Open Zoom: All Israel will be saved

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Updates

Here is the Zoom link for the evening (Thursday 16th April):

Open Zoom Link

ID: 572 803 9267
Passcode: 5GkMTA

A reminder: the article can be found by accessing the menu labelled ‘Journals’ and it is Volume 8. It can be downloaded or read online.

I suggest if you read it that you make notes particularly for any questions that need clarification. Not a short ‘breezy’ read.

There is also a short(-ish) video that gives a summary of what I have written.

I am aware this is a highly controversial / debated subject, so a quick reminder – do not come on board assuming I have now settled all discussions and am ‘right’… and neither come to the Zoom assuming that you are right!! we are not seeking to make a point but as the title to the series makes plain these are ‘explorations in theology and practice’.

The part that is ‘new’ follows the work of Jason Staples who has gone to great lengths to show that ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’ are not synonymous. An article by Staples that can be easily accessed is here. In it there is a short explanation of how since the influential publication of Kittel’s Dictionary there has been a common assumption that Jew and Israel are simply synonymous… I put an extended explanation below (material from Staples)…

[In addition to lecturing on Rabbinic Judaism while wearing a Nazi paramilitary uniform in the 1930s, Kuhn (1906-1976) was, together with his mentor Gerhard Kittel, one of fifteen appointees to the “Institute for the Study of the Jewish Problem” established in 1936. He contributed several scholarly articles on the so-called “Jewish Problem” in the service of the institute, putting forth anti-Semitic scholarship with remarkable subtlety and scholarly sophistication.

But Kuhn is also the author of the entry in Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament on the terms Israel, Ioudaios (Jew/Judaean), and Hebrew in early Jewish literature, an entry that established the paradigm for how these terms and their relationships to each other have been understood for nearly a century—a paradigm now so dominant as to be regularly assumed without argument or citation across a broad range of scholarly literature.

Like most modern scholars, Kuhn presumed that the terms “Israelite,” “Jew,” and “Hebrew” were essentially synonymous or coextensive in early Jewish literature, with all three terms referring to the same group of people. Nevertheless, these terms are not evenly distributed across early Jewish literature like one would expect if they were completely synonymous. As a result, Kuhn proposed that Israel/Israelite is the preferred “insider” terminology, while “Jew” is a term typically used by outsiders and sometimes carries a nuance of disrespect or contempt, and was used by Israelites themselves as an accommodation when communicating in an outsider or diaspora context. As for “Hebrew,” Kuhn explains that this term serves as another “more dignified” alternative to the “deprecatory element that clings so easily to [Jew].”]

Here are the key points I raise:

  • Israel – defined ethnically or by faith. Not all ‘of Israel’ (ethnicity) are ‘Israel’ – a point Paul makes that would not have been controversial.
  • ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’ are not synonymous so we cannot make ‘All Israel’ to mean ‘All Jews’.
  • Paul is seeking to defend God’s faithfulness to the promises in Rom. 9-11; those promises being made to Abraham and his ‘seed’. In Galatians Paul somewhat ‘cheekily’ holds that ‘seed’ is singular therefore it is a reference to ‘Jesus’. (Neither in Greek nor English does the point hold grammatically.) In Romans he is much more nuanced.
  • More nuanced but the promises are not made to Abraham’s descendants who are ‘Jews’ (tribe of Judah and Benjamin) but who are ‘of Israel’ (all tribes).
  • The Gentile mission is not the abandonment of ‘Israel’ (think ‘faith Israel) but is the very means that ‘all Israel’ will be saved. This is not a temporal statement but a modal one: ‘in this way all Israel will be saved’.
  • Leaning into other NT texts – those who come to faith from a Gentile background do not become Jews but are adopted into Israel. This also cuts through the divide on Acts 1:6 are you going to restore the kingdom to Israel at this time. The reply (leaning heavily on Isaianic texts) is neither a denial nor an affirmation (as understood classically) but again a modal answer.

I look forward to seeing you soon.

The YouTube (summary) video is:

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Some Resources

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

I left behind something like 3000 books when Gayle and I moved to Spain… a good move as I am not a great reader and have a fairly low vocabulary. When I get into a subject I like to dig fairly deep but there are huge gaps in what I grasp. Since the days of living in the UK though resources have increased enormously on the internet.

I first studied theology some 50 years ago; back then so much of evangelical theology was defensive. I remember the lectures of Dr. Donald Guthrie on the New Testament. Each book had to be shown to ‘apostolic’ and I always thought there was quite a bit of manoeuvring going on to prove this. Behind it was something bigger going on – a doctrine of Scripture. (Same motivation with Wayne Grudem and his (loved by charismatics) the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament apostles spoke the inspired words of God… falls down some when looking at clearly unfulfilled OT prophecies – but the motivation is a predetermined view of Scripture). I liked what FF Bruce said when asking the rhetorical question as to why we have to add more than the simple statements such as ‘truth’ or ‘authority’ of Scripture. For some my doctrine of Scripture might be a little shaky, but I seek to live under the authority of what I read.

Anyway enough of that. Coming under the authority of (the story) of Scripture does not mean we cannot question what is there. What do I make of the ‘God-ordained’ genocide commands? Firstly I wish they were not there or at least there was a footnote explaining them. But there they are… just glad that the 66 books I read don’t end there… and that the infallible word of God was incarnated in Jesus. Loads I don’t get.

So to resources.

The bible project is an amazing resource, and free. Tim Mackie and Jon Collins are the two main people behind this who work with a team. Tim has a (more than) genuine PhD and is well versed in scholarship. He communicates in an amazingly down to earth way. Animated videos are available on every book of the Bible (plus a whole lot more). A great introduction to a book before reading it.

Try this one on Amos: https://bibleproject.com/videos/amos.

Want something a little provocative? Peter Enns got booted from his former position for his book on the Bible where he used the incarnation (human and divine) as the model. He (with his mate, Jared) interview a wide variety of scholars (simple language is used). Try the regular podcast:
https://thebiblefornormalpeople.com/podcast.

Greek… always be suspicious when the smart guy says but the Greek actually says… then they kinda go to the ‘root word’ or to Strong’s concordance. Might get something 1% of the time, but that is not how language works. The Greek text though is available and maybe the best resource is the Step Bible. The Greek text that can be accessed there is bang up to date. Maybe a bit of hard work but for example I give my preferred translation (NRSV updated edition) a bit of a slap for the translation of Rom. 9:6 in the latest ‘extended article’ on All Israel will be saved (did I mention that an Open Zoom is coming up on this?)

Here is the NRSVue:

It is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all those descended from Israel are Israelites,

In the light of what I am pushing for in that article: the importance of Israel, Jew, Israelite not being confused and the ‘seed/ descendant’ word being very key I consider there are confusions set up in the translation that I use (other translations are better on this). Here is what I wrote:

In reality all those descended from Israel are ‘Israelites’ as he has already indicated. Ethnically they are Israelites. Paul actually writes not all those who are of Israel (ἐξ Ἰσραήλ) are Israel (Ἰσραήλ). Being ‘of / descended from Israel’ means they are Israelites (an ethnic definition), but does not mean they are of Israel (a faith / faithfulness definition).

Maybe you have to take my word for it… but check out other translations or even try out StepBible:

No mention of ‘Israelite’ in the verse (though verse 4 has this to make it plain that there Paul is talking ethnically) and no mention of ‘descendant’. In the right hand column of the StepBible program is a dictionary that helps you also find the other uses of the word – highlight it as I have above. This is important – words are not given meaning primarily by their root but by how they are used. (Hence the important distinction between ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’.)

YouTube has so many good interviews and videocasts. If you find a ‘scholar’ there do a quick google on them. For example I had someone the other day say how much they appreciated James Tabor. Brilliant insights but Jesus’ extended family inaugurating a royal dynasty???? Probably affects how he reads parts of the New Testament methinks!

And there are a thousand more down to earth resources.Try the Nomad Podcasts. Try this one from my good mate Roger Mitchell: Pentecost for Progressives.

Gone are the days when we need to be defensive. Thank God. Truth is centred in one Person alone, and any resources need to be assessed that way, not by how clever anyone thinks they are.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Other side of the resurrection

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

Easter (this year) is behind us and the historical Easter is behind us. We live in the light of the resurrection. I am not of the ‘sacramental’ background of ‘church’ (Lesslie Newbigin in The Household of God suggested there were three broad strands: Catholic (sacramental), Protestant (word) and Pentecostal (Spirit)) but have been reading of John and of Jesus’ disciples and their practice of baptism so of course am provoked. Beyond that Gayle and I have been thinking about ‘the breaking of bread’. Historically it references a meal where the ‘head of the household’ would literally break the bread so was a term simply referring to a meal. This carries over with the passover meal and what has been termed the agape meal.

Meals. I eat cos I am hungry, but the culture of the day was deeper than that – it was one of fellowship and openness. And there were special meals, banquets that strengthened the (hierarchical) culture. Who was invited and where they were seated was very important. That part of what went on then determined who invited you back and where you would be seated. Jesus’ instruction was so radical (‘do not invite…’); his behaviour was outrageous – allowing a woman from the street (the ‘doors’ were not closed so people could come in) to wash his feet with her tears and he himself getting up from the table to wash the feet.

Meals… I have quoted before but it is worth doing so again. Vincent Branick (a Catholic) wrote The House Church in the writings of Paul (1989)

The prohibition of Laodicea [365AD] completes a critical cycle. The Lord’s Supper had changed from evening meal to stylized (sic) ritual. The assembly had moved from dining room to sacred hall. Leadership had shifted from family members to special clergy. Now the orginal form of church was declared illegal.

Meals… the take the three aspects that make the content of the meal:

  • Remember Jesus
  • Proclaim his death
  • Until he come

How about – a response of a biblical recounting of a Jesus story and a personal one. ‘I remember the story about… and when I encountered Jesus…’

As we eat and drink – we are proclaiming the death of Jesus, the victory over the powers, the carving out of a new path… and we do do ‘until he comes’ for we have entered an era that continues from the empty tomb and will continue until that day.

The other side of the resurrection – no need to simply home in solemnly on the cross – it is a vital part of the story, but so is the resurrection.

Meals – Jesus had meals at multiple levels. Maybe we could experiment?

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

The Emmaus / Life Walk

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

I have posted on the walk to Emmaus that took place as it seems to reflect on our journey of life – ups and downs of it. This one I wrote in a series for Lent alongside other authors.

The resurrection narrative that recounts how Jesus appeared to the two on the way to Emmaus has always brought me great hope. Two disciples that numerous historic traditions have held as being to Cleopas and his wife Mary. (In John 19:25 Mary is described as the wife of Clopas (Aramaic origin; Cleopas being Greek).) Let’s take it (as I believe) for a moment to be a married couple.

They are not only physically walking but emotionally walking away from the place where they had so much hope. They had hoped that Jesus would redeem Israel but are now devastated. It seems that Luke is drawing on the narrative of another couple who walked devastated with what had taken place for them. Adam and Eve have to walk away from the Garden. The now-unreachable promises of God bearing heavily on them, walking with the sentence of death over them. For Mary and Cleopas the evening hour is approaching, that hour when God came in that original narrative to visit in the Garden. Cleopas and Mary are completely unaware who has come to walk with them, and I suggest that when Adam and Eve (and all those who follow generationally) left their Garden they were completely unaware that they did not walk simply as a couple, but a Stranger walked with them, for God did not stay in the Garden but walked also with them, sharing the ‘sentence’ of death with them. God walked it all the way through history to the cross. 

This Emmaus walk is one that we often take. Hopes have taken a bash or are even gone. And we don’t walk alone for we are accompanied by shame, disappointment, regret, guilt or another equally burdensome emotion. But Emmaus tells us we do not walk alone. We might use different words to ‘And it is the third day since all this happened’ to express the depth of the loss of hope. But I think heaven responds with those same words. There is a third day when he meets us on the way and invites us to take bread again from his hands.

Bread from that hand gives hope. Fresh hope. Substantial hope.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

All Israel will be saved

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

I am setting an ‘open zoom’ date for two weeks’ time:

Thursday April 16th 19:30 (UK time).

Two resources – a shortish video that will raise the poignant points in headline form:

I love the ‘in the moment’ thumbnail (I deliberately don’t change them!). Either I am making a point that no one can dispute or I am practising my kangaroo imitation – you decide.

In headline form:

  • ‘Israel’ is more a faith than an ethnic term.
  • Jew and Israel are not synonymous terms – so Paul is seeking to deal with the issue of God being faithful to his promises to Israel – his discussion is not about the future nor about the people in the land in his day.
  • He argues that God has not forsaken the people ‘Israel’… that not all ‘of Israel’ are ‘Israel’ – the term ‘Israel’ is smaller than the ethnic term Israel. That Israel is bigger than ‘Jews’… and that the Gentile mission is among the nations (where Israel is to be found) and there those of the 10 tribes are found and (God always works bigger) Gentiles also come in…
  • So in this way all Israel will be saved.

The above headlines are what I touch on in the video; the pdf that goes with this open zoom expands on all the above – and if you want to push in to the substance of my direction you will need to read that also.

When coming on the evening it is not about agreeing with me nor is it about forcefully presenting an opposing position. It is about listening and seeing where this might take us.

I will post a link to the Zoom nearer the time.

The pdf is found here: All Israel will be saved

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Beyond the ‘quiet revival’

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

Approximately a year ago the Bible Society (UK) published a report from a reputable polling firm that strongly suggested that there was ‘A Quiet Revival’ taking place. Highly encouraging. They have now removed that from their site with the out-of-house company (YouGov) acknowledging that the survey was deeply flawed. Disappointing? Yes. And the Bible Society has honourably met it head on.

I am sure that many are disappointed as it would be awesome news to hear of people (particularly younger people who do not have a church background) coming to faith. There is nothing more valuable than being connected to the God of heaven and that relationship growing. And yet…

Here is a video I bumped into from a guy called Steve who is a YouTube blogger and who confesses that he is an atheist. Of course someone from the opposite ‘camp’ is going to be happy when the statistics are shown to be not accurate but his video is not vitriolic at any level… and it goes much deeper in its response. I recommend watching right through (or if not from 10:00 onwards) or if you wish read my comments below first.

For some time I have been advocating that we have to look to unlikely sources for the (prophetic) voice of God. We have been disappointed by the farce that has come out regarding some of the mainstream prophetic voices across the pond, but this does not mean God is silent.

Steve in the video exposes how ‘Christian faith’ has been colonised to serve an agenda that bears no resemblance to the agenda Jesus set out. How the term ‘Christian’ has become something other than what it was intended – so much so that Richard Dawkins (of ‘The God Delusion’ fame) is now a Christian – a ‘cultural Christian’, and still believes that the very idea of ‘God’ is a delusion!

Christendom is over (see the link I gave a few days ago to Jeff Fountain’s newsletter: The Constantine Trap) and yet there is a serious attempt in numerous settings to breathe new life into it. And beware we must be… the beasts among us have this ability to have the head wounded but come to life again – even if the life is only prolonged for a short period of time (so many smart insights in that book). There still needs to be vigilence – and for Gayle and I we plan with others a visit to Istanbul to at least to say ‘we are awake so still are keeping watch’. Hopefully with the others we might be able to say a little more than that.

If we can hold out against Christendom the next on the agenda is mammon – hence it is not surprising that so much is being shaken right now. (Money is not mammon, but mammon has colonised money… the colonisation of Christianity to an agenda as outlined in the video is a parallel example.)

I am both disappointed that the ‘quiet revival’ is not as claimed… and also not disappointed as we have to go deeper. We are not here to be satisfied with a pat on the back that indicates that at last we are proved right. There is so much more.

Tomorrow (mañana – means something like tomorrow, or perhaps some time in the future) I plan to put up a video to go along with my paper on ‘All Israel will be saved’; part of what I have been reading in Rom. 11 is challenging as indeed it was in Paul’s day. A ‘hardening has come on part of Israel’ (not the same hardening as was on Pharaoh and more like an inability to see beyond)… but the part that has provoked me is what he follows it with: ‘so that…’ The so that in Paul’s day was so that the Gentiles could come in and in they came without submitting to the edicts of the Torah. Some (the majority) of Israel could not see it, but those with sight could see that God, as always, was at work way outside of the boxes they had previously drawn.

Disappointed? But I am asking ‘so that’? What is the ‘so that?’ that is taking place.

More to come that will disappoint us for this is not a short season. But atheists speaking truth and truth to power? Bring it on. There is more where that came from.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

All Israel will be saved

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

I have just completed my piece of writing seeking to engage with the understanding of ‘Israel’ as distinct from ‘Jew’ in second temple Judaism and Paul’s use lining up with that (a big acknowledgement to the work of Jason Staples on that aspect). I will in a short while put up a video of this (much shorter than the pdf, which is 60 pages long… but not big pages!) and hopefully get an Open Zoom where you can nod in agreement / push back in a suitable open discussion format! I will put notice to both of those here.

For now if you wish to download / read – maybe with a coffee in hand and an open Bible when it gets to Romans 9-11. Something in it for everyone I hope!!

All Israel will be saved

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Romans 9-11 A quick run through

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

This is the final post here on ‘Jew, Israel and Gentile’. I am in a final edit of my extended article and will include what is below and then expand on Romans 9-11 in a deeper way. By the end of next week all will be revealed!

Paul’s arguments are somewhat dense at times and his use of phrases and words mean we need to go slowly!

In these chapters Paul is concerned to show that God has been faithful to his promises to people he describes as being his own flesh and blood (Israelites – an ethnic term). He insists that God has not abandoned his promises. He draws from history that not all who are physically descended from Abraham are ‘Israel’, even though they are ‘of Israel’. Drawing on Scripture he uses the illustration of Ishmael and Isaac: they were both ethnically descended from Abraham but the ‘seed’ is through Isaac. Then he uses the story of Esau and Jacob with Jacob being chosen, and the choice not on the basis of works. In using those two illustrations he is effectively saying that neither ethnic descent nor even living by the works (of Torah) are sufficient. These were the two foundational understandings by which ‘Israel’ could lay claim to being the true ‘seed’ of Abraham.

God has not rejected his people – evidence Paul himself has found faith and history informs us that those who were the people of covenant were always a remnant (a part of the whole). He references Elijah and the 7000 faithful people to illustrate this point.

Israel has always been likened to an Olive Tree and consistent with history unfaithful branches have been cut off, the remaining branches are drawing from the root, and at the same time ‘wild branches’ have been grafted in. He instructs those wild branches not to be arrogant and he holds out hope for branches that have currently been cut off to be regrafted – conditional on their repentance, not something that will simply occur automatically. Those wild branches are from the Gentiles / nations… among those ‘other nations’ the northern kingdom of ‘Israel / Ephraim’ has been sown. So as the ‘Gentile branches’ are grafted in two aspects take place: northern tribes are coming in (for they were scattered among the nations) and the Gentiles are incorporated into Israel. The tree that is pruned and has had the wild branches grafted in is Israel, thus Paul concludes ‘in this way all Israel will be saved’. All Israel is the olive tree. Not all those of Israel are Israel, but Israel is the olive tree – smaller than all ethnic Israelites; but beyond a remnant of Jews; and bigger than ethnic Israel.

In the pdf I will expand considerably on the above. The key points to note are that Paul is seeking to show how God has been faithful throughout and continues to be faithful to the covenants in spite of many ‘of Israel’ rejecting the gospel and at the same time Gentiles coming to faith. His conclusion then is that God’s working is the process by which ‘all Israel’ (not every Israelite nor every Jew) but all Israel (all 12 tribes) will find salvation. More to come… I will put the link here when I finally complete.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Christendom

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

I subscribe to Jeff Fountain’s weekly newsletter and this week his title was:

The Constantine Trap (Click on link to read the full newsletter).

Here are the headings (but I recommend a full read):

  • The first danger of a ‘Christian empire/nation’: Faith is shaped by power, not obedience.
  • The second danger: Faith becomes compulsory rather than voluntary.
  • The danger deepened: War itself was given sacred meaning.
  • The pattern repeats: Christianity becomes civilisational identity, not just personal faith.
  • The danger is exclusion: Outsiders are seen as threats to Christian identity, rather than neighbours to be loved.
  • The danger is clear and present: Christianity has become weaponised to ‘make America great’ rather than to offer freedom to all peoples.

A nation may be shaped by Christian values—justice, truth, dignity, compassion—but it cannot be Christian in the way individuals or communities can. The state wields power. 

Following Jesus Christ, the church must be the state’s conscience. Not merely its chaplain.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

The Acts 1:6 question

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

Here is part 7… I am almost finished (tomorrow??? though mañana is rather vague word – a little more vague than ‘maybe’ or ‘possibly’! ).

A flip in this section back to the question in Acts 1:6… More to it than a ‘yes’, ‘no’ answer

Did the disciples completely miss the mark with their question concerning the ‘restoration of the kingdom’? And perhaps more importantly how should we understand Jesus’ reply. Is it an affirmation that there is work to be done first and then the kingdom will be restored to Israel, or is his answer a redirection?

Their question is understandable as it aligns with the hope that had been consistently expressed. In the vision of the dry bones coming back to life we read,

Thus says the Lord God: I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone and will gather them from every quarter and bring them to their own land. I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king over them all. Never again shall they be two nations, and never again shall they be divided into two kingdoms. They shall never again defile themselves with their idols and their detestable things or with any of their transgressions. I will save them from all the apostasies into which they have fallen and will cleanse them. Then they shall be my people, and I will be their God (Ezek37:19-23).

The restoration vision was of those who had been scattered (the northern tribes / Israel / Ephraim) being gathered from where they had been scattered, being re-united with the southern kingdom (Judah and the smaller tribe of Benjamin) under one king. In Isaiah we read that the land would be desolate until ‘a spirit from on high is poured out’ (Is. 32:15) and Peter says this had indeed taken place,

Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you see and hear (Acts 2:33).

A new era of fulfilment was here. The big vision for restoration was therefore within sight; the Messiah had been raised from the dead so we can understand the disciples’ question,

So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, is this the time when you will restore the kingdom to Israel?”

In response Jesus clearly pushes the disciples away from a focus on time but engages them in a process. In doing so he uses a framework from Isaiah relating to the servant (Israel, Isaiah, Messiah, and now disciples) as ‘witness’.

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.

Reflecting on the Isaianic passages we can see they carry the theme of the restoration of Israel. Here are some Isaianic passages that undergird Jesus’ response and we should in particular take note of the final one:

Here is my servant, whom I uphold,
    my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my spirit upon him;
    he will bring forth justice to the nations (Is. 42:1).

You are my witnesses, says the Lord,
    and my servant whom I have chosen (Is. 43:10)

Here is my servant, whom I uphold,
    my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my spirit upon him;
    he will bring forth justice to the nations (Is. 44:26).

And now the Lord says,
    who formed me in the womb to be his servant,
to bring Jacob back to him,
    and that Israel might be gathered to him,
for I am honored in the sight of the Lord,
    and my God has become my strength—
he says,
“It is too light a thing that you should be my servant
    to raise up the tribes of Jacob
    and to restore the survivors of Israel;
I will give you as a light to the nations,
    that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth” (is. 49 5,6).

From Jerusalem and Judea (the Jewish world) to the Samaritans (are they ‘of Israel’ or are they not? – but they are a sign pointing toward the restoration of Israel)… and then ‘to the ends of the earth’. Leaning on Isaiah 49 the reaching out to the ends of the earth is the gathering of the ‘tribes of Jacob / Israel’. Hence we should understand Jesus response (in summary) as being:

  • Don’t focus on timing.
  • Focus on process.
  • And the process affects the timing, for in the process the restoration of the kingdom to Israel is taking place.

This latter point I understand to mean that as the mission extends to the ends of the earth the ingathering of the tribes of Jacob takes place simultaneously with the ‘conversion’ of Gentiles.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink
Perspectives