11:15. “…the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and His Christ…” (See also 1:9, ‘kingdom.’)
“…This manner of speech, ‘the kingdom of heaven’, is taken from Daniel, chap. vii. 13, 14….
“Truly I admire that the fulfilling of that vision and prophecy in Daniel should be lengthened out still into I know not what long and late expectation, not to receive its completion before Rome and antichrist shall fall; since the books of the Gospel afford us a commentary clearer than the sun, that that kingdom of heaven took its beginning immediately upon the preaching of the Gospel. When both the Baptist and Christ published the approach of the kingdom of heaven from their very first preaching; certainly, for any to think that the fulfilling of those things in Daniel did not then begin, for my part, I think it is to grope in the dark, either through wilfulness or ignorance.” [2:49]
“If by the kingdom of heaven, in these and other such-like places, …they mean the inward love and fear of God, which indeed they seem to do; so far they agree with our gospel sense, which asserts the inward and spiritual kingdom of Christ especially….” [2:51]
“…The kingdom of God, or of heaven, hath especially a twofold distinct sense in the Holy Scriptures. In some places it signifies the propagation of the gospel by the Messias and his followers, and that especially amongst the Gentiles: in other places it denotes the Messiah‘s victory and vengeance upon the Jews, the enemies of this gospel; but in the Jewish schools this was their conceit of him: that when he came he should cut off all those nations that obeyed not his, i.e. the Jewish law; redeeming Israel from the Gentile yoke; establishing a kingdom and age amongst them that should be crowned with all kind of delights whatever. In this they were miserably deceived, that they thought the Gentiles were first to be destroyed by him, and then that he himself would reign amongst the Israelites. Which, in truth, fell out just contrary; he was first to overthrow Israel, and then to reign amongst the Gentiles.”
“…the cutting-off of that place and nation is emphatically called his kingdom, and his coming in glory. Nor indeed without reason: for before he wasted the city and subverted that nation, he had subdued all nations under the empire and obedience of the gospel; according to what he foretold, ‘That the gospel of the kingdom should be preached in all the world, and then should the end [of Jerusalem] come.’ And when he had obtained his dominion amongst the Gentiles, what then remained towards the consummation of his kingdom and victories, but to cut off his enemies the Jews, who would not that he should rule over them? Of this kingdom of God he speaks in this place {Luke 17:20}, not answering according to that vain apprehension the Pharisee had when he propounded the question, but according to the thing itself and the truth of it. There are two things he saith of this kingdom:
“… That it comes not … with observation. Not but that it might be seen and conspicuous, but that they would not see and observe it….
“…He further tells them … this kingdom of God is within you: you are the scene of these triumphs. And whereas your expectancies are of that kind, that you say, Behold here a token of the Messias in the subduing of such a nation, and, Behold there in the subduing of another; they will be all in vain, for … it is within you; within, and upon your own nation, that these things must be done….
“Besides, those things which follow, ver. 22 {Luke 17}, do very much confirm it, that Christ speaks of the kingdom of God in that sense wherein we have supposed it: they are spoken to his disciples ‘that the days will come, wherein they shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, but shall not see it.’ … the days of the Son of man, in the Jewish style, are … the days of the Messias: days, wherein they promise themselves nothing but pleasing, prosperous, and gay enjoyments: and questionless, the Pharisees put this question under this notion only. {i.e., the question as to when the kingdom of God should come.} But our Saviour so applies the terms of the question to the truth, and to his own purpose, that they signify little else but vengeance and wrath and affliction. And it was so far from it, that the Jews should see their expected pleasures, that the disciples themselves should see nothing but affliction, though under another notion.” [3:181]
“…that the kingdom of God or of heaven are terms convertible in the evangelist, is obvious to every one that will take the pains to compare them: and that by the kingdom of God or of heaven is meant the kingdom and times of the Messiah, is so plain, that it needs no argument to prove it….
“…The Jews thought that it was enough for them to have been of the seed of Abraham, or the stock of Israel, to make them fit subjects for the kingdom of heaven, and the happiness that should accrue to them from the days of the Messiah. Hence that passage, … There is a part allotted to all Israel in the world to come; that is, in the participation of the Messiah. But whence is it that universal Israel claim such a part? Merely because they come of the stock and lineage of Israel. Our Saviour sets himself against this error of theirs, and teacheth that it is not enough for them to be the children of Abraham, or the stock of Israel, to give them any title to or interest in the Messiah; but they must further be born … from above; they must claim it by a heavenly, not an earthly birth….
“Christ teaches another kind of new birth, requisite for those that partake of the kingdom of the Messiah, beyond what they have either as Israelites or proselytes; viz., that they should be born from above, or by a celestial generation, which only makes them capable of the kingdom of heaven….
“…{Jesus} tells him, {Nicodemus}, that the Jew himself cannot be admitted into the kingdom of the Messiah unless he first strip himself of his Judaism by baptism, and then put off his carnal and put on a spiritual state….it is of little or of no value for a man to be born of the seed of Abraham, or to be originally an Israelite, unless he was also born… from above; so he now further teacheth him that this admission is not to be obtained but by an absolute renunciation of Judaism, and being baptized into the profession of the gospel. For the tenor of Christian baptism runs pointblank against Judaism. [3:265-7]
11:19. “…and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament…”
“I. There was indeed in the second Temple a certain ark in the Holy of Holies; but this was neither Moses‘s ark nor the ark of the covenant: which may not unfitly come to mind when we read that passage, Rev.xi.19, ‘The Temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his Temple the ark of his testament.’ It was not seen, nor indeed was it at all in the second Temple.
“The Jews have a tradition, that Josias hid the ark before the Babylonish captivity, lest it should fall into the hands of the enemy, as once it did amongst the Philistines; but there is no mention that it was ever found and restored again. [3:259]
Davies, [238] “The importance of the kapporeth in Jewish ritual may be gauged from the fact that once a year, on the Day of Atonement the High Priest entered alone into the Holy of Holies to bring the blood of the sin-offerings to be sprinkled on the kapporeth which was thus the innermost shrine of the sanctuary, the point at which expiation was made on the most solemn of all occasions in the Jewish year. Although with the destruction of the first Temple the Ark and the kapporeth were lost, the ritual of the Day of Atonement was carried on as though they were still there, a stone having replaced their Ark and the kapporeth. ‘After the Ark was taken away a stone remained there from the time of the early prophets, and it was called Shetiyah3. It was higher than the ground by three finger-breadths….'” [Note 3:”M. Yoma 5.2; Danby, p. 167″]