What is the political meaning of the Kingdom of God?

Answer 1

Interestingly, this very subject has a rich history.

At the end of the Roman Age, the Church had acquired such power and prestige, that after the fall of the Empire, the Church retained the idea and inspiration of a government that was ordained by God, uniting all men. Although this was hardly a new idea, it was expressed in a curious fashion, dictated on interpretation of scripture, and embodied in that political platypus, the Holy Roman Empire.

Strange as it may sound, this institution was intended to fit into Biblical prophecy and even forestall Armageddon. As it was prophesied that there would be a number of "Romes" before the rise of the Anti-Christ, it was supposed that the Holy Roman Empire was one of the number, and a self-conscious one, at that. It was holding back the gates of Hell, as it were.

The Holy Roman Empire may date from Christmas Day, 800, when Charlemagne was crowned Emperor by the Pope. The term "Emperor" is important here. It was viewed in its original Roman context, meaning ruler of all the earth. Technically speaking, there could be only one emperor. That he had to be crowned by the Pope was significant, and a symbiotic relationship between church and empire was formed. The Holy Roman Empire invoked the ghost of the original Roman Empire, in all of its Biblically-prophesied implications, but in an assumed purified form, consecrated through the coronation by the Pope, the head of all Christendom, and crowned with the Iron crown of Lombardy, supposedly made from the nails of the true cross.

In this fashion, the Holy Roman Empire represented God's government on earth--literally--for centuries. It was a political power of such strength, that when the New World was beginning to be explored, the Pope's sanction was given to Portugal and Spain to grab as much of it as they could. And Europe, by and large, acquiesced in this papal mandate.

The Empire lasted, over the centuries becoming more obscure and remote in its military power. After the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, the independence of the various princes(About 300 in number) comprising the Empire was confirmed, although technically subject to both Emperor and Pope. Rarely, as the centuries progressed, could either unite the constituent parts of the Empire in concerted action.

After the Empire's height, under Charles V in the 16th century, decline was rapid, and eventually the elective title of Emperor, from the 16th century onward a member of the House of Habsburg, became little more than ceremonial. Napoleon more or less destroyed the Empire when he was crowned Emperor of the French in 1804, introducing a new, nationalistic meaning to the term "emperor", and thus undermining the old meaning implicit in the Holy Roman title. Francis II, realizing the danger of a rival, and one with military supremacy at that, abdicated the title in 1806, and henceforth the nationalistic meaning of emperor has been predominant.

The popes continued to have a considerable political hold, but also emerged much weakened from the Napoleonic era, and the nationalism of the 19th century proved their undoing. The Church tried to rally conservative support with the "Syllabus of Errors" in 1864, but things were too progressed, and the fall of the temporal power of the church in 1870 was a blow that more or less ended the political role of the church in modern life, despite the creation of the Vatican in the Lateran Treaty of 1929. These days, the Church claims only spiritual jurisdiction--officially--although its influence in politics can be measured in the social legislation it has been the enemy of, such as gay rights.

This is all divorced from the Protestant realm, but Protestantism never had such a rich background of sheer political power to draw from, save for the Cromwell years in England. Protestantism officially is bound by separation of Church and State as well as Catholicism and every other manifestation of Christendom.

I know I've written a novel here, but history is one subject I love and excelled in at University, lol!

Answer 2

According to the Jehovah's Witnesses, Gods Kingdom is what will bring about salvation for man. It will destroy and put an end to all political systems on Earth, and it alone will rule mankind. Jesus has all ready been enthroned as its King, and he will lead the Battle of Armageddon. Then the Kingdom with the help of God and Jesus will transform the Earth to a Paradise, and man to perfection. All people on Earth who are not part of this Kingdom will be destroyed during Armageddon. That is a brief summery of the political meaning of The Kingdom of God.

Answer 3

I'm pretty sure Jesus said "my kingdom is not of this world." Or something like that. To the extent that the Kingdom is meant to be salt and light - the personal lives of Christ's community bringing love and peace to their surrounding cultures - it may be incidentally political. But I disagree with those who try to make Jesus' message into a purely political one. Any attempt to equate a historically-bound viewpoint or institution with the eternal Truth of God's Kingdom is bound to end in pride and idolatry. It's saying "our truth" is "The Truth."

On the other hand, if you must, this is a pretty good take on it:
http://www.amazon.com/Politics-Jesus-John-Howard-Yoder/dp/0802807348

Peace to you.

Answer 4

"For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." Romans 14:17

Answer 5

The meaning is there will be no politics in the realm of mankind. You figure it out.

Answer 6

LBJ thought it was 'The Great Society'. Bush the Younger thinks it is all that he surveys.

Answer 7

the white house

Answer 8

ruler of all men