My previous post made the case that Jesus was born to be a king. Of course, there is nothing controversial about that assertion. Jesus’ kingly-ness is affirmed and taught in every corner of Christendom. However . . .

. . . within the Protestant world, there are two very different understandings about when that king’s reign begins in earnest.

Much of the Evangelical world views “the kingdom”—i.e., Jesus’ rule on earth—as primarily a future prospect. The position held (in varying forms) is that, although Jesus is currently recognized and honored as “King” throughout heaven, His kingdom will not be present and active on earth until He physically returns. Upon returning, Jesus basically kicks tail; takes names; sets everything in order; and sets up His throne in Jerusalem from whence He reigns for precisely 1,000 years.

There is another view. This one views Jesus’ reign as rightful, ruling King of Earth (as well as Heaven) as beginning when he “sat down at the right hand of the Father” (Mark 16:19). In other words, the rule of King Jesus is primarily a present prospect.

Which view does the witness of Scripture support? And what difference does it make which view one holds?

I’ll be addressing these questions in a series of blog posts to come. (An exciting promise, I know. Try to contain yourself.)