Interplanner
Well-known member
First, I mean to say that futurist would be a very distant future. There simply is no conception like that in the NT. Almost all references to the 2nd coming in judgement, resulting in a NHNE were that it would be right after the Destruction of Jerusalem, and even that is not necessarily set
to be 40 years later, no matter what. It could have happened very early in that generation (30-70).
If you go by Daniel 9 on that question, you have an additional reason, but I'm referring to the amount of tension between Israel and Rome and pressure from the Sabeans to get Israel on its side to puncture the Roman hold of the eastern shore of the Roman "lake." Rebels were already active and were opportunistic.
2, the refreshing times were underway. The prophesied outpouring of the Spirit, the outreach, the language event, the dreams and visions, the signs and wonders, the fellowship of the Christians, the great grace, and on and on.
3, then there is the expression the restoration of all things. It is that which has been capitalized upon by the distant futurists. In order to make it an honest offer, they think that he was offering a restored Israel in the old covenant sense right then. I used to think so to.
I stopped thinking that way when I realized how wide all things was. When the prophetic vision of Isaiah refers to all suffering, war, death, why would this suddenly mean a temple and worship system in a micro country?
I stopped thinking that way when I realized the overlay of the last 3 verses of the preaching, 24. They are very definitely in them; they are underway. It was time for all nations on earth to be blessed through them. There is a huge amount of confusion if we think the activity here was to terminate in blessing FOR Israel, instead of a conveyance THROUGH Israel. Because, yes, salvation is through Israel, that is, Christ, Jn 4. But finally and conclusively, the first...and then... formula is right there in 26. He did bless Israel first, but not terminally. It was to bless them so they would be a 'light in His light' to the nations.
All I had to do was realize how short the timeframe was in their (the apostles) thinking about the 2nd coming. As in so many passages like I Cor 1:7, ch 7 on the shortness of time, 'marana Tha', the Thess passages (where he had to clear up that it had NOT happened yet!), Rom 16 'he will soon crush Satan' etc.
So to summarize: it is an announcement that the prophetic mission to the whole world is now here, and announced to Israel, to get them on board. This is why the 'kingdom offer' is totally absent beyond this point, is not a discussion, is no where else in Acts. If Acts 8 is any indication, the nation/ethne is in for a rough time, while the mission will flourish.
What is in Acts is 13's and 26's complete statements that this is the destiny of Israel, including a lament by Paul that Israel seeks its old covenant restored day and night at services at the temple, missing the fact that the new age had arrived in the resurrection of Christ and the mission of spreading the Gospel.
For details footnotes of this, showing that Peter and Paul were on the same page all through, see the middle of Rom 10 through the end of 11. Even with such prodding to Israel to be the great host of preachers of Isaiah, he got very few.
I have dealt with the poorly done workups of 11:25 and of Heb 8 many times in other threads. (Those two were the other proof texts mentioned in a recent blast at me about the restored kingdom offer).
to be 40 years later, no matter what. It could have happened very early in that generation (30-70).
If you go by Daniel 9 on that question, you have an additional reason, but I'm referring to the amount of tension between Israel and Rome and pressure from the Sabeans to get Israel on its side to puncture the Roman hold of the eastern shore of the Roman "lake." Rebels were already active and were opportunistic.
2, the refreshing times were underway. The prophesied outpouring of the Spirit, the outreach, the language event, the dreams and visions, the signs and wonders, the fellowship of the Christians, the great grace, and on and on.
3, then there is the expression the restoration of all things. It is that which has been capitalized upon by the distant futurists. In order to make it an honest offer, they think that he was offering a restored Israel in the old covenant sense right then. I used to think so to.
I stopped thinking that way when I realized how wide all things was. When the prophetic vision of Isaiah refers to all suffering, war, death, why would this suddenly mean a temple and worship system in a micro country?
I stopped thinking that way when I realized the overlay of the last 3 verses of the preaching, 24. They are very definitely in them; they are underway. It was time for all nations on earth to be blessed through them. There is a huge amount of confusion if we think the activity here was to terminate in blessing FOR Israel, instead of a conveyance THROUGH Israel. Because, yes, salvation is through Israel, that is, Christ, Jn 4. But finally and conclusively, the first...and then... formula is right there in 26. He did bless Israel first, but not terminally. It was to bless them so they would be a 'light in His light' to the nations.
All I had to do was realize how short the timeframe was in their (the apostles) thinking about the 2nd coming. As in so many passages like I Cor 1:7, ch 7 on the shortness of time, 'marana Tha', the Thess passages (where he had to clear up that it had NOT happened yet!), Rom 16 'he will soon crush Satan' etc.
So to summarize: it is an announcement that the prophetic mission to the whole world is now here, and announced to Israel, to get them on board. This is why the 'kingdom offer' is totally absent beyond this point, is not a discussion, is no where else in Acts. If Acts 8 is any indication, the nation/ethne is in for a rough time, while the mission will flourish.
What is in Acts is 13's and 26's complete statements that this is the destiny of Israel, including a lament by Paul that Israel seeks its old covenant restored day and night at services at the temple, missing the fact that the new age had arrived in the resurrection of Christ and the mission of spreading the Gospel.
For details footnotes of this, showing that Peter and Paul were on the same page all through, see the middle of Rom 10 through the end of 11. Even with such prodding to Israel to be the great host of preachers of Isaiah, he got very few.
I have dealt with the poorly done workups of 11:25 and of Heb 8 many times in other threads. (Those two were the other proof texts mentioned in a recent blast at me about the restored kingdom offer).
