Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 164


In Proposition 164, George Peters states:

“This Kingdom ends the Gentile domination.”

In this final proposition of Volume 2, Peters notes the coming Theocratic Kingdom will bring to an end the Gentile domination. What exactly does he mean by Gentile? It seems in this case, Peters uses the term Gentile as a reference simply to those not in covenant relationship with God. I am not speaking of covenant theology, but rather the difference noted in Scripture of those in relationship with God (i.e. His people, those set apart by Him to be His) and the wicked who in this case are in the category of Gentile.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 164 is the following:

“It is a significant fact, fully attested by history, past, and present, that no Christian nation has ever existed among the Gentiles. No matter how largely the laws of Moses and the precepts of Christ have been incorporated, and no matter how men of a Christian spirit have endeavored at times to legislate and execute laws in a proper spirit, it still remains true that the design of this dispensation has never been to convert nations (Prop. 86, etc.), and that every nation, however professedly Christian, has been guilty of oppression, injustice, and wickedness. The spirit of self-interest, aggrandizement, earthly glory, etc., has led nations into paths of sin, violence and cruelty, and with the principles at work they are utterly unfitted to cooperate with a pure Theocratic Kingdom, and hence their domination must come to an end.”

This is an important observation by Peters. Throughout history and as noted by Scripture, we can assess this to be true of any future nation, there has never been a fully God fearing nation. Every nation has at one point, even despite a desire for pursuing righteousness at the outset, eventually degraded into a collection of depravity. One can certainly suggest this is in alignment with the doctrine of the depravity of man. Thankfully, God has declared these nations and this continual depravity found in both the leadership of Gentile nations and their people, will come to an end. This depravity will be replaced with the Theocratic Kingdom. Oppression, injustice, and wickedness will be no more as such things are the result of sin. This sin problem will be dealt its final blow. Can we all say, come quickly Lord? I know I can! It certainly gets old to turn on the news and see yet another report of corrupt government and man doing inhumanity to their fellow man. No amount of laws can be enacted to deal with man’s depravity. An ultimate solution needs to take place and that solution will arrive when our Lord returns.

This concludes our journey through Volume 2 of George Peter’s The Theocratic Kingdom. I am not yet sure when I will begin blogging through Volume 3, but I anticipate it will be sometime this Spring. Stay tuned!

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 163


In Proposition 163, George Peters states:

“This Kingdom will be preceded by the predicted “battle of that great day of God Almighty.”

In this propostion, Peters is not setting out to establish that a battle will take place as he has already noted that fact in previous propositions. What he does strive to do is to elaborate on specific elements of the battle, most notably how the Antichrist and his “kingdom” will attempt to essentially rule the world through civil, military, and spiritual means and in doing so, will make war against the people of God. Of course, this false kingdom will meet its end in a spectacular fashion which Peters alludes to in the below observation.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 163 is the following:

“The greatness of this Antichrist in his civil and military aspects, which are, as we have shown, sustained by the religious, is also predicted. The Spirit beholding in prospect the coming of this gigantic power says (Rev. 13:3-4), that “All the world wondered after the beast” and “they worshipped the beast, saying: Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with the beast?” The beast is a civil polity; it is, as we have shown Prop. 160, the revived Roman Empire in a modified form; and the last head, the virtually eighth, is, as the controlling head or the representative of it, this beast. It is by virtue of hsi being thus the head of civil government that he is enabled to make and carry on the extensive military preparations announced by Daniel (latter part of ch. 11, see Prop. 160) and the prophets. He will surely overcome all oppositio that other civil powers may excite, for it is written: “and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” We are told that he will not reach the climax of power and arrogance without meeting foes whome he will overcome with much bloodshed. But in the wars carried on, he shall be successful, being prospered beyond all precedent. This is purposely allowed both as a punishment to the nations (inflicinting the predicted distress of nations), and to make the final overthrow of Antichrist the more impressive in the eyes of the world. Under the most specious pretexts, including that of religion, preparatory to the final conflict. While he is thus meeting with success and elevating himself to the most lofty and commmanding position, believers will ponder such passages as Joel 3:16; Ps. 92:7-9, Micah 4:11-12; Ps. 37 and 73; Heb. 1:12-17; Is. 35:4, etc., anticipating, by faith, his utter destruction. It seems that God intends to show in the most striking manner, both by allowing this ascendancy and by the subsequent overthrow, how utterly vain and false are the high-swelling expectations inculcated by rebellious reason in behalf of “Collective Humanity,” unified and deified in the person of the last head.”

Some might wonder why God will allow someone like the Antichrist and his fellow conspirators to take control of the world in the end of days. I think Peters notes an important reason and that is to make the fall of the Antichrist and his minions all the more spectacular. You see only pride and sheer hubris can cloud a person enough to bring them to the point where they actually think making war against God and His people will come to a successful outcome. The Antichrist will seem to be achieving success at ever turn. As with the current seemingly victories of the wicked, this will be short-lived. Success will be fleeting.

Furthermore, this period can be construed as a time of testing for the saints. Will this period of history serve as a pruning hook if you will for the saints? We are after all called to endure to the end, placing our faith and trust in the promise that God will be triumphant. Even if physical death is the result of declaring our faith in God in the face of the onslaught of the Antichrist’s evil reign, so be it. As Peters has rightly noted, the righteous can have confidence is such passages as:

Joel 3:16 – “The LORD roars from Zion, and utters his voice from Jerusalem, and the heavens and the earth quake. But the LORD is a refuge to his people, a stronghold to the people of Israel.”

Ps. 92:7-9 – “That when the wicked sprouted up like grass and all who did iniquity flourished, It was only that they might be destroyed forevermore. But You, O LORD, are on high forever. For, behold, Your enemies, O LORD, For, behold, Your enemies will perish; All who do iniquity will be scattered.”

Micah 4:11-12 – “And now many nations have been assembled against you Who say, ‘Let her be polluted, And let our eyes gloat over Zion.’ “But they do not know the thoughts of the LORD, And they do not understand His purpose; For He has gathered them like sheaves to the threshing floor.”

Is. 35:4 – “say to those with fearful hearts, “Be strong, do not fear; your God will come, he will come with vengeance; with divine retribution he will come to save you.”

(By the way, I am now sure the reference made in the observation to Heb. 1. There are only 14 verses in that chapter.)

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 162


In Proposition 162, George Peters states:

“This Kingdom will be preceded by a fearful time of trouble, both in the Church and the World.”

Whenever the reader of Scripture comes across an eschatological (i.e. end times) passage, it is likely they are presented with a description of a time of trouble. Perhaps the student of Scripture overlooks the reality that the people of God will also endure a time of trouble. Debate certainly rages as to how long or even if believers will endure what is known as the Great Tribulation. Space and time do not permit an investigation of the various positions on that issue. What can be said is what Scripture is quite clear upon, and that the end will be a time of great turmoil such as has never before been seen or experienced by humanity. This time of trouble will precede the coming Theocratic Kingdom.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 162 is the following:

“The reader need not be detained for us to prove that this tribulation immediately precedes the re-establishment of the Davidic throne and kingdom. This has been done under various Propositions and in numerous Observations. It is sufficiently clear that immediately after the tyranny and persecution of this last head of the beast, and that after the overthrow of the confederation under this Antichrist, the Kingdom of the Lord Jesus appears with its Millennial blessedness, and extends itself over the nations of the earth. Leaving the abundant Scripture already presented, we confine ourselves to a solitary illustration, which forcibly describes this period of the enemies’ triumph, their overthrow, and the peaceful kingdom that succeeds. Take Ps. 46 and consider how the Spirit describes the confidence of the true believer in a time of unparalleled trouble and commotion, precisely such as attends this period of tribulation. It is a time when “the heathen raged, the kingdoms were move,” and God helps His people amid the waving, troubled and swelling waters “when the morning appeareth”(marg. reading, comp. Prop. 139) and He breaks to pieces the warlike equipments of the nations, exalting Himself among the heathen – that “a river (i.e., a kingdom), the streams whereof shall make glad the City of God,” appears and is firmly established, because, “God is in the midst of her.” (Comp. other versions which, with some change, even make it more expressive as e.g., Luther’s, that the City of God, in which are the holy habitations of the Most High shall be joyful, etc.). The testimony on this point is overwhelming, and to an extent too that leaves every one who rejects it inexcusable. There is no doubt whatever that so much is said respecting it, that when the hour of the sorest trial comes to the Church, she may console and encourage herself by the glorious prospect before her.”

I firmly believe Peters is correct in stating it is inexcusable for the exegete or even the casual reader of Scripture to ignore or debate against the overwhelming evidence found throughout Scripture that the time preceding the coming Theocratic Kingdom will be a time of great distress. As Peters saliently notes, even during a period of great distress, the believer can and should have hope in that no matter what persecution they may endure and regardless of how long, in the end, we are consoled by the promise of the coming Kingdom. The evil kingdoms of this world will come to an end and will one day be no more. We can and must take great joy in that reality.

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 161


In Proposition 161, George Peters states:

“This Kingdom will not be re-established until after Antichrist is overthrown.”

As Peters has noted in other propositions, there are event markers provided in Scripture to help the people of God to correctly watch, wait, and be prepared for what will transpire in the end of the age. The overthrow of the Antichrist is one such even marker.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 161 is the following:

“The Church has always kept its eye fixed on the prophecies pertaining to Antichrist. Every century, from the Christian era down, gives us in the writings of eminent men an expression of opinion relating to it. However important the subject in the past, interest in it increases proportionately to the increasing nearness of the Millennial age. he Millennium can never be introduced before the fearful scenes under that Antichrist are first witnessed and experienced. The prominence given to Antichrist in the Scriptures and by the faith of the Church; the nearness of fulfillment that may be nigh to us; the delineation of character and work given by the Spirit; these are sufficient warrant for a careful consideration of this powerful actor in the world’s history.”

Much debate centers on the identity of the Antichrist. Will the Antichrist be an individual or representative of a collective spirit of the age? Will the Antichrist be a political figure, full of charisma who steps in at a critical juncture to secure what appears to be peace for the world? Does this figure arise out of a revived Roman Empire? All these and many more are typical questions that are asked. It seems each time a charismatic figure arises somewhere in the world, especially in a region associated by people as the center stage for end times events, that figure is given the label of being a potential Antichrist. Whomever that person ends up being, his rise and fall serve as even markers for the coming Theocraic Kingdom.

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 160


In Proposition 160, George Peters states:

“This Kingdom is set up in the divided state of the Roman Empire.”

In this proposition, Peters suggests that the Theocratic-Kingdom will be set up during the period of a revived Roman Empire. I have heard such a suggestion before, in particular the teaching that a revived Roman Empire will arise in the last days. Such a suggestion is based on what is stated in Daniel 7 which Peters addresses in a bit more detail in the below observation.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 160 is the following:

“Without repeating the reasoning elsewhere given, it is sufficient to say that this Kingdom, according to Daniel 7, is received by the Son of man after the Fourth Beast or Roman Empire is divided; after the rise of the ten horns and little horn, and at the very time that the judgments of God are to be poured out upon the divided Empire. The First Advent took place when the Empire was consolidated, the Second will occur when it is divided into its ten-toed form; for the smiting is upon the feet of the image, the reception and inheriting of the Kingdom is after the saints have long suffered from the arrogance, etc., of the powers arising out of this Empire, and these powers are to meet an awful infliction of tribulation.”

The passage in Daniel 7, for those perhaps not familiar with this reference, is Daniel’s dream of four beasts. The portion of that passage that addresses the fourth beast states,

“After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast — terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.

“While I was thinking about the horns, there before me was another horn, a little one, which came up among them; and three of the first horns were uprooted before it. This horn had eyes like the eyes of a human being and a mouth that spoke boastfully.”

The typical explanation of the Fourth Beast is that it is/was the Roman Empire. Thus, if applied to future prophecy, this Beast must then represent a revived Roman Empire. Peters follows the line or reasoning that since the Roman Empire was in power during the First Advent, as the final Beast in Daniel’s dream, a revived version must then be in place at the Second Advent. Analyzing such a prophecy is far beyond my area of expertise and I repeatedly note varying opinions by astute theologians on exactly what Daniel is describing. I will leave my comments with I suppose it is possible. Exactly how such an empire will revive itself and what that looks like remains of course to be seen. The most popular explanation using current events is the European Union. Again, we shall see is my response.

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 159


In Proposition 159, George Peters states:

“This Theocratic Kingdom of the Lord Jesus, the Christ, will never come to an end.”

What a comfort for the believer to have confidence in the reality that the Kingdom of our Lord will never end. The sheer finality of the end to evil and the enemies of God and the believer provides us with a great hope in this life. Despite the seeming triumph of evil over the righteous in this age, as believers, we know this current construct of sin, death, and decay will come to an end and replaced with the Theocratic Kingdom and a new heavens and a new earth. Evil will never again rise up to try and usurp the throne of the King. Come quickly Lord!

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 159 is the following:

“While the words “eternal,” “everlasting,” “forever,” are sometimes employed to denote limited duration (i.e. duration adapted to the nature of the thing of which it is affirmed), yet such words applied to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ cannot be thus restricted, because an unending duration intended by them is stated in explanatory phraseology (as e.g. Luke 1:32 “of His Kingdom there shall be no end,” etc.). The thousand years are specifically mentioned as the period of Satan’s binding and of the time existing between the two resurrections, and of this era it is also asserted that Christ and His saints reign. the declaration of their reigning during this period does not limit the reign of it, but is added to indicate that the reign is already commenced and extends through this Millenary age. Jesus is not merely the king of “an age” but of “the ages” (1 Tim. 1:17 Greek), and His Kingdom is united, not merely to “an age,” but to “the age of ages” or “eternal ages,” thus indicating its extension onward through the vast succession of time in unending series. Hence the perpetuity of the Kingdom is freely declared in 2 Sam. 7:16; Heb. 1:8; Luke 1:32-33; Rev. 11:15; Is. 9:7; 2 Pet. 1:11, etc., and this is explained, Dan. 2:44, to be “a Kingdom that shall never be destroyed,” and in Dan. 7:14,” His dominion is an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away, and His Kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” Indeed, so expressive are these and kindred passages that even thsoe who advocate a transfer of the Kingdom to the Father and some kind of an ending of the Kingdom, are still forced, by their weight and concurrence, unhesitatingly to acknowledge, in some form (as Barnes, etc.) “the perpetuity of Christ’s Kingdom and His eternal reign.” Hence this reign, beginning at the Millennial era, is not terminated by the close of the thousand years. The idea of the perpetuity of Christ’s reign was so generally diffused in the early Church, that we even find it in the Sibylline Oracles (B. 3) “the Holy King of all the earth shall come, who shall wield the sceptre during all the ages of swiftly moving time,” etc.”

The sheer volume of the biblical message regarding the eternality of the coming Kingdom is such that it is impossible to find any traction upon which to pose even the smallest argument against it. As Peters aptly notes, words such as eternal, everlasting, and forever can at times have a limited timeframe attached to them. Descriptions related to the Theocratic Kingdom do not have any element or sense of a limited duration. When Scripture says something will never end, well quite frankly it will never end. No ifs, ands, or buts about it as they say. As I noted above, this provides a great deal of confidence to the believer. Evil will be dealt an eternal blow. No longer will evil try and rear its ugly head. The King of King and Lord of Lords will reign forever. It sends goosebumps up my arms just thinking about that day!

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 158


In Proposition 158, George Peters states:

“The doctrine of the Kingdom aids in locating the Millennial period.”

This proposition is well stated. I say this because all the information that has been covered thus far by Peters has served as milemarkers if you will to help the reader understand not just the nature of the coming Kingdom, but its timing within salvation history. The individual parts are a key to the whole. Overlook or misapply those parts, and you will end up with the errant understanding of the Millennial period found in far too many eschatological positions.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 158 is the following:

“Against all theories which locate the Mill. age (the thousand years) in the past or present, or after the last resurrection, it is sufficient to point out, what every able commentator of the Apoc. concedes, viz., that the distinctive thousand years of Rev. 20 follow after the seven seals, seven trumpets and seven vials; after a certain harvest and vintage; after a particular Advent and conflict; after a complete overthrow of Antichristian enemies; after a binding of Satan; and then after the supremacy and ruling of saints it is followed by “a little season” witnessing a remarkable but futile outburst of enmity; and then, and only then, after the thousand years are ended comes the last resurrection and the entrance into the eternal ages. No such order, no such events have been witnessed in the past or present, and by the very nature of the predictions, interposing time and events, cannot be transposed to the eternal state. Simple unity, justice to the order laid down, demands that Rev. 20:1-6 should be regarded as a distinctive period, that of the binding of Satan, after which he is released and the events follow which precede the consummation of the last resurrection and judgment. No Bible reader who simply follows the order laid down can mistake the plainness of prediction.”

I appreciate the pointedness of Peters in this observation. Yes his concluding statement might seem a bit overreaching. I disagree. The reality is if the faithful reader of Scripture follows the signposts God has provided, the clarit of the predictions God has made regarding the coming Kingdom and its timing as related to the Millennial period are quite clear. Perhaps they are laden at times in symbolism, but that symbolism is explained by the biblical authors in a way so as not to confuse the reader regarding matters of timing. As Peters has noted, a period of events will take place and those events are laid out in Scripture. If one rushes to conclusions and allows their presuppositions to control their understanding of the text, thenn it is possible to drive right by and miss these signposts. Take the necessary time on the other hand, and the salvation history map of events becomes quite clear. Does this take effort and hard work on the part of the reader? Of course, so we best get to it!

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 157


In Proposition 157, George Peters states:

“This doctrine of the Kingdom enforces the future ministration of angels.”

I don’t believe we often take into account the issue Peters has presented in this proposition. Angels are kind of a side note it seems for most Christians. We come across them in Scripture and they certainly make a big appearance at Christmas time when the birth of Jesus is front and center. With that said, have we stopped to ponder the role of angels in eternity future, specifically their purpose in the new heavens and new earth and in the Theocratic Kingdom? The aspect of spiritual warfare of course at that time will be over, so the role of angels duking it out if you will with the forces of evil is thus over. Will angels be out of a job and just hanging out for all eternity? Peters suggests and rightly so the angelic host will continue to serve an important role of ministration.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 157 is the following:

“To be “as the angels of God in heaven” (Matt. 22:30), or to be “equal unto the angels” (Luke 20:36) may, as the context seems to indicate, only refer to the mode of existence (i.e. in reference to marriage, happiness, and immortality), but there is one passage which distinctly teaches a certain pre-eminency over, at least, some of the angels. In 1 Cor. 6:3 we read: “Know ye not that we shall judge angels?” which evidently means ruling over angels, just as “Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?” indicates clearly a ruling over the world. This is seen by a reference to Props. 133, 134, and 154, where the meaning of judging is given in detail. Now, such a governing power, bestowed in view of associated Rulership or Kingship with Jesus, is undoubtedly exercised in behalf of the administrations of the Theocratic Kingdom, and, consequently, must minister to the good, directly or indirectly, of its rulers or subjects. The realization can alone teach us the extent and the results of such a judging.”

Judging is most often thought of in the judicial sense of the word. Will the saints partake in judging the angelic host? Perhaps the intent of 1 Cor. 6:3 is to suggest the saints, as co-heirs with Jesus, will have the ability to judge the fallen angelic host in some manner. From a quick survey of commentaries, many biblical commentators approach 1 Cor. 6:3 in this way, stating the saints will to some degree serve as judges over the angelic servants of the enemy.

Peters references previous propositions where he discusses another means by which to understand what judging means in this passage. If we hearken back to Proposition 132, Observation 3, Peters asks, “Are we to understand by this Judgeship that Christ only sits in a judicial capacity to decide respecting the innocence or guilt of men; or, is far moe embraced in this term, such as judicial, legislative, and executive action, a supreme power, Kingly rule?” In response to his quetion, Peters states, “If we take the Bible idea of Judge, instead of the restricted, more modern sense engrafted upon it, there is no difficulty in replying that the latter is intended.” As proof, Peters points to the role of the Judges in the book of Judges, namely those whom God raised up to deliver Israel from oppressive enemies, enacting God’s judgment on those enemies, and then serving (at least for a time/cycle) in the office of Theocratic ruler. If we apply the Judgeship of Christ in this manner, then I can see how the saints can be understood to be judging the angels in eternity future. In this sense, the saints will not be performing judicial actions for all eternity over the angels. Conversely, our position will be elevated over the angels to such an extent that indicates the role of angels as ministering to the saints in the Theocratic Kingdom.

As further proof of Peters’ position, the meaning of the Greek word translated as judge in 1 Cor. 6:3, namely krinō, means in this context “to rule or govern.” While the term certainly has in its semantic range the idea of judicial oversight, properly understood, we should apply the meaning of ruling and governing to what Paul is telling us in 1 Cor. 6:3 as being part of the overall judging equation if you will.

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 156


In Proposition 156, George Peters states:

“The doctrine of the Kingdom enforces the future priesthood of the saints.”

At first glance, this may seem to some like an odd statement. How and why would the saints be priests in the future Kingdom? For that matter, why would there be a need for priests in the coming Kingdom? Weren’t priests, at least in the OT, all about doing animal sacrifices and duties of that nature? While that is what we typically think of when the word priest comes to mind, we have to grasp the reality that as saints, we will and are a royal priesthood of believers.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 156 is the following:

“In Ex. 19:5-6 we have presented God’s desire to exalt the Theocratic ordering by making it “a Kingdom of priests,” i.e. a Kingdom so permeated by heartfelt allegiance to God, the Ruler, that it would be under the permanent authority of a holy priesthood, thus making the Divine a controlling element. A Theocracy in its purity demands holiness, an entire consecration to its Ruler. This idea remained unrealized, not-withstanding its tender to the Jewish nation, on account of disobediance. But this sinfulness of the nation will not prevent God from ultimately realizing in ample fulfillment His purpose as indicated. This will be done when the Theocracy is restored under David’s Son. In the mean time, to insure the complete realization, God is constantly raising up those who are destined to officiate as Priests in the coming Kingdom. These are specified, and the promise of Ex. 19:5-6 applied to them, by Peter (1 Peter 2:9) “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people.” By the process of engrafting, these priests, being thus all the children of Abraham, are fully incorporated with the commonwealth of Israel.”

Peters notes the connection made by the Apostle Peter in 1 Peter 2:9 to a statement made in Exodus 19:5-6. The Exodus passage states, “Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; 6 and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel.” The Apostle Peter applies this passage to NT believers given we are grafted in to the promises made to Israel, including this declaration of being a kingdom of priests.

Now what do we mean by a kingdom of priests? Are we to be for all eternity offering up animal sacrifices and doing all manner of temple related duties? Is that what being a priest means in these passages? Given the tribe of Levi was called by God to perform the priestly duties, those duties specific to their calling are not what God had in mind when He declared that all of Israel would be a kingdom of priests. So what does God and Peter mean in applying this term to all believers.

Let’s think about the function of the priest. They had special access to God and the holy things of God in the temple. We have access to God through Jesus, our great High Priest. The priesthood served God. As believers, we serve God. The priests were servants of God. All believers are servants of God. The priesthood was a set apart group. All believers are set apart by God to be His chosen, special people. As we can see, this kingdom of priests, while not perhaps resembling the OT priesthood in every respect, nevertheless can be stated as a people dedicated to serving God as a holy and chosen group, thus meeting the definition of those who can rightly be called priests before God.

Please follow and like us:

Michael Boling – Thoughts from the Theocratic Kingdom (Vol. 2): Proposition 155


In Proposition 155, George Peters states:

“This Kingdom exhibits Jesus, not only as the King, but as “the Priest.”

In this proposition, Peters notes the importance of recognizing not only the Kingship of Jesus in the coming Kingdom, but also his office as “the Priest.” Those familiar with teachings on the threefold office of Jesus will recognize two of the three offices represented in this proposition with the third being that of Prophet.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 155 is the following:

“This priesthood, being after the similitude of Melchisedec, is exhibited in its completeness with His kingship. Now, at his Sec. Advent He comes as King, and reigns as King; it follows, therefore, that He is also revealed as Priest. The two offices are united in the same person, and so long as the one endures the other must also remain. His Kingship is eternal (comp. Prop. 159), so likewise must be the priesthood.”

Although Peters misspelled Melchizedek (small joke there…very small joke), this observation is about as straightforward as one can get with such a topic. Given Scripture repeatedly outlines (see the book of Hebrews) Jesus as a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek and given the eternality of his Kingship, it goes without saying then that both are everlasting roles or offices which Jesus holds for eternity. I am quite sure volumes of books could be written outlining all the nuances of this particular element of the doctrine of the Kingdom, but in short, Jesus is our eternal King and Priest, a priest after the order of Melchizedek.

Please follow and like us: