Ok, so i know this sounds wierd, but I'm not sure if i'm a mid-acts guy or a post-acts guy. So, i'll just lay out my beliefs.
That papaer Welch wrote (which is on this website) was very convincing toward a post acts posistion. But there are still some issues I have that keep me from going all the way.
I strongly believe that 1 Thessalonians 4 talks about the rapture (mid acts position)
I believe the Spiritual gifts stopped at the conclusion of acts.
Romans does talk a lot about "to the Jew first and then to the Gentile,"(post acts position) but then comes romans 11 where it talks about Israel being cut out (mid acts position).
If the post acts position is right, why does that mean in terms of how to be saved during the period around acts 20? What about in Galatians where Paul tells us he was the minister unto the uncircumcision?
In post-acts beliefs, what was the difference in his message, besides the explanation of the mystery?
So, i have come to a vague conclusion. From Mid-acts through Acts 28, there was a "transition period". As soon as Saul/Paul was called out by God people COULD be saved by grace thru faith, but could also be saved by the old way (faith plus works); then after acts 28 people can only be saved by the Pauline(grace thru faith) way.
This might souns absurd, but i'm not sure which way to go.
Can someone please help me out? I love to listen to Richard Jordan from Shorewood Bible church and am inclined to believe him; but Welch's papers make pretty darn good arguements too. |
