George Peters' Vision of the Kingdom, Church, and Progressive Dispensationalism

George Peters' influence on Dispensationalism is undeniable. Lewis Sperry Chafer cites him repeatedly throughout his systematic theology, and in volume three declares that Peters' The Theocratic Kingdom (1884) is "unsurpassed either for completeness or for scholarship." Alva McClain likewise references Peters' work in his own classic treatment, acknowledging its weight and influence within the Dispensationalist tradition.

Peters' work spans three volumes and contains 206 propositions in total, each accompanied by a series of observations. Having read the majority of these propositions, I have reached a significant conclusion: Peters actually rejects the most common Traditional Dispensationalist view that the Kingdom described in Matthew 13 represents Christendom. For Peters, the expression "Kingdom of Heaven" in Matthew 13 does not undergo a shift in meaning. Rather, the "mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven" signify — precisely as we Progressive Dispensationalists believe — new truths or fresh revelations about the Old Testament Kingdom. Peters states this explicitly:

“

"The mysteries, therefore, imply: (1) a previous acquaintance with the doctrine of the kingdom, and (2) that the mysteries imparted bestow a fuller knowledge of the subject in view of the additions made." (Peters, Vol. 1, p. 143)

For Peters, these new revelations (mysteries) do not alter the nature of the Kingdom — contrary to what many Traditional Dispensationalists teach when they speak of a "mystery form of the Kingdom" as Christendom:

“

"Some writers… connect the mystery with a change of the nature of the Kingdom, so that a new meaning is to be attached to it; it includes, at least, such new characteristics added, such modifications or alterations, that it is completely transformed. Admitting additions and changes to it as predicted, yet it remains unproven that there is a change in its nature or meaning." (Peters, Vol. 1, p. 147)

Peters further argues that the New Testament assumes and carries forward the Old Testament meaning of the Kingdom rather than replacing it — and that the mysteries represent new revelations about the Kingdom, not the introduction of an entirely new kingdom:

“

"The doctrine of the kingdom is first taught by covenant, theocratic ordering, and prophecy in the Old Testament, and it is taken for granted in the New Testament as a subject derived from the Old Testament and well understood; for the kingdom is preached without any appended explanation." (Peters, Vol. 1, p. 157)

Church, Kingdom, and the Covenants

Another crucial aspect of Peters' view is that he does not disconnect the Church from the plan and promises of the Kingdom, as most Traditional Dispensationalists do. On the contrary — in Proposition 30, he affirms:

“

"The participation of the Gentiles in the covenanted relationship (and through this, to an inheriting of the blessings of the Kingdom), must depend… upon their being, in some way, adopted as the seed of Abraham. Precisely here was the mystery, which baffled even the apostles until specially enlightened." (Peters, Vol. 1, p. 233)

Peters is correct and aligns with the Progressive Dispensationalist view on this point: the Church was integrated into the covenantal relationship, which causes it to inherit blessings of the Kingdom. Thus, the mystery of the Kingdom, even in the sense of new revelation, does not disconnect the Church from the Kingdom program. For Peters, the Church is connected to the Kingdom program. Many Traditional Dispensationalists argue that because the Church is a mystery — unrevealed in the Old Testament — it has nothing to do with the prophesied Kingdom. Peters argues precisely the opposite: the mystery implies that the Gentiles (who constitute the Church) now participate in the covenants through Christ and inherit "the blessings of the Kingdom."

Proposition 61 further develops this: the Kingdom, which by promise belonged exclusively to the Jewish nation as the legitimate seed of Abraham, was now to be given to an engrafted people. In Observation 3 of that proposition, Peters affirms that the language of Scripture is clear (Ephesians 2–3): Gentiles who were once "strangers from the covenants of promise" and "far off" have now been "made near by the blood of Christ," becoming "fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God," so that "the Gentiles should be fellow heirs and of the same body." This mode of adoption is called a "mystery" because the central question was how this could be accomplished without altering or diminishing the covenants given to the Jewish nation.

Peters then draws a profound — and in some ways bolder — connection between the Church and the Kingdom than Traditional Dispensationalism (and I myself) would allow:

“

"This Kingdom is to be given to all of the elected nation, both believing Jews of natural descent and engrafted Gentiles, to all believers, therefore, that have ever lived; and it will be bestowed upon both at the same time, including the Patriarchs, ancient worthies, faithful Jews, and believing adopted Gentiles." (Peters, Vol. 1, p. 413)

Continuity in God's Plan

If George Peters — so highly regarded by the most prominent Dispensationalist theologians — is saying precisely what we Progressive Dispensationalists have been arguing regarding the meaning of "mystery," the relationship between the Church and the Kingdom, and the interpretation of the Kingdom in Matthew 13, then there is good reason to recognize a greater degree of progression and continuity in God's plan throughout the present age.

Therefore, the Church is indeed a mystery — a new revelation not contained in the Old Testament — but a mystery not disconnected from the plan revealed in the Old Testament. The new revelation itself is that the Church would be connected to the promise of the covenants, being a co-heir and participating together with Israel. Thus, as Peters correctly states, it is a mystery that connects to the divine plan of the Old Testament.

It is also worth noting that Peters is the father of the futurist reading of Matthew 13, a view later adopted by Stanley Toussaint. Peters does acknowledge present elements of the Kingdom in Matthew 13, but understands them as preparatory to the Kingdom — not as evidence that the Kingdom has already been inaugurated in a spiritual sense.