Kingdom theology?

I do not know very much about the "Dominion" or "Kingdom Now" theology, but I do know enough to know that I disagree with them. Are you familiar with the two kingdom concept as given in David Bercot's topic "Two Kingdoms" (given in the course Christian Citizenship)? My understanding is that this represents the view of both the early church and the early Anabaptists. Could you clarify specifically what you're asking (i.e.

How did the Anabaptists view the kingdom of heaven, When did they feel it was established, How did they feel we as Christians should advance the kingdom, etc.)?

I will look at the "Two Kingdoms" topic. I'm sorry that inahvent responded quicker, I didn't receive a notification in my email account. I apologize for that and I thank you for the time you took to answer.

Basically, I'm a preterist who thinks that Jesus came in 70 AD and destroyed the second temple through the Romans. (I learned about this doctrine about a year ago, in France it's not known at all, "everybody" seems to be a futurist). Therefore, for me, the Revelation's prophecies are passed and Hades is no more, so we're going straight to heaven or hell, if I summarize it grossly. And thus my question is what are Christians supposed to do now?

I've heard about the Dominion theology, but it's too centered on the world (politics, ecology, laws, etc). I don't think that's the answer I am looking for, because Jesus didn't change the political landscape back in the day either, he changed the hearts. And I wondered if such a theological doctrine existed, like Dominion theology, but for the Kingdom of God (deliverance, miracles, etc).

I think the belief that Jesus did not come to change the political landscape but to change hearts is extremely fundamental to understanding the Christian faith. This basic belief is necessary in order for the Sermon on the Mount to make sense, and this was recognized by early Christians and early Anabaptists alike. I am not well acquainted with the early Anabaptist position on Revelation, but I would suggest David Bercot's course "Future Things" for the early Christian perspective.

I am curious as to how your view accounts for 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18? Did this return of the Lord already take place or is it still waiting to be fulfilled?

Also, when do you believe the book of Revelation was written?

I agree, changing hearts is paramount!

I did watch "Future Things", I will rewatch it since I don't remember what David is saying.

As for your question, I'm in no way a teacher, I don't have a gift for that at all, so I might just refer you to a website I'm starting to read that speaks on the preterist doctrine in depth. I don't want to say something that is not true, since we're all here to seek the truth. It would be foolish on my part to "teach" something when I'm really not a teacher.

This website answers questions about verses, like yours. Here is the article about 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, if you want to read it: 1 corinthians 15 50 54 a preterist commentary (revelationrevolution.org) — https://www.revelationrevolution.org/1-corinthians-15-50-54-a-preterist-commentary (I'm still discovering the website, as I said, I'm starting to read it, we need to test everything).

In my opinion, Revelation was written before 70 AD, for the mere fact that back in the days, the temple of the Jews was the center of all the religious "system" (for a l ack of a better term ), it was very important for the Jews because, there, dwelt the presence of God. Everything revolved around the temple (offerings, sacrifices, feasts, etc).

Therefore, because there is never one mention of its destruction in any of the epistles (only in Matthew 24), I believe that to be a strong argument for it being written before 70 AD. I understand that it goes against the majority of the scholars out there, but I don't think scholars are the basis for my faith.

Also, there are so many time indicators ( 101 preterist time indicators (adammaarschalk.com) — https://adammaarschalk.com/2013/07/23/101-preterist-time-indicators/ ) concerning the end times being near to their time, that it just makes sense that God wouldn't tell believers back then that He'd come quickly in their generation (Matthew 24) and everybody needs to prepare, but 2000 years later He still didn't come. It makes no sense to me.

What made me consider preterism is the constant fear and passivity in some, not all, but a majority of Christians "waiting for Jesus to return", the fruits are weird to me, and also, the Bible wasn't written to us, it was written to the people back then. So John* clearly tells his audience 2000 years ago that it was the last hour for them, as in, it's coming. And Jesus ends the book of Revelation by saying that He'll come soon. I could go on, but that's not the topic. I'm just passionate haha :p

Again, I thank you for your help and your answers.

Interesting thoughts there! I don't agree with everything on the website you shared, but it does give some very interesting perspectives. My two biggest issues with the preterist view based on what I've read so far is 1) I fail to find compelling Scriptural support for the theory that Jesus has already returned, and 2) If this view is accurate, where is the early Christian support for it? Why didn't the early Christians notice prophecy being fulfilled if they lived in that culture and era?

I don't feel that we should base our faith on what the early Christians believed (their writings are not Scripture), but we should keep their perspectives in mind.

All that aside, I will definitely be looking into this some more. Looks like I have some homework cut out.

Personally, I believe that end-time theology is really a fairly minor part of our faith; that is, it's more important to obey Jesus' teachings than to have everything figured out. If we have an obedient love-faith relationship established with Christ, He will lead us in the truth. May God bless you on your journey!

I don't necessarily agree with everything either. Also, the website is so packed with information, that reading everything through takes a long time.

For your first point, I do believe that Matthew 24 has strong support for preterism since the "end of times" is linked with Jesus talking about the temple being destroyed, for example. Also, the way Revelation is written refers to Old Testament prophecies of judgment (the Day of the Lord is a phrase used in the OT multiple times, as well as the sun darkening and such other imageries) and indicate sudden judgment.

In Isaiah, this prophecy leads to the fall of Babylon, and in Joel deliverance follows after God visits the oppressors.

For the second point, Eusebius talks about that in "The Church History of Eusebius" (I read this in The Church Fathers. The Complete Ante-Nicene & Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers Collection: 3 Series, 37 Volumes, 65 Authors, 1,000 Books, 18,000 Chapters, 16 Million Words. Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition. It is about 2,99 euros on amazon.fr (I'm from France).)

I would even add that Josephus Flavius in The Wars of the Jews and Tacitus talk about that at length and it's really amazing to read and parallel all that with Revelation.

Preterism is a lot to take in, there are so many things to consider haha

I agree with you, let's obey and follow Jesus!
Thank you for your help, again! Have an awesome day! Be blessed!