[chette777]

Heaven is a created physical place, God is spirit.

The Kingdom of Heaven is refereing to a Earthly created kingdom.

The Kingdom of God is speaking of a spiritual kingdom.

They will be partially blended in the Millennial Kingdom. then perfected into the Eternal Kingdom.

together they are a physical kingdom with a spiritual government

But they are not the same thing. Things that are different are not the same.

[Billie]

Originally Posted by adelphos

The kingdom of God is the kingdom set up by God. The kingdom of heaven is the kingdom that finds its source in heaven. Though both phrases have various aspects, it is all one kingdom. We do injustice to the teaching of the Bible when we force distinction where God does not.

Hi adelphos

Welcome to the forum! You have an exellent study here, well thought out with scripture backing the varients . Have to say it is a LOT to study,chew
on, and digest..this will take some time..which I have

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.. I had a talk with my
pastor last week, and he came to this same conclusion. I have a lot
of respect for him, and I listen closely...but I need to STUDY!

Blessings and Peace,

Billie

[Biblestudent]

I have read a lot concerning the "differences" between the "kingdom of heaven" and the "kingdom of God". In fact, I had taught them in opposition to the teaching of the allegorizers that they are one kingdom "ruling in our hearts".

However, as in adelphos's post, I find some inconsistencies with this splitting of the kingdom of God versus the kingdom of heaven. There must be some other way to "rightly divide" this doctrine.

So, instead of splitting God's kingdom into two, I think it is best to think of it in relation to Israel versus its relation to the Church:

The Kingdom of God in relation to Israel has to be earthly; the Kingdom of God in relation to the Church has to be heavenly.
It is called "Kingdom of God" because it's of God over men, and it's called "Kingdom of Heaven" because it's of Heaven over the earth.

Now this approach does not allegorize but rightly divides.

Adelphos' post is an article from David Reagan.
While I enjoy much of Reagan's stuff, there are numerous problems with his view on the Kingdom of God/Kingdom of heaven.

Take this excerpt, for example -

"An interesting answer to this question is found in The Life and Times
of Jesus the Messiah by Alfred Edersheim. As a Jewish convert,
Edersheim often studied the Jewish Talmud and rabbinic teachings in
order to understand the Jewish comprehension of Bible events and
teachings. Concerning the use of the kingdom of heaven by the rabbis,
he taught that "the word `heaven' was very often used instead
of `God,' so as to avoid unduly familiarizing the ear with the Sacred
Name" (vol.1, p.267).
The book of Matthew, more than any other gospel, was written to the
Jewish people and presented Jesus as their Messiah in the line of
David. According to Edersheim, the Jewish teachers understood the
kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven to be the same kingdom.
Matthew may have used heaven as a way to reach out to the Jewish
population."

What a horrid explanation from a man I usually highly respect!

Reagan is saying that Jesus ORIGINALLY said "Kingdom of God" But Matthew CHANGED this to "Kingdom of heaven" throughout his gospel so as not to offend the Jews.
This would make Matthew no better than the modern-day new
version Bible scribes. According to Reagan, Matthew wasn't concerned
with Jesus exact words, but with the "message" they were conveying, so
he "took liberties" with the text so as not to offend the Jews.
Basically, according to Reagan, Matthew was (as Bart Erhman puts it)
misquoting Jesus!

Reagan should know better than this!

Furthermore, Jesus was TALKING to Jews when he supposedly said "Kingdom of God" over and over again (in those places where Matthew records "kingdom of Heaven.")

So Matthew was worried about offending the Jews, but Jesus wasn't?


Besides that, the whole idea is just plain false as Matthew uses the
word "God" NUMEROUS times throughout his gospel.

Originally Posted by Billie

Hi adelphos

Welcome to the forum! You have an exellent study here, well thought out with scripture backing the varients . Have to say it is a LOT to study,chew
on, and digest..this will take some time..which I have

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.. I had a talk with my
pastor last week, and he came to this same conclusion. I have a lot
of respect for him, and I listen closely...but I need to STUDY!

Blessings and Peace,

Billie

Hi Billie and thanks for the welcome!

All one really needs to do is study the parallel passages and they will quickly see that the KoG and the KoH are interchangeable. No one can deny that the parallels are the exact same instances but Matt. will say KoH while the others will read KoG. One of the best passages to prove that the two kingdoms are interchangeable is Matt. 19:23-24

23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Clearly Jesus used "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" to mean the exact same thing in this instance. Mark 10 has KoG in both instances -- once again demonstrating that they are the same. Another interesting thing about this passage is the question that was asked of Jesus. As you recall the young man asked, "Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" In His answer Jesus equates "eternal life" with the KoG/KoH. Once again proving that the KoH is not some physical place as has been stated in this thread. There are other examples of this as well.

This is really not a hard or complicated issue. A little study goes a long way.

Adelphos

Originally Posted by adelphos

Scofield's notes are inconsistent with scripture and inconsistent within themselves. Bro. Reagan has a great little article demonstrating that Scofield's notes are wrong and also proving that the KoG and the KoH are the same in scripture. I heartily agree with Bro. Reagan.

Thank you for sharing the article, which was interesting. Alas, I cannot say that it was terribly convincing. For the first few years of my Christian life, I assumed that the two Kingdoms were synonymous, and my confusion was considerable. They simply don't match. I believe that Larkin and Scofield are right on the money.

[George]

Originally Posted by adelphos

Hi Billie and thanks for the welcome!

All one really needs to do is study the parallel passages and they will quickly see that the KoG and the KoH are interchangeable. No one can deny that the parallels are the exact same instances but Matt. will say KoH while the others will read KoG. One of the best passages to prove that the two kingdoms are interchangeable is Matt. 19:23-24

23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Clearly Jesus used "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" to mean the exact same thing in this instance. Mark 10 has KoG in both instances -- once again demonstrating that they are the same. Another interesting thing about this passage is the question that was asked of Jesus. As you recall the young man asked, "Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" In His answer Jesus equates "eternal life" with the KoG/KoH. Once again proving that the KoH is not some physical place as has been stated in this thread. There are other examples of this as well.

This is really not a hard or complicated issue. A little study goes a long way.

Adelphos

Aloha Adelphos,

We have gone over this ground before (with the same results!). Please check out my Posts under AV1611 Bible Forums > Chit-Chat > Posts # 203, 213, & 221. Your Pronouncement (with "finality"):

"This is really not a hard or complicated issue. A little study goes a long way."

demonstrates either naivete on your part, or a profession (by you) that you have complete understanding of an issue that is demonstrably both "hard" and "complicated", and which has been debated by sincere Christians for decades (at least).

Just because some things in the Bible "appear"' to be the same, doesn't necessarily mean they are the same. And in this case {the kingdom of heaven & The Kingdom of God} cannot be exactly the same because, (whether you know it or not) GOD and heaven (small h) are NOT THE SAME! (Regardless of what you may think or conclude).

You are entitled to your "opinion", but your "pronouncements" are not necessarily sound doctrine - just because you "think" that you have figured out (apparently David Reagan "figured it out" for you) one of the most complicated and misunderstood doctrine's in the entire Bible.

Here are just a few observations as to why things that may "appear" to be the same are not always the same:

1. Birds fly in heaven -they do not fly in God.
2. There are clouds in heaven - there are no clouds in God or in God's "kingdom".
3. God created the heavens - heaven did not create God.
4. God was in the beginning - heaven was not.
5. The heavens are material - you can SEE them (at least 2).
6. God is a Spirit - and cannot be seen.
7. God controls the heavens - heaven does not control God.
8. God has a moral nature - the heavens (2 of them) are a-moral.
9. The heavens declare the Glory of God - God does not declare the glory of heaven.
10. The heavens contain darkness - in God there is NO darkness!
11. The heavens (at least 2 of them) are populated - God is not populated.
12. You can only enter the Kingdom of God by the new birth - entry into the kingdom of heaven has no such requirement!
13. There are some "mysteries" concerning the kingdom of heaven - that do not coincide with the "mysteries" concerning the Kingdom of God (These "mysteries" are revealed to some people and NOT to others).
14. The kingdom of heaven is an earthly, physical, visible "kingdom" - The Kingdom of God is a Spiritual Kingdom!
15. People live in and reside in the kingdom of heaven - The Kingdom of God is within those of us who have been born again!
16. The kingdom of heaven is for the "poor in spirit" - The Kingdom of God is for those who have been born of the Spirit of God!
17. The kingdom of heaven is for those who "are persecuted for righteousness' sake: - The Kingdom of God is for those who have BELIEVED on the Lord Jesus Christ (we have Christ's righteousness - not our own!).
18. The kingdom of heaven is entered into by those who DO the Father's will - The Kingdom of God is entered into by believing on in the Lord Jesus Christ.
19. Peter was given the "keys" to the kingdom of heaven - nowhere's in the Bible is it said that he received the "keys" to the Kingdom of God.
20. The kingdom of heaven is "likened to ten virgins" - The church is in the Kingdom of God and is referred to as the Bride of Christ - NOT ten virgins.
21. A rich man can hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven - The Kingdom of God has no such restrictions (anyone can enter upon receiving Jesus Christ as Saviour -Rich or poor, Jew or Gentile)
22. The kingdom of heaven has been taken by force - The Kingdom of God can NEVER be "taken by force"!
23. During Jesus' earthly ministry - the Pharisees could "SHUT UP the kingdom of heaven against men" - Do you really think that some religious leader today can SHUT UP the Kingdom of God?
24. The English words heaven and God are not only spelled different - they have DIFFERENT MEANINGS!

There are more distinctions - by why go on? Your conclusions are "faulty" because instead of following the commandment of God to "rightly divide the word of truth" - you have sought to "HARMONIZE" the Holy Scriptures, with the tragic result that you (or David Reagan) have concluded that you have a much better understanding of this issue than those of us who disagree with you (and David Reagan).

Read my previous Posts. For you to lightly proclaim (with such finality): "This is really not a hard or complicated issue. A little study goes a long way." When the truth of the matter is that this issue is one the most misunderstood issues in the entire Bible (an issue which the vast majority of Christians are totally unaware of) demonstrates to me that you are either ignorant of the complexity of the issue or are incredibly arrogant in thinking that you (or David Reagan) possess the only correct "interpretation" when there are plenty of sincere Bible believing Christians that differ with you - and for many good Scriptural reasons.

I have confessed (elsewhere on this Forum) that "I don't have a complete handle on this issue"; but there is one thing that I do know and that is - neither do you (or David Reagan).

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

Thank you for sharing the article, which was interesting. Alas, I cannot say that it was terribly convincing. For the first few years of my Christian life, I assumed that the two Kingdoms were synonymous, and my confusion was considerable. They simply don't match. I believe that Larkin and Scofield are right on the money.

Thanks for your thoughts! In my own studies I find no confusion whatsoever. Confusion reigns when I attempt to make two separate distinct kingdoms when scripture indicates that they are interchangeable.

Perhaps you can outline for me the "considerable confusion" that you faced so I can get a better understanding of where you are coming from.

Based upon scripture it is quite clear that Scofield was mistaken. I can offer many examples proving that Scofield's theology regarding the Kingdom of God/Heaven leads to utter confusion. If you abide by Scofield's theology you will not be able to reconcile many passages.

George,

I nearly missed your post because you must have been posting at the same time I was writing to Vendetta Ride. After reading it I wish I would have missed it.

Considering that I don't know you and you don't know me I was surprised at your comments about me. I thought I was on an "AV 1611" forum! I pretty much expect that kind of verbal abuse from the infidels and modern version supporters but coming from a fellow Bible Believer

I'll do my best to ignore your many ad hominem attacks on both my character and my intellect. If all you wish to do is call names and insult then I'll take my leave of this discussion. As I said, I'll ignore the ad hominems for now and try to respond to a few of your comments.

We have gone over this ground before (with the same results!). Please check out my Posts under AV1611 Bible Forums > Chit-Chat > Posts # 203, 213, & 221. Your Pronouncement (with "finality"): demonstrates either naivete on your part, or a profession (by you) that you have complete understanding of an issue that is demonstrably both "hard" and "complicated", and which has been debated by sincere Christians for decades (at least).

I didn't bother going over to read your posts. As you pointed out, I too "have gone over this ground before" and I'm reasonably sure that you didn't bring up any points that I haven't already refuted in the past.

I'm not "naivete" at all. I understand the subject and the "debates" that surround it quite well....thank you!

Tell me, George, was it "naivete on your part" and "incredibly arrogant" when you "Pronounce(d) (with "finality") that, "The kingdom of heaven is an earthly, physical, visible "kingdom" - The Kingdom of God is a Spiritual Kingdom!"? Or is it 'okay' for you to make such "pronouncements" but it is "naivete" and "incredibly arrogant" for others to reach a different conclusion than you? George, don't you know and understand that "Christians for decades" have debated this very idea? The same could be said of nearly ALL of your "pronouncements" contained in your list. I suppose if George (who supposedly doesn't "have a complete handle on this issue") makes a long list of "Pronouncements (with "finality") then we must all accept them or risk being labeled "naivete", "ignorant" and/or "incredibly arrogant". I would say that that was not only "incredibly arrogant" of you George and also very hypocritical of you but I prefer not to use ad hominem attacks like you.

Were you in fact lying, George, when you stated, ""I don't have a complete handle on this issue"? It would seem that you were in light of your MANY "pronouncements". For someone who doesn't "have a complete handle on this issue" you sure do make some rather dogmatic statements in your list. I would hate to see your statements when you DO "have a complete handle on this issue".

Just because some things in the Bible "appear"' to be the same, doesn't necessarily mean they are the same. And in this case {the kingdom of heaven & The Kingdom of God} cannot be exactly the same because, (whether you know it or not) GOD and heaven (small h) are NOT THE SAME! (Regardless of what you may think or conclude).

This is the kind of childish foolishness that I can do without. Of course, I understand that "God" and "heaven" are not the same. I have never stated that they were nor have I ever implied such a childish notion. For you to carry on is such a manner indicates that you imagine that you DO "have a complete handle on this issue". I find your "humility" in your previous post to be nothing but a fake humility. You in fact DO believe that you "have a complete handle on this issue" or you wouldn't have bothered making your latest post -- both attacking me and adamantly proclaiming that "there is one thing that I do know and that is - neither do you". Tell me, George, if you truly don't "have a handle on this issue" how can you so adamantly "pronounce (with finality)" that I'm wrong? If you don't "have a handle" how do you know that it isn't YOU that is wrong? You should be more careful, George, your true colors are showing!

You are entitled to your "opinion", but your "pronouncements" are not necessarily sound doctrine - just because you "think" that you have figured out (apparently David Reagan "figured it out" for you) one of the most complicated and misunderstood doctrine's in the entire Bible.

George, would you say that your long list is "your opinion" or are they "pronouncements"?

You can only enter the Kingdom of God by the new birth - entry into the kingdom of heaven has no such requirement!

Perhaps you can explain your above "opinion"/"pronouncement" in light of the following scriptures.

Matthew 19

16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Mark 10

24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

These are the same exact instances. Not only is "heaven" interchangeable with "God" but entrance into the kingdom of heaven is equated with "eternal life".

Oh yeah, speaking of "God" and "heaven", which, in your words are "NOT THE SAME" --- could you explain the following verse:

Luke 15:18 I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee,

What did the son mean when he said "I have sinned against heaven"? How should we "rightly divide" this verse?

There are more distinctions - by why go on? Your conclusions are "faulty" because instead of following the commandment of God to "rightly divide the word of truth" - you have sought to "HARMONIZE" the Holy Scriptures, with the tragic result that you (or David Reagan) have concluded that you have a much better understanding of this issue than those of us who disagree with you (and David Reagan).

Strange and strong words coming from a guy that claims not to "have a handle on this issue"!

I see -- you are the typical "Christian". If I don't agree 100% with you then MY "conclusions are faulty because" I didn't follow "the commandment of God to 'rightly divide the word of truth". It couldn't possibly be that YOUR "conslusions are faulty"! Do you honestly understand how FEW people agree with you? "Regardless of what you may think or conclude" it is YOU that has not "rightly divided the word of truth".

I have confessed (elsewhere on this Forum) that "I don't have a complete handle on this issue"; but there is one thing that I do know and that is - neither do you (or David Reagan).

There is one thing that I do know and that is that the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are used interchangeable in the Bible. If you wish to argue with God go right ahead! Jesus used them interchangeably in many instances. If you wish to turn a blind eye to the scriptures be my guest.

George,

I don't want to bore you with my "faulty conclusions" but I thought I would answer one more of your "prouncements"/"opinions". Actually I'm answering for other readers and not for your sake. It seems that you've already reached your own "faulty conclusions".

There are some "mysteries" concerning the kingdom of heaven - that do not coincide with the "mysteries" concerning the Kingdom of God (These "mysteries" are revealed to some people and NOT to others).

Apparently you are referring to Matthew 13:11

He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

In Luke 8:10 we read,

10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

In light of your above "prounouncement" how should we "rightly divide" these verses George?