Thy Kingdom Come
Author: R.J. Rushdoony
Book Review by Ken Davies
Rushdoony, Rousas John. Thy
Kingdom Come: Studies in Daniel and Revelation. Fairfax, VA:
Thoburn Press, 1970. Paperback, 256 pp. Available from: Fairfax
Christian Bookstore, 11121 Pope’s Head Rd., Fairfax, VA 22030.
Rousas Rushdoony is the author
of over 20 other books, including the Institutes of Biblical
Law, Law and Liberty, and By What Standard? Currently, he
is acting as president of the Chalcedon foundation in Vallecito,
CA.
Mr. Rushdoony begins this
book by demonstrating the offense of Daniel to a mankind which
considers itself to be autonomous and God to be its servant.
The fact that Daniel predicted, hundreds of years in advance,
the rise and fall of four empires (along with the establishment
of a permanent fifth empire), is offensive to the non-Christian
because it shows conclusively that God is the Sovereign King
of the universe, who does as He pleases and predestines the
future of men and nations according to His purpose. This is
seen by the unregenerate man as being entirely contrary to
all that he knows or thinks, therefore, he concludes, the
book of Daniel must be a forgery, written much later than
the historical figure we know as Daniel.
The historical background
of Daniel is enlightening, showing why God’s sovereignty is
emphasized to such an extent. The Persians, and later the
Greeks and Romans, considered their leaders to be representatives
of the gods on earth and therefore divine beings. The book
of Daniel points again and again to man’s mortality and inability
to manipulate God.
When he comes to Revelation,
Rushdoony gives brief historical outlines of events surrounding
the seven churches and relates these to the instructions given
to each by the Holy Spirit. However, he sees these letters,
not so much as relating exclusively to the churches of Asia,
but to the church in general, and throughout all time. They
are not a chronological account of history (as the historical
position would say), but they show general trends that the
church can expect during its existence.
In some respects, I found
this book to be refreshing. At times, however, it was frustrating.
Mr. Rushdoony’s comments regarding the premillennial position
rang true with a vengeance: “...[T]he expectation that history
will culminate in the triumph of antichrist is not only a
dualistic surrender of the material world to Satan, but also
a direct offense against the announced power and supremacy
of God in, through, and over all creation and history.” He
says both premill and amill eschatology are “tainted with
the background of Manichaean heresy, with its surrender of
matter to darkness.” He also points out that premillennialism
has made racism a “divine principle,” and essential doctrine:
“Every attempt to bring the Jew back into prophecy as a [non-Christian]
Jew, is to give race and works (for racial descent is a human
work) a priority over grace and Christ’s work, and is nothing
more or less than paganism.”
Rushdoony goes on to say that
the premill method of interpretation was the “essence of Phariseeism
and led to the rejection and crucifixion of Christ.” No wonder
he considers it a “vicious heresy”!
One of the frustrating things
I encountered while reading Thy Kingdom Come was Mr. Rushdoony’s
apparent disregard for the Scriptures’ time element. For example,
in a footnote on page 86, he is careful to include the disclaimer
of Henry Alford regarding the “must shortly come to pass”
verses of Revelation, in which he states that these do not
mean “close at hand”. He seems to take a historical view of
Revelation, that it is in some ways like a handbook of what
the church can expect throughout history. The seven churches
in Revelation are taken to be archetypes, representing “the
whole church of every age”. The time factors are taken to
be flexible, not necessarily requiring a first century fulfillment.
From a preterist, as well as a Biblical viewpoint, this is
unacceptable. Mr. Rushdoony says that Christ is continually
coming in judgment throughout history. This makes the judgment
of Israel in A.D. 70 just one of many, and not an especially
significant one at that. It is unfortunate to find this opinion
being held by a man who, in other places, upholds the integrity
of the Bible with zealous tenacity. In another place, Mr.
Rushdoony quotes Mk.9:1 and references Mt. 16:28 and Lk. 9:27.
He admits that some of the disciples present did live to see
“the kingdom of God come with power”, but he ignores the references
in the preceding verses to the coming of Christ that was to
be concurrent with the coming of the kingdom. In an effort
to explain away the plain time elements in Mt. 24, he says,
“The Day of the Lord and the coming of the Lord, also His
coming on clouds, are often spoken of in the OT as
a very real coming, and as distinct from the end and yet part
of it and a forerunner of it”. (His emphasis) How can something
be apart from something and still be a part of it, and also
precede it?
We can agree with the author’s
view of the church being victorious in the world. “If history
is thus in the hands of Christ, its issue is victory, not
the surrender of time to Satan with the reservation of eternity
to God”. Rushdoony quotes the famous premill statement, “You
don’t polish brass on a sinking ship”, and says that this
type of philosophy is “errant paganism and radically at odds
with Scripture”. We can certainly say “Amen!” to that. The
idea that the kingdom of God is purely spiritual, he says,
“is a fearful perversion of the role of the church”. “Christian
faith is either relevant to all of life or it is relevant
to none of it: The claims of God are either total, or He is
not God”.
|