The Kingdom of Heaven and Kingdom of God Are Not Different - Refuting Mid-Acts Dispensationalism

What is the Difference Between the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God?

Today, I continue my ongoing refutation of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism. We continue the Biblical correction of these who wrongly divide the word of truth by correcting their wrong division of the Kingdom of heaven and the Kingdom of God.

Mid-Acts Dispensationalists and Classical Dispensationalists make a distinction between the Kingdom of heaven and the Kingdom of God. The view goes like this. The Kingdom of heaven and Kingdom of God are two separate and distinct kingdoms. In order to properly represent their position and not be accused of arguing a strawman, let's go to that hero of Classical Dispensationalism. Scofield's note at Matthew 3:2 gives us a definition of the Kingdom of heaven.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

[shawnglass]

“But it don’t be like that” Amen..That should be one of your signature quotes.

[jeaninedrylie]

Your comment from Edersheim about the Hebrews' reluctance to use the name of God was especially enlightening to help understand Matthew's exclusive use of the term, 'Kingdom of Heaven.' It is so freeing to read the Word of God without a man-concocted filter over it. Over and over, the Bible explains itself and how to interpret itself without external 'systems' being placed upon it. Thanks for addressing this subject so well.

[thechronicillnessdiaries]

Thank you for refuting this dangerous and deceptive doctrine. One would think that if a doctorine began 200 years ago - that it IS not what the early believers followed. But most of Churchianity will die on this hill. They are following two gospels when there is one.

[peterhenderson]

I'm a Messianic. I believe that the world today is populated by three People groups, Jews, Gentiles, and the Church. And I have always tended to imagine that this can be represented as two overlapping circles. In one circle we have the Jews, in the other we have the Gentiles, and in the space where these circles overlap we have the Church, in which we find both Jewish and Gentile believers in Mashiach. Though I also identify as what I refer to as a normative Dispy, I have never seen any distinction between KOH & KOG. I do find the mid Acts folk rather interesting, and I'm not sure how they would define where I fit, or what my position should be in the team. I am left to assume that they believe I should remain on the reserves bench, or on the left right out-field... But that's their problem, not mine. I, like the rest of the Church, belong on home base.

[classicchristianliterature]

I’m a “mid verse” dispensationalist… whenever I’m in the middle of a verse of scripture that I don’t like, easy solution —> that’s for the Jews in the tribulation / millennium or whatever 😂 gotta rightly divide and such

[annakimborahpa]

Good breakdown, Pastor B. You performed a C.S.I on C.I.S, i.e., a crime scene investigation on Cyrus Ingerson Scofield.
The four gospel authors were presenting the same message but intended for different audiences. According to Ireneaus of Lyons in his book Against Heresies from 180 AD, Matthew wrote first for a Hebrew audience, Mark wrote down what Peter preached to the Romans, Luke wrote down what Paul preached to the Greeks and John batted clean-up to the first three in order to augment the general synoptic message.

Some observations:
1. Dispensationalism is a revival of the first century Judaizer controversy when some Jewish Christians insisted that Gentiles also needed to be circumcised and follow the Law of Moses.
2. This was addressed and rebutted at the Council of Jerusalem, as well as in Galatians 2 when Paul confronted Peter when he came to Antioch and had wrongly conformed himself to Judaizer practice.
3. The Judaizer controversy eventually died out as both Jewish and Gentile converts merged together into single Christian communities. The destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 AD signaled there was no longer any need for Jewish Christians to observe customs related to ancient temple worship. The Letter to the Hebrews helped significantly to bridge the gap for Jewish converts in diaspora by showing how Jesus had superseded temple sacrifice. He was the prophetic fulfillment of a new covenant and priesthood according to order of Melchizedek that was ratified by His blood on Calvary.
4. By first making a distinction between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God, and then secondly positing a rapture whereby followers of the kingdom of God are suddenly removed while followers of a specifically Jewish kingdom of heaven rule the earth, Dispensationalism seeks to reestablish the Old Covenant as the dominant religion in the future, thereby making the church Jesus Christ established null and void.
5. But didn't Jesus say, "and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world"? (Matthew 28:20, KJV)

[andrettisampson]

Growing up I was taught that Christians get the New Heavens, and Jews get the New Earth.

[PreachingPolitics]

The kingdom of heaven is simply the more semetic way of saying the kingdom of God, which was more popular with the Greek speaking world. The fact that there is more than one way to say the thing is not new. Even in America, depending on the region /culture one lives, language is often customized and nuanced to that particular culture. For instance, if you want to ask someone for a carbonated drink, some places refer to it as a pop, other places say soda, and others refer to it as a coke. Different words, same context. So it is with the kingdom of heaven/God.

[RIBpastor]

It amazes me the ignorance, when it comes to this topic. I am IFB and was raised Dispensational. I am now no longer dispensational, but when I studied the Bible for myself without any theological system telling me what I should see in the text, I realized dispensationalism is a highly flawed framework. I also do not identify as covenant either. Though I agree with covenant on certain topics. God bless hang in there, it’s ok to be different amongst the normality .

[brothermike]

Great content brother! My experience has been - any teacher making this distinction between the supposed kingdoms always has something wonky in their teaching. Miss Piggy getting waylaid was the perfect visual for your point. If it just weren’t for that “may-sonic” G on the wall…….😂

[kevinjodrey]

Great video!!! I really like the video clips you slip in!!! This was helpful.

[joestfrancois]

Jonathan, I am apologizing to you. I am not a believer in Christianity. I comment on different vids about some aspects of Christianity. I watched a couple of your vids and did not understand the depth of your understanding of the Bible. I always liked you, I just didn't realize what a brain you got on you. You are an honest man as well.

I have to ask you though, I know you have decades of using the KJV and an affinity for it. I get that, I was in a group that used the NASB when I was a believer 40 years ago. When I started read the Bible again, as an intellectual pursuit, I am not going to believe in Christianity again, I read a HCSB that I downloaded free on my Kindle. I liked that, I thought it very readable. Since then I have been reading a NEB and a NRSV. I find these, especially the NEB to be very "readable."

I am curious as to how you feel about other translations. I get your everyday and preaching bible is the KJV. Are there any others that you like? Feel comfortable using and reading?

[SimplyProtestantBibleBeliever]

This very far distinction is made by Dr. Ruckman's Mid-Acts position, the Mid-Acts position of Charles Baker (Scofield's protege's protege) agreed with Scofield his pastor, and not with the very far distinction Dr. Ruckman made (see his book The Sure Word of Prophecy) those who endorse Dr. Ruckman's Mid-Acts view are under the allusion that "The Sure Word of Prophecy" is a "definitive work."

I hold the position of Larkin, Baker and Scofield, not Dr. Ruckman's.

Scofield stated one is within another “Pardon me if I dwell yet a moment upon these distinctions, for they are fundamental to any clear understanding of the Scriptures. The kingdom of God is the great inclusive term. The kingdom of heaven has its full manifestation in the thousand years' reign of Christ over the earth. The church is a distinct body of saved ones between Pentecost and the descent of the Lord into the air just before the great tribulation, who are to be associated with Him in the rule when the kingdom of heaven is set up. The kingdom of heaven is in the kingdom of God, but it does not follow that the two terms are synonymous. For example, the State of Texas is in the United States, but it is not the United States. Because it is in the United States it has much in common with the United States. It has the same president; the same constitution is the supreme law, the same language is spoken, but it would be mere con- fusion to speak of the State of Texas and the United States interchangeably. The kingdom of Scotland is in Great Britain, but it is not Great Britain. The kingdom of heaven is in the kingdom of God. Therefore, we may expect to find in the Scriptures a great many things which are common to the kingdom of heaven and we cannot make apply interchangeably to both.” pg. 106-107 Addresses on Prophecy by Dr. CI Scofield

Chafer puts it excellently: “No attempt is made by these expositors to explain why the term kingdom of heaven is used by Matthew only, nor do they seem to recognize the fact that the real difference between that which these designations represent is to be discovered in connection with the instances where they are not and cannot be used interchangeably rather than in the instances where they are interchangeable. Certain features are common to both the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God, and in such instances the interchange of the terms is justified. Closer attention will reveal that the kingdom of heaven is always earthly while the kingdom of God is as wide as the universe and includes as much of earthly things as are germane to it. Likewise, the kingdom of heaven is entered by a righteousness exceeding the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20), while the kingdom of God is entered by a new birth (John 3:1–16). So, again, the kingdom of heaven answers the hope of Israel and the Gentiles, while the kingdom of God answers the eternal and all-inclusive purpose of God.” (Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology Vol. 4, pg. 26)

And the Baker says the same in his systematic: "A great deal of confusion concerning the Kingship of Christ has arisen because of a misunderstanding of the Scriptural use of the word kingdom. A kingdom implies a king. If there is such a thing as the kingdom of God today, must there not be a king in that kingdom? Assuredly there must. God Himself is King in the Kingdom of God. God's kingdom, according to Scripture, is at times represented as the entire universe, as in Daniel 4:17; and at other times as limited to those beings who are in subjection to God spiritually, as in John 3:3. God's kingdom reigneth over all. Thus the Body of Christ of this dispensation as well as the Messianic Kingdom of the coming dispensation are both a part of the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is analogous to the United States as being one and yet comprised of several distinct States. One may be in New York or California and be in the United States, but one cannot be in New York while he is in California. And just as New York and California are separate and distinct parts of the United States, so the Body of Christ and the Messianic Kingdom are separate and distinct parts of the Kingdom of God. When dispensationalists make reference to the kingdom and to Christ's office of King they mean what the great majority of Scriptural references mean by these terms, namely, the millennial, Messianic kingdom promised to Israel but which will have dominion over the whole earth for a thousand years. It should be apparent to every one that Christ is not now reigning as king in this sense of the word." (Charles F. Baker, A Dispensational Theology, pg. 322)

[toddstevens]

This is off-topic, but I have this weird dispensationalist who is continually contacting me. He is evidently more dispy than the mid-Acts dispys. I guess he only believes that four Epistles (Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians) are written for the church. The rest of the Epistles (even Paul’s) belong to a different dispensation. He doesn’t believe in water baptism or the Lord’s Supper, because they are physical acts rather than spiritual. Is this guy alone in this weird teaching? Or is this some weird dispy cult that is fairly widespread?

[aworkman]

I'm a mid acts dispensationalist and agree that the kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God are the same.

[SoldierofChrist]

Excellent break down Pastor. Just wondering when you will come on over to superior theology and embrace reformed theology..lol

[Alex-mgyc]

So glad your channel is not KJV-Only only.

[oswaldumeh]

Just seeing the parallel passages alone knocks the life out of the argument for the difference between the Kingdom of heaven and the Kingdom of God!

[mikehopper]

Most mid act dispensationalists I know say they are the same, at least the ones I used to follow.

[Mumpowerpc]

Do you know why your first argument is the weakest argument?