ever, and the American church will benefit immensely from the riches of his deep theological knowledge of the work of Christ at the cross.

Finally, this thesis endeavours to present an interpretation of the kingdom that magnifies the importance of a canonical interpretation of Scripture through the lens of the Christ-event. Any study of the kingdom that merely academizes or theologizes the work of Christ is insufficient; Forsyth’s focus in this context is to move from a consistent theological interpretation and settle upon a deeply rooted heart of worship. He moves from theology to doxology because of a greater understanding of what Christ achieves through the work of the cross and resurrection. Forsyth’s reorientation takes believers from tribalism and theological distance and brings them towards a unified experience of brotherly φιλέω founded upon a shared familial salvation in and through Christ.

Methodology

Overcoming the Problem of Biblicism

There is, however, a significant issue that must be addressed for the aim of this thesis to be made possible, and that is that the context into which this work will be directed is highly Biblicist.³¹ By this, it is meant that many Dispensationalists would not read a text penned by Forsyth due to what would be perceived as his lack of biblical exegesis. It could be supposed that he may speak some truth, but as he rarely explicitly grounds his teaching in an exegetical analysis of the text, he is assumed to not be a trustworthy expert, or, at least, he is someone who should be read with a stridently critical, even suspicious, eye.³² To combat this potential issue, this thesis will utilize George Ladd as a Biblicist bulwark.³³ Ladd is renowned as a convert from Dispensationalist theology, granted, but his background as a Fundamentalist gives him an acute sensitivity to Biblicist concerns. Further, he remains a millenarian voice (even holding to a literal millennium), giving him credence as someone who holds to certain aspects of prophetic interpretation familiar to Dispensationalist theologians: he is, in a sense, one of their own and will therefore be an acceptable voice to demonstrate the biblical validity of Forsyth’s position. Using Ladd, therefore, bolsters Forsyth’s credibility since there is great congruence between them, and Ladd offers a Biblicist translation and exegetical basis for the theological claims of Forsyth.

Therefore, although Forsyth and Ladd engage in disputes against different opponents, it will be shown that they make the same argument concerning the kingdom of God and the nature of Christ’s messianic calling in establishing his kingdom, albeit from two different angles. Forsyth engages with Liberalism to argue against the idea that the kingdom is a humanly cultivated entity that can be exclusively realized in this life through human effort, while Ladd argues against a purely futuristic kingdom of God which is reserved exclusively for the Jews due to an emphasis on the Old Testament’s prophecies that, allegedly, remain to be fulfilled. It will subsequently be demonstrated that both Forsyth and Ladd argue for an inaugurated eschatology of the kingdom; that is to say, the kingdom of God is a present reality, but only insofar as it is preparation for the consummation, which is indeed in the future, and that the kingdom is open to every believer in this present age through the atoning work of Christ at the cross. This dual aspect concerning the kingdom means that the believer is not only a citizen of the kingdom, but has rights, obligations, and privileges in this life that such citizenship logically provides. As they are making parallel theological arguments, it can be accepted that, although Forsyth may not demonstrate his biblical exegesis, he is nevertheless a ‘safe’ theologian for any Fundamentalist Biblicist to read and interact with: Ladd will provide the biblical trellis upon which Forsyth’s theology can be seen to stand.

That is not to say that Forsyth and Ladd are identical, for what need would there be of engaging with Forsyth’s theology? Whilst Ladd will provide the exegetical foundation for this case, Forsyth’s prioritisation of the Christ-event as the interpretive hermeneutic is unique to him insofar as he utilizes the munus triplex to identify the Messiah and his kingdom. Because Ladd is shaped by the polemic of his academic engagements (which are in dialogue with Dispensationalism), his impact is limited as he is in the end defined by the polemics against which he engages and is not free to give a better alternative. This thesis aims to use Forsyth to offer a paradigm that pushes further than mere disagreement. Forsyth, having been shown through utilisation of Ladd’s exegesis to be acceptable in terms of a biblically based argument with Dispensationalism, can constructively introduce a new and beneficial paradigm for understanding the kingdom through the triplex munus.

Structure

The structure of the thesis and its argument may, at first, appear to be convoluted. Chapters 1 and 8 operate as a pair: in chapter 1, the discussion will revolve around understanding the history and doctrinal development of Dispensationalism as presented by Darby while chapter 8 will be the culmination of the entire thesis (applying Forsyth’s messianic kingdom of God to the three aforementioned critical aspects of Dispensationalist thought). Chapters 2 and 3 are written as a pair to utilize the work of Ladd as evidence that Forsyth’s position, presented in chapter 2, is defensible. Chapters 4 and 5 form a pair by analysing the nature of Christ’s kingship in, and over, the kingdom of God and, again, use Ladd to present the biblical foundation upon which Forsyth’s argument is built. Chapters 6 and 7 form the final pair and consider the other two aspects of the munus triplex as they relate to the kingdom of God. However, although chapters 2 through 7 are written in pairs, they comprise a single complete argument and function by allowing Forsyth to speak with his contemporary opponents while still allowing his conception of the kingdom to be brought into dialogue with Dispensationalism. In other words, his engagement with Liberalism is the catalyst that forces Forsyth to think about the kingdom, and thus he presents his interpretation of the kingdom in terms of that confrontation; nevertheless, the theological insight itself remains unchanged and able to engage with Dispensationalism when paired with Ladd’s biblical exegesis in order to translate Forsyth’s ideas from one context to another.

Chapter 1: The Return of the King: Introduction to the Rise of Dispensationalism

Chapter 1 provides a brief sketch of the history and theology of Dispensationalism. It begins with a historical synopsis of the growth of millenarianism in both the United States and the United Kingdom, demonstrating that the ideas which J. N. Darby systematized were present prior to his efforts. The subsequent analysis of Darby’s biography and theology is required because it provides the foundational framework of Dispensationalism that will be analyzed in chapter 8. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a clear understanding of how Dispensationalism developed under the leadership of Darby and some of the early implications of this new system.

One of the critical developments implemented by Darby was a strong mistrust of any established denomination of the church and a strict dichotomy between the church of the New Testament and Israel of the Old Testament. Because of this dichotomy, Darby came to view the kingdom of God as an earthly entity that was to be fulfilled by ethnic, corporate Israel, and therefore it was not something that God offered to the church (a spiritual entity). The church could not claim the promises given through, nor live out the ethic of, the kingdom because they were not citizens in the kingdom. By analysing the development of Dispensationalist thought, and its reliance upon millenarianism, as well as noting its inherent distinctiveness from other Protestant schemas, this chapter will provide the groundwork for chapter 8 where Forsyth’s theology, demonstrated and defended in chapters 2 through 7, will interact with Dispensationalism on the critical areas of doctrine already mentioned.

Chapter 2: Now and Then: Forsyth’s Framework of the Kingdom of God

Chapter 2 will introduce the argument of this thesis by presenting its primary interlocutor, P. T. Forsyth, and his interpretation of the kingdom. Chapter 2 begins with a brief biography of Forsyth which provides a contextual comprehension of his theological framework. This chapter will then argue that Forsyth holds to an early form of what would come to be known as inaugurated eschatology, and this interpretation of the kingdom provides the foundation for his theological contribution to the discussion with Dispensationalism.

Forsyth argues for a dual concept of the kingdom by engaging with the Liberal theology of his day to demonstrate inherent weaknesses in their interpretation, specifically relating to the work of Christ on the cross. It will be shown that he presents a clear understanding that the kingdom of God is not the vehicle for societal change but the inauguration of a new order exclusive to believers in this current age. This new kingdom will create a community of kingdom citizens whose task it will then be to advance society, without the pretext of utopian fantasy or dystopian nightmare, but with an appropriate eschatological anticipation. It will be argued that Forsyth sees the kingdom as something present in this current age as well as something that will only be fully experienced in the age to come.

Chapter 3: Now and Then: Using Ladd’s Biblicism to Defend Forsyth’s Framework

Having established Forsyth’s framework, this chapter will offer a biblical analysis of Forsyth’s view. The purpose of this is to show that his insights are biblically defensible by using Ladd’s exegetical argumentation in order to speak into the contemporary ecclesial (and theo-political) contexts. The overarching purpose of this thesis is to use Forsyth’s arguments in dialogue with Dispensationalism. Since he is a theologian whose exegesis is not often visible, the primary aim of chapter 3 is to present George Ladd, a millenarian who once subscribed to both Fundamentalism and Dispensationalism, as a mediator who can provide the biblical foundations for Forsyth’s framework. To achieve this result, it will be necessary to demonstrate the Fundamentalist and Biblicist credentials of G. E. Ladd through a brief biography.

Chapter 3 will present Ladd’s theology of the kingdom which will show that, although argued from a different perspective, Ladd agrees with Forsyth’s interpretation of the kingdom. Having laid this foundation, this thesis will progress to an analysis of the kingdom itself. This chapter will conclude by crafting a synthesized definition of the kingdom of God that will be the definition used for the rest of the thesis.

Chapters 4–5: Rex, Religio, or Regio: Comprehending the Nature of the Kingdom of God, Parts 1 and 2

Chapters 4 and 5 form the next cohesive unit. In chapter 4, the argument develops by now addressing the nature of the kingdom. Chapter 4 will, firstly, argue that the nature of basileia is derived from the Old Testament concept of malkuth, or kingship, and speaks primarily of the reign of the king over his people, before, secondly, explaining how the kingship of Christ functions within the kingdom, with the aim of preparing the argument for 8.2. This analysis will indicate that the Old Testament and New Testament stand in agreement that the kingdom is to be understood as simultaneously a present reality in which God’s people reside as citizens and a future hope for a time when the king will reign over his people in person.

The main thrust of chapter 5 is to demonstrate that Forsyth makes the same argument concerning the kingdom as was shown in chapter 4: the kingdom is to be understood through an inaugurated eschatological lens. It will be demonstrated that Forsyth argues that the nature of the kingdom in the present age is to function as preparation for the kingdom of God in the future age: the kingdom’s presence in this world is to lead towards (but not cause) the final consummation of the kingdom. This will then result in asking the question whether one can be satisfied with a concept of the kingdom that rests solely, or primarily, on the nature of kingship, and it will be shown that a holistic interpretation of the kingdom must consider the entire biblical witness: the king who reigns in God’s kingdom will be a priest as well as a prophet. A view that relies on only one aspect of the messianic calling (such as kingship) is deficient.

Chapters 6–7 Prophet, Priest, or Prince: Applying the Triplex Munis of the Messianic Calling

Chapters 6 and 7 move the argument forward by demonstrating that the messianic calling of the king who would reign over the kingdom of God relies upon a correct understanding of the threefold office of the Messiah. These chapters will analyze the priestly and prophetic offices of Christ through the inaugurated eschatological framework established in chapters 2 and 3 and will interpret them in a manner consistent with the expression of the kingdom as articulated in chapters 4 and 5.

In chapter 6, it will be argued that the priestly office of the Messiah is necessary to appropriately grasp the power and application of the kingdom of God. Acknowledging that the disputants with whom both interlocutors are engaged shapes their priority, it nevertheless becomes evident that Forsyth locates the kingship of Christ as founded upon the atoning work of the cross. This chapter will consider the priestly aspect of the office of the Messiah and will argue that the kingdom is built upon the atonement of Christ as the means for entrance for any who would be a citizen. Forsyth presents the atonement as the central event in Scripture and as such it is the event by which both Old and New Testaments must be interpreted and understood, creating a hermeneutic that stands in contrast with Dispensationalism, and which will be employed in dialogue with Dispensationalism in chapter 8.

Chapter 7 pairs with chapter 6 as it considers the prophetic work of the messianic calling. To establish the nature of the prophetic office, this chapter will explain the importance of the promise of a Mosaic prophet and demonstrate how Jesus fulfils that criteria by being the greater lawgiving Moses of a greater covenant: a new covenant for all who believe, not merely for ethnic, corporate Israel. Christ, who is the greater prophet, uses Scripture to exercise his rule under the authority of the Spirit to create citizens who are willing and able to be obedient to his commands: the kingdom is a present reality that can be experienced by citizens. Further, this chapter will demonstrate that the kingdom ethic of obedience derives from the prophetic work of Jesus: as citizens experience the power of Christ, it inculcates a desire and ability to observe the commands of Christ that demonstrate citizenship.

Forsyth’s presentation of the centrality of the cross of Christ as the foundation of the kingdom, and how one can enter it, presents this christological hermeneutical lens from