In Proposition 73, George Peters states:
“The doctrine of the Kingdom preached by the Apostles and Elders, raised up no controversy with the Jews.”
Peters continues to make note of the acceptance of the doctrine of the Kingdom by the Jews as promulgated by the Apostles. It caused no great stir of controversy. Any stir it did create was rooted in the hearts of the hearers who took note, embraced the message, and came to a belief in the Messiah. If what was preached was in stark contrast to the great expectation and hope of this Messianic Kingdom, surely there would have been a great deal of push back. We see no such thing in Acts.
The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 73 is the following:
“Consider (1) how large numbers of the Jews were converted to Christianity, accepting of Jesus as “the Messiah”, because of the fact that they were led to believe (a) that at the Second Advent the glorious predicted Messianic Kingdom would be established, and (b) that the life and death of Jesus (His resurrection and exaltation included), evinced Him as preeminently qualified to be “the Messiah” and as possessing the requisite power to fulfill the covenant promises. (2) How, as the early doctrine became obscured, substituted, and finally driven from the field, the conversions of the Jews became rarer and almost entirely ceased, excepting such as were produced under compulsion. How else account for so great a change, unless it be in the gradual engrafting of other than Jewish ideas to the Messiahship of Jesus, making the Messiah less and less in correspondence with the Messiah in the Old Testament Scriptures?”
All I can really say is well stated George Peters. It seems we have two halves to the Scriptures these days – a Jewish half and a Christian half and unfortunately for many, the Christian half overrules the Jewish half. Thus, I appreciate what Peters is saying in the observation as it is a horrible reality of how we approach the Word of God, what it says, and quite frankly, the whole entire concept of the doctrine of the Kingdom and the Messiah who will rule that Kingdom. Are we viewing such things from our modern lens or are we understanding Scripture from the perspective of the authors and what God revealed to them? We make quite a few claims in the world of hermeneutics and exegesis about authorial intent and its importance. Are we really taking the time to engage Scripture from a Hebraic perspective in order to grasp for example who the Messiah really is, what these covenants God made are really about and who they were made with and how we fit into those covenant promises as an engrafted people? I fear the answer is no for the most part. It is high time we take a different and more correct approach to Scripture. We seem to want to mold Scripture into a modern construct which more often than not does severe damage to its message.