Transitional books...

[@@Paul@@]

OK, here's a nice theory, looking for some thoughts.

There are three transitional books in the NT which aid us in your understanding of how God transitions between administrations...

We know he does it.

Joh 3:30 He must increase, but I must decrease.​

Matthew would be the transition from the OT to the NT (Law to Grace).

Acts shows us the transition from the gospel of the kingdom to the church age

Hebrews would reverse Acts.. from the church age to the Tribulation (the gospel of the kingdom)

Fire away!!

 

[Terral]

Hi Paul:

Please allow me to speak off topic a sec . . . When you start using terms like ‘gospel of the kingdom’ in your posts, then look out for the stones. That is a completely legal Biblical phrase that describes the gospel message that our Lord Himself preached to Israel (Matt. 4:23), but people for some reason have the hardest time accepting it. They want to deny the very existence of the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ with every fiber of their being, even though the Holy Spirit uses the phrase four times in Matthew and Acts. Although, Luke waters it down some, saying,

“But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike.” Acts 8:12.

Even though the wording is a little different, this still represents the same ‘gospel’ that Christ describes right here:

"This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.” Matt. 24:14.

Christ reinforced the fact that the Twelve would take this message to the whole world in Acts 1:

“. . . but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth." Acts 1:8.

Anyhow, I just wanted to warn you about using the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ accurately in a sentence, because that makes folks mighty nervous. To your topic:

Paul >> Matthew would be the transition from the OT to the NT (Law to Grace).

We disagree here Paul. The Law and the Prophets actually prophesied until John. Matt. 11:13. He is the Elijah character of the final words of Malachi 4:5+6 that arrived on the scene as early as Mark 1:4 in that gospel account. We cannot actually give any one of the four gospels accounts a head start on the other three in determining which one is really and truly the transitional book. Christ kind of took the guess work out of that process by naming John as the key figure that began the fulfillment process to OT Prophecy. That is really the key you are seeking in locating a ‘dispensational shift’ in Scripture. It is about the appointment of the steward of that particular household/administration that identifies the exact location.

Imagine for a second that Christ was never born, and that John the Baptist was Elijah coming to restore all things. Then he would have been the steward, and baptized everybody with the Holy Spirit from the Temple that he received from dear old dad Zacharias in Luke 1. Instead, Christ came along and took the Spirit from him (Matt. 3:16) and died on the cross for our sins. So, God’s plan A for the kingdom was really plan B. It is just that God had to fool Satan into pulling it off the way he did. Satan and his band of dark guys are on their way down, and we take their places in the process. The cool part is that when Israel makes her entrance into the heavenly, then it will appear that we have been there all along. What’s the name of the reality show where everyone is on the trick, except the one guy? That is kind of what is going to play out in the heavenly realm with the trick being on Israel. They will work for eternity to get what we had from day one. Body = grace, Bride = works. Give me a spot in the body any day.

Paul >> Acts shows us the transition from the gospel of the kingdom to the church age

Yes sir, indeed. This is our transitional book for the New Testament. They key is that a dispensational shift has occurred within the timeline established by Luke. In other words, he began the book by describing events that related to the preaching of the Kingdom of God, as the ministry of the Son was in transition to that of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Note that both Christ and the Holy Spirit used the same Twelve (minus son of perdition of course) to bring the gospel of the kingdom to Israel first, then to the entire world.

Christ Himself appointed Peter as the head of the KingdomChurch back in Matthew 16:16-19. This is another point in which folks like to dismiss as something of a myth. After all, they wish to start ‘the’ church in Acts 2. Therefore, everyone that John the Baptist, Christ and the Twelve had baptized into the Kingdom for the past three years are left out in the cold. Do you want to see the evidence that this KingdomChurch began before Pentecost? Peter stood up among 120 brethren and began describing how they intended to elect the new person among the Twelve. Acts 1:15. To what church did they belong? They chose from among the Jews who had walked with them the entire time. Acts 1:21+22. If the kingdom church started in Acts 2, then Christ would have been talking about handing over keys there in Acts, and not in the middle of Matthew.


Many here will disagree, but the dispensational shift occurs in Acts with the conversion of Paul. He represents the ‘protos’ (first) of 1Tim. 1:16. He became the pattern/example by which all of us are saved. Nobody seems to have a problem believing that Adam is the first man and therefore ‘father’ of us all. Right? Who became your father in Christ through the gospel? Paul. 1Cor. 4:15. Why did the Holy Spirit use Luke to describe the ‘steward of this dispensation’ being converted in three different chapters? (9, 22, 26). One person in the entire Bible has the distinction of being called, “chosen instrument of Mine,’ (Acts 9:15). No other man is called an ‘instrument’ period, except Paul. This signifies one of the most important acts of selecting an individual to any position that the Lord God has done since the dawn of this age. It is through the gospel message that this man would carry, and through the spiritual body of individuals that he would steward that the ‘sons of God’ (Rom. 8:14, 19) will become manifest into this Creation.

The ‘gospel of the grace of God’ (Acts 20:24) is the most magnificent peace offering of forgiveness and mercy from our Creator that has ever been or shall ever be manifested in this age or any to come. Right now in our day men have the greatest opportunity for placement in the highest positions in all the heavenly realms through obedience to Paul’s gospel, and God’s free gift of eternal life. The only condition is that we must accept it by faith apart from any works whatsoever. Eph. 2:8+9. God made it so very simple, that the wise of this world trip right over it; seeking to establish their own righteousness, instead of allowing God to impute them with His (Rom. 4:4-6). Those things being true, Acts is the transitional book of our NT, because of the transition from the preaching of the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt. 24:14, Acts 8:12) to the ‘gospel of the grace of God’ (Acts 20:24), which Paul enjoys calling “my gospel.” Rom. 2:16, 16:25, 2Tim. 2:8. What starts off as preaching, teaching and building up of the ‘bride’ (John 3:29) ends with Paul turning his back on the Israel (Acts 28:28), and working exclusively with the Gentile ‘body’ (Eph. 4:4, 12.).

Paul >> Hebrews would reverse Acts.. from the church age to the Tribulation (the gospel of the kingdom)

Where Acts shows a transition from Kingdom Doctrine (under Peter) to Grace Doctrine (under Paul), Hebrews is a Kingdom book written to the Levitical Priesthood of the coming Kingdom Dispensation. God gave thirteen letters to the Gentile Body of Christ through Paul, and thirteen letters to the Jewish Bride of Christ through some of Paul’s travel companions (Mark, Luke) and the heads of the Messianic Kingdom Church in Jerusalem (Peter, John, James, Jude). Most believe that Paul also wrote Hebrews, because it contains the more technical language of the priest, and one educated in the way of Paul. It is very possible that Paul and Luke together have more education than the remainder of the NT writers combined. Most of the Kingdom Disciples were fishermen and the like. That would give Paul and his crew credit for writing seventeen of the twenty-seven books.

Paul’s letters represent Grace Doctrine for the Gentile dominant Body of Christ that is upon the earth today. The Spirit of the Temple is currently working inside the bodies (1Cor. 6:19) of those individuals in order to restore the body of Christ to full stature (Eph. 4:13). When this ‘time of the Gentiles’ is complete, then Elijah will once again start his work of restoring the bride and Israel to her full stature. In those coming days, the people from that kingdom dispensation will read from the Kingdom Gospels and Hebrew Epistles like we use Paul’s letters today. In that day, false prophets and teachers will try to distort the Gospel of the Kingdom by trying to add elements of Paul’s gospel to their message for that day. People will be saying, “No water baptism!, It is by faith alone!” Except for in that day the work of water baptism will indeed be part of their gospel, and Kingdom Doctrine will be the law of the land (Matt. 5:18, James 2:10).

In Christ,

Terral

 

[@@Paul@@]

We agree so much here, I'll only touch on the one subject where we disagree.

Act 26:22-23
(22) Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
(23) That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.​

Even Paul admitted that everything he was doing, was prophesied in scripture.. i.e. Acts would then be more accurately titled a transition book from the prophetic plan of God to the Hidden purpose of God.

All of the Acts period was of the grace of God.. even Israel chance to receive the messianic kingdom. Acts dealt solely with that kingdom and the “powers of the world to come” > including Paul's first 7 epistles... < the last seven being specifically for this calling.

The Law and the Prophets actually prophesied until John. Matt. 11:13.

Then why did Paul say otherwise?

 

[Terral]

Hi Paul:

Paul >> We agree so much here, I'll only touch on the one subject where we disagree.

Our posts in general tend to concentrate more on points of disagreement than where we agree. That is how we iron out the differences. Our explanations to one another assist in helping us develop those views more clearly. Let’s see what you have for me today:

Act 26:22-23 (22) Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: (23) That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Paul >> Even Paul admitted that everything he was doing, was prophesied in scripture.. i.e. Acts would then be more accurately titled a transition book from the prophetic plan of God to the Hidden purpose of God.

Here is what I need you to do, Paul: Show me in the prophets and Moses where it says that Christ should suffer and that He would be the first to raise from the dead, and show light to the people (Jews) and to the Gentiles. What I am going to do now is write out in English what the Greek manuscript of the Majority Text actually says with the tenses intact:

Acts 26:[22b] “. . . nothing except saying [the things] which both the prophets spoke of as being about to happen and Moses, [23] that subject to suffering the Messiah was, that as [the] first from resurrection from [the] dead a light He is about to proclaim to the [Jewish] people and to the Gentiles.”

That is the way in which Luke actually wrote the words. Here is what Matthew wrote down concerning Christ’s words about John the Baptist:

[Matt. 11:13] “all ~ For the prophets and the law until John prophesied.”

Here is the difference: Paul is standing in front of King Agrippa in about the time of 60 Ad. or so. He has written the letters to the Thessalonians, Romans, Corinthians and Galatians. While the full revelation of the mystery is still ahead (Prison Epistles), the gifts of Prophecy, Knowledge and Tongues have been working in the Church for the past two decades. The ‘prophets’ of Paul’s words relate to the spirit of prophecy at work during the time our NT letters were being written through the Holy Spirit of God. Christ’s words are regarding the OT Prophets and Law that were beginning to be fulfilled through John the Baptist, as he began offering the Kingdom to Israel. Therefore, Paul is describing his commission from Christ that pertains to “Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel.” (Acts 9:15). The OT prophets were not given to see his ‘gospel to the uncircumcised’ (Rom. 16:25) or the ‘body of Christ,’ as His Church (Col. 1:24-27). Those are the subject of the NT prophets that were working in Paul’s day giving us our completed (perfect; 1Cor. 13:10) Word of God.

Paul >> All of the Acts period was of the grace of God.. even

Israel chance to receive the messianic kingdom. Acts dealt solely with that kingdom and the “powers of the world to come” > including Paul's first 7 epistles... < the last seven being specifically for this calling.

If you want to place a label of ‘grace’ upon figures in Scripture, then grace began with Adam, when he ate of the fruit from the woman and did not die that very second. For the Lord God told him,

“. . . but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." Gen. 2:17.

That does not place Adam inside our ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ given to Paul for us Gentiles. Eph. 3:2. God showed his favor and mercy upon practically every key figure of Scripture at one time or another. Look at the example of David sending Uriah the Hittite to the front lines to die in battle, so he could have his wife. The Lord God took his child, but spared David. 2Sam. 12:18. Still, nobody from the OT is a member of the body of Christ through Paul’s gospel. This ‘mystery among the Gentiles’ (Col. 1:27) pertains to a particular group of select individuals who have heard and believed our ‘Christ and Him crucified’ (1Cor. 2:2) good news message for today. That is the difference in God’s grace, and the ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ given to Paul for us Gentiles. Eph. 3:2.

Terral Original >> The Law and the Prophets actually prophesied until John. Matt. 11:13.

Paul >> Then why did Paul say otherwise?

Even if Paul was speaking in the same context as Christ (and he is not), that would not change one word of what Christ said concerning John the Baptist (Elijah; Matt. 11:14). After all, Paul was not the key figure in Scripture to ‘begin’ fulfilling the Law and the Prophets of the OT. That distinction clearly belongs to John the Baptist (Isa. 40:3, Mal. 3:1; prophecy – Matt. 3:1-6 fulfilled). As shown above, Paul was working with the information pertaining to NT prophecy, and the ‘visions and revelations’ of the Lord Jesus. 1Cor. 12:1. At the time that Paul stood in front of King Agrippa, he was still ‘preaching the kingdom’ (Acts 20:25) to Israel. He would continue to do so until Acts 28:28, where Luke by the Holy Spirit, ends the account to Theophilus. Even though that is true, our Grace Church still began back at his conversion. We are to keep in mind that Acts is a book of transition. Therefore, the two administrations of Kingdom and Grace run parallel for a specific period. During that period, both good news messages were being offered, as the bride and body were being built simultaneously. That would continue, until the Spirit Himself began to work exclusively with the body of Christ, as we see today.

In Christ,

Terral

 

[plmarquette]

What about Romans ?
Grace v's the Law ...

 

[@@Paul@@]

What about Romans ?
Grace v's the Law ...

I suppose any book written during the acts period would be transitional in some sense.

Romans was the last book written during that period.