Scriptural Discussion - What did the disciples preach?

RAIDER

Well-known member
Doctor
Elect
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
8,299
Reaction score
109
Points
63
In Matthew chapter 4 we see that Jesus began to preach that the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Matthew 4:17

"From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

In Matthew 10 he calls his 12 disciples and sends them forth to preach that the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Matthew 10: 5-7

"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand."

In reading those two passages some would say that Jesus was telling his disciples to go and tell the Jews that He was the Messiah and they needed to repent and believe that He was going to die for their sins.  Some would preach that Jesus was sending them forth to preach the gospel - the death, burial, and resurrection.

Notice what Jesus told His disciples several chapters later in Matthew 16.

Matthew 16:21

"From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life."

According to Matthew's gospel Jesus didn't tell His disciples about His death and resurrection until chapter 16.  What exactly were the disciples preaching before this time? 
 
That God was breaking into creation to bring Israel out of her long exile.
 
rsc2a said:
That God was breaking into creation to bring Israel out of her long exile.

In other words the disciples were not preaching about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, but rather the Messiah freeing them from bondage?
 
From my blog on the life of a Christ, a post entitled "The Kingdom Then":
http://concerningjesus.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-kingdom-then.html

One of the phrases we find again and again in the Gospels (97 by my count) is 'the kingdom of heaven' or 'the kingdom of God'. What did the people of Jesus' day understand that to mean? What did John the Baptist mean when he used it? What did Jesus mean when He used it? What does it mean for us today?
          To answer these questions let me take you back to Genesis 12, and what is commonly known as the Abrahamic Covenant. In the beginning of this chapter God makes Abraham, the first Jew, some promises, and later passes those promises on to Abraham's descendants, the nation of Israel. Amongst other things, God promised Israel through Abraham eternal deed to the land of Palestine, indeed to a geographical area larger than any they have ever yet controlled.
          This is not the only covenant in the Old Testament by any means, and another one that has a direct bearing on the idea of 'the kingdom' is the Davidic Covenant. This set of promises made by God to David and his descendants can be found, amongst other places, in I Chronicles 17. In it God promises David that one of his descendants will sit on the throne of Israel forever.
          In these two covenants, then, God promises Israel an eternal deed to the land of Palestine, and its environs, and He promises that a descendant of David will sit on Israel's throne forever. Neither of them have ever been true in the years since David and Abraham and they aren't true now. It is my belief in this, and in a literal fulfillment of God's promises that drives much of my doctrinal position as a premillennialist. But beyond that, it drives my understanding of the arc of the life of Jesus Christ.
          To the Jews of Jesus' day these were precious promises indeed. Their theology understood this like mine does in the sense that they believed it to be a literal fulfillment, and to be ushered in by the coming of the Messiah. Thus, when John the Baptist came blazing out of nowhere to shake up the system just prior to the beginning of Jesus' ministry his message needs seen in this light: 'Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand' (Matthew 3.2). The Baptist was preaching that the fulfillment of these promises was right around the corner, and that to prepare for them Israel corporately and individually needed to repent of her sins.
          Jesus Himself, when He came on the scene, interacted much with John the Baptist, and indeed preached a very similar message toward the beginning: 'From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand' (Matthew 4.17). When we read this we must understand that since He clearly claimed to be the Messiah from the beginning, and since all the Jews knew that when the Messiah came the kingdom came too, then He was here essentially proclaiming Himself to be Israel's sovereign King and offering Himself as such to the people.
          In the Old Testament there are many prophecies regarding the coming eternal King of Israel, one of which is found in Isaiah 60 and 61. It was precisely from this passage that Jesus read the first time He went back to preach in Nazareth. 'And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears' (Luke 4.21). In other words, Jesus reads one of the prophecies regarding the long promised king and says, 'It's me'.
          So what was Israel's reaction to this astonishing claim? Well, we already saw that in Nazareth that day they tried to kill Him by throwing Him off a cliff, but Israel as a whole hardened her heart against those claims. Jesus, in an effort to prove His credentials, did miracle after miracle. In response, the Pharisees advance the unforgivable theory that He does these in the power of Satan, and when Israel chose to follow the Pharisees in believing this in Matthew 12 she chose to reject her King. There, Jesus told them that for this rejection of Himself they would be condemned. 'But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned' (Matthew 12.21-22).
          Not only is it my understanding that this eternal throne of David is what Jesus claimed for Himself, but it was also the understanding of the Jews of His own day as well. We see this clearly at the crucifixion when Pilate wrote 'the King of the Jews' (John 19.21) and hung it over Jesus' head on the cross. The Sanhedrin got upset about it, and asked Pilate to rewrite it as 'he said, I am King of the Jews'. Pilate, of course, refused, but the point is that Israel's religious leadership clearly understood that Jesus claimed to be that king, and that He claimed to be coming to usher in the kingdom long promised via the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants.
          The reality is that Israel didn't reject Him at Calvary. She rejected Him over a year before in Matthew 12 when she chose to believe the Pharisees unforgivable assertion that Jesus was possessed by Satan. It is for this reason that Jesus would later tell the Jews that the kingdom had been taken from Israel and given away. 'Therefore I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof' (Mathew 21.43).
          He did not mean by this that the land and throne were taken from them in a literal, permanent sense, but that His own generation had lost their opportunity and it would take an entirely different Israel, purified of her stubborn rejection in the awful fiery armageddon of the Tribulation period, to be receptive enough of her King to bring in the kingdom.
          That was what the phrase 'the kingdom' meant as John the Baptist used it, as Jesus used it, and as the Jews of His day understood it. In the next  post I will discuss how that changed with the hinge pivot rejection of Christ in Matthew 12, and what Jesus would mean by it as He explained it to the Apostles in Matthew 13, and how that impacts us very much still today.
 
From my blog on the life of Christ, a post entitled "The Kingdom Now":
http://concerningjesus.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-kingdom-now.html

  Following the corporate rejection by Israel of Jesus Christ under the direction of the Pharisees in Matthew 12 many things changed. One of those things is that Jesus immediately began to speak, for the first time, of His coming death and resurrection (Matthew 12.39-40). In other words, He is no longer looking toward a coronation but instead to a cross. To follow this thought in reference to the kingdom, Jesus would no longer announce the literal Kingdom as being at hand, but rather that it had been postponed. The fulfillment of the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants will now have to wait for His Second Coming.
          Besides informing our understanding of the arc of His life, what does this mean for us? Well, immediately after these events in Matthew 12 Jesus proceeds to give several parables in Matthew 13 to explain and emphasize the kingdom of God. We know, at this point, He isn't talking about a literal throne and the fulfilling of the covenants, yet still He points His people to the idea of the kingdom of God. At one point, He specifically says in the text that this is the reason for these parables. 'And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 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' (Matthew 13.10-11).
          In a scriptural context a mystery is something that was not previously known that is now revealed. For instance, the Church is described in Scripture as a mystery (Ephesians 5.32). The idea or concept of the Church wasn't even dreamed about by the prophets in the Old Testament, but it was clearly revealed in the New Testament. Jesus is saying, then, to His Apostles in Matthew 13 that there is some aspect of the kingdom that was not previously understood that is now being revealed. In other words, He gives these sets of parables specifically to explain and emphasize, not only that the idea of the kingdom had shifted, but also that they might understand what it now meant.
          If the coronation and the crown will now have to wait for His Second Coming than it wouldn't be unfair to say that His first coming, and thus the new or revised concept of the kingdom has much more to do with the cross. As God's people, we don't necessarily like hearing that. We would rather our religion be about a throne than about a cross, but our rathers are wrong. 'Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body' (II Corinthians 4.10). 'I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me' (Galatians 2.20). Scripture is clear – the life we are supposed to lead, in this dispensation, is the crucified life. 'And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts' (Galatians 5.24).
          Was there anything of His life that Jesus held back? Was there anything of His life that Jesus kept for Himself? Was there anything that Jesus refused to give up, or to do, or to yield? No, all the way up to a cross. 'Let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt' (Matthew 26.39).
          It is just this idea of yielding everything we are or want or have to the Lord that marks the mature believer. It is just this that is the kingdom of God in our dispensation. No, we won't sit on a throne and rule over the world in our current Christian life, but we are still called to the kingdom of God. Well, what is the kingdom of God if it isn't a throne? Simply this: the kingdom of God is the complete rule of God in my life. It is when I yield everything up to Him, when the crucified life of Christ is lived out in my life, and when He rules me completely. 'Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls: Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it' (Matthew 13.44-46).
          Jesus came to be Israel's King. She rejected Him. So He turned to the cross, and in it, not only bought my redemption, but my allegiance to His kingship, not on the throne of Israel, but on the throne of my heart.

          Is the King in residence in your heart today? Have you yielded to Him as your King? Has the kingdom of God come to your heart and life?
 
RAIDER said:
rsc2a said:
That God was breaking into creation to bring Israel out of her long exile.

In other words the disciples were not preaching about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, but rather the Messiah freeing them from bondage?

I don't think the disciples even grasped the death, burial,  and resurrection of the Christ.  What they did know was the Jewish expectation that God would restore Israel.
 
rsc2a said:
RAIDER said:
rsc2a said:
That God was breaking into creation to bring Israel out of her long exile.

In other words the disciples were not preaching about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, but rather the Messiah freeing them from bondage?

I don't think the disciples even grasped the death, burial,  and resurrection of the Christ.  What they did know was the Jewish expectation that God would restore Israel.

I agree 100%.
 
rsc2a said:
RAIDER said:
rsc2a said:
That God was breaking into creation to bring Israel out of her long exile.

In other words the disciples were not preaching about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, but rather the Messiah freeing them from bondage?

I could not possibly agree with you more strongly. This is exactly right and a key point to understand if you want to understand Jesus in His own day/time.


I don't think the disciples even grasped the death, burial,  and resurrection of the Christ.  What they did know was the Jewish expectation that God would restore Israel.
 
TB - The problem I have with your analysis is that it turns the cross into a backup plan instead of the point upon which all of history turns. 
 
Tom Brennan said:
rsc2a said:
RAIDER said:
rsc2a said:
That God was breaking into creation to bring Israel out of her long exile.

In other words the disciples were not preaching about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, but rather the Messiah freeing them from bondage?

I could not possibly agree with you more strongly. This is exactly right and a key point to understand if you want to understand Jesus in His own day/time.


I don't think the disciples even grasped the death, burial,  and resurrection of the Christ.  What they did know was the Jewish expectation that God would restore Israel.

I believe that may be why Paul called the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ "my gospel".  It was different than what the disciples were preaching.
 
RAIDER said:
According to Matthew's gospel Jesus didn't tell His disciples about His death and resurrection until chapter 16.  What exactly were the disciples preaching before this time?

I want to go back to this b/c this is your basic question. He did tell the Apostles of His death/resurrection prior to ch16, but not much prior. Your larger point is what did they preach when they preached the Gospel. They preached - not the death/burial/resurrection - for they never understood that until the week after the resurrection. No, they preached Jesus - in the sense of the validity/truth of His claims. Jesus claimed to be Israel's Messiah and, further, to be the divine Son of God. That is what the Apostles preached prior to the resurrection. They preached that the nation ought to accept Jesus as her Messiah and her God.
 
rsc2a said:
TB - The problem I have with your analysis is that it turns the cross into a backup plan instead of the point upon which all of history turns.

I don't believe it was a "backup" plan, but rather part of the original plan.  God's plan for the ages had/has many steps.
 
rsc2a said:
TB - The problem I have with your analysis is that it turns the cross into a backup plan instead of the point upon which all of history turns.

I understand but obviously I disagree with you. The foreknowledge of God does not mean the cross was a back up plan; it means that He understood how His people were going to react to Christ and planned for it all along. Another way of saying this is that the salvation of man from his sin was always God's purpose for Jesus' first advent. This was true from before the foundation of the world. But the human process (and God mostly uses human processes though He certainly does not have to) was Israel's rejection of His offer of Himself as her Messiah.
 
Tom Brennan said:
RAIDER said:
According to Matthew's gospel Jesus didn't tell His disciples about His death and resurrection until chapter 16.  What exactly were the disciples preaching before this time?

I want to go back to this b/c this is your basic question. He did tell the Apostles of His death/resurrection prior to ch16, but not much prior. Your larger point is what did they preach when they preached the Gospel. They preached - not the death/burial/resurrection - for they never understood that until the week after the resurrection. No, they preached Jesus - in the sense of the validity/truth of His claims. Jesus claimed to be Israel's Messiah and, further, to be the divine Son of God. That is what the Apostles preached prior to the resurrection. They preached that the nation ought to accept Jesus as her Messiah and her God.

Nicely done.  So many preachers take liberty with what was happening in the gospels.  They act as if the disciples were sent out in Matthew 10 to preach what you and I know today as the "gospel".  It was definitely good news, but not the good news you and I know of today.
 
This brings up an even deeper discussion.  If the disciples did not know about the death, burial, and resurrection until later, what did they do to be "saved"?
 
[quote author=RAIDER]Nicely done.  So many preachers take liberty with what was happening in the gospels.  They act as if the disciples were sent out in Matthew 10 to preach what you and I know today as the "gospel".  It was definitely good news, but not the good news you and I know of today.[/quote]

I'm firmly convinced it is the same good news.  :)
 
rsc2a said:
[quote author=RAIDER]Nicely done.  So many preachers take liberty with what was happening in the gospels.  They act as if the disciples were sent out in Matthew 10 to preach what you and I know today as the "gospel".  It was definitely good news, but not the good news you and I know of today.

I'm firmly convinced it is the same good news.  :)
[/quote]

Interesting.  Expound please.
 
RAIDER said:
This brings up an even deeper discussion.  If the disciples did not know about the death, burial, and resurrection until later, what did they do to be "saved"?

Follow Jesus. Just like you and me.  :)
 
rsc2a said:
RAIDER said:
This brings up an even deeper discussion.  If the disciples did not know about the death, burial, and resurrection until later, what did they do to be "saved"?

Follow Jesus. Just like you and me.  :)

Got it.  Do you lean toward a dispensational view?
 
RAIDER said:
rsc2a said:
[quote author=RAIDER]Nicely done.  So many preachers take liberty with what was happening in the gospels.  They act as if the disciples were sent out in Matthew 10 to preach what you and I know today as the "gospel".  It was definitely good news, but not the good news you and I know of today.

I'm firmly convinced it is the same good news.  :)

Interesting.  Expound please.
[/quote]

A major,  major thrust of the Bible is exile and return.  From the very beginning,  mankind was exiled from heaven.  In the last chapters , we see heaven again come down to mankind. It's the story of Israel all over again.
 
Back
Top