I N D E X
49
does not indicate something new, but to bring back something that existed before, and this can be nothing other than
the theocratic kingdom of the Old Testament which we have been considering and the word `Israel' can only mean
the historical nation, the literal descendants of Abraham.
The Lord Jesus made no attempt to correct the disciples for asking such a question regarding the kingdom, which
would have certainly been necessary if this kingdom had become entirely a spiritual one, disassociated from the
earthly people. The only thing He could not answer was the time element. When that kingdom would be restored
was conditional, just as it had been at the time when John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus announced that this
kingdom was near. Israel was then put to the test. It could not have been otherwise, unless one can entirely rule out
human responsibility when divine truth is proclaimed, in which case there is no point whatsoever in proclaiming
truth at all. Israel was now, in the wisdom of God put to the test once more as we shall see. To have revealed the
result of this test before it was applied would have cancelled the resulting responsibility. The Lord was too wise to
reveal the fact that although His longsuffering still held for the people of Israel He knew they would refuse once
more to repent and turn back to Him. As we said before, God was not play-acting. His mercy and patience with this
people was amazing and real, as is perfectly clear when this portion of the Word of God is studied without bias and
tradition gripping the mind.
The next thing we find in the record is the concern of the eleven to fill the gap left by the apostasy of Judas. The
number twelve must be made up. This can be well understood if the earthly kingdom purposes are still continuing,
for in that kingdom the Lord had made a promise that when it was set up, the twelve apostles should sit on twelve
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28). Note it was twelve thrones not eleven. Who was qualified
to fill such a position? The condition is stated in Acts 1:21,22:
`Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among
us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that He was taken up from us, must one be ordained
to be a witness with us of His resurrection'.
This agrees with the words of Christ in John 15:27:
`Ye shall also bear witness, because ye have been with Me from the beginning'.
The thought here is the capacity to bear personal testimony from being an eye-witness, to the life and works of the
Lord Jesus from the commencement of His public ministry right through to the Resurrection.
Two men fulfilled these conditions, Joseph, surnamed Justus, and Matthias (Acts 1:23), and the apostles looked
to the Lord to indicate which man was His choice. Matthias was chosen, and the reader should notice that on the
day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit and His divine power rested on Matthias equally with the eleven, indicating that no
mistake had been made in this matter. Matthias was certainly God's choice and the number 12 (Israel's number) had
been restored. Those who talk of `apostolic mistakes' here are really accusing the Holy Spirit of error in enduing the
wrong man.
This restoration would have had no meaning at all if Israel had been rejected at the Cross, and if the earthly
kingdom, of which Israel is the centre, had been laid aside by God.
The next great event that followed was Pentecost and it is vital to get its proper setting in the second chapter of
Acts. So many think that it was the beginning of a Gentile church, that close attention must be given to the
Scriptural facts. Passover was one of the feasts of Jehovah given in Leviticus 23. We have already alluded to them
(see page 42). First there was Passover (typical of Calvary) and Unleavened Bread (the new Christian walk, verses
5-8), then Firstfruits (Resurrection 9-14), followed by Pentecost (Restoration 15-21).
The events recorded in Acts 2 were the beginning of fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy. Peter asserts in
explanation of the happenings of that day:
`This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel' (2:16).
In endeavouring to understand the meaning of the day of Pentecost we shall be wise therefore if we heed these
divine clues and do not go wider than the scope of Joel's prophecy. This book, under the illumination of the Holy