Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 35:1 (Mar 1992)
Article: Comments On Craig L. Blomberg’s Response To “The Kingdom Of God In The Teaching Of Jesus”
Author: George R. Beasley-Murray

---

JETS 35:1 (March 1992) p. 37

Comments On Craig L. Blomberg’s Response
To “The Kingdom Of God In The Teaching Of Jesus”

G. R. Beasley-Murray

No lecturer could wish to have a more sympathetic response to a paper he has delivered than that of Craig Blomberg on my brief résumé of our Lord’s teaching on the kingdom of God, and I thank him most warmly for it. I shall keep my comments on his response as brief as I can.

Blomberg would interpret Matt 11:12 solely as relating to the hostility encountered by the proclamation of the kingdom of God, alike by John the Baptist and Jesus. In this he has many supporters. He has read what I have had to say about it in my book Jesus and the Kingdom of God, and the reasons there given for adhering to the interpretation that Jesus there spoke of the kingdom as powerfully breaking into the world, and the consequent resistance to it. We must agree to differ on the probabilities of interpretation here.

As to “Hallowed be thy name” in the Lord’s prayer: The point at issue is who hallows the name. The usual view is that man does so by treating the name of God with respect. My contention is that the first three petitions of the prayer are parallel and seek for God to act in his sovereign, redeeming might to bring to completion the kingdom that Jesus inaugurated. Ezekiel 36:16 ff. tells of one way of doing that: In light of the profaning of the Lord’s name, through Israel God is going to act for the sake of his holy name: “I will hallow my great name…When they see that I reveal my holiness through you the nations will know that I am the LORD, says the Lord GOD.” Strangely enough the passage does not refer to people respecting the Lord’s name after his transformation of Israel, only that they marvel at the works of God. That people shall in turn “hallow” God’s name is at best the consequence of God’s doing it, and this aspect of Scripture seems to be largely ignored.

I am quite unrepentant about urging the primary future reference to the beatitudes. The “happiness,” of course, is present possession, but declared in view of the wonder of the blessings of the consummated kingdom. This seems to me undoubted in considering the judgment of God apparent in vv. 7 and 9, the vision of God in v. 8, and the “reward” in v. 12. Naturally insofar as the kingdom is a present phenomenon through the saving work of the Lord the blessings of the kingdom are present realities also, but one is conscious that the majority of preachers seem not to realize that the primary focus of the beatitudes is the gracious giving of God in the future revelation of the kingdom.

The objection to the use of the midrash...

visitor : : uid: ()