From Acts to the Epistles
Arlen L. Chitwood
Restoration of All Things
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, and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before 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 [age] began. (Acts 3:19-21)
Events occurring on the day of Pentecost set the tone for the ministry of the apostles throughout the book of Acts. Individuals were filled with the Spirit after a fashion peculiar to that period when the kingdom of the heavens was re-offered to Israel, and this filling of the Spirit formed a beginning fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy (2:4, 16-21).
Those filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost were empowered to manifest signs, wonders, and miracles in the presence of Israel; and on this beginning day, the sign was “tongues.” Jews present in Jerusalem from every nation under heaven heard the message in their own native language. The apostles (and others), having no knowledge of all these various languages, were empowered to speak and deliver a message to these Jews in their own languages.
Then, beyond the manifested sign and being able to reach the Jews in Jerusalem with the message (cf. Isaiah 28:10, 11), there were also those Jews in the various nations from which these men had come who must be reached. And the men present in Jerusalem, after hearing the message, would then be expected to carry this message back to the Jewish people in their own countries.
But as was the case in the ministry of Christ and the apostles before Calvary, so it was in the continuing ministry of the apostles at and following Pentecost. Though the Jews present were “all amazed” when hearing the message in their own native tongue [language], there was “doubt”; and this was followed by confusion and/or unbelief. Some asked, “Whatever could this mean?” And others said, “They are full of new wine” (2:12, 13).
But Peter, standing up with the other apostles, told these Jews exactly what was happening. Peter said, “But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel…” There was a beginning fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy by their being filled with the Spirit and being empowered to speak in other languages (vv. 14-21).
Then Peter directed these Jews’ attention to the issue at hand (2:22ff). Israel’s Messiah had previously appeared to the nation, manifesting “miracles, wonders, and signs”; and God, through these miraculous works, had provided visible evidence to Israel concerning the authenticity of both the Messenger and the message.
However, Israel had rejected the message and crucified the Messenger (vv. 22, 23). But God had raised Him from the dead, and there were numerous witnesses to this fact (vv. 24, 32; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:4-7).
And not only had God raised Him from the dead, but He was, at that very time, in the heavens at God’s right hand, waiting. He was waiting for that day when His “enemies” would be made His “footstool” (vv. 30-35).
Peter, in verses thirty-four and thirty-five, quoted from Psalm 110:1, the first verse of a Messianic Psalm. And note how the Psalm goes on to read:
The LORD shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion. Rule in the midst of Your enemies! . . . The Lord hath sworn and will not relent [KJV: “repent,” will not change His mind], “You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.” (Psalm 110:2, 4)
Events occurring on the day of Pentecost in Acts, chapter two had one purpose in view: Israel’s repentance. The Jewish people, nationwide, were called upon to change their minds. Only through this means could the nation bring about Christ’s return, bring about the continuing and complete fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy, and bring about a restoration of the kingdom to Israel. This was what the question in Acts 2:37 and the answer in the next verse involved.
And the same thing can be seen over and over in the ministry of the apostles to Israel as one begins to work his way through the book of Acts, especially through the first seven chapters. There are manifestations of supernatural signs, followed by a confrontation with the religious leaders in Israel, followed by a call to repentance; and the complete sequence is always followed by the nation remaining in unbelief, though some of the Jews hearing the message at different times believed (as the three thousand on the day of Pentecost).
Repent…and Be Converted
Exactly what is meant by repentance and conversion in relation to Israel during the ministry of the apostles throughout the book of Acts? Note the message previously proclaimed to Israel in the gospel accounts, beginning with John the Baptist and continuing with Christ and the apostles; then note the continuing message proclaimed by the apostles in the book of Acts. The message was essentially the same throughout, though, following the events of Calvary, it took on the added tone (which became a central emphasis) of the Jewish people having been “the betrayers and murderers” of Jesus (cf. Acts 2:23, 36; 3:14, 15; 4:10; 5:28-30; 7:52).
But there is something often not understood — which must be understood — about the message proclaimed to Israel. This message, beginning with John the Baptist, was not a salvation message in the same sense that salvation by grace through faith is to be proclaimed to Jew and Gentile alike today. Rather, the message dealt with salvation in an entirely different sense. This message dealt with salvation (deliverance) in relation to the kingdom, not in relation to eternal life.
Before Calvary, with Messiah present, there was a call for Israel to repent; and this was with a view to deliverance being brought to pass for the nation in the kingdom, which would be established. Following Calvary, with Messiah absent, there was again a call for Israel to repent; and this, as before, was with a view to deliverance being brought to pass for the nation in the kingdom, which would be established following Messiah’s return.
In this respect, the main difference in the message proclaimed to Israel in the original offer (in the gospel accounts) and the message proclaimed to Israel in the re-offer (in the book of Acts) was the presence or the absence of Israel’s Messiah. The conditions on Israel’s part at both times were identical: repentance and baptism (cf. Matthew 3:1-6; Acts 2:38). In the original offer, Christ was already present and could have established the kingdom; whereas, in the re-offer, Christ was absent and would have had to return in order to establish the kingdom.
Thus, correctly understanding the message proclaimed to Israel in either the gospel accounts or in Acts, it’s easy to see and understand that a salvation message pertaining to one’s eternal destiny was not part of this message. This message concerned salvation (deliverance) in relation to the kingdom.
But this is not to say that a message surrounding one’s eternal destiny cannot be seen in the gospel accounts or in Acts, for such is not the case at all.
Even during John’s ministry, preceding Christ’s ministry, he referred to Jesus on a particular occasion as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29, 36); and this statement could only draw from Old Testament typology (e.g., Genesis 4, 22; Exodus 12) and point to the events surrounding Calvary, which would occur later.
Then, that which John had expressed began to come into full focus once Israel had rejected the proffered kingdom (Matthew 12:22-32). Events in Christ’s ministry turned more toward the Cross; and, during this time, numerous things can be found in the gospel accounts and in Acts pertaining to the Cross rather than to the Crown.
At the time of Israel’s climactic rejection in Matthew 12:22-32, some of the Scribes and Pharisees, who had just seen Christ perform a miraculous work, asked for a sign; but Christ, seeing that they had rejected the miraculous sign that He performed (among others prior to that time), refused their request. He told them that no sign would be given but “the sign of the prophet Jonah,” which pointed to His coming death, burial, and resurrection (vv. 38-40).
This is undoubtedly why Jesus dealt with Nicodemus as He did following a similar rejection by the Jews (John 3:1ff; cf. John 2:18-25). Nicodemus came to Jesus, admitting, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him” (v. 2). However, Jesus, rather than dealing with the signs Nicodemus referred to, dealt with “the sign of the prophet Jonah” once again (using a parallel type).
Christ first dealt with truths relative to seeing and entering the kingdom (vv. 3-13), and then He concluded with explanatory, related truths drawn from an Old Testament type, paralleling the account of Jonah. Christ drew from the account of Moses lifting up the brazen serpent in the wilderness (Numbers 21:6-9), a type of His being lifted up on Calvary, to occur not many days hence (vv. 14ff).
And the message of salvation by grace through faith can be derived from sections of Scripture such as Matthew 12:40, John 1:29, 36, or John 3:3ff, among many others. But, again, this was not part of the central message proclaimed to Israel by John, Jesus, or the disciples before Calvary; and this was not part of the same message proclaimed to Israel by the apostles (and others) following Calvary.
That is to say, there was no call for the Jewish people to receive Jesus as their Savior, in the sense of providing salvation from eternal damnation (either before Calvary in the gospel accounts or following Calvary in the book of Acts). The call was for the Jewish people to receive Jesus as their King, One Who would save them in the sense of providing deliverance in the proffered kingdom (cf. Matthew 2:2; 21:5, 8, 9, 15; John 19:14-19; Acts 2:30-36).
Note a statement delivered to the Jewish religious leaders following Calvary by Peter and the other apostles in this respect:
The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree. Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. (Acts 5:30, 31)
The word “Prince” is Archegos in the Greek text and refers to “a Ruler.” As Israel’s King He would be their Savior, their Deliverer.
But prior to Christ returning as King, Israel had to repent. Then Jesus would be sent as King to bring about deliverance (as Savior), providing forgiveness for the Jewish peoples’ sins, with their main sin being that of crucifying their Messiah. But, again, the call for Israel to repent was not a message pertaining to eternal salvation or eternal damnation.
There are things about the generation of Jews to whom the kingdom of the heavens was offered both before and following Calvary that people don’t seem to understand. This wasn’t a lost generation of Jews in need of hearing a salvation message — no more so than the generation during Daniel’s day, or David’s day, or Jews living at any other time throughout the fourteen centuries extending from Moses to Christ.
If such had been the case, the message of John, Jesus, and the apostles (both before and following Calvary) would have been quite different. It would have dealt with the issue of eternal salvation first. But it didn’t. It dealt with a kingly message first, with salvation being seen in the message in the sense of deliverance by the King in His kingdom.
1. Salvation in the Old and New Testaments
It may come as a surprise for some to learn that salvation, presented in the Old Testament — whether dealing with eternal verities or with the Messianic Kingdom — is identical to the way salvation is presented in the New Testament.
In either Testament, salvation with respect to one’s eternal destiny is entirely through divine intervention, it is by the shedding of blood, it involves a substitutionary atonement, and a Man is revealed to be the Substitute. But salvation with respect to Christ and His kingdom is always seen in both Testaments as a separate matter, having to do with issues subsequent to those surrounding one’s eternal destiny.
These are truths set forth initially in the opening two chapters of Genesis (1:1-2:3). Then, Scripture beyond that provides all the necessary details to fully understand this opening section. And, within subsequent Scripture, no change can ever occur from that set forth at the very beginning.
Everything must remain the same throughout, which is why there can be no difference in salvation throughout Scripture — whether relative to one’s eternal destiny or relative to deliverance in the kingdom. And that is also why correctly understanding these matters at the outset, at the very beginning of Scripture, cannot be overemphasized. If one understands matters correctly at the beginning, he will have a foundational base that will allow him to correctly understand related subject matter dealt with in various ways at later points in Scripture.
But confining the discussion to salvation with respect to one’s eternal destiny — for that must be settled first — one thing stands out about the opening four chapters of Genesis. Not only does the foundational framework set forth in the opening two chapters deal with this matter first (which can only be the case, for this must occur first [1:1-5]), but Scripture in the immediately following two chapters (chapters 3, 4), as well, deals with this matter first (which should also only be expected, for, again, this is what must occur, as well as be understood, first).
In Genesis, chapter one, the beginning restoration of the ruined creation — typifying man, a subsequent ruined creation, passing from death unto life — occurred entirely through divine intervention. The Spirit of God moved, God spoke, and light came into existence. The ruined material creation was completely powerless, as ruined man is today, to act in and of self (vv. 2b-5).
Then, in chapter three, dealing once again with the same subject as the opening five verses of chapter one, God began to provide additional information. Adam partook of sin to effect Eve’s redemption (as Christ was made sin to effect our redemption [2 Corinthians 5:21]), and in the latter part of the chapter God slew innocent animals and clothed Adam and Eve with skins from these animals.
Thus, salvation in chapter three is seen in a dual sense. It is seen through the act of a man (typifying the Man, Christ Jesus), and it is seen through the shedding of blood (typifying the shed blood of Christ). And, typically, from God clothing Adam and Eve, man is seen clothed in the righteousness of Christ.
Then, in chapter four, salvation is once again seen in a dual sense, but from a different perspective. It is seen through the shed blood of lambs from the flock, and it is seen through the shed blood of a man himself (Abel, the one who offered the lambs to God). And this dual type looks out ahead to the act of One Person — “the Lamb of God” putting away sin through the sacrifice of Himself (cf. Hebrews 12:24).
Thus, in this chapter, additional information is provided to not only help a person understand chapter three but also the opening five verses in chapter one. And, when all of the material in these opening four chapters of Genesis is put together and understood, a person will possess a good grasp of salvation by grace through faith — a salvation based entirely on the finished work of Christ, one wrought entirely through divine intervention.
Then in Genesis chapter twenty-two, all of the preceding is put together in one type. And for an individual to properly understand this one type (where different things in several preceding types have been put together), he must have an understanding of the individual preceding types and how they relate to one another. Only then will he be in a position to dig into the type set forth in chapter twenty-two and mine its treasures.
In brief, in this chapter, Abraham offered his son on a particular mountain in the land of Moriah (a place chosen by God, where His Son, in the antitype, was to be offered 2,000 years later); and a substitutionary atonement was involved through a ram dying in the stead of Isaac (with Isaac, through the death of the ram, seen as having himself died [cf. Hebrews 11:17]).
Then the preceding — along with other places like Joseph’s experiences when he went to his brethren in Genesis chapter thirty-seven — brings a person to and prepares the person for the death of the firstborn in Exodus chapter twelve. When one arrives at this chapter in Exodus, all of the necessary preliminary data has already been provided; and an individual having availed himself of this preliminary data finds himself in a position where he can properly understand the material in this chapter.
Thus, a person is not to begin in Exodus, chapter twelve when studying Scripture. Rather a person is to begin in Genesis chapter one and work his way through Genesis to the book of Exodus, availing himself of all the previous data so that he can properly understand Exodus chapter twelve (and beyond). And this is of vital importance, for this chapter in Exodus is the beginning chapter in a type that extends all the way into the book of Joshua.
This is the basic overall type that establishes the framework upon which so much of Scripture rests (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:24-10:11; Hebrews 3-6), with the overall type itself resting upon the foundational framework set forth at the beginning, in the opening two chapters of Genesis (1:1-2:3; cf. Hebrews 4:1-9).
2. Shed Blood in the Old and New Testaments
According to Scripture, Christ was slain two different times in history — “from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8) and at “Calvary” in 30 A.D. (Acts 2:23, 36). The “foundation of the world” carries one back to the time of the restoration of the ruined creation, beginning with Genesis 1:2b (ref. Hebrews 4:3, 4). At the very beginning of man’s history, God, looking 4,000 years ahead, saw His Son as already slain. But bear one thing in mind, though Christ is seen in Scripture as “slain from the foundation of the world,” He is only seen in Scripture as being “offered” at one time — at “Calvary,” in 30 A.D. (Hebrews 9:25-28). Note the reference in verse twenty-six to “the foundation of the world.” The allusion is to Christ being slain at this time, though not “offered” until 4,000 years later when slain within man’s history (vv. 26, 28; 1 Peter 3:18).
And between these two points lie all the animal sacrifices, the “offerings,” in the Old Testament. These sacrifices began with God Himself slaying animals to clothe Adam and Eve immediately following the entrance of sin into the human race; and they ended with the slaying of the paschal lambs in 30 A.D., slain by the Israelites throughout the camp at the very time that the nation was slaying the Paschal Lamb at Calvary.
Thus, there is the picture. Christ was slain at the time man’s history began, preceding the entrance of sin into the human race (though not offered at this time); animals were slain immediately following the entrance of sin into the human race (for offerings), and they continued to be slain throughout the next 4,000 years (for offerings), for death had “passed upon all men” (Romans 5:12); and, “when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son,” to be slain (as the offering), though already “slain from the foundation of the world” (Galatians 4:4, 5; Revelation 13:8).
Then, tying that in with the different types once again (Genesis 1-4, 22, 37; Exodus 12), it is easy to see that redemption for man is the same throughout Scripture, Old or New Testament. As stated in Hebrews 9:22, “…without shedding of blood is no remission.” And this blood was to ultimately be shed by a Man — slain from “the foundation of the world,” offered 4,000 years later — with all the bloody animal sacrifices (for offerings) lying between these two times, pointing to Christ’s sacrifice, His offering once for all.
A) Atonement; Reconciliation
The word “atonement” (Hebrew: kaphar) means “to cover.” This is the word used throughout the Old Testament relative to the blood of animal sacrifices providing a covering for sins (e.g., Leviticus 16:6, 10, 11, 16-18, 20…). The blood of animal sacrifices could not do away with sins. It could only cover sins. This is why in Hebrews it states:
For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. (Hebrews 10:4)
Thus, there were continual sacrifices throughout the Old Testament, year after year; and blood from these continual sacrifices provided a covering for sins.
This can easily be seen through activities on the Day of Atonement when the high priest placed blood on the mercy seat. God dwelt in the Holy of Holies, above the mercy seat, between the cherubim, one on each end of the mercy seat (Exodus 25:21, 22). The two tablets of stone, containing the broken law, were in the ark below the mercy seat (Exodus 40:20; cf. Exodus 31:18; Hebrews 9:4); and, with blood on the mercy seat, when God looked toward the broken law, He saw a blood covering, not the broken law. The blood could not do away with the Israelites’ sins, but it could, and did, cover them.
The shed blood of Christ though is another matter. It does not cover sins. Rather, it does away with sins.
The word used in connection with Christ’s shed blood is not a Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word kaphar. Instead, the Greek word katallasso, translated “reconciliation,” is used (cf. Romans 5:10, 11; 2 Corinthians 5:18-21).
Katallasso means, “to change,” “to bring back into harmony.” There is not even the slightest thought of forming a covering. Rather, the thought with reference to sin has to do with bringing back into harmony through doing away with sin, leaving nothing to cover.
This is why the writer of Hebrews drew a sharp contrast between the blood of animals and the blood of Christ in this respect (chapters 7-10). And this is also why he used the expression, “put away sin,” with reference to Christ’s sacrifice (9:26; cf. 10:1, 12).
B) Paschal Lambs; Passover Lamb
With these thoughts in mind, what was the difference between God viewing the shed blood of animal sacrifices or viewing the shed blood of His Son insofar as not seeing man’s sins was concerned? There wasn’t any difference. There couldn’t be.
God didn’t see man’s sins in either instance. In the former, man’s sins were covered; God saw only the blood that covered them. In the latter, man’s sins were done away with; God saw only the blood that did away with them.
God looked upon the blood in both instances — the only thing that could cover or do away with sins. That’s why there can be no remission for sins apart from the shedding of blood. And that is also why to talk about salvation in either the Old or the New Testament apart from the shedding of blood is utter nonsense.
God’s requirement for and recognition of a substitutionary atonement began at the time of Adam’s sin and can be seen throughout the Old Testament, with all the sacrifices pointing to and typifying Christ’s sacrifice. And this can perhaps best be seen and illustrated through viewing the death of the paschal lambs in Exodus chapter twelve.
Insofar as the death of the firstborn and God’s corresponding satisfaction are concerned, note that there is no difference between Jews applying the blood of the paschal lambs (by faith) to the doorposts and lintel during Moses’ day and Christians applying the blood of the Passover Lamb, by faith, today. In both instances God is seen recognizing a vicarious death of the firstborn, and in both instances, God’s satisfaction can be seen. The statement, “…when I see the blood, I will pass over you…” (Exodus 12:13), is equally true in both instances, in both type and antitype.
And also note that God would have had to look upon the shed blood of the paschal lambs exactly the same way throughout the fourteen centuries (thirty-five generations) from Moses to Christ — “…when I see the blood, I will pass over you…” God looked for the blood. That was the one criterion, the only criterion.
God could only have recognized an individual vicarious death in each generation exactly the same way; and, since the generation living when Christ was upon earth was still slaying the paschal lambs year after year, God could only have still been recognizing an individual vicarious death and been satisfied. God looked for the blood. That was the one criterion during Moses’ day, and that could only have remained the one criterion throughout the fourteen centuries from Moses to Christ.
Contrary to common belief, Christ didn’t come to a lost generation of Jews — no more so than if He had appeared to any other generation extending all the way back to Moses. The paschal lambs were still being slain year after year, with the blood being properly applied; and God could only have still looked at the blood (which covered sin) the same way that He had always looked at it.
And this is exactly what the apostles recognized when carrying the message to the same generation once again following Calvary. The salvation message they carried concerned deliverance in the kingdom, exactly the same as the message which John, Christ, and the disciples had carried to Israel before Calvary.
The message was being carried to a generation of Jews living on both sides of Calvary — Jews who had applied the blood of the paschal lambs preceding Calvary but had rejected the King and His kingdom. Still though, preceding Calvary, there was a vicarious death, resulting in God’s satisfaction; and this could not be nullified.
But a status of this nature was for that generation alone. Jews in any subsequent generation would be as Jews are today. A vicarious death, resulting in God’s satisfaction, could be theirs only through availing themselves of the shed blood of the Paschal Lamb. They had to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Thus, repenting and being converted in Acts 3:19 had to do with the Jews of that one generation changing their minds and going in a different direction. Eternal salvation was not in view, only deliverance in relation to Christ’s return and the restoration of the kingdom to Israel.
And the 3,000 being “saved” on the day of Pentecost, or at times following, including Paul’s conversion (chapter 9), must be looked upon after the same fashion. Their heeding the message must be looked upon in the sense of a change of mind and a change of direction, with any thought of salvation having to do with Christ’s return and deliverance in the kingdom. They were saved “from this untoward [‘perverse’] generation” (Acts 2:40), with respect to the kingdom.
(And, in contrast, note Paul and Silas’ message in Acts 16:31 to a Gentile of their generation — a jailor at Philippi, one outside the camp of Israel, one having been separated from the blood of the paschal lambs.
This jailor was “dead in trespasses and sins.” He was spiritually dead and in no position to hear and understand spiritual truth concerning the kingdom. He had to first pass “from death unto life” before a message concerning the kingdom could be proclaimed to him.
In his case, contrasted with those in Israel, matters surrounding the death of the firstborn in Exodus 12 had not occurred; and the firstborn must die first.
Thus, in response to his question concerning salvation, he was told, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved…” He had to first apply the blood of the slain Paschal Lamb. A vicarious death had to occur first — the only means through which this man could be made alive spiritually and be placed in a position where he could subsequently understand spiritual truth concerning the kingdom.)
And He Shall Send Jesus
Christ was to remain in the heavens “until the times of restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21). There was to be (or, will be future) repentance on Israel’s part. Then Christ would (or, will yet future) return and restore the kingdom to Israel.
(The word translated “restitution” in Acts 3:21 is the same word in the Greek text translated “restore” in Acts 1:6. The word appears in a verb form in chapter one and in a noun form in chapter three, and exactly the same thing is in view both places [though in a broader sense in chapter three] — the restoration of the kingdom to Israel.
In the past, the kingdom of the heavens was in view [which would have necessitated that the kingdom covenanted to David (the earthly sphere of the kingdom) also subsequently be restored]. In the future though, only the kingdom covenanted to David can be in view; and only this earthly sphere of the kingdom can and will be restored to the nation. Israel has forfeited the right and privilege to rule from heavenly places in the kingdom. The Church is now in possession of the kingdom of the heavens; and Christians are the ones who will occupy heavenly positions of power and authority as co-heirs with Christ in the kingdom.)
Israel didn’t repent throughout the time covered by the book of Acts, and thus Christ did not return and bring about the “restoration of all things.” And the day eventually came when the door of opportunity closed for Israel, and God set the nation aside for a dispensation. Israel now has to await God’s completion of His dealings with the “one new man” in Christ, which will take two days, two thousand years.
But the day is coming, and is near at hand, when God will complete His dealings with the Church, remove the Church, and then turn back to Israel once again. And, during that future time, Israel, after passing through the fires of the great Tribulation, will repent. The Jews in that day, during a time of unparalleled trouble — “such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Matthew 24:21) — will call upon the God of their fathers for deliverance.
They will repent, change their minds, in that day. And, when they do, God will see their “affliction,” hear their “cry,” and know their “sorrows”; and He will come down in the person of His Son to “deliver” them (Exodus 3:2-12; 4:19, 20).
But one thing needs to be understood relative to Israel being delivered in that day. True, Christ will return as King to effect salvation (deliverance) in relation to the kingdom. But the Jews of that day, unlike the Jews during the time Christ was on earth the first time, will have to be dealt with first in relation to matters surrounding that set forth in Exodus chapter twelve.
Israel will first have to experience her national Passover through believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, the Passover Lamb Who shed His blood for the nation. Then, and only then, can Israel be dealt with relative to deliverance with respect to the kingdom.