Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Text/SMS
Random
Subscribe
Answer
Kin-dom is a term used by some liberal theologians and Christian feminists as a replacement for the biblical word kingdom. Rather than speak of the “kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 13:11), they choose to speak of the “kin-dom of heaven” or the “kin-dom of God.”
The thought behind the word kin-dom is that the term is more inclusive and welcoming than the word kingdom. According to progressives, kingdom connotes hierarchy, imperialism, and patriarchy. Liberals associate their term kin-dom with family, equality, and diversity. They envision followers of Christ not as subjects of a king—a male ruler and enforcer of the patriarchy—but rather as family members seated at a table of fellowship where all are equal. A kingdom forces people into subservience; a kin-dom fosters community and tolerance and allows everyone to flourish.
An early proponent of the idea of a kin-dom of God was Catholic feminist theologian Ada María Isasi-Díaz. In Decolonizing Epistemologies: Latina/o Theology and Philosophy, Isasi-Díaz argued that the word kingdom should be replaced by kin-dom to emphasize relationship over authoritarianism. A kin-dom liberates, according to Isasi-Díaz; a kingdom enslaves. Various non-Catholic liberal theologians have picked up on Isasi-Díaz’s “kin-dom” idea and incorporated it into their own theology.
The use of kin-dom instead of kingdom presents several problems, both linguistic and theological:
• The use of kin-dom instead of kingdom ignores basic rules of good translation. The original words translated as “kingdom” in Scripture mean exactly that—“kingdom.” The Greek word basileia, for example, refers to a king’s sovereignty and royal power and, by extension, the realm over which he rules. There is no hint of “kinship” in the meaning of the Greek word. The same is true for the Hebrew word malku. Translating either word as “kin-dom,” as if the definition included a suggestion of familial life, is unwarranted and inaccurate.
• The use of kin-dom instead of kingdom wrongly assumes that kingdom assigns gender to God. The use of kin-dom is, in part, an attempt to move away from the word king and the patriarchal thinking that word supposedly promotes. The problem is that, from the very first chapter of the Bible, God refers to Himself in masculine terms. God transcends gender, of course, but, in both the Old and New Testaments, the pronouns referring to God are grammatically masculine. So, there should not be any issue with referring to God’s “kingdom,” especially when that’s the wording used by the writers of inspired Scripture.
• The use of kin-dom as a replacement for kingdom lessens the importance of God’s sovereign rule and diminishes Christ’s authority. Those who use the term kin-dom seek to avoid implying a hierarchy among Christ’s followers. Yet Scripture teaches there is a hierarchy, on the most basic level, in that God is in charge. It’s true that God’s kingdom sets itself in opposition to the kingdoms of this world, and it follows different laws (see Matthew 20:25–28). But God is the ruler. God says in Psalm 2:6, “I have installed my king on Zion, my holy mountain”—and that king is Jesus. Our Lord claimed to have a kingdom, albeit it is currently “not of this world” but “from another place” (John 18:36).
• The use of kin-dom instead of kingdom destroys the contrast between Christ’s kingdom and the world’s kingdoms. As Daniel interprets Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, he speaks of worldly kingdoms that will be destroyed: “The God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever” (Daniel 2:44). This antithesis between God’s eternal kingdom and the world’s frail substitutes continues throughout Scripture (see 1 Corinthians 15:24; Revelation 11:15).
Scripture insists that “the Lord will be king over all the earth” (Zechariah 14:9), and the language it uses is undeniably related to kings and kingdoms and royal authority. The term kin-dom is an attempt to inject contemporary thinking into Scripture, and it cannot be utilized without changing the words of Scripture.• The use of kin-dom instead of kingdom wrongly assumes that kingdom assigns gender to God. The use of kin-dom is, in part, an attempt to move away from the word king and the patriarchal thinking that word supposedly promotes. The problem is that, from the very first chapter of the Bible, God refers to Himself in masculine terms. God transcends gender, of course, but, in both the Old and New Testaments, the pronouns referring to God are grammatically masculine. So, there should not be any issue with referring to God’s “kingdom,” especially when that’s the wording used by the writers of inspired Scripture.
• The use of kin-dom as a replacement for kingdom lessens the importance of God’s sovereign rule and diminishes Christ’s authority. Those who use the term kin-dom seek to avoid implying a hierarchy among Christ’s followers. Yet Scripture teaches there is a hierarchy, on the most basic level, in that God is in charge. It’s true that God’s kingdom sets itself in opposition to the kingdoms of this world, and it follows different laws (see Matthew 20:25–28). But God is the ruler. God says in Psalm 2:6, “I have installed my king on Zion, my holy mountain”—and that king is Jesus. Our Lord claimed to have a kingdom, albeit it is currently “not of this world” but “from another place” (John 18:36).
• The use of kin-dom instead of kingdom destroys the contrast between Christ’s kingdom and the world’s kingdoms. As Daniel interprets Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, he speaks of worldly kingdoms that will be destroyed: “The God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever” (Daniel 2:44). This antithesis between God’s eternal kingdom and the world’s frail substitutes continues throughout Scripture (see 1 Corinthians 15:24; Revelation 11:15).
