Any argument from silence is tenuous at best. However, under certain conditions such an argument can be significant. For example, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle built an entire argument around the silence of a dog during a murder in his book “The Adventure of Silver Blaze.” The dog’s silence was quite deafening! However, what about the silence in the scriptures concerning the physical Kingdom Jesus is said to have intended to set up at his Second Coming. Does the argument of silence work here? Is it great enough to show he intended to set up a spiritual Kingdom, not a physical one as most folks expected?
With the above in mind, if, indeed, the Kingdom of God was to be a physical entity, that is, a theocracy on earth with Jesus in a physical body as its King, if that is what the Bible teaches, where is the evidence? Does Jesus rule from physical Jerusalem or from spiritual Jerusalem that comes out of heaven (Revelation 21:1-3)? If Jesus rules from physical Jerusalem or on a renovated earth as indicated in the teachings of amillennialism, postmillennialism and premillennialism, shouldn’t we be able to see the physical nature of the Kingdom somewhere in scripture?
To be sure folks who embrace the futurists’ point of view do point to scriptures that they interpret to mean Jesus returns in a physical body to reign on a physical throne in physical Jerusalem in a physical Kingdom of God. However, I have also been pointing out that a closer look at those scriptures (viz. Matthew 16:27) tends to show such a point of view isn’t true, and, in fact, often contradicts both the context and the laws of language in the text.
Moreover, as testified in the book of Acts, Jesus is ruling from heaven, on David’s throne, and at the right hand of God (Acts 2:32-36). How does this present reality fit into a physical Kingdom of God on earth? Would Jesus leave the “throne of God” in order to rule from physical Jerusalem, and, if so, how does that fit in with what John tells us in Revelation 22:1-5? It seems that Jesus reigns from the throne of God forever, and this is found in spiritual Jerusalem that comes out of heaven (Revelation 21:1-3). The “silence” of the physical in these scriptures is deafening.
What about the physical Temple that many of the futurists say must be built? Where do we find evidence for that in scripture? When we look in the book of Acts what we find is Peter claiming that Jesus is the ‘stone’ the builders rejected, but he has become the chief cornerstone in the Messianic Temple (Acts 4:10-10; cf. Zechariah 4:6-7; Ephesians 2:20-22). While I can see and understand a spiritual Messianic Temple as described in these scriptures fitting into a spiritual Jerusalem that comes out of heaven (Revelation 21:1-3), how does such a Messianic Temple fit into a physical Kingdom of God, headquartered in physical Jerusalem? Where are the scriptures that would substantiate that claim? What I see is silence!
Jesus claimed that his Kingdom, that is, his Messianic Kingdom, or the Kingdom of God, is not of this world (John 18:36). How does a Kingdom that is “not of this world” become a physical kingdom “of this world”? What logic would permit a physical Kingdom under these circumstances? The “evidence” for a physical Kingdom of God is strangely silent. Is their silence loud enough to impress the reader of the scriptures of a “strong argument” for a spiritual Kingdom of God? All I can say is, the silence is ‘loud’ enough for this reader.
Smoodock's Blog 