The Apostles didn't blur the distinction between history and type. They didn't alter identities in the prophecies. Their projections were based on the established fact of fulfilled prophecy.
"...the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children..." preached Paul (Acts 13:33).
He didn't explain that prophecies concerning Israel were not about Israel but were about the Church. That would hardly have been convincing to the teachers of the Law.
Rather he taught that there'd been the fulfilment in and for Israel of the very promises which were for them.
The fact that Paul explained that there was a true Israel within Israel did not mean that there wasn't a fulfilment in and for Israel - precisely the opposite - it explained how there was the fulfilment in and for Israel.
All that had to happen in history before Gentiles could then be included in salvation.
And in defending the later inclusion of Gentiles, the Apostles quoted prophecies which had nominated the Gentiles specifically.
They never blurred the identities and locations in prophecies in order to assert their case for Jesus, to defend the inclusion of the Gentiles, or to make any projections they made.
Their Gospel and their projections were based on the rock solid truth that God had done what He said He would do, for the people for whom He said He would do it, in the place He said He would do it, at the time He said He would do it, and in the manner He said He would do it.
Most of the main schemes of popular eschatology don't seem to maintain quite the same integrity of logic.
"...the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children..." preached Paul (Acts 13:33).
He didn't explain that prophecies concerning Israel were not about Israel but were about the Church. That would hardly have been convincing to the teachers of the Law.
Rather he taught that there'd been the fulfilment in and for Israel of the very promises which were for them.
The fact that Paul explained that there was a true Israel within Israel did not mean that there wasn't a fulfilment in and for Israel - precisely the opposite - it explained how there was the fulfilment in and for Israel.
All that had to happen in history before Gentiles could then be included in salvation.
And in defending the later inclusion of Gentiles, the Apostles quoted prophecies which had nominated the Gentiles specifically.
They never blurred the identities and locations in prophecies in order to assert their case for Jesus, to defend the inclusion of the Gentiles, or to make any projections they made.
Their Gospel and their projections were based on the rock solid truth that God had done what He said He would do, for the people for whom He said He would do it, in the place He said He would do it, at the time He said He would do it, and in the manner He said He would do it.
Most of the main schemes of popular eschatology don't seem to maintain quite the same integrity of logic.
No comments:
Post a Comment