Discussion Questions
John D. Martin describes growing up with “basically an evangelical Protestant message” plus two “distinctive doctrines: nonconformity and nonresistance,” where nonconformity felt “superfluous.” What does that reveal about how we tend to treat Jesus’ commands—as optional “add-ons” versus the content of the gospel itself? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does it show about us when we treat some of Jesus’ commands as optional “extra rules” instead of part of the gospel itself?
The speaker insists that “Kingdom suggests a society of people,” contrasting it with “a very individualistic concept of the gospel.” How does the Bible’s storyline (Abraham, Israel as a nation, “a kingdom of priests”) challenge the assumption that God’s primary goal is saving individuals rather than forming a people? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does the Bible’s big story (Abraham, Israel, “a kingdom of priests”) show that God is forming a people, not just saving separate individuals?
He calls the church a “mediatorial kingdom,” not the “absolute kingdom,” and says it will be “credible because we’ll live in repentance when we fail.” What does this teach about God’s expectations for visible holiness now, and how should repentance function in a kingdom-community without pretending perfection? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the church should be believable by living holy lives and repenting when we fail, what should “visible holiness” look like now, and how do we repent without acting perfect?
The speaker notes Jesus’ emphasis: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” “gospel of the kingdom,” and that Jesus spent the final 40 days teaching “things concerning the kingdom.” If Jesus framed his mission this way, what does it say about God’s intentions for what “repentance” is actually repentance *into*? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Jesus’ main message was about the kingdom, what are we actually repenting into when we repent?
He highlights Matthew’s wording that the seed is “the word of the kingdom,” and that in the tares parable the seed is “the children of the kingdom.” How does that change the way we think about evangelism and conversion—more as information transfer, or more as becoming a new kind of person inside a new society? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the “seed” is both the message of the kingdom and the people of the kingdom, does evangelism mean mainly sharing facts, or helping people become part of a new kind of community?
The speaker claims the epistles say “nothing much…about going to heaven when you die,” and summarizes the contrast: evangelical focus on “getting people to heaven” versus Anabaptist focus on “getting heaven to earth.” Where does your own spiritual imagination live most of the time—future escape or present embodiment—and what concrete evidence in your choices shows which gospel you’ve absorbed? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Do you mostly think about faith as escaping to heaven later or living “heaven on earth” now, and what choices in your life prove which one you really believe?
He critiques “the gospel of the empty cloak” (from the Apostles’ Creed) that jumps from birth to “suffered under Pontius Pilate,” and argues Jesus had a “finished work” before the cross: “a demonstration of the kingdom.” How does this confront common evangelical instincts about grace, obedience, and what counts as “the gospel”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Jesus showed the kingdom through his life before the cross, how should that change what we think the gospel is, and how grace and obedience fit together?
He says the kingdom concept was “lost” through dispensationalism (kingdom pushed to the future), revivalistic “heaven-hell preaching,” and gospel songs focused on heaven. What practices—sermons, songs, testimonies, youth teaching—most shape your church’s “center of gravity,” and what would have to change to make the kingdom a present reality again? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What most shapes your church’s focus—sermons, songs, testimonies, youth teaching—and what would need to change for the kingdom to feel real and present again?
The speaker says if the church is “the apple of God’s eye” we “don’t split churches except under most extraordinary circumstances,” because “the church is his inheritance.” What does this claim expose about our tolerance for division, and what would repentance look like for people who have treated church-hopping or faction-building as normal? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the church matters that much to God, what does our comfort with church splits or church-hopping say about us, and what would real repentance look like?
He argues the kingdom addresses real issues (economic ideals, violence, sexuality), saying Jesus’ kingdom is the only solution to “selfishness,” and he applies it to a caller asking, “I’m gay. Can I go to heaven?” How does framing moral questions as “Does this fit the kingdom ideal?” reshape the way we speak truth and call for transformation without reducing everything to “going to heaven” or “scare tactics”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does asking “Does this fit the kingdom way of life?” change how we talk about hard moral issues, so we call for change without making it only about ‘going to heaven’ or fear?