Is the Second coming prophesied in the OT?

[Guest]

Guys, if the Second Coming is not prophesied in the OT, how are we to interpret Peter's words before the Jews in the Solomon's portico:

19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began. (Acts 3)

Peter seems to be speaking about the sending of Jesus Christ as something that would happen concurrently with Him no longer being received by heaven. This would see the inauguration of "the times of restoration of all things" which "all the holy prophets" had spoken about.

Here's on way of intepreting this passage. Peter was speaking concerning the second coming of Christ from heaven when He would "restore the Kingdom to Israel" (Acts 1:1-8). Thus, he was saying that the second coming of the Messiah was actually spoken of by all God's holy prophets.

But it's been said on this very thread by Steve and Mort respectively:

nothing written prior to the time of Jesus' utterance anticipates a fulfillment in any specific event beyond AD 70.

I'm not aware of any credible and reliable hermeneutic that allows one to apply Old Testament scriptures beyond Christ [by which I assume he means Christ's first coming - Ely] to far future events or people. Particularly since the New Testament writers didn't make such applications.

Okay, so I'm wondering how peter's preaching would be understood using a "credible and reliable" hermeneutic. What are these "times of restoration of all things" that "all[God's] holy prophets" had spoken [i.e. written] about and that would not take place until Jesus Christ had been sent from heaven?

ybiM,
Ely

[Guest]

Ely,

As I understand it, the "restoration of all things" of which the prophets spoke was a reference to the many prophecies that speak of God restoring His kingdom through the Messiah, and including all nations in this kingdom. The prophets used imagery of the desert blossoming like a rose (Isa.35:1), or becoming fruitful (Isa.32:15/41:19/55:13), of the parched land becoming a place of waters (Isa.35:7/41:18/44:3-4), of the dead sea being made fresh and habitable by fish (Ezek.47:8-9), of Jerusalem (or Zion) being built-up (Mic.4:1), of the breach being repaired (Isa.58:12), of the tabernacle (booth) of David being built again Amos 9:11), and other "restoration" imagery.

According to my understanding of the New Testament, the apostles applied these images to the age of the Holy Spirit, inaugurated at Pentecost and to be fulfilled when "the knowledge of the glory of the Lord covers the earth as the waters cover the sea."

This time of the restoration of all things is the church age, and was the burden of all the prophets' ministries. Despite the dispensational claim that God did not say anything about the church age, Peter (in the same sermon where he spoke of the restoration of all things) said:

"Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days" (Acts 3:24).

According to Peter, in Acts 3, what did all the prophets predict? "The restoration of all things" (v.21), which means "these days"(v.24). When all things have been restored (i.e., when the fulness of the Gentiles have come in" (Rom.11:25), then God will send Jesus back, as Peter said (Acts 3:21). The prophets predicted the times in which we live; they did not mention Jesus coming again at the end of that time. They only spoke of His first coming, to inaugurate that age.

By the way, there is one other reference to "all things" being "restored." Jesus said, "Elijah surely will come, and will restore all things" (Matt.17:11). In my opinion, Jesus was paraphrasing the prediction of one of the prophets, Malachi (4:5-6), who predicted "the restoration of all things" (Jesus' paraphrase, not Malachi's actual words). In keeping with the trend mentioned above, Jesus saw the inauguration of that fulfillment at the time of His first coming, in the ministry of John the Baptist (Matt.11:14).

As for the New Testament passages that speak of the future coming of Christ, I concur entirely with Sean's comments above.

[Guest]

Steve,

I fully agree that in Peter's sermon he says that the (so-called) gospel or church "age" were spoken of by the prophets. However, you said:

According to Peter, in Acts 3, what did all the prophets predict? "The restoration of all things" (v.21), which means "these days"(v.24).

This idea doesn't appear to fit with what Peter actually said:

19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

According to Peter, "the times of restoration of all things" had not yet arrived. These "times" were not going to be upon them until Jesus Christ was sent from heaven which had received (or was receving) Him. His words seem to forbid any idea "times of restoration of all things" were already upon them and thus we cannot equate them with the "church age".

ybiM,
Ely

[Guest]

Steve,

I fully agree that in Peter's sermon he says that the (so-called) gospel or church "age" were spoken of by the prophets. However, you said:

According to Peter, in Acts 3, what did all the prophets predict? "The restoration of all things" (v.21), which means "these days"(v.24).

This idea doesn't appear to fit with what Peter actually said:

19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

According to Peter, "the times of restoration of all things" had not yet arrived. These "times" were not going to be upon them until Jesus Christ was sent from heaven which had received (or was receving) Him. His words seem to forbid any idea "times of restoration of all things" were already upon them and thus we cannot equate them with the "church age".

ybiM,
Ely

Actually, I understand this passage this way:

Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before,

I take all of this as the conversion process. Repent, be refreshed, Jesus is sent to you (i.e. the Holy Spirit aka Christ in you).

21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things,

I see this as a paranthetical statement about the new heavens and earth at the second coming. So there is a tension between Christ being sent to the believers and Christ also remaining in heaven. Christ being in you and yet still in heaven is not a novel concept and is spoken of by Jesus, Paul and Peter. Notice that if you are premil, you should have a problem here, as the second coming is spoken of as the "restoration of all things", not the restoration of the kingdom to Israel, or the Millennial reign of Christ. If this is the second coming, it ushers in the resoration of all things, not some things for 1,000 years.

which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

I take this to apply to verses 19-20 (since I see verse 21 as paranthetical), the Church age. Since the apostles many times quoted from all the prophets and applied their writings to the Church age. Although I could understand it to be about the new heavens and earth as well. It just seems to parallel Acts 3:24 better.

[Guest]

Thanks for adding another angle Sean. That would make sense I guess. One thing though,

Notice that if you are premil, you should have a problem here, as the second coming is spoken of as the "restoration of all things", not the restoration of the kingdom to Israel, or the Millennial reign of Christ. If this is the second coming, it ushers in the resoration of all things, not some things for 1,000 years.

There's only a problem if one understands this to be a reference only to the eventof the Second Coming. But Peter spoke of the "times [plural] of restoration of all things". These times will begin when Jesus is sent from heaven. There will come a point when everything will have been "restored" at which point the times of restoration of all things will be completed (finished).

ybiM,
Ely

[Guest]

The easiest way to understand "whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things," would seemingly be to apply that restoration to the new heavens and new earth, which will be created at the time of the second coming (but which premillennialists place a thousand years after the second coming). That will be a literal restoration of all things. The only problem with that identification is trying to find places in more than one of the prophets that speak of this.

Obviously, one might apply Isaiah 65:17 to that event (though I think it applies to something else), but even then, you only have one prophet talking about it. Peter said the thing he was talking about was the burden of all the prophets... a claim that he also made about "these days." Thus we know that Peter believed all the prophets spoke of the church age, and many Old Testament passages seem to do so. But which Old Testament passages, specifically, speak of anything beyond the church age? I can't think of any.

As for the passages that premillennialists apply to a future millennium, though they would, in such a case, speak of events after the church age, yet that millennium is not the time (or "times") when all things are restored, but that time is believed to precede the new heavens and new earth by 1000 years. Thus, to apply Peter's words to the arrival of the millennial kingdom would be to have him saying that Jesus must remain in heaven until the "times of restoration of all things," but He, in fact, will return a thousand years before the restoration of all things.

It is not convincing to me, for a premillennialist to say, "But the thousand years is just ONE OF the 'times' of the restoration of all things." If these times might refer to different ages representing various phases of restoration, then it becomes impossible to eliminate the church age from being one of those phases of the many-staged restoration enterprise.

Once we decide that "the times of restoration of all things," refers to multiple, separate phases of restoration, I think we lose any specificity in Peter's prediction. If "the times of restoration of all things," might refer to a variety of stages of God's restoration, beginning with the church age, crossing a threshold with the coming of the millennial kingdom, and then crossing another with the coming of the new heavens and new earth, then the statement "whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things," doesn't clearly point to any specific point in time in particular, and becomes a statement containing no information about when Jesus will come.

The way it is worded, it is possible to take Peter's phrase two different ways. It might mean "whom heaven must receive until the [arrival of the] times of restoration of all things," or, equally possibly, it might means "whom heaven must receive until the [completion of the] times of restoration of all things." That is, "until the times of restoration of all things have run their course or reached their culmination"

On the face of it, we might think that the first meaning sounds more natural. However, if taken this way, it also is most natural to see the time indicated as the creation of a new heavens and new earth (not some non-final development a thousand years earlier). It is not natural to have Peter refer to a millennium (which, in any case, he did not seem to believe in--2 Peter 3:10-13) as "the times of restoration of all things," when that event actually falls short of that restoration by a thousand years.

And as I mentioned, one must then be looking for the references in the Old Testament, to which Peter alludes, to find the many predictions about the millennium and/or the new heavens and new earth. The latter, as mentioned above, might conceivably be found in one prophet (Isa), but not "all the prophets." The former is not found in any of the prophets, unless the apostles misunderstood the meanings of the Old Testament passages (since they applied all the so-called "millennial" passages to church age).

Peter's statement is undeniably ambiguous, and uses a phrase the exact equivalent of which is not used elsewhere in scripture. By itself, I do not think Peter's statement presents a convincing case for premillennialism, which is contrary to the whole eschatology of the New Testament (with the possible exception of the controversial Revelation 20).

If it is referring to the commencement of God's final restoration of all things, it must refer to the new heavens and new earth (suggesting an amillennial, not premillennial, sequence of events).

On the other hand, if it is really referring to something foretold in ALL the prophets, it would more likely refer to the age of Messiah, or age of the Spirit, which commenced two thousand years ago, and will continue until its consummation, at which time, Jesus will return.

Thus far my opinion.

[Guest]

If it is referring to the commencement of God's final restoration of all things, it must refer to the new heavens and new earth (suggesting an amillennial, not premillennial, sequence of events).

The term "restoration" is surely by definition not a permanent state or condition. FOr example, when an ancient cathedral or castle is being restored - we understand that it will eventually be restored i.e. it's "times of restoration" will eventually end. But as I undestand it, amillennialism posits that there will be no more restoring to be done once Jesus has returned.

if it is really referring to something foretold in ALL the prophets, it would more likely refer to the age of Messiah, or age of the Spirit, which commenced two thousand years ago, and will continue until its consummation, at which time, Jesus will return.

So, in this scenario, these "times of restoration of all things" had already comenced by the time Peter was speaking? But unless I'm missing something, Peter plainly said that these "times of restoration of all things" wouldn't come until Jesus was sent from heaven where He had been (or was being) received. This disallowes any idea that these times had already commenced.

ybiM,
Ely

[Guest]

Ely,

You wrote:

"Peter plainly said that these "times of restoration of all things" wouldn't come until Jesus was sent from heaven..."

If this is the case, then my position is surely wrong. However, I am surprised to hear this interpretation, because I would have said that Peter's words affirm just the opposite.

To say that there is a point at which Jesus will return, and that He won't return until that point arrives, would seem to mean that that point must come first, then He will return. If "the times of the restoration of all things" are that point (which, I think, Peter does say rather plainly), then that would suggest that the times of the restoration of all things must arrive as a prerequisite to His returning.

If I tell my child, "You are not going out to play until the time your plate is empty," I certainly would expect to be understood to mean, "You must empty your plate first, then you may go out and play." I would be surprised if my child thought that I meant that he must go out and play in order to empty his plate.

Perhaps I have a blind spot, but this seems to me to be the normal force of the language--regardless what the disputed phrase itself may be referring to.

I would have thought that any controversy about the "times of the restoration of all things" would center more upon whether that is a time already inaugurated or whether it is a time entirely future. It never occurred to me that there would be controversy over whether Jesus' coming would be before or after those times.

I suppose, with this glaring presuppositional difference, there is little hope that you and I will come to understand this passage the same way.

[Guest]

Hi guys,
I am really enjoying reading your discourse here. But to say that these things must happen first and then Jesus will return does not seem to be the language to me...


Acts 3:19-21
19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
(KJV)

Couldn't this just as easily mean that when He comes back all things will be restored at the time of His arrival, and not before or after. Like when we have a new president elect. The old president must remain the president until the time of the innaugration of the new president. That doesn't mean that His innauguration was an ongoing thing from His election until the beginning of His term, it more or less ushered it in at the time of the beginning of his term.

[Guest]

Couldn't this just as easily mean that when He comes back all things will be restored at the time of His arrival, and not before or after. Like when we have a new president elect. The old president must remain the president until the time of the innaugration of the new president. That doesn't mean that His innauguration was an ongoing thing from His election until the beginning of His term, it more or less ushered it in at the time of the beginning of his term.


Probably not since the OT prophets which Peter referenced seemed to be pointing to the church age itself. But if you're right and there is a restoration of all things when He returns it would also preclude a millenium afterward because at the end of that millenium Satan inspires a great rebellion whose participants are as many as the sands on the sea. I don't see a restoration in the millenium but a massive rebellion after Christ reigns visibly for a thousand years. Quite remarkable!