The Kingdom of God: Now and Not Yet

In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,  And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Matthew 3:1-2

The promise of the kingdom began with God’s promise to David:
2 Samuel 7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever. 

As you can imagine, John caused quite a stir, the promised, long awaited kingdom was at hand. Close. Soon!

So, When is the kingdom? That is, when does it begin or come? I think a good way to answer the question is to follow the message of the kingdom in the Gospel According to Matthew.

4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Jesus began his ministry with the same message. The kingdom is not here yet, but close. Soon.

4: 23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
I think it is safe to say he was preaching the kingdom is “at hand”

7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
This refers to the kingdom that is to come, future.

8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
This definitely refers to the future

9:35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.
Probably preaching the kingdom is “at hand” because in ch 10 it is still

10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
This is interesting. John the Baptist is not in the kingdom. People “enter” the kingdom sometime after him. Then Jesus goes on to add that since John the kingdom is not only preached, but seems to be present. It is here, it has arrived.

12: 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
This removes all doubt. The kingdom has come unto you - it is now here and operative. What is the sign? Jesus casting out demons. As he goes on to say in the next verse, Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. The King is here and he has brought the kingdom!

13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Mysteries – things about the kingdom the prophets did not explain. What mysteries? Passages such as Daniel 7:13-14 speak of the kingdom like we speak of the second coming. This is what the Jews were expecting and Jesus says, the kingdom is come unto you. Jesus explains this with the parables of Matthew 13. In these parables we find the spiritual character of the kingdom revealed. It is hidden, it begins small, it is resistible, but it also has a glorious end. This is an important chapter.

25: 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
Ah, even though the kingdom has come spiritually, clearly, the kingdom is yet future.

The Gospel begins with the message, the kingdom is at hand. But by chapter 12, it has come unto you, and is a present spiritual reality. In Luke 17:20-21 we read,

And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. 

The kingdom of God is within you. This is the present, spiritual reality of the kingdom. But this does not completely fulfill the promise, it is the power of the world to come. There is still the coming of the kingdom, when Jesus shall come in power and glory, and set up his kingdom on the earth. Amen. Maranatha!

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Daniel 7:13-14

Next, the most important question: What is the kingdom?

Is there a difference between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God?

Last week I began teaching on the Sermon on the Mount. The first week was an introduction that focused largely on the kingdom of heaven: What it is, When it is, and Is there a difference between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God? And I answered that question, No.

This week we had a new couple. They had done some reading on the Sermon and came in with a question, “Is there any difference between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God?” Since a lot of their reading had told them that they were two different things, they had questions (in class and after). Now, this is the neat thing about public teaching: people can ask questions. And questions are good - that’s when you know you are really scratching where it itches!

I expect this to come up some again, because there are folks out there who are teaching that there is a difference between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God. They say the kingdom of heaven is future, while the kingdom of God is now. Why do they teach this?  Simply because some verses say of heaven and others of God!

Are they right? No. There is no difference and no distinction to be made between kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God. The best way to demonstrate this is to simply list parallel verses from Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Then you can see that where Matthew uses of heaven, Mark or Luke use of God. Then I will offer a brief explanation of why the two phrases are used.

Matthew 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mark 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.


Matthew 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Luke 6:20 Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God.


Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. 
13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. 
Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. 


Matthew 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
Luke 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.


Matthew 13:11 Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Mark 4:11 Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
Luke 8:10 Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

Matthew 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mark 10:15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
Luke 18:17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.


Matthew 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
Mark 10:23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!  
24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!  
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 
Luke 18:24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.


Perhaps you noticed that kingdom of heaven only occurs in Matthew. Matthew sometimes uses kingdom of God, but Mark, Luke, and John never use kingdom of heaven. It never occurs outside of Matthew. So, unless Matthew is presenting a different message than the other Gospels, kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God are the same thing. There is only one kingdom. (What you can’t see here is that later on in the epistles and Revelation, it is sometimes referred to as the kingdom of Christ, yet there is only one kingdom.) So, why does Matthew employ the term kingdom of heaven? Because Matthew was written for a Jewish audience. This offers us two possible explanations: (1) Jewish rabbis had used the term kingdom of heaven, and (2) the Jews had developed an aversion to saying God’s personal name (YHWH) and this had even been extended to saying God. As a result, they had developed euphemisms, like of heaven for of God.

There is no difference and no distinction between kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God. Both refer to one and the same kingdom. So the real questions are, What is the kingdom? and, When is the kingdom? I asked and answered them in my introduction to the Sermon on the Mount and, Lord willing, I hope to answer them in future posts as well.

The Sermon on the Mount: Is it for us today?

Yesterday I began teaching the Sermon on the Mount to the combined adult Sunday School. The first class was an introduction to the sermon, mainly focusing on the message of the kingdom of God. But as we closed I asked the following question:

Is the sermon on the mount for us today?

One brother pointed out that all of the Bible is for us today. True. But there is a difference in how it is for us. The Bible is neatly divided into Old and New Testament. That is Old and New Covenant. We are under the new covenant, we are not under the old. What I read in Romans and 1 Peter I can directly apply to my life. What I read in Leviticus I have to filter through the gospel and make spiritual application. For example, we are not obligated to keep the feasts, meet in Jerusalem, build a temple, offer sacrifices, circumcise our males etc.

One more example of what I mean. Our pastor is preaching through the book of Ezra. The book of Ezra is for us today, but we can’t and don’t make direct application because we are not Israel, nor are we required to re-build the temple, restore the priesthood and animal sacrifices. We look for spiritual and eternal truths to apply.

So, how do we approach the sermon on the mount? Can we apply it directly (like what we read in the epistles) or do we need to attempt spiritual application (as when we read Ezra)?

A couple of weeks ago I had just such a discussion with a friend about the sermon on the mount. He contends that the sermon on the mount is not for us today. He says it is part of the Old Testament (Jesus was born under the Law) and is a continuation of the Law. We are under grace, therefore this is not for us today. We didn’t have opportunity to pursue the question of spiritual application or of how he views the rest of the Old Testament, but I know he is not alone in this view. These people read the sermon on the mount and, as far as I can tell, they say, “This is good but this does not apply to you. You can ignore this.” I have a problem with this. I don’t ignore the Old Testament. When I read it I am looking for truths that apply to me today. Would I do less with the sermon on the mount?

I discussed this with another friend. He disagreed with the notion that the sermon on the mount is not for us today, but went on to explain that the standards are too high, we can’t hope to keep it, and that is why it was given, so we would see our sin and come to Christ for salvation.

Truth is, in different ways, both are saying the same thing – this is law and not grace. And it seems to me that the same conclusion can be drawn from both views, namely, I can essentially ignore the sermon on the mount. But I don’t believe this is true. Are the commands found in the epistles of Paul somehow easier to obey than the commands in the sermon on the mount?

What is the sermon on the mount? It is the teaching of Jesus the Christ. He has been preaching the gospel of the kingdom (repent for the kingdom is at hand) and in the sermon on the mount he teaches about kingdom life. How can I dismiss this?

What is a Christian? A Christian is a disciple or follower of Christ. As a Christian I am a person who says, “I believe Jesus is the Messiah, the promised Savior, the Son of God. And I will follow him.” And what does it mean to be a disciple? It means I embrace and follow the teachings of the one I am following. Since I am a disciple of Christ, I thereby commit myself to following the teachings of Jesus. And I find the teachings of Jesus in the sermon on the mount. Therefore they are for me!

What about Jesus and the Law? One only needs to read the sermon to find that Jesus goes to the heart of the Law and elevates it: Ye have heard it said…but I say… and, All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye likewise unto them, for this is the law and the prophets. Amen!

There is no conflict between Jesus and Paul, as if Jesus taught law and Paul improved on this and taught grace. If there were a conflict between Paul and Jesus, there is not but if there were, I would choose Jesus over Paul. After all, I am a follower of Jesus, not of Paul; I believe in Jesus, not Paul; I was baptized in the name of Jesus, not that of Paul.

“But Jesus doesn’t talk about the Holy Spirit in the sermon on the mount.” Does this mean that the sermon on the mount is all about your efforts while the teachings of Paul are all about the work of the Holy Spirit? Hey, Paul doesn’t mention the Holy Spirit every time he gives a command either. The Gospel, as taught by Jesus, promises forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Sure there is an inner transformation required to enter the kingdom, and was it not Jesus who said, Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God?

The sermon on the mount is not Jesus saying, “Do these things. Do them the best you can. Do them more than you don’t do them so you can earn eternal life.” Eternal life is gained by coming to Jesus. BUT, make no mistake, he is saying, “This is kingdom life. This is how those who follow me are to live.”

So, is the sermon on the mount for us today? Yes. Yes it is. And to the teachings found in the sermon on the mount we can apply the words of Jesus:

If ye love me, keep my commandments

He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings

Jesus and the rich young ruler Part II

My last post was Jesus and the rich young ruler or Did Jesus forget the tickets? I received a comment with some interesting questions. I thought I would address the issues raised in the comment through a second post. The comment is in italics.

first we have to understand that Jesus would never say anything that was not true, so with that said the problem is that yes you must be able to gain eternal live by keeping "all" the laws/commands, otherwise Jesus was not being honest. But Paul writes that no one, except Christ, is perfect, so the Young Rich man was not being honest when he said he had kept all these from when he was young or age of accountability. This is the deception of Satan our view is skewed, so we rationalize and say were perfect, but were not.. But the Young man knew this was not true because he asked "what else?" this is s confession that he had not truly kept these. 
I agree that the Scriptures set forth the Law as a way of righteousness: Leviticus 18:5 So ye shall keep all my ordinances, and all my judgments, and do them; which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Lord your God. But we know,

Romans 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 8:3  For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh
One of the fundamental problems with the Law is me

Galatians 3:21  for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Here is the other problem with the Law, it cannot give life

So what is the purpose of the Law?
Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ

Therefore, Jesus was not being dishonest when he told the man to keep the Law. He was using the Law according to it’s purpose – to bring conviction of sin and to draw the man to himself. And it worked for the man responded, What lack I yet?

Then Jesus tells him "if you want to be perfect" interesting he does not say gain eternal life, but being perfect does gain eternal life? 
We put so much weight into the word perfect, especially in religious matters. As if the only meaning possible for perfect is “completely mistake free.” But the Greek word signifies to reach or attain a goal. As Adam Clarke, the old Methodist commentator noted: "If thou wilt be perfect— To be complete, to have the business finished, and all hindrances to thy salvation removed"

The man wanted to attain eternal life, so Jesus told him, If you want to reach that goal then…. Therefore he WAS saying, If you want to gain eternal life.

Then Jesus say's give everything away, but is this true, is giving everything away a requirement for entering the Kingdom of Heaven ? Can I not keep the law, but give everything I have away to gain it? I'm still perplexed about this, is what Jesus saying true or not? 
It is especially important here to pay attention to the grammar. Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. Jesus did not say, "If you want eternal life go and sell all you have and give to the poor.” That is not the end of the sentence. There is no life in simply giving away all your things. The sentence finishes, and come and follow me. Come to me is where life is to be found and had.

As we read in 1 John 5:11-12
And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 

Eternal life is in the Son. To have life you must have the Son. Whatever it takes, you must have the Son to have life. This, it seems to me, highlights the significance of two little words in the Bible, into and in. As in “baptized into Christ” and “of him are ye in Christ.” I must have Christ if I am to have eternal life.

Jesus told this man, this rich man, go and sell all you have, give to the poor and come follow me. Does this constitute a continuing condition for coming to Jesus? All and any who want to come and follow Jesus must first give away all they own? No more than the condition he laid down for the woman at the well, The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. 

Go, call thy husband is not a condition for any and all who want to drink of the water of life. This was a word for her, to bring conviction of sin to her. So he tells the rich man, go sell what you have – get rid of that which is a hindrance to you - and come to me.

Can I gain eternal life merely by giving away all my things? No. Can I gain eternal life by keeping the Law? No. By going to church or otherwise being a good person? No. And why not? And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

In other words, the question is not, What good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? but instead, How can I have the Son? And Jesus answers that:

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life

This is why Jesus told the man, come and follow me. That is the part that is for any and all who want eternal life. Come to me, believe in me, follow me and you will have eternal life.

Jesus and the rich young ruler or Did Jesus forget the tickets?

When I was a young Christian, evangelism was often carried out by means of The Four Spiritual Laws, the Roman Road of Salvation, and then Evangelism Explosion. I don’t hear much about those methods anymore, instead I increasingly see signs like that above.

I thought about this when I read Matthew 19 the other night. I read it and then thought about it for the rest of the night. Isn’t that the best kind of Bible reading? Here are a few of my thoughts:

16  And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
He came straight to the point! What is interesting is the man knew he didn’t have eternal life. This is something we can know.

17  And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, God:
This is quite a nugget, but I am setting it aside for now

but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18  He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19  Honour thy father and mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Uh, the man asks about eternal life and Jesus tells him to obey the Law?? Did he get it wrong? Did he forget to offer the man the free ticket?
I find it interesting that Jesus only mentions the second tablet. Nevertheless, his response is clear, If you will enter into life, keep the commandments.

20  The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?
This is why Jesus pointed him to the Law. The man said, “I’ve done that and I still don’t have eternal life.” Let’s set aside the discussion of whether or not we can obey the Law, the thing Jesus wants the man to recognize is the inability of the law to give life. The Law is good, but it is weak. It cannot forgive sins; it cannot justify; it cannot give life. The man knew he didn't have eternal life and Jesus wanted him to know and to feel deeply, that his best efforts at doing the best thing were not enough, could never be enough, to gain him eternal life. What lack I yet?

21  Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
Argh! it gets worse! More works! Does Jesus not know the Gospel? Or, Is this proof that the teaching of Jesus is not for the Church? Or, Is this what everyone needs to do to be saved? ie. salvation really is by works?
Have you ever noticed that Jesus did not use the same approach with every person? He talked to one man about being born again, to a woman about the water of life, and to this man about riches. We, on the other hand, get hold of a phrase and use it on everyone.
But what is the message? Can life be had by keeping the commandments? No. Can life be had by giving away all your money? No. Where is life to be found? Come follow me. Jesus has life and for me to have life I must come to him. This is the gospel, Come follow me.

22  But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
This is why he said these things, to expose the man’s heart. The man loved his money more than eternal life. He loved the things of this world more than heaven. He was full of sorrow, yet not willing to part with that thing that was keeping him from Jesus. This is serious and thought provoking.

Back to this “free ticket to heaven” kind of evangelism. Could it be that many today would have simply offered the man a ticket, and said, “Just sign on the dotted line and you will go to heaven.” But Jesus said, Come follow me. You see, eternal life is not some thing you acquire. It is not some thing you can buy with obedience or sacrifice. Nor is it some thing you need a ‘claim ticket’ for.

Come follow me. Come to Jesus. He has life. He is life. When I come to him he breathes into me the breath of life. The gospel is about Jesus. The gospel invitation is “come to Jesus.” Come follow Jesus.

23  Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24  And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
25  When his disciples heard [it], they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
26  But Jesus beheld [them], and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

The story now shifts to the disciples. They were rather shocked at all this. I love the ending, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. No matter how you look at it, eternal life is not within my grasp. It’s impossible. I cannot do it. But with God all things are possible. Again the gospel! You cannot do this. God can do this. Amen!

Skateboards, the wedding at Cana, and Tony Evans

When I arrived at work last night, I clocked in and counted my drawer. My co-worker told me, “a skateboarder tried to trick me tonight.”
“Really? What happened?”
She said, “This skateboarder came in and wanted a cigarillo. I asked for his ID, but he didn’t have one, so I turned him down. He tried to tell me he really was old enough. He looked 15 and just the fact that he was still riding a skateboard told me he wasn’t 18.”
I cracked up. And the man in my line also began laughing and nodding his head, “She’s right.”


Then around 2:20 a man came in who comes in nearly every week day morning on his way to work. We talk about the Lord and I always ask him what his pastor preached on this past Sunday or Wednesday. He had previously told me that he was in a series on faith on Sundays but tonight he explained that it was on the miraculous works of God. From our conversation, I think he meant how by faith we can experience the working of God. He mentioned specifically, the wedding at Cana and the water to wine miracle.
I told him my favorite part of that story was when Mary turned to the servants and said, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. And talked about how that was the key to walking with and receiving from God - Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
I went on further, “Imagine those servants and their faith. It was water in the water pots. It was water when they filled the pitchers. Somewhere between the water pot and the act of pouring it into the glass it turned into wine.”
His eyes lit up, “You could make a message out of just that verse!”
As he walked out the door he smiled and said, “We’ve had our Bible study this morning.”
Fellowship!


Then around 4:15 another brother came in. He’s out every day delivering papers but doesn’t always make it in for his cup of coffee. But he did this morning. We talked awhile and then I asked him if he was still reading the same book in the Bible, he said yes etc. Then he told he was also reading a book by Tony Evans. Kingdom Man (I think). And he began to explain the book. Sounded good. Then he mentioned his favorite part- “There are three hoods in a man’s life: male-hood, boyhood, manhood. And the question I really like is, ‘Which hood are you living in?’” He went on to talk more about the book, his life, and Tony Evan’s life.
I think I want to get this book!

The paradox that is America

The paradox that is America

America is a great place, marked by abundance and freedom. Yet America is also a harsh place. It’s as if the invitation of America is:

The water is great, jump in!

Oh yeah, it’s sink or swim.

Has this not always been the case? When Europeans “discovered” America, they all described it as a land of unbelievable abundance. Yet the first settlers often starved to death.

Abundance abounding. Yet Freedom means you’re not guaranteed a slice of the pie.

The other night I got to thinking

The other night I got to thinking, “Isn’t it interesting that in Bible days the people knew their Bibles so well.” I mean, when Jesus and the Apostles preached, they could just reference stories and the people knew what they were talking about. This is true for the epistles as well. Why was that?

My conclusion? They knew their Bible so well because of the public reading of the Word. The Jews had a plan for the systematic reading of the Bible. When I got home I did a little research on the practice of the Jews in the first century. Here is some of what I learned:

“We can presume that every community had a copy of the Torah…Individuals may have owned  their own copies of some of the biblical texts, but this was no doubt the exception rather than the rule.” Therefore, the synagogue was where it was read.

The Ancient Precedence for the Reading of the Torah

Exodus 24:12 And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them. “Thus from the very beginning the Torah was intended to be read publicly.”

Deuteronomy 31:9-13  10 And Moses commanded them [the priests], saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles,  11 When all Israel is come to appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their hearing. 

Joshua 8:34-35 And afterward he read all the words of the law, the blessings and cursings, according to all that is written in the book of the law. There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the congregation of Israel…

Nehemiah 8:1-8  So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

Josephus, the Jewish historian, wrote of Moses in the Law, “permitting the people to leave off their other employments, and to assemble together for the hearing of the law, and learning it exactly, and this not once or twice, or oftener, but every week.”

Thus we find this well established in the New Testament

Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

Acts 13:15 And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on. 
“word of exhortation” refers to preaching, expository preaching it would seem

Luke 4:16-30  16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. 17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book [to Isa 61:1-2]...
 
In my research I learned that there were two plans or models for reading through the Law. One was to read through the Law (Genesis through Deuteronomy) once every year. The other was to do this once every three years. This is called lectio continua. That is, they would read a portion of the Law on the sabbath and the next sabbath they would begin reading where they left off the last week. This would continue until they had finished reading the Torah. And when they finished they would start the cycle again.

And actually, there were two Scripture lessons: “the Law and the Prophets, which in the Jewish division of the Scriptures also included the historical books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings. Thus, Moses was read every Sabbath and so were the Prophets. Unlike the torah, the [prophets] were not read as a lectio continua but were specifically chosen to complement the torah lessons and provided the key to their interpretation.” This means that the core of the synagogue service was the reading of Scripture.

I know there are those who would dismiss this out of hand as Jewish practice under the Law, one that can therefore be disregarded. Yet the Apostle Paul wrote (1 Tim 4:13): Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. This refers to public reading

And this was the practice of the early church. Justin Martyr, in his description of Christian worship, says: “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.”

“The lectio continua was carried over from the synagogue into Christian worship and remained the basic rule for the first few centuries of the church, as we see in the sermons of Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom, etc. It was eventually supplanted, however, by lectionaries and the liturgical calendar.”

Thus, both the Jews and the earliest Christians had as a central part of their worship the reading of the Scriptures, accompanied by comments on the passage read.

Is this just a historical survey? No. It is yet another plea for the church today to return to the biblical model of worship, and to systematically read the Scriptures when we assemble.

Some of the sites I visited:

http://opc.org/os.html?article_id=342#note27

http://www.massexplained.com/2011/09/the-rise-of-the-synagogue/
I know this is a Catholic page and that some people will react violently to it; scroll down to The Scriptures and the Synagogue for the relevant section

http://www.torahresource.com/EnglishArticles/TriennialCycle.pdf