I've looked at all of the Old Testament passages referenced in the AOG's official statement about the Millennium, but it feels awkward to me to place those passages in the future, because:
If the passages are future, then for we Christians to claim that certain Messianic prophecies contained in those passages were fulfilled by Jesus' first coming, would be to pull a verse out of its context - pulling it forward thousands of years from the passage's future context.
If we've got to pull a verse out of its context in order to make our point, then our case for asserting that Jesus of Nazareth was their Messiah is somewhat weakened, no matter what hermeneutic we create to justify our method.
Making the passages about the future also implies that God will require us to revert to Old Covenant practices even after the New Covenant has already come. The passages paint a picture of Israel and the nations on annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem, bringing animal sacrifices to the Levite priests - or being cursed. That concept doesn't seem to fit with Paul's Gospel.
If the Millennium is to "bring the salvation of national Israel" as stated in the AOG's official statement of Fundamental Truths, that implies that Jews can get saved after the second coming of Christ. But the parables of Jesus seem to teach that it will be too late for anyone who isn't ready when He comes.
If it's possible to get saved after Jesus' return has been seen, then it's possible to get saved through another means besides faith - because faith that is seen is no more faith.
If it's possible to get saved through a means other than faith, then Jesus died in vain.
Many claim all Israel will be saved after they "look upon him who they pierced", at His coming, and realise He was their Messiah. But John said that verse was fulfilled at Christ's first coming, at the cross.
I'm therefore exploring the possibility that: Every Old Testament prophecy which was about Old Covenant distinctives, such as sacrifices, incense, feasts and Jerusalem-centric worship, must have been fulfilled at a time when the Old Covenant was still in force - most of them literally (especially where the prophecy is written in prose); and some of them as the fulfilment of a symbol (where the prophecy is written in the Apocalyptic genre).
If the passages are future, then for we Christians to claim that certain Messianic prophecies contained in those passages were fulfilled by Jesus' first coming, would be to pull a verse out of its context - pulling it forward thousands of years from the passage's future context.
If we've got to pull a verse out of its context in order to make our point, then our case for asserting that Jesus of Nazareth was their Messiah is somewhat weakened, no matter what hermeneutic we create to justify our method.
Making the passages about the future also implies that God will require us to revert to Old Covenant practices even after the New Covenant has already come. The passages paint a picture of Israel and the nations on annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem, bringing animal sacrifices to the Levite priests - or being cursed. That concept doesn't seem to fit with Paul's Gospel.
If the Millennium is to "bring the salvation of national Israel" as stated in the AOG's official statement of Fundamental Truths, that implies that Jews can get saved after the second coming of Christ. But the parables of Jesus seem to teach that it will be too late for anyone who isn't ready when He comes.
If it's possible to get saved after Jesus' return has been seen, then it's possible to get saved through another means besides faith - because faith that is seen is no more faith.
If it's possible to get saved through a means other than faith, then Jesus died in vain.
Many claim all Israel will be saved after they "look upon him who they pierced", at His coming, and realise He was their Messiah. But John said that verse was fulfilled at Christ's first coming, at the cross.
I'm therefore exploring the possibility that: Every Old Testament prophecy which was about Old Covenant distinctives, such as sacrifices, incense, feasts and Jerusalem-centric worship, must have been fulfilled at a time when the Old Covenant was still in force - most of them literally (especially where the prophecy is written in prose); and some of them as the fulfilment of a symbol (where the prophecy is written in the Apocalyptic genre).
If that's indeed the case, then it would strengthen our case for asserting that Jesus fulfilled the Messianic prophecies which were included in that historical context.
It would also eliminate the need for a return to Judaism in future.
Paul didn't respond to the seeming discrepancy between what had been Promised to Israel and what had actually come to pass in Israel by saying that the promises had been postponed. Rather, he explained the manner in which the Prophecies had been fulfilled exactly, through the Gospel, without any failure or postponement.
And I'm considering if the symbolism of the Book of Revelation can be made to fit that scenario.
With regard to that, a friend of mine said that "One thousand" appears to him to be the highest specific number in OT Greek; after that he said the word "murios" is used (although he's not sure of the spelling), or "expressions such as "a thousand times ten thousand and thousands of thousands".
"I'm sure that God owns not only 'the cattle on a thousand hills, but on all other hills as well! he quipped.
But I also know that many more spiritually mature AOG minds would already have thought about many of the issues in regard to all this.
So we'll see how it goes.
No comments:
Post a Comment