We do not build the Kingdom of God. So please don’t say that we do. Let’s all stop saying that we build the Kingdom of God. If you have been saying it, I don’t blame you. You no doubt meant well. But you can stop now. That’s my admonition for today.
The Bible never calls us to “build the Kingdom.” We seek it, we see it, we enter it, it is given to us, it is near us, it is coming, it has come, and it is at hand, but we do not build it. At least not according to the New Testament, and that should make us hesitant to say it.
Roman Catholics say it rarely. I hear it most among Calvinists and Methodists. I heard a Wesleyan preacher end a sermon with, “Now go out and build the kingdom.” It expresses world-formative Christianity—that “thy Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven” is more than saving souls and individual obedience. Of late the language is being used by the Christian Right.
I was surprised to discover that the language appears in the Contemporary Testimony of the Christian Reformed Church in North America, that excellent document called Our World Belongs to God. In article 46 the phrase “building the kingdom” is used twice for Christian activity.
Oddly, the paragraph is the one on marriage, family, and divorce. Did I miss something when Melody and I got married at the Sherman Street Christian Reformed Church? We never thought of raising our two kids as “building the Kingdom,” even when we sent them to Christian schools! So this is my little gravamen against the Contemporary Testimony of the CRC.
When I ask you not to use this language anymore, I am not advocating privatist, pietist soul-winning as the end-all of Christian witness. I am not speaking against a robust Kingdom-orientation or what Richard Mouw calls “cultural discipleship.” I have criticized my own denomination, the Reformed Church in America, for the weakness of its Kingdom vision. I am in favor of Christian schools and Christian cultural institutions. These things need buildings, and organization, and fund-raising, and hard work. I suppose it’s the concreteness of this work that tempts us to speak of “building the Kingdom.”
What harm is there in it? Even if the New Testament never uses the phrase, don’t we often use language beyond what’s in the Bible? The word “Trinity” is not in the Bible. Fair enough. But our language can make us deaf to how the Bible prefers to speak. The fact that the New Testament speaks so constantly of the Kingdom but uses other verbs than “building” should give us pause.
The language implies that we naturally identify the Kingdom with what we are building or organizing or working on. We often call these efforts “Kingdom work.” We “see” the Kingdom in our designs and Christian institutions. But what if that puts blinders on us from seeing the Kingdom elsewhere? I suggest that Kingdom-builders are slow to see the Kingdom in places not of our own designs, among people not of our preference, and “at hand” in ways that contradict our intentions. In Matthew 5, the Lord Jesus says that the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to the poor in spirit and to those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake. And “poor in spirit” does not mean “not poor.”
A danger for Christians in the Kuyperian tradition is to think of our Christian institutions as being on the good side of the so-called Antithesis, where the Kingdom is, while secular institutions and public schools are on the wrong side. But the Antithesis is not vertical—with antithetical cultures on one side or the other—but horizontal, and over everything, including Christian institutions and cultural discipleship. All of our human designs and desires are under the judgment of the cross. We cannot build the Kingdom.
The Lord Jesus says to his disciples, “Fear not little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom” (Luke 12:32). We don’t have to build it. It is given to us. So what we can do is bear witness to it. We can haltingly imagine its magnificence in our designs. We can demonstrate its comprehension and character by our institutions and our schools.
A paper-cup salesman was a deacon in my church in Brooklyn. He was down-to-earth and practical, not big on doctrine or mystery, but he worshiped faithfully. He served on committees and handled the grunt-work of rentals and tenants. On Saturdays he never missed being at the church kitchen to cook for the homeless shelter. One Sunday he gave his testimony. He said, “Do you know why I do this? Do you know why I keep giving my time for all these committees and projects? Because when I do it I can see the Kingdom of God!” I was thrilled.
24 Responses
Good morning, Daniel. The Antithesis is not vertical, but horizontal, and over everything. Something clicked when I read that and I feel like I’ve gained a new understanding. Thank you.
Thank you, Dan. How about “erecting sign posts to the Kingdom, as we do the will of God on earth as it is in heaven?” I’ve long felt that those two phrases, “Thy Kingdom come” and “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” are tightly woven together. I don’t know where the language of “sign posts” came from. Certainly not original to me.
I wonder if we talked about this some 50 years ago in our attempt at daily devotions, you and me, in the Worden Street Community. I know I’ve always resisted the “building the Kingdom” language which I encountered for the first time when I came into the CRC. Even our “sign posts” will be somewhat blurry. Again, thank you.
Thanks Daniel. I appreciate the point of your post. You were very gracious to leave unstated one of the spiritual hazards of “building the kingdom” language, namely, triumphalism. God has his ways of humbling those who believe they have a secret sauce of the kingdom that no one else quite has. These days I take great comfort and hope from Isaiah 40:4-5: “Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain. And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all people will see it together.”
Spot on, Dan. I pressed this same matter over and over again in the missiology classes I taught at Western Seminary, over a couple of decades. And I istressed the point in chapter 4 of the book Missional Church. Thanks for keeping up the drumbeat.
Ja, I vividly recall a regional synod meeting many years ago, when the person who was leading worship concluded the service by “quoting” Jesus saying “Now go out there and build my church!” (Imperative) When I asked him later where Jesus had said that, he replied, “you know, that place where he said ‘on this rock I will *build my church*”. Ranks up there with “build the kingdom” as one of the common but just plain wrong tropes out there. (Like how ‘perseverance of the saints’ means gosh-darn stick-to-it-ive-ness, or how ‘total depravity’ means everyone everywhere does the worst possible thing all the time. Yikes!)
“The Bible never calls us to “build the Kingdom.” We seek it, we see it, we enter it, it is given to us, it is near us, it is coming, it has come, and it is at hand, but we do not build it. At least not according to the New Testament, and that should make us hesitant to say it.”
Perfect!
Thank you, friend.
“The Kingdom of God _is like . . .” suggests it is already built, not “to _be built” but recognized, joined, shared. Thanks for this reminder of God’s work accomplished.
“Because when I do it I can see the Kingdom of God” – what a glorious statement! I have the kingdom of God; most recently in the citizenship classes that our church has set up via our justice and Mercy committee. What a privilege to help and get to know and love folk from another culture.
Jesus came proclaiming, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news.” You are correct in highlighting the gospel message of Jesus. Then his disciples say little about the kingdom but confess, “Jesus is Lord.” If Jim Cook was right in what he taught me, the disciples understood that Jesus established the kingdom in his life, death, resurrection, and ascension and they recognize that we are called to believe this good news and be ambassadors of him/it. An ambassador does not build the nation/kingdom. s/he/they represent it, bear witness to its life and message. If any of this is correct, and I think it is, “building the kingdom” is simply a fancy term for works righteousness, and its danger is captured in a bit of pop culture, “If you build it, he will come.” This kind of thinking leads to running roughshod over Palestine, while building up Israel no matter what it takes, running roughshod over due process to “establish the kingdom” in our country, running roughshod over anything, anyone, and everything to do the “good work” that will save us from “those” people.
Thanks Daniel. It’s a helpful reminder and a gentle nudge to check my language, because it matters.
Happy to join a grateful chorus in thanks for this piece, Daniel. Thankfully I was disabused of this notion decades ago by both George Hunsburger in WTS’s Gospel and Our Culture course, and earlier, Jeff Munroe, who as area director for Young Life assigned a bunch of young adult volunteers(!) Sign of the Kingdom by Lesslie Newbigin. In their lastest book, Jesus and the Powers, N. T. Wright and Michael Bird are using the phrase, “Building for the kingdom.” I’m curious to see how they flesh this out. Thanks again!
Daniel, thank you for another thought provoking article. We need to relax and let the Lord build his Kingdom for us. We are asked to be his hands in this process. We are watching the turmoil in both the RCA and the CRCNA tearing apppart His church. At the same time, we are seeing the RCA welcoming in both those ministers and churches who are being forced out of the CRCNA as well as churches from Latin America. I’ve watched this struggle from the sidelines, knowing the history of both denominations, believing that we seeing Christ building and refining “His Church” as he has been doing in the 2000 years since he laid its foundation while He was with us on earth. The history of His church has been one of struggle and internal disagreements, often over things and ideas, that seem minor and petty to us today, but through it all have actually made His church stronger and more vibrant. We all need to be like your “Paper-cup salesman” and serve in the trenches helping others and let Christ do the building. (Again I can clearly see in your writing that the apple didn’t fall far from the tree.)
I am in full agreement with what Daniel has said and the above responses. But since I like to find agreement among Christians, I tried to find a few verses that might lie behind the “building the kingdom” talk. I found plenty of verses undermining the building the kingdom language (like the Lord saying to David that David would not build him a house, but the Lord would build David a house), but there were a few interesting verses that made me think. Psalm 127:1 says, “Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain.” The emphasis is on God doing the building, but there does seem to be room for us to be involved in the labor as well, as long as the Lord is leading the way. When Isaiah 57:14 says, “And it shall be said, ‘Build up, build up, prepare the way, remove every obstruction from my people’s way,'” it’s not clear who these words are addressed to: Israel, the Messiah, John the Baptist, or the people of God. It’s not necessarily about building the kingdom, but it is about building something to help people might draw near to God. Paul also conceived of ministry as building something on the foundation of Christ (see Romans 15:20, 1 Corinthians 3:10-15). But overall, even if we are not called to build the kingdom, we are called to build up others: “Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to build him up” (Romans 15:2) and “Therefore encourage one another and build one another up, just as you are doing.” (1 These 5:11). I see that as a challenge to build up those who mistakenly talk of “building the kingdom.”
Thank you for this David. I think the confusion that happens to many Christians (not saying you) is the conflation of the Church and the Kingdom of God. They are not the same thing. We may (and you suggest rightly I think) be called to build up the Church (though some might argue even that is God’s work), but as you note and Daniel notes that is not building up the Kingdom.
At any rate, thank you for this contribution.
An interesting peek into the work of hymnal committees: When the first joint CRC/RCA committee prepared the 2001 collection Sing a New Creation, they requested and received copyright permission for a change to the 1986 song “Bring Forth the Kingdom,” by Marty Haugen. Originally the refrain read “Bring forth the Kingdom of mercy, Bring forth the Kingdom of peace, Bring forth the Kingdom of justice, Bring forth the City of God.” We edited the text and received permission to change caps and two words, to read “Bring forth the kingdom of mercy, bring forth the kingdom of peace, work for the kingdom of justice, hope for the city of God.” Sung theology can stick pretty tight. It matters what we sing. The song didn’t make it into the 2013 CRC/RCA hymnal Lift Up Your Hearts.
This is fascinating! I vividly remember singing that song from that spiral-bound book, so I appreciate hearing the backstory. Good ol’ Marty Haugen… 🙂 Thanks for sharing.
Hmmm. You may have given me an idea…
Well, don’t leave me in suspense!
I agree with your analysis and am tempted to author an overture to amend Our World Belongs To God. No gravamen should be necessary to change a contemporary testimony.
I wonder if the oft-used phrase “kingdom workers” led many to think of workers as builders rather than workers for and within the kingdom.
I agree, we do not and are not invited to build the kingdom. However, I don’t want to throw out the “build” language. There remain many workers in the church for whom such language matters. Wish I could recall, but someone once noted we build FOR the kingdom. I think your deacon, homeless shelter cook was building FOR the kingdom and it helped him and others see the kingdom. This would be just another way of being like John the Baptist who “prepared the way of the Lord.” He was a kind of bulldozer making the way to the kingdom more accessible.
In fact, the NT is much looser with the word “build” when it comes to the church. The church was built up Paul compares himself to a master builder. We are living stones in the temple. I didn’t have room in 800 words to go into this difference. The Lord Jesus himself builds the church, upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles, but he designates offices and ministers to serve him in this work. The Lord God gave the kingdom to David, but Solomon was authorized to build the Temple. I haven’t figured out all the implications of this distinction, but it is noteworthy.
Thank you for writing this post. I gained some insight into the Kingdom of God and followed up with a search and study of Bible Verses that mention the Kingdom of God. I do agree with you that God’s Kingdom can’t be “built” by people. As other commenters noted, a more biblical verb to use would be “build for” or “build up” and even better would be “workers or laborers” for the Kingdom of God. I also spent some time reading/studying the CRC Contemporary Testimony. This is a very thorough and wonderful summary with its depth and breadth of the Christian faith. So even it contains reference to “build”, it is obvious that the writers were able to get to the heart of the matter, using bible references.
What worries me much more is the way progressive Christians explain the Kingdom of God. They are using the term “co-create with God” to replace “workers for the Kingdom of God”. They say that we are “collaborators” with God to further the “kin-dom” of God. According to Philip Hefner (an influential progressive church leader) the term co-creator is defined: “at it’s core, the created co-creator concept claims that, as creative beings fashioned in our Creator’s image, humans are meant to join God in further creating reality.” Yikes! This is a whole mix up of the meaning, not even trying to get it right. In addition, a popular term the progressive Christians like to use is “kin-dom” instead of “Kingdom of God”. Because they don’t like to think of God’s reign and rule as a “Kingdom”, they just change it to “kin-dom”. Apparently as co-creators with God, this gives them the authority to change God’s stated purposes to something they like better or think is more fitting for Christians to believe. This term indicates that we are equal to God. This should be a concern for the RJ readers.
Thank you. Recently I read somewhere the statement that God builds the kingdom; we don’t. It gave me pause. You have expanded on and explained that, and I appreciate it.