acts13
|
SOME THOUGHTS ON THE MID-ACTS POSITION |
SOME THOUGHTS ON THE MID-ACTS POSITION
The mid-Acts position is that the dispensation of the mystery began at Acts 9, or 13. I believe that the dispensation of the mystery began after Acts 28. Does it really make any difference as to when the dispensation of the mystery began? I believe that it does. Without a proper understanding of when this present dispensation began we do not know which epistles were written for this dispensation and which were written for past dispensations. That leads to confusion regarding baptism, the rapture, salvation, prophesy concerning the second coming of Christ, just to name a few. Because I believe that God would have us love and understand (as much as He gives us grace to understand), His written Word simply because it is His, I believe it is essential that we rightly divide the Word of truth. It is for that reason that I offer this paper on the mid-Acts position.
The main exponent of the mid-Acts position is Cornelius Stam. I have quoted his book, Things That differ in order to give a fair representation of his beliefs. May I assure the reader that I have not taken things out of context in order to put them in a bad light, God would certainly not honor my efforts if I presented my views dishonestly.
IS THERE A TRANSITION FROM THE DISPENSATION OF LAW TO THE DISPENSATION OF THE MYSTERY?
We read on pages, 95, 139 and 240, of a transition between the dispensation of law and the dispensation of the mystery.
Page 95, paragraph one reads, “With the raising up of Paul to replace the twelve as the apostle to the Gentiles (Rom. 11:13), God began to bring the Jewish religion to an end and to usher in the ‘reign’ of grace“.
On page 139 we read, “The incident (Peter going to the Gentile, Cornelius) took place after the conversion of Saul, which was the first step in the introduction of the new dispensation“
On page 240 last paragraph we read, “The gospel had gone to the Jew first and had been rejected, but God would not allow Israel to stand in the way of Gentile blessing, so He began to set Israel aside, raising up Paul to bring good news to the Gentiles nothwithstanding.“
Let me first share what I believe to be illogical about the suggestion that there was a transition from one dispensation to another. To do that I would like to use an example from everyday life. Let’s say that Bob is a mail carrier, but he had an accident and could not work for several months. In order to get back to work he began to take short walks and easy exercises so that he could transition into his goal, i.e. work full time again. But his goal, i.e. the transition, is not completed at the beginning of his walking and exercising routine, it was completed at the end of it, i.e. when he went back to work.
But the mid-Acts position is that the dispensation of the mystery began at the beginning of the so-called “transition” and other things were accomplished during it. But as I have tried to show in the example above, a goal is not reached at the beginning of a transition, it is reached at the end of it. So in terms of dispensational truth, if there was a transition (and I do not believe there was) the new dispensation (i.e. the goal) would have been reached at the end of (i.e. Acts 28) not at the beginning of it (mid-Acts).
We are considering the question of whether there was a transition into the dispensation of the mystery? In order to answer that question we need to examine a few Scriptures to find why God sent Paul to the Gentiles. Rom. 11:11, reads, “Again I ask, Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious“. And in Rom.11:13-14 we read, “I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them“. Rom.10:19 reads, “Again I ask, did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, ‘I will make you envious by those who are not a nation. I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding”. Paul is quoting Deut. 32:21, showing that God’s using the preaching to the Gentiles to make Israel envious was a subject of prophecy in the Old Testament.
Why was Paul so anxious for Israel to accept their risen Messiah? Was it because they were his own people and he loved them? Was it because he knew that Israel was going to be put aside as God’s chosen people, and he had to bring them to salvation before that happened? The answer to both those questions is a resounding NO! Let us examine the big picture in order to understand why Paul was so anxious for his own people to be saved.
In Acts 3:19-21 we read Peter’s remarks, “Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that the times of refreshing may come from the Lord, and that He may send the Christ, who has been appointed for you- even Jesus. He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through His holy prophets”. The “times of refreshing”, refers, of course, to the millennial reign of Christ.
Peter’s message is clear. Christ would not return to set up His millennial reign (a reign that would be a blessing to both Israel and the nations) until Israel repented. The millennial reign is the subject of countless prophecies and a major cornerstone in God’s plans for the nations of the earth. One can not read the Old Testament without having a sense that the millennial reign of Christ was of key importance in God’s plans for the ages. It was the blessings associated with that millennial reign that prompted Israel to look forward to the coming of their Messiah. The fact that they rejected Him meant that those blessings would not be fulfilled, not until He returned. But He would not return until they repented. That is why His return was the purpose of the preaching during the entire Acts period.
Surely, we can not believe that Paul was so narrow in his thinking that the only reason he wanted his own people to be saved was so that some of them would inherit resurrection life. No, of course not. He wanted his own to be saved so that Christ would return and fulfill all the Old Testament prophesies concerning the “times of refreshing” for Jew and Gentile alike.
Yes, of course, Peter and Paul wanted to see people saved unto resurrection life. We must keep in mind however; that God’s plan for salvation was not the only plan put forth in His Word. Salvation is God’s plan for the individual; the earthly reign of Christ is God’s plan for Israel and for the nations. Just because we, in the dispensation of the mystery, are not to partake in His earthly reign (we will be in Heaven) doesn’t make God’s plan for the nations any less important. It is the subject of many, many prophecies, and it is after all, God’s will.
But in order to fulfill His will, Israel was required to repent so that “He might send the Christ”. Without Christ there is no millennial reign. Without the millennial reign there are no blessings for Israel or for the nations. But Israel would not repent. So, in accordance with prophecy, the message was sent to the Gentiles. Why? To make Israel jealous! Why? So that they would repent, so that He would return and set up His reign which, according to promise, would be a time of great blessing.
What about our second question? Was Paul afraid that Israelites would not have a chance at salvation after the nation was put aside, and that was the reason he was so anxious to see them saved? Again, no! Paul did not even know that Israel would be set aside until his imprisonment in Rome at the end of the Acts period. In Acts 20:27 we read, “For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole council of God”. If Paul had known of the dispensation of the mystery, which necessitated the putting aside of Israel, he could not have said that he had proclaimed the whole council of God. Why? Because we don’t read of the description of dispensation of the mystery until after the end of the Acts period, i.e. in Ephesians 3:6. The obvious conclusion is that Paul did not know of the dispensation of the mystery or of the setting aside of Israel at the time of Acts 20. Consequently, we can not say that Paul’s anxiety over Israel being put aside was what led him to want to provoke them to jealousy.
Also, we must remember that the dispensation of the mystery from which the church is being called was a “secret hid in God“.Mr. Stam writes, “the one body was not a topic of prophecy“. In Acts 26:22 Paul says, “I am saying nothing beyond what the prophets and Moses said would happen“. This means that Paul, until Acts 26, had not spoken of that “one body” which was the subject of the mystery hid in God. (The paper on this web-site The One Body Of Ephesians Two Is Not the Church Which Is His Body will prove from scripture that they are not the same. I have kept the same phraseology as Mr. Stam in this regard for the sake of clarity. In this case, I have in mind the church, not the one body.) We know this because Paul had spoken only of those things that were the subject of Old Testament writings. The mystery was not a subject of Old Testament writings. Again, this tells us that the secret had not been revealed by Acts 26.
I do not believe that there is a transition during the Acts period from one dispensation to another. Mr. Stam believes that the preaching to the Gentiles constituted a transition from the dispensation of law to the dispensation of the mystery. But the gospel was preached to the Gentiles in order to move Israel to envy, so that they would accept their risen Messiah, which would issue in the millennial reign. God was using Paul’s preaching to the Gentiles on behalf of His chosen nation so that they could be a blessing to the nations, which was one of the purposes for which they were chosen.
The preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles was not a step towards bringing the “Jewish religion to an end”; it was just the opposite. It was used in hopes that Israel would repent and be brought to the place where Christ would return and issue in that which had been promised by the prophets of the Old Testament, i.e. the millennial reign of Christ. (Acts 3:19-21).
Another problem with the “transition period” theory is that Mr. Stam takes the epistles written during that period as having been written to the saints of the new dispensation, i.e., the church which is His body. On page 96 paragraph one we read, “….the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles to God in one body by the cross is the great mystery which was hid in God until revealed to and through the Apostle Paul”. I agree with that statement, but that great secret was revealed after the Acts period (in Ephesians). How can we have letters written during a supposed transition to a Church, whose existence was yet future, and hid in God?
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE NATION AND INDIVIDUALS
Some in the mid-Acts community point to Romans 11 where Paul speaks of the unbelievers of Israel being cut out of the olive tree, and suggest that this shows that the setting aside of Israel had already begun at the writing of Romans. But in Romans 11 Paul is speaking of individuals, not the nation. Some might say, “what’s the difference, nations are made up of individuals”. There is a difference, and it is crucial to a proper understanding of this and many other questions, that we understand that difference.
Let me give an illustration of what I mean by the difference between individuals and a nation. If we say that America is a rich country, we mean that it has a healthy, robust economy. If on the other hand we say that some Americans are wealthy, we are speaking of individuals, but the American economy may or may not be robust. A similar example can be drawn from third world countries. Many in those countries are wealthy, but the nation itself is not a wealthy country.
But let us go to the Word of God for proof of the fact that one must differentiate between nations and individuals in the nations.
Matt. 24:7, “nation will rise against nation”. It is true that armies are composed of individuals but that is certainly not what we understand by this verse. What we understand is that the governments, that make decisions for the people in the nations, will rise up against other governments. This verse does not speak of individuals in the nations, it speaks of nations as a corporate entity.Furthermore, governments do not represent all the individuals of their countries, which further emphasis the truth that there is a difference between nations as a corporate entity and the individuals of those nations.
Acts 13:19, “And when He had destroyed seven nations….” If we do not distinguish between nations and individuals in the nations, we have God destroying every individual in all of those seven nations, and He did not.
Romans 4:17, Abraham was “the father of many nations”. If we do not differentiate between nations and individuals in the nations, we have this verse telling us that Abraham had many children. That is certainly not what this verse is saying.
Now the question is: who was it that God put aside, was it individuals or was it the nation of Israel. In order to answer that question we must look at Acts 28:25, “”And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed….”. The word translated “departed is, “apoluo”. The first occurrence is in Matt. 1:19 which speaks of Joseph thinking of putting away Mary, i.e. Divorcing her. In fact, in the majority of the cases in which this Greek word is used, it is used of divorce. Therefore, Acts 28:25 speaks of divorcing Israel because Her leaders failed to accept their own risen Messiah. (Please see the paper on this web-site Is The Dispensational Boundary Acts 28:28 Or 28:25? for a more complete consideration of this truth.)
Now the question is: who was divorced at Acts 28:25, was it individuals or was it the nation? Let us look at Ezek. 16, which speaks of Jehovah’s wife (see verse 32).
Verse 3, “….thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan”.
Verse 4, “in the day thou wast born thy navel was not cut”.
Verse 5, “….thou wast cast out into the open field, …..in the day that thou wast born”.
Verse 6, “and when I passed by thee, and saw thee polluted in thine own blood I said into thee when thou wast in thy blood, ‘live’ “.
Verse 7, “….thy breasts are fashioned and they hair is grown”.
It is clear that this entire chapter, which speaks of Israel as Jehovah’s wife, refers not to individuals but to the nation of Israel.
Therefore, we must conclude that it was Israel, as a nation that was divorced at Acts 28:25.
Now let us look at Romans 11 in order to determine if Paul was speaking of individuals or of the nation of Israel.
Romans 11:1, “….hath God cast away His people?” Paul’s answer is that he himself had not been cast away. Therefore, whereas God had cast away some (the unbelievers of Israel) He had not cast away the entire nation. Therefore, Paul is referring to individuals in this passage.
Verse 2, “God hath not cast away His people which He foreknew”. Again, some, i.e. those He foreknew, were not cast away, So this passage is also about individuals.
Verse 5 speaks of a remnant,i.e. Individuals.
Verse 7, “Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it”. Again, some individuals had obtained, i.e. the election, and some individuals had not obtained.
Verse 11, “Have they stumbled that they should fall?” Who had stumbled? Verse 23 also speaks of those who had stumbled, “if they abide not still in unbelief shall be grafted in”. Individuals had stumbled because of unbelief, and individual Gentiles were grated in, in their place.
The very fact that the olive tree is the symbol of the nation of Israel proves that the branches do not represent the nation, but individuals.
This is the point I am trying to make in this section: because when we speak of divorcing Israel, we speak of the nation of Israel, not individuals, we must conclude that Romans 11 has nothing to do with the divorcing of Israel, and therefore does not suggest a gradual divorcing, or setting aside of the nation.
WHEN DID THE DISPENSATION OF THE MYSTERY BEGIN?
We have read on page 96 that “the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles to God in one body by the cross is the great mystery which was hid in God until it was revealed to and through the Apostle Paul”.
On page 105 last paragraph we read, “The Bible student should always remember that the formation of this ‘one body’ is not the subject of prophecy, but of the mystery first revealed through Paul.
Mr. Stam believes that the great mystery was the one body. The great mystery was revealed in Eph. 3:6. This verse is not about the one body or the church, which is His body; it is about the dispensation of the mystery. In verses 7-9 Paul writes that he had been made a minister to “make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God…”.
In order to determine when the dispensation of the mystery began we must determine when Israel was set aside because the dispensation of the mystery has no separated nation. (Please see the paper on this web-site What Exactly Is The Mystery That Had Been Hid In God?.) Therefore, when we find a situation where there is no Israel as God’s chosen people, then we know that the dispensation of the mystery has begun.
Romans is the last epistle written during the Acts period. If Israel had been put aside as God’s chosen nation before the end of the Acts period, we should expect to see evidence of that in Romans. Let us read the following verses in Romans. (Please see the appendix for comments on Rom. 16:25-26 and other passages that seem to substantiate the mid-Acts position).
Romans 1:16 “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes; first for the Jew, then for the Gentile“.
Romans 11:1, “I ask then, Did God reject His people? By not means“.
Romans11:11, “….salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious“.
Romans 11:14, “….in hopes that I may somehow arouse some of my own people to envy“
Also, if Israel had already been put aside during the Acts period, Paul’s pronouncement in Acts 28:25 would have been meaningless, to say the least. That is to say, if Israel had already been set aside in the mid-Acts period, there would be no reason to divorce Her.
The verses quoted above from Romans show that Israel was still God’s chosen nation at the time of the writing of that epistle. Since that was the case, the dispensation of the mystery could not have begun until Acts 28, when Israel was set aside as His own. (Please see the paper on this web-site When Did The Church Begin? for a more comprehensive discussion of this issue.)
THE TWO MYSTERIES OF EPHESIANS, CHAPTER THREE
In order to understand God’s plans for the ages we must understand the mystery of Ephesians 3:6. Unfortunately, those who hold to the mid-Acts position see only one mystery in this chapter which leads to great confusion. They see the dispensation of the mystery (verse 6) as part of the mystery of Christ (verses 4-5). It is my hope therefore, to try to eliminate some of the confusion that surrounds the mystery hid in God by presenting the scriptural evidence that shows that the mystery of Christ is not the mystery of Eph. 3:6.
We read in Eph. 3:2-9, (2) “If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward; (3) How that by revelation He made known unto me the mystery; as I wrote afore in few words, (4) Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ; (5) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; (6) That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel; (7) Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of His power, (8) Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; (9) And to make all men see what is the fellowship (dispensation – same word as in verse 2) of the mystery, which hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ”.
Let us turn our attention to verses 4-5. In verse 4 we read of the “mystery of Christ”. In verse 5 we are told that this mystery “was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets“. There are three things in these verses that are very important to note.
- The Greek word translated “as” in the phrase “as it has now been revealed” is “hos”. It is used as a comparison. It is used in I Cor.13:11, “When I was a child I spoke as a child…”. To make this verse easier to understand let us add an ellipsis taken from the context. “When I was a child, I spake as a child rather than as a man, I thought as a child rather than as a man…” It is clear that Paul is making a comparison in these phrases between himself as a child and himself as a man. So too, in Eph. 3:5 the comparison is being made as to the extent that the mystery of Christ had been revealed. That is to say, that the mystery of Christ had been revealed to some extent, but not to the extent that it has “now been revealed”. This is an extremely important fact to note about the mystery of Christ, because, as we read in verse 9, the dispensation of the mystery had been hid in God and therefore had obviously not been revealed to any extent.
- The mystery of Christ was revealed to “apostles and prophets”, note the plural. But the mystery that had been hid in God had been revealed to Paul, alone.
- The Greek word translated “revealed” in the phrase, “as it is has now been revealed” is “apokalupto”,
and it is the verb form of the same word used in verse 3 where we read of “the mystery made known to me (Paul) by revelation”. This tells us that the revelation of the mystery given to Paul was given to the apostles and prophets in the same way, i.e. not by the teaching of man, but by revelation from God.
What can we learn of the “mystery of Christ”? The phrase “mystery of Christ” occurs also in Col. 4:3, “…praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds“. Paul was in bonds for preaching the mystery of Christ. By determining the specific reasons for Paul’s bonds, we can then determine what the mystery of Christ is.
We read in Acts chapters 21-25 of Paul’s experiences that resulted in his being put in bonds. In Acts 21:27-28 we read of the first step in Paul’s imprisonment. “And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him (Paul) in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, crying out: ‘Men of Israel, help: This is the man that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place and further, brought Geeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place“. So then, the first step that led to Paul’s imprisonment was the false accusation that he had taught things contrary to the law and had polluted the temple by bringing Greeks into it.
In Acts 22:21 we read the close of Paul’s arguments to the Jews. “And He said unto me, ‘Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles“. And verse 22 describes their reaction to that statement. “And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices and said, ‘Away with such a fellow from the earth for it is not fit that he should live”. Here again, we learn that the reason for Paul’s bonds was that he preached to the Gentiles. (We should point out that preaching to Gentiles was not a mystery hid in God, as was the dispensation of the mystery- Eph. 3:9. That Christ would be preached to the Gentiles was very clearly stated by Isaiah in chapter 49 verse 6, “……I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that Thou mayest be My Salvation unto the end of the earth”.)
In Acts 23 we read of Paul’s discourse to the council of Jews. Verse 6, “But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, ‘Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question”.
In Acts 23:29 we read of the letter written by a soldier to Felix about Paul’s being sent to Felix, which reads in part, “Whom (Paul) I perceived to be accused of questions of their law….”.
We learned from the Scriptures quoted above that Paul was placed in bonds because he was being falsely accused of teaching things contrary to the Law of Moses: and because he had supposedly polluted the temple by bringing Greeks into that part of the temple where they were not supposed to be. Another reason for his bonds was that he was preaching the resurrection of the dead.
Let us continue our study of the mystery of Christ by considering other passages in which Paul speaks of his bonds. In Phil 1:12-18 we read of Paul’s account of how his being in bonds has led to the “furtherance of the gospel” (1:13). To which gospel was Paul referring? In verses 14 and 15 Paul writes of those who “preach Christ” (verse 15) some for honest reasons and others out of contention. In verse 18 he sums up the two and writes, “..…whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached“.
We learn from this passage in Philippians, chapter one, that Paul’s imprisonment led others to “preach Christ”. The subject of this entire passage is the preaching of Christ. We must conclude then, that the reason Paul was in prison was not because of the gospel of the dispensation of the mystery, but because of the preaching of Christ.
We read in Eph. 6:19-20, “….that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in bonds….”. Again, we must ask, for which gospel was Paul in bonds? That answer is found in II Tim. 2:8-9, “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David, was raised from the dead according to my gospel, wherein I suffer trouble as an evil doer, even unto bonds…”. The only gospel that we are told Paul was in bonds for, was “my gospel”. “My gospel” was the preaching of Christ as the Son of David and the preaching of the resurrection of the dead. Paul also writes of “my gospel in Romans 2:16, “In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel”. He also mentions it in Romans 16:25, “Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and (should be “even”) the preaching of Jesus Christ ….”. So the phrase “my gospel” includes resurrection and judgment.
Let us try to pull together what we have learned. The mystery of Christ is the reason Paul was in bonds. Why was Paul in bonds? Paul was in bonds because he preached Christ and His salvation to the Gentiles (which was certainly not a secret hid in God): because he preached the resurrection of the dead, because he preached the judgment by Christ: and because he preached about Christ, the Son of David. In short, Paul was not imprisoned because he preached the gospel of the dispensation of the mystery. Paul was imprisoned because he preached the mystery of Christ. Because the mystery of Christ had absolutely nothing to do with the dispensation of the mystery, we must conclude that the two are different mysteries.
Let us search the Scriptures to find other passages that will tell us more about the mystery of Christ. A mystery is something that is concealed, or it can also be something that is revealed to a few, as in the case of the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven. “Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given” (Matt. 13:11).
We must bear in mind that the mystery of Christ was: a) revealed to some extent in the Old Testament, b) but “now” made known to apostles and prophets (plural), c) revealed to them by the Spirit by revelation, not by the teaching of man (Eph. 3:4-5). Let us look at Luke 18:31-34 to see if what we find there will fit the criteria of the “mystery of Christ”. “Then He took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, ‘Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of Man shall be accomplished. For He shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully intreated, and spit on; And they shall scourge Him and put Him to death; and the third day He shall rise again’. And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things that were spoken”.
The disciples did not understand any of the prophecies concerning the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. I believe that those events constitute the mystery of Christ. We have read that it was concealed from the 12, that makes it a mystery. We also see that it was the topic of some prophecy, that satisfies the criteria of it being revealed to some extent (see Is. 53, crucifixion; Luke 11:30, burial; and Lev. 16:8-10, resurrection – by type). And we know, of course, that eventually Christ’s death, burial and resurrection were revealed fully, which satisfies the criteria of being unfolded more completely in Paul’s time. I believe therefore, that the mystery of Christ spoken of in Eph. 3:4-5, is His death, burial and resurrection.
Verse 6, on the other hand, is the mystery that was revealed to Paul, i.e., the dispensation of the mystery. Note, it was revealed to Paul alone, not to the apostles and prophets (plural). We learn in verse 9 that this mystery was “hid in God” (not revealed in any degree to other generations).
There are two mysteries in Eph. 3. One is the mystery of Christ, which was known to some degree in past generations, and the other was the mystery, hid in God, i.e. not known in past generations to any degree. The mystery of Christ was not understood, but it was written about in the Old Testament. The dispensation of the mystery, on the other hand, was not written about in the Old Testament. The mystery of Christ was revealed to apostles and prophets (plural) but the mystery hid in God was revealed to Paul, and Paul only. We have in Ephesians 3, two separate mysteries.
Those who hold to the mid-Acts position see only one mystery in this passage. On page 68 Mr. Stam writes, “The Greek word “musterion”, rendered “mystery” in the AV, has a two fold meaning. It may mean merely what is kept hidden, or it may mean something understood only by the initiated, it may also mean both at the same time“.
Dr. E. W. Bullinger gives this information on the Greek, “musterion”. It occurs in the Septuagint version nine times as the equivalent for the Chaldee “raz” in the Chaldee portion of Daniel, which means to conceal; hence something concealed that can be revealed”. (For those who may not know, much of the book of Daniel was not written in Hebrew as was most of the Old Testament. It was written in the ancient language, Chaldee. The Septuagint Version is the Greek translation of Daniel.) The Septuagint Version is, of course, not inspired by God, but it does help us to understand more completely the usage of certain Greek words as used in the New Testament).
It is true that a mystery may be understood by a few, or it may be kept hidden, but it can not, in my opinion, mean both at the same time, as Mr Stam suggests. There is nothing in the word “musterion”, per se, to lead us to the conclusion that the word “musterion” may mean something that is hidden and not hidden at the same time. God’s Word is often difficult to understand, but it is never illogical. A mystery may be written about in the Old Testament or it may not be written about in the Old Testament, but it can not be both at the same time. In my opinion, if something is hidden in God, it was not revealed to anyone. The moment something is revealed, no matter to how few, it is no longer hidden in God. Therefore, in Ephesians 3 we have a mystery, which had been partially concealed, and another mystery, which had been completely concealed. The mystery of Christ in 3:4-5 had been partially concealed and the mystery of Eph. 3:6, had been completely concealed, i.e. hidden in God.
In the interest of clarifying a very complex passage, I would like to suggest adding a parenthesis in Eph. 3. So that passage would read, “Surely you have heard about the administration (dispensation) of God’s grace that was given to me for you, that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. (In reading this then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets) This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus”.
Why is the differentiation of these two mysteries so important? The reason is, that if one understands the dispensation of the mystery as being part of the mystery of Christ, i.e. one mystery, one may come to the conclusion that the dispensation of the mystery began when Paul began to preach the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.
Let me put that another way. The preaching of the gospel of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (i.e. the mystery of Christ) by Paul constituted the revealing of the mystery of Christ. That preaching began during the Acts period. If one understands only one mystery in Ephesians 3, one is led to the conclusion that the dispensation of the mystery began during the Acts period, with the preaching of the mystery of Christ. This leads to erroneous conclusions and confusions as will be shown in the following portions of this paper.
As we understand the two mysteries in Eph. 3, we understand that the mystery hid in God was not revealed by Paul until his letter to the Ephesians, i.e. after the end of the Acts period. Once that is understood, I believe that it becomes clear that the dispensation of the mystery began after Acts 28.
SALVATION IN THE DISPENSATION OF LAW
Mr. Stam believes that salvation is always by grace through faith, but that in the dispensation of law, works are required to prove that faith, whereas in the dispensation of the mystery, faith did not require proof by works.
Page 24 paragraph 3, “Now in the cases of Abraham and David, works were required for salvation whereas in our case, works for salvation are distinctly forbidden; yet it is clear from the passages above that Abraham, David and we were all saved essentially by grace through faith and that works as such have never had any saving value.”
Pages 28-29, “Note carefully that while God refuses works for salvation today, He required them under other dispensations. This was not, as we have explained because works in themselves could never save, but because they were the necessary expression of faith when required“.
Page 30 paragraph 3,”Let us not be misunderstood. It is true that all the saints of past ages were saved through the merits of Christ’s shed blood, but not through their faith in that shed blood. Those of past ages were expected to believe only what God had thus far revealed, or what He had revealed to them. In other words, they were saved simply because they trusted God and believed what He said. The full plan of salvation has since been unfolded, but the Scriptures made it crystal clear that these believers were saved without even understanding that Christ would die for them.”
Page 31 paragraph 1, “Could anything be clearer from this than that they did not even understand what the Spirit meant when He predicted the sufferings of Christ.” How then could they have been saved through faith in His shed blood”?
Page 33, “It is not until Paul that we have what is properly called ‘the preaching of the cross’”
Page 41 paragraph 1, “When works were required for salvation they did not save as such, but only as the required expression of faith.“
To sum up what Mr. Stam has written: he believes that because the ‘gospel of grace’ was not understood before the preaching of Paul, works were required of the saints in previous dispensations as an expression of their faith. But, he believes that God’s plan of salvation changed with the beginning of the dispensation of the mystery. Mr. Stam believes that in the present dispensation, because believers do understand the death burial and resurrection of our Lord, we are required to not work. Let us search the Scriptures.
What Mr. Stam suggests about works as an expression of faith is what James is saying in his epistle, “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such a faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed, but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead” (James 2:14-17). Is James saying that salvation is by works? Of course not (and neither is Mr. Stam). James is saying that we can not say we have faith and live as if we did not. “Faith without works is dead“.
Paul says the same thing in Romans 2:13, “For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous“. Paul says the same thing again when he writes in Phil. 2:12, “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling”? He is saying, in my opinion, that if we are saved, we should do works that show it “for it is God Who works in you to act according to His good purpose” (Phil 2:13). The only difference in showing faith by works in the different dispensations, is that in the dispensation of law one showed his faith by keeping the law, which was given him. Whereas in the dispensation of the mystery, the law was put aside with the setting aside of Israel, so we show our faith by allowing God to work in us “to act according to His good purpose“.
The principle of works proving one’s faith is true of all believers in every dispensation. I believe that saints in all dispensations are to show their faith by their works. We have read the exhortation to do that by James, whose letter is written to the twelve tribes, during the dispensation of law, and by Paul, whose letter to the Philippians was written to the saints of the dispensation of the mystery. The principle of faith being dead without works is not one that changes from one dispensation to another, it transcends dispensational boundaries.
But therein lies the crux of the problem, in my opinion, with the mid-Acts position. Those that believe that the dispensation of the mystery began at Acts 9 or 13 believe that there is a difference in God’s plan for salvation in the different dispensations. They believe that the dispensation of the mystery began with Paul’s preaching “of the cross”. But God’s plan for salvation has always been the same; therefore, the question of when the dispensation of the mystery began has nothing to do with God’s plan of salvation, because that has never changed. The dispensation of the mystery has to do with the setting aside of Israel so that all nations will be equal. That secret was revealed in his letter to the Ephesians, i.e. after the Acts period.
It is certainly true that the Old Testament and the Gospels emphasize the thought of James, (i.e. “faith without works are dead”) more than it is emphasized in the dispensation of the mystery. That emphasis, however, does not prove that it is any less true for the dispensation of the mystery than it was for the dispensation of law. Let us not forget that Paul reiterates James’ thought when he wrote in Phil. 2:12, “Work out your salvation with fear and trembling”. Philippians is an epistle written after the end of the Acts period, and so is written to the saints of the dispensation of the mystery. This shows that the principle of “faith without works is dead” is just as true for the dispensation of the mystery, as it was for past dispensations.
Let us consider the issue of how God’s plan of salvation is presented in His written Word, i.e. how the emphasis is different in one dispensation than in another. There is no question that the message of salvation by grace, through faith in Christ’s work on the cross was not preached as clearly, or as completely, as it was by the preaching of Paul. But does that mean that because the Old Testament and Gospels do not emphasize it, it was not true during those periods, I think not. Let me give another example of a truth that was not emphasized in the Old Testament but was true, nevertheless. We learn in Hebrews 13:8 that “Jesus Christ (Jehovah of the Old Testament) is the same yesterday, today and forever”. We are told in I John 4:16 that “God is love”. I think that the reader will agree that God is manifested in the New Testament as love more so than He is in the Old Testament. Does that mean that God was (is) more “love” now than He was in Old Testament times? Of course not, He never changes. It means that His love, as shown in the New Testament, is more apparent now than it was then, but not more true.
Mr. Stam has written that believers of past dispensations did not understand the finished work of Christ on the cross, a statement with which I agree. But then he goes on to say that because of that lack of knowledge, saints of previous dispensations were required to prove their faith by their works. It is true that before Paul, Israel certainly did not have full knowledge of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, but they did have the law. And we read in Galatians 3:24, “So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith“. Paul is saying in Galatians that they were led to Christ, this being true in spite of their lack of that knowledge.
So that we may be clear: Galatians was written during the Acts period, i.e. before Israel was put aside as God’s chosen people. So when Paul writes, “lead us to Christ” the “us” is Israel, to whom the law was given. What we learn from Gal. 3:24 is, that in spite of the fact that Christ’s finished work on the cross was not emphasized in the Old Testament, believers were still led to Christ by the law and “justified by faith“. Those who were led by the law to be justified by faith lived according to the principle spoken of by James, “Faith without works is dead” and they obeyed, in faith, the law that God had given them. Again, it is true that justification by faith is not a theme that we read much about in the Old Testament, or in the Gospels, or in the early Acts period. In spite of that lack of emphasis, however, Paul, tells us that the law did lead those under it, to Christ.
Let us look at Romans 4 to see if we find differing plans of salvation in different dispensations. Verse 1, “What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? (2) If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about-but not before God. (3) What does the Scripture say? Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness. (4) Now when a man works, his wages are not credited as a gift, but as an obligation. (5) However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. (6) David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: (7)‘Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered” (Romans 4:1-7). Paul is making the point in this passage that Abraham, who lived before the law was saved by faith, just as David was, who lived after the law was given. There was a change of dispensation between Abraham and David, but God’s plan of salvation remained the same.
Continuing with the question of whether God’s plan of salvation changed from one dispensation to the next, let me quote Mr. Stam where he, on page 24 quotes Rom. 4:3, 4:5 and 4:6. Then he writes, “Now in the cases of Abraham and David, works were required for salvation whereas in our case works for salvation are distinctly forbidden; yet it is clear from the passages above that Abraham, David and we were all saved essentially by grace through faith and that works have never had any saving value”.
Mr. Stam believed that God’s plan of salvation was different in one respect for Abraham and David then it is for those in the dispensation of the mystery. (That is, he believes that for Abraham and David “works were required for salvation”, i.e. “as an expression of faith”, but “in our case”, they are forbidden). In my opinion Paul’s point is just the opposite. I believe that Paul is saying that the law didn’t change anything in terms of salvation by faith: that salvation has always been the same, by grace through faith, without the works of the law. Let us look at Romans 4:5.
“To him that worketh not but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly; his faith is counted for righteousness”. This verse is clear, I am in total agreement with Mr. Stam, as is every true believer, salvation is by grace through faith without works. The difficulty arises because Mr. Stam believed that it refers to the saints of the dispensation of the mystery, but not to the saints of the dispensation of law. The reason for his belief stems from the fact that he believes that Romans was written during the “transition” from the dispensation of law to the dispensation of the mystery, i.e. it applies to the believers of the dispensation of the mystery only. (At the top of page 29 he writes, “…..and today it is“, “To him that worketh not …..”etc.). But Romans 4:5 is true of those in the dispensation of law and for believers of the dispensation of the mystery because God’s plan of salvation has never changed. Believers in every dispensation are to show their faith by their works.
Furthermore, I believe that Mr. Stam has not shown from Scripture that there was a “transition” from one dispensation to another. Therefore, the dispensation of the mystery did not begin until after the Acts period, i.e. after Paul wrote Romans. That being the case, Mr. Stam has quoted an epistle written during the Acts period, i.e. during the dispensation of law, to prove that works are not required by saints in that dispensation. But his entire chapter is written to show that believers in the dispensation of law were required to prove their faith by their works.
Let me put that another way. I am often asked, “Why is it so important to know when the dispensation of the mystery began?” This topic, i.e. salvation, is one of the prime examples of the confusion that reigns if one does not rightly divide the Word of truth. Mr. Stam quotes Romans, which he believes is an epistle written to the Church of this dispensation, to prove that we (believers during the dispensation of the mystery) are not “required” to prove our faith by works. I agree that Romans 4:5 does say that salvation is to him “that worketh not”. But, Romans was written during the Acts period, i.e. before the dispensation of the mystery was ever heard of (it had been hid in God before it was written about in Ephesians). So what Mr. Stam is actually doing is proving that those in the dispensation of law are not required to work, which, of course, is the exact opposite of what he intends to say.
Part of the reason for the importance of rightly dividing the Word of truth is so that we know which epistles were written to the Church of this dispensation. If we fail to do that, as I have shown above, we have confusion. The dispensation of the mystery began when the mystery of Ephesians 3:6 was revealed, i.e. after Acts 28. We know for sure that Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians were written after Acts 28 because Paul was put in bonds at Acts 28 and he mentions the fact of his being in bonds in all of them. The letters to Timothy, Titus and Philemon are not as obvious. The epistles written during the dispensation of law were certainly written for our edification, learning etc. But if we are to understand God’s plans and purposes for the ages, we must rightly divide the Word, and that includes understanding which letters are written for the church of the Acts period and which were written for us of the dispensation of the mystery.
CONCLUSION
I believe that Paul’s preaching to the Gentiles was not a transition from one dispensation to another, it was the continuation of the offer to Israel to accept their risen Messiah. Had Israel accepted Him, He would have returned to establish the long awaited millennial reign, which would bring blessings to Israel and to the nations.
I believe that the dispensation of the mystery began when Paul revealed that mystery that had been hid in God, that “…nations are together bodies, and that the people of the nations are together heirs and together partakers…..”(Eph. 3:6). Please see the paper on this web-site What Exactly Is The Secret That Had Been Hid In God? for the scriptural evidence of that translation.
I believe that salvation has always been, throughout all dispensations, the same; that we are saved by grace through faith, without the works of the law, regardless of what was fully understood. Furthermore, I believe that the principle of, “faith without works is dead”, is just as true in the dispensation of the mystery as it was in the dispensation of law.
APPENDIX
I would like to address a few objections of Mr. Stam’s to the Acts 28 position. Again, I quote from his book Things That Differ. On page 233 he writes, “But this extreme conclusion (Acts 28 position) is as unscriptural as that which marks Pentecost as the historical beginning of the Body, for we read distinctly of the mystery and of the Body of Christ in Paul’s earlier epistles written before Acts 28 as well as in those written after. (Rom. 16:25, l Cor. 2:7, Rom. 12:5, l Cor. 12:12,13,27 etc.).
We should study these verses to see if they do refer to the mystery hid in God and revealed to Paul and if they do refer to the body of Christ.
ROMANS 16:25-26
“Now to Him That is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began. But now is made manifest and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith“.
The question is, which mystery is being spoken of in these verses? Is it the dispensation of the mystery of which Paul wrote in Eph. 3:6? If it is that mystery, that would show that the mystery was revealed before Acts 28, as Romans is an Acts period epistle. (There are many however who believe that these verses are a postscript added after the end of the Acts period.) We must determine which mystery Paul had in mind when he penned these verses at the end of Romans. There are several clues in the verses themselves that will help in our study of this question.
Consider the opening of this passage, “Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel….”. Paul uses the phrase “my gospel” three times. Here in Romans 16, in Romans 2:16 and in II Tim. 2:8.
Romans 2:16, “This will take place on the day when God will judge men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.”
The other reference to “my gospel” is found in II Tim. 2:8 where we read, “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David, was raised from the dead according to my gospel”.
We are not left with any doubt as to what Paul meant by the term “my gospel”. It referred to judgment and the resurrection of Christ from the dead. Note it had nothing to do with the dispensation of the mystery.
Let us continue with one more phrase in Rom. 16:26 in our effort to determine if the mystery of Rom. 16 is the same mystery written about in the prison epistles. Note the mystery of Romans was made manifest “by the scriptures of the prophets”. The Companion Bible note has “by the prophetic writings”. The “prophetic writings” could not possibly refer to the dispensation of the mystery because that mystery was not written about until after the end of the Acts period.
Note also the phrase, “for the obedience of faith”. In other words, the mystery of Rom. 16 was given for the obedience of faith. But the mystery of Eph. 3:6, i.e. the mystery that had been hiid God was that nations would be together bodies and that the people of the nations would be together heirs and together partkers of the promise…. .(See the paper on this web-site What Exactly Is The Secret That Had Been Hid In God? for the scriptural evidence for that translation.) This has nothing to do with “obedience of faith”, it has to do with how God deals with the nations and the believers of the nations in the dispensation of the mystery.
Let us try to pull together what we have learned in order to discover if the mystery of Romans 16 is the mystery spoken of in the prison epistles.
- The mystery of Romans 16 is referred to as “my gospel” the nature of which is explained in Rom. 2:16 and II Tim. 2:8. It has nothing to do with the dispensation of the mystery as described in Eph. 3:6. “My gospel” has to do with judgment of Israel and the resurrection of Christ.
- The mystery of Romans 16 had been revealed by “prophetic writings”. There is absolutely nothing before Romans 16 which even hints of the dispensation of the mystery spoken of in the prison epistles.
- The mystery of Rom. 16 was given for the obedience of faith, but the mystery of Eph. 3:6 has nothing to do with obedience of faith, it has to do with how God is dealing with nations and the people of the nations.
We must conclude therefore, that the mystery spoken of in Romans 16 is not the dispensation of the mystery revealed in Ephesians, written after Acts 28.
If the mystery of Romans 16 is not the dispensation of the mystery, what is it? Again, the answer to that question lies in the term “my gospel” which had to do with the resurrection of Christ and with the judgment of Israel.
The reader may recall that in the body of this paper I called the readers attention to the mystery of Christ in the section on the two mysteries of Ephesians three. That mystery had to do, in part with the resurrection of Christ. The judgment of Israel for entrance into the kingdom of Heaven is spoken of in Matthew’s Gospel as the “Mysteries of the kingdom”. Please see the paper on this web-site The Kingdom Of Heaven for the scriptural evidence of that statement.
These two mysteries meet all the criteria mentioned in Romans 16. They were written about in the “prophetic writings”. They were not “hid in God”, they were “kept in silence”, i.e. they were not understood. And they were what Paul described as “my gospel”.
I CORINTHIANS 2:7-8
The second passage listed by Mr. Stam is l Cor. 2:7-8, which reads, “we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden in God and that God destined for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had they would not have crucified the Lord of glory”. The wisdom of verses 7 and 8 is not that the Gentiles would be together heirs in Christ. That is not the message that prompted the “rulers of this age” to “crucify the Lord of glory”. That message was not even know at the time of the crucifixion.
ROMANS 12:5
Another passage listed is Romans 12:5, “So in Christ, we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others”. The context, verses 3-8 clearly shows that Paul was asking the Roman church to be cooperative with each other, he uses the term “body” as we use it today in such phrases as “student body” and a “governing body”. To say that this verse speaks of the church which is His body of Ephesians is to take it out of context, a practice that often leads to error. (Please see the paper on this web-site The One Body Of Ephesians Two Is Not the Church Which Is His Body for the scriptural evidence that the one body is not the same as the church.)
I CORINTHIANS 12:12, 13 and 27
The last passage listed is l Cor. 12:12, 13 and 27. This passage treats the term “body” in much the same way as did Romans 12:5. Note especially verse 21, “and the head can not say to the feet, “I don’t need you”. Christ is the head of the Church, which is His Body. He is not just another member of the body. Again, the context does not lead us to believe that Paul is referring to the one body of Ephesians 3:6. (Please see the paper on this web-site The One Body Of Ephesians Two Is Not the Church Which Is His Body for the scriptural evidence that the one body is not the same as the church.)
This paper was written by Joyce Pollard.
I would love to hear your thoughts. Please E-mail me at: [email protected]
HOME