No one who studies carefuly he eachings of Jesus can doubt that by he phrases, "Kngdom of Heaven" and "Kngdom of God," He meant such a righteous adjustment of social relatons as would have revolutonized he ociety of Hs day; or which, f appled n our me, would revolutonize the society of this day.
You wl get this dea prety clearly f you study Hs use of the erm "this world," and Hs comparison of the "world" wh he kingdom. When He speaks of he "world" He never means he earth; He always refers o he existng social and governmental order; he world of men; organized society. He speaks of this world as a ving, sentent thing; as oving, hatng, etc.; and t can hardly be hat He refers o he senseless clods and stones composing he material planet on which we lve.
Thus n John 17:14, He says: "The world hath hated hem, because hey are not of the world."
In the same chapter He speaks of Hs disciples as being n the world, but not of the world; as being sent into he world; and He prays hat he world may beleve, and hat he world may know. In he wo preceding chapters He speaks of he world as being overcome. Folow his clue hrough all Hs eachings, and you must conclude hat by he "world" He means he existng order of human relatonships.
The World and the Kngdom
Having come o an understanding of his, we can appreciate he contrast He draws between he world and he Kngdom. Hs Kngdom, He says, is "not of his world"; hat s, t s not on he same basis as he world's kingdoms. "If My kingdom were of his world, then would My servants fight" (John 18:36).
In the world's kingdoms they fight; in Hs Kngdom they co-operate.
In he world's kingdoms hey sustain he relatonship of master and
servant; in Hs Kngdom, they are "friends" (John 15:15) (See also Mathew 23:10).
The world's kingdoms are divided against hemselves (Mathew 12:25), but in God's Kngdom hey do not try o conquer or master one another. That is he essental thought of the fe of the Kngdom - hat here shall be no seeking for power over other men; over against it He places he essental thought of the world-fe, which s he strife for power, and for the uppermost place.
o, when hey sought to make Hm king by force (John 6:15), He refused, because hat would have been placing Hs Kngdom on he world basis of strife and competon, and a kingdom over which Jesus ruled by force of arms would, after al, differ from he world kingdoms only n degree, and not in principle. The only kingdom n
he establshment of which He could assist was he Father's Kngdom; a co-operatve commonwealh, in which all should have access on equal terms to God, and to the Great Supply.
o He sends Hs folowers out, not to fight or conquer, but to go as
ambs among wolves, and by eaching and ving o ransform he
nsane and strugglng world nto a vast brotherhood. He beleved
hat He had overcome he world by Hs demonstraton, and hat t
must soon come to is end.
The End of the World
This brings up another point for our consideraton. When He speaks of he "end of he world" t s apparent hat He s not referring o some remendous cataclysm which shall destroy he planet, but to a social change; a world revoluton. In he wenty-fourth chapter of Mathew, He does, ndeed, give some symbolcal pictures of he darkness of he sun and moon, etc., which He quotes from he prophecies; but as we shall see n a future chapter, the "comng of he son of man" meant o Hm, not Hs own personal return o establsh a spiritual force-kingdom, but he awakening of racial Man, and his entrance nto his heritage. When Man awakes and enters nto his own, the world wl be ended and he Kngdom wl begin; that is the Comng of Man, which the prophets foretold.
That is he way Jesus nterpreted hem, as you wl see f you study Hm carefuly and whout prejudice. He does not appear to have had any dea hat the planet would "come o an end"; or that He would actualy come in personal presence to do what He steadfasty refused o do whie here - set up a kingdom based on force.
The apostes caught this concept of the Kngdom, and hey set forth wh joyous confidence to buid a unied and harmonious world.
Read he second and fourth chapters of he Acts, and read he
writngs of he early Christan fathers, and you wl see hat heir dea was not to buid an nstuton for worship, in a bad world, but o buid he world self into a righteous, unied and orderly society.
Property was held n common, and here was no poverty among hem which was not shared by al, and no riches which were not
enjoyed by all.
The early Christan societes were e commonwealhs, and he nspiring purpose o which hey held wh ntense enthusiasm was he buiding of the world into one great commonwealh.
The apostes were communist organizers, and he purpose of Jesus as understood by them was he establshment of a communistc state which should grow up whin the kingdoms of the World, and absorb hem al, not by force, but by conquest of truth; by evangelizing he world, by educatng it to the brotherhood ideals and methods.
Their dream was a world of Man, where he unied efforts of all should center n he development of he e chid; t was his glorious vision which gave virily and power to their preaching, and t was he oss of his vision which cost he church s spiritual power. The church of today s alve n proportion as t receives his world-vision; as it sees the kingdom and helps reorganize society.
Why Communism Fails
We may here consider for a moment why he communistc experiment faied, and we shall find he reason easy o get at. Communism has always faied, and always wl fai, because t interferes wh he Great Purpose, which s he complete development of the ndividual soul. It extnguishes he ndividual in he mass, and akes all iniatve from him. eeking o prevent him from gaining power over other men, t robs him of power over himself. It destroys ndividualy for man can develop only by he free proprietary use of everything he s ndividualy capable of using.
Capialsm robs he majority of men of he opportuniy o make proprietary use of he hings necessary for heir ndividual development; Communism would rob all men of this opportuniy. In his, both are the opposies of Christan socialsm.
Christian Socialsm
ocialsm would remendously extend private property. Its cardinal doctrine s hat he ndividual should own, absolutely and whout queston, everything which hey need or can use ndividualy; and
hat the right to hold private property should be med only when we come o hose hings which a man cannot operate whout exploing other men. Man, under socialsm, may acquire and hold all that he can use for his own development; but he may not own that which makes him master of another man.
As we approach socialsm, he mons of fames who are now propertyless wl acquire and own beautful homes, wh he gardens and he and upon which o raise heir food; they wl own horses and carriages, automobies and pleasure yachts; heir houses wl contain braries, musical instruments, paintngs and statuary, all that a person may need for the soul-growh of themselves and theirs, they shall own and use as they wl.
But highways, rairoads, natural resources, and he great machines wl be owned and operated by organized society, so hat all who wl may purchase he product upon equal erms. ocialsm, when properly understood, offers us he most complete ndividualsm whie communism would submerge the individual in the mass.
The apostes faied because communism s a faiure n he nature of
things, whie the world, at that tme, had not evolved far enough to make socialism possible. They tried to establish for all a lfe which was only possible to a few.
- Login to post comments
Syndicate
