The Violent Take it By Force

Another helpful way to understand this passage is to look at the Greek word basileia, which is better translated as "reign", rather than kingdom.

When we read the Bible, sometimes we can have a "ME" centered perspective. This is not always the case in the Scriptures. Matthew 11:12 is not dealing with us "Gentiles." You have to also think that during Christ's Earthly ministry, Jesus did not send out His disciples to all Gentile nations yet. In Matthew 11, Jesus was coming for Israel first.

For the Gentiles were more of a secondary thought to the Lord Jesus at this time.
How so?
It is written,

22 "...a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs."
(Matthew 15:22-26).

Tree of Life said:

The text doesn't say this.

ESV - and the violent take it by force.

NASB - violent men take it by force.

NIV (2011) - violent people have been raiding it.

The italicized expressions above are all renderings of one Greek word - ἁρπάζω (harpazo). Here's a few dictionary entries for the meaning of this Greek word:

773 ἁρπάζω (harpazō): vb.; ≡ Str 726; TDNT 1.472—1. LN 18.4 snatch, seize (Mt 13:19; Jn 6:15; Ac 23:10; Jude 23); a rapture to God and glory (Ac 8:39; 2Co 12:2, 4; 1Th 4:17; Rev 12:5+); 2. LN 39.49 attack, implying the seizing of something (Mt 11:12; Jn 10:12+); 3. LN 57.235 plunder, seize possessions by force (Mt 12:29+); 4. LN 37.28 gain control over, formally, snatch from the hand (Jn 10:28, 29+)

Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament)​

“To take something forcefully” (firmly, quickly or rapaciously). Thus a. “to steal” (Jos. Ant., 20, 214 of robbers), b. “To capture in war.”

Foerster, W. (1964–). ἁρπάζω, ἁρπαγμός. G. Kittel, G. W. Bromiley, & G. Friedrich (Eds.), Theological dictionary of the New Testament (electronic ed., Vol. 1, p. 472). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
​

18.4 ἁρπάζωa: to grab or seize by force, with the purpose of removing and/or controlling—‘to seize, to snatch away, to take away.’ ἐκέλευσεν τὸ στράτευμα καταβὰν ἁρπάσαι αὐτὸν ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν ‘he ordered soldiers to go down (into the group) and snatch him away from them’ Ac 23:10; ἔρχεται ὁ πονηρὸς καὶ ἁρπάζει τὸ ἐσπαρμένον ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ ‘the Evil One comes and snatches away the seed that was sown in his heart’ Mt 13:19. In Mt 13:19 the context as a whole is figurative, but a more or less literal rendering of ‘snatches’ or ‘seizes’ is probably satisfactory.

Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 220). New York: United Bible Societies.
​

As you can see, the word does not mean "enter". It means to seize, snatch away, attack, or plunder. It's consistent with the idea of persecution.

Click to expand...

Then, in context of the full sentence, it means that in spite of being 'violent' (not just only or at all physical violence here), at this moment, the 'violent' were gaining/grabbing/seizing hold of the Kingdom, forcefully pushing forward (perhaps both physically, but also attention wise) to lay claim to it.

They saw something good was available -- right there in front of them -- and were determined to have it for themselves. Forcefully. That's a kind of 'violence' also.

Remember at one point how John the Baptist challenged them -- "what are you doing here!?" (ok, lemme get the accurate verse...)

Luke 3:7 Then John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?

Later, with Christ, the same in some ways. The violent were seizing what was good, for themselves.

Which they could not have done if Christ Himself had not been physically present there in a place they could march forward to, so as to claim Him for their own. See post #107 above for more key pieces.

seizing, raiding, laying hold of, claiming

or in some modern American words, grabbing perhaps violently (in effect) barging forward to take, elbowing others out of the way rudely perhaps even. But it's not the physical side so much as the heart attitude that is key. They wanted to grab what was good, for themselves, perhaps one might speculate even some only repenting solely from an awareness that was the program (not their love/urge).

Remember how the crowds also pressed in, the diverse crowds, likely with many different motives in them. So that He would sometimes go in a boat away.

Tree of Life said:

The question is whether this violence is a commendable thing or a despicable thing. I think that it's being portrayed as a despicable thing and a sad reality. The violent try to damage the kingdom and anyone who is a kingdom person can expect to face violence of some kind in this world for the sake of righteousness.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, it is praised as something commentable and presented almost as a requirement for acquiring the Kingdom of God. The question is what kind of violence has a positive quality. The same as the positive hatred Christ speaks of when He says: "If any man come to Me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." (Luke 14:26)

- edit -

Incidentally, today is the feast day of St Martinian who was quite violent with himself:

Tree of Life said:

I think your hatred of the institutional church is skewing your ability to understand this text.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I believe people can be led to God through such imperfect institutions. In time, they will discover the truth if they are open to it. Believers are not given instant knowledge of all things overnight. It takes time to study and to learn.

Also, it was first the Pharisees and not any kind of Gentile churches that was the primary reference to what Jesus was referring to here, as well. Again, the context shows that they are the primary focus. The church are a body of believers (i.e. the disciples) and it is not an institutional building with a paid staff. Jesus was referring to the religious leaders of Israel. How could Jesus not have them in mind when telling the people to Israel to repent, etc. Jesus again was crucified ultimately as a result of the Pharisees. The Pharisees were acting on behalf of what they felt was the way of God. The violent seek to take the kingdom of God by force (But obviously this is impossible to do - even though they tried).

Again, Jesus says it is from the days of John the baptist until now (Jesus's present time of speaking in Matthew 11) that the violent try to take the kingdom by force. This does not work if it is talking about unbelievers in general. For the Jews went through the Babylonian Exile. They were taken by force before. So this means that Jesus is comparing John's persecution with that of the persecution of the Pharisees. How so? Because only believers in God are interested in taking the Kingdom. Unbelievers do not care about God's Kingdom.

Tree of Life said:

I think your hatred of the institutional church is skewing your ability to understand this text.

Click to expand...

Also, how do you interpret John 16:2?


This clearly is the violent seeking to take the Kingdom by force.
For they are believers who are seeking to kill us Christians who think they are doing God a service.