Since Acts 2 is such a crucial passage in bridging the Old and the New Covenants, it might be well for us to digress a moment and give an expanded outline of the main points in the chapter. As I mentioned, this book is primarily concerned with demonstrating basic presuppositions. This section will not only help to do that, but it will also be an opportunity to show that our hermeneutical approach will greatly affect our basic understanding of the OT Scriptures.

Acts 2:1–11—The Miracle of Tongues. Verse 7 says, “they were all amazed,” and verse 12 also says, “they were all amazed.” The first amazement was that men from sixteen places and speaking sixteen different languages, each heard the message of the gospel in his own tongue:

Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, “Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born” (Acts 2:7, 8 NKJV).

The second cause of amazement was that the gospel, or “wonderful works of God,” was being preached to Jews in Gentile languages:

“…we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” So they were all amazed and perplexed,… (vv. 11, 12 NKJV).

Acts 2:12—The Obvious Question. The question, “What could this mean?” grows out of both of the amazements mentioned above. The greatest amazement was probably not the tongues, but the message that was given in the tongues.

Acts 2:13—The Carnal Answer. One will notice that the Holy Spirit says, “Others mocking said, ‘They are full of new wine.’” All of those present did not hear the message of the wonderful works of God. Those asking the question saw the hand of God in the message that they were hearing, but others heard only babbling. The miracle well might have been on the ear of the listener as well as on the tongue of the speaker.

Acts 2:14–20—Peter’s Inspired Interpretation. Peter’s understanding of what took place on the day of Pentecost is full of instruction, especially for us in our discussion concerning the “seed to whom the promise was made.” Here is the beginning of his sermon:

But Peter, standing up with the eleven, raised his voice and said to them, “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and heed my words. For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

‘And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God,
That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh;
Your Sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
Your young men shall see visions,
Your old men shall dream dreams.
And on my menservants and on my maidservants
I will pour out My Spirit in those days;
And they shall prophecy.
I will show wonders in heaven above
And signs in the earth beneath:
Blood and fire and vapor of smoke.
The sun shall be turned into darkness,
And the moon into blood,
Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord…’ (Acts 2:14–20 NKJV).

The pouring out of the Spirit was the sign that would inaugurate the New Covenant age. This was clearly foretold by the prophets (not only by Joel), and Peter was telling his hearers that the events they were witnessing were the positive proofs that the New Covenant Age had come.

We must avoid two extremes as we seek to understand Peter’s use of the prophecy of Joel. First, we must not get our concept of the kingdom out of Joel and then demand that the events in Acts literally, meaning in natural language, agree on a one to one basis. This method will easily prove that Joel’s prophecy was not literally fulfilled at Pentecost and therefore it awaits a millennium fulfillment. This is using the Old Testament Scriptures to interpret the New Testament Scriptures instead of the other way around. This is not allowing Peter to mean what he literally says.

The second mistake is to make Peter’s words in Acts 2 mean far more than they actually say. This is often done by showing that Peter clearly understood Joel 2:32 to be fulfilled in the giving of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost to indwell believers. So far, so good. However, this fact is then extended to everything in the book of Joel, and by further extension, to every kingdom prophecy in the Old Testament Scriptures. It seems to me this is as bad as the first extreme. There is no question that Peter is using both the Davidic covenant and Joel’s prophecy to prove that the kingdom has truly come, or been inaugurated, but that in no way means that the kingdom’s fullness, or every predicted aspect, has been accomplished. Because Peter declares Joel 2:32 to be fulfilled does not mean every single kingdom prophecy has been fulfilled.

Acts 2:21—The Heart of the Pentecost Passage. This is the heart of Joel’s prophecy and shows beyond question that Joel was talking about the gospel message for the whole world when he was prophesying. Joel was talking about this present age when the gospel of grace would be extended to all men, including the “far-off” Gentiles, and Peter was saying, “That age has come. That prophecy is being fulfilled in front of your eyes.” Look carefully at Peter’s interpretation of Joel:

‘…And it shall come to pass
That whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD
Shall be saved’ (Acts 2:21 NKJV).

By setting Peter’s words along side of Joel’s words, we not only see how Peter understood Joel’s prophecy, but we also get a lesson in how the inspired New Testament Apostles interpreted the ‘kingdom’ prophecies of the OT Scriptures. We must insist that our hermeneutical approach to the OT Scriptures be the same as that of the writers of the NT Scriptures. It seems quite clear to me that both Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism approach the NT Scriptures with a system already fixed in their minds that they derived entirely from the OT Scriptures. Both of those systems of theology insist on interpreting the new in light of the old instead of the other way around. Unfortunately, both systems are fully developed before they even get out of the book of Genesis. Instead of allowing the Apostles to tell us what the Old Testament prophets meant, both Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism make the Old Testament prophets establish what the Apostles have to say. They merely do it in different areas in order to prove different doctrines.

The following comparison of Joel’s prophecy and Peter’s inspired interpretation is an example of how we must learn to read the OT Scriptures in the light of their interpretation by inspired NT Apostles. It is obvious that the ‘deliverance’ spoken of in Joel is not political freedom for the Jews in a future earthly kingdom, but is clearly understood by Peter to be referring to the full salvation that will be experienced by Jew and Gentile under the gospel age (Luke l:68–79).

And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered:… (Joel 2:32)

And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved’ (Acts 2:21 NKJV).

The new age ‘of the Spirit’ is the gospel age predicted by Joel. Peter
was stating the following facts about the kingdom.

1. When would this kingdom be established? Joel’s prophecy concerned the time in which you and I live today and not just the future.

2. To whom was this kingdom promised? The promise is equally applied to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews. According to Peter’s interpretation of Joel’s prophecy, the promise is to whosoever and not just the nation of Israel.

3. How were the blessings of the kingdom to be received? The deliverance was to be given on the basis of faith in the gospel message and had nothing at all to do with physical birth.

4. Exactly what did Joel mean by ‘deliverance?’ Peter clearly says that Joel’s ‘deliverance’ was spiritual salvation and not national, political freedom.

Acts 2:22–24—Jesus had all of the credentials necessary to prove that he was the Messiah; but, in spite of all the evidence, the Jews still crucified him. However, “God raised him from the dead” (Acts 2:24a NIV). Peter’s emphasis proves that the man they crucified had fulfilled the prophecies contained in the prophets concerning the Messiah King.

Acts 2: 25–28—This resurrection of Christ from the grave was also clearly prophesied by David.

Acts 2:29–36—Peter’s application of the fact of the resurrection and the ascension of Christ reveals that David understood exactly what was being promised to him in 2 Samuel 7. Peter’s sermon also shows that David understood both when and how the covenant promise to “raise up his Son to sit on his throne” would be fulfilled. This very clear ‘time’ reference is often missed when discussing the establishment of David’s throne.

Again, it will be helpful to put David’s prophetic words and Peter’s interpretation side by side. The following chart is designed to prove exactly how a New Testament apostle understood and applied an Old Testament prophecy concerning the Davidic kingdom.

Notice carefully the following facts that are clearly established in a careful comparison of the actual words in the prophecy and Peter’s inspired interpretation of them.

	… let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David,
And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers,	that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore
I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will	being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ
establish his kingdom.	to sit on his throne;
	He [David] seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ...
2 Samuel 7:12 (1 Chron. 17:11)	Acts 2:29–31

1. Peter substitutes the word Christ for seed so there is no question as to whom the prophecy refers. Christ is the seed that was “raised up” (or “resurrected”—clearly pinpoints the time of fulfillment) to sit on the throne in fulfillment of the covenant promise to David.

2. Peter shows that David understood these words to be more than just a promise of the bodily resurrection of Christ. Peter clearly connected the resurrection and ascension of Christ with the establishment of the kingdom promised to David. When one compares the words of 2 Samuel 7 and Acts 2, it is impossible to miss that fact. The “setting up the seed” and “establishing the kingdom” are the same thing as “raising up Christ” to “sit on his (David’s) throne” and all of this was to happen at the same time. The Holy Spirit specifically tells us that when David spoke of “the raising up of Christ (resurrection) to sit on his (David’s) throne” that David was expressly speaking of the resurrection and ascension of Christ that had just taken place (vv. 30, 31). Peter’s words can only mean that David’s greater Son was to begin sitting on the promised throne at the time of Christ’s resurrection and ascension.

There is not the slightest hint of a postponed future earthly throne in Peter’s words. If one takes Peter’s words literally, he proves beyond question that the Holy Spirit deliberately spiritualized the Old Testament prophecy of the Davidic kingdom.

3. Further proof of this time factor can be seen in the words “while David was sleeping with the fathers.” This can only mean that Christ would sit on David’s throne at the same time that David was still “sleeping with the fathers,” or before David’s resurrection. This is why Peter deliberately mentioned that David is “both dead and buried and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.” Peter is saying, “The promise to David has been fulfilled in the exact manner and precise time (how and when) as it was prophesied to David.” The throne was to be established at the time of the resurrection and ascension of Christ, and it would happen “while David was sleeping with his fathers” awaiting his own resurrection (1 Chronicles 17:11 and Acts 13:35, 36 for the same time reference). It is impossible to fit Walvoord’s statement (see page 21) that “resurrected David will reign under Christ as a Prince over the house of Israel” into Peter’s inspired interpretation of God’s covenant with David. Recent ‘Progressive’ Dispensationalists admit that Walvoord is wrong in expecting David himself to be raised from the dead and rule in Jerusalem. However, they insist that substituting Christ for David is not to be understood as spiritualizing prophecy.

4. The words “I will establish his kingdom” in the promise to David becomes “raise up Christ to sit on his throne” in the inspired interpretation by Peter. Again, it is clear that this event took place at the ascension of Christ. There is not the slightest hint in Peter’s words of any expectations of a future Davidic throne or kingdom that has temporarily been postponed. If this enthronement of David’s Seed takes place during a future earthly millennium, then David will not be raised from the dead until after that millennium is over.

The Holy Spirit could not possibly say any more clearly that David’s Seed is sitting on David’s throne right now and that the kingdom promised to David has, in some sense, already been established at the ascension of Christ (1 Chronicles 17:11–15). It would be grasping at straws to say that Christ now sits in heaven on a throne as Lord of the church, but he will later sit on a physical throne in Palestine as King of Israel. The NT Scriptures simply will not allow that distinction. The days of the manifestation of both the glory and the power of Christ began at the ascension. No New Testament writer ever thinks or writes of such a manifestation of Christ’s glory and power as being totally future.^[1]

The gift of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost is the evidence of Christ’s ascension to David’s throne as promised in 2 Samuel 7. Pentecost is also a visible expression or exercise of Christ’s earned Lordship or present Kingship (Joel 2:28, 29). The gift of the Holy Spirit was the direct and earned response to the victorious work of the enthroned King, and it was also the full proof that the Father was perfectly satisfied with that work.

Consistent Dispensationalism must either deny, ignore, or minimize a ‘Lordship of Christ’ theology for the present ‘church age.’ That system cannot see the events of the day of Pentecost as being the true fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy and the Davidic Covenant. Joel’s prophecy and David’s throne simply must be pushed into the future and must be related to physical Israel. To accept Peter’s spiritualizing of the OT Scriptures is to deny the basic hermeneutical principle upon which the Dispensational system of interpreting the Scripture rests. That system must understand Peter’s words in the light of the natural (literal) meaning of Joel’s words instead of the natural (literal) spiritualizing of those words by Peter. Such an approach makes it impossible to take the words of the New Testament writers literally when those writers give a spiritual meaning to the natural words used by the prophets. When Peter says, “This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel,” a Dispensationalist cannot take Peter’s words literally unless he can see each physical word used by Joel fulfilled in a specific natural or physical event in Acts. His theology, without any help from the NT Scriptures, establishes Joel’s literal (natural) meaning, and then demands that Peter’s words have to agree with that natural interpretation. This method of interpretation simply cannot literalize Peter’s words in the same manner that Peter literally spiritualizes Joel’s words.

Covenant Theology, on the other hand, must downplay any idea that the day of Pentecost inaugurated either a distinctly new and different Covenant or any really new and distinct work of the Holy Spirit. The personal advent of the Spirit is reduced to merely a greater effusion of what was already a reality in the experience of the Old Covenant believer. Covenant Theology practically ignores the specific NT Scriptures that say otherwise.

In reality, Covenant Theology no more allows the NT Scriptures to interpret the OT Scriptures than does Dispensationalism. Both systems have a fully developed theology before they ever get to the NT Scriptures. In the one case, “God’s unconditional covenant with Israel, Abraham’s seed, enters the New Testament Scriptures unchanged.” In the other case, “God’s unconditional covenant with the children of believing parents, Abraham’s seed, enters the NT Scriptures unchanged.” In both systems the New Testament Scriptures are forced to fit into the mold that was formed entirely from a naturalizing of the Old Testament Scriptures. The basic hermeneutic is identical in both cases.

Here are a few things that must be faced if we are to be honest with the clear facts revealed in the NT Scriptures:

A. The Holy Spirit could not come until Christ had completed his redemptive work and ascended to his newly earned throne. When the Holy Spirit did come, it was as a direct consequence of Christ having ascended to the right hand of God to sit on David’s throne after being crowned with glory and power as a reward for his finished work of redemption. The apostle John is emphatic:

But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified (John 7:39).^[2]

This Scripture specifically uses the future tense “should receive,” and just as specifically tells us why “the Holy Spirit was not yet given” before that time, namely, “because Jesus was not yet glorified.” When the Holy Spirit is so clear and specific in his language, what reasons do theologians have for saying, “The Holy Spirit has always been here doing the same work as he now does?” There simply must be a New Covenant ‘coming of the Spirit’ to do a new and distinct work from that which he did in the Old Covenant, and that work must be in direct response to the ascension of Christ to the Father’s right hand. If this is not so, then the above verses have no real meaning.

I grant that I may not understand what the totally new work is that the Holy Spirit has come to do in this dispensation, but I do know that these verses demand some kind of a totally new work. These words cannot be glossed over by saying, “We know that since God’s people are always under the same covenant of grace, the verse cannot mean that there is something which is essentially and totally new and different in the Spirit’s ministry to believers today.” That is forcing Scripture to fit into a system instead of allowing the Scripture to produce a system.

Likewise, we must see that our receiving the Holy Spirit is a manifestation and proof that the days of Christ’s ‘glory’ have already begun. Look again at the words in John 7:39 and notice the specific and essential relationship between the ‘glory of Christ’ and the ‘giving of the Spirit.’ The latter is the proof that the former has already happened. Look at another text of God’s Word.

Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you (John 16:7).

If the Holy Spirit was already here, then Christ’s words have no meaning. These words in John 16:7 demand a new ministry of the Spirit, and the beginning of that new ministry is contingent upon the victorious ascension of Christ to David’s throne. This is exactly how the early believers understood these words of Christ. One does not wait for something that one already possesses. The Apostles were not waiting to receive the fulfillment of a promise for more of something they already had. They were waiting for the promise of the Spirit himself.

And being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me (Acts 1:4).

The personal advent of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost began a totally new era in which he has a distinctly new ministry. One cannot take these verses seriously and believe that a New Covenant believer enjoys nothing but more of the same thing experienced by an Old Covenant believer any more than one can make these words offer a future hope of a postponed kingdom to national Israel. Covenant Theology simply cannot allow a new and distinct dispensation governed by a new and distinctly different covenant to come into being as the result of the personal advent of Christ and the personal advent of the Holy Spirit. There cannot be any essential difference between Israel and the church or between the older and the newer administrations of the same covenant of grace. Covenant Theology cannot see the Body of Christ as a totally new thing that could not possibly come into being before the baptizing work of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

The Dispensationalist, on the other hand, cannot see that the kingdom of ‘glory’ anticipated by the OT prophets has already been inaugurated because the King himself has already been ‘glorified’ and is right now sitting on David’s throne with “all power and authority.” The Dispensational system will not allow the church to be the true Israel of God in any sense. It is forced to make the church an interlude between the time the kingdom was postponed (when Christ supposedly announced an earthly kingdom and the Jews rejected it) and the future time when God again deals with Israel as a nation and establishes the earthly kingdom (millennium) that was postponed.

Dispensationalism cannot see that we now live in the very days “promised to the fathers and the prophets.” The kingdom, the King, David’s throne, the days of glory, the display of power, etc., must all be pushed into the future. The Amil on the other hand assumes, with no textual warrant, that we have seen and experienced the full extent of everything that was promised. He must insist that we have seen all of the earthly display of Christ’s power and glory that will ever be seen on the present earth. Everything else awaits the “new heavens and the new earth.”

When I hear Amils lauding the “present gospel millennium,” or as some refer to it, the “realized millennium,” as the total package for this dispensation, I feel like singing Peggy Lee’s song, Is This All There Is?^[3] The kingdom inaugurated and established is not the kingdom consummated in total victory.

B. The Feast of Pentecost was fifty days after the Feast of First Fruits. The specific day was already established. We do not call the day upon which the Holy Spirit came “the day of Pentecost” because he came on that day. The Holy Spirit came that particular day because it was the day of Pentecost. Acts 2:1 says, “When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place” (NIV). The coming of the Spirit on that particular day was the direct fulfillment of the Levitical feasts, just as the death of Christ was on the day of Atonement. The events that happened on the day of Pentecost were the final and full proofs that Christ was the true Passover Lamb. The long awaited promise of the “pouring out of the Spirit” (Joel 2:28, 29) had come. The promise of Jesus to the disciples that the Holy Spirit would be “in them” was being realized. This is the new ministry of the Holy Spirit that had to await the crowning of the victorious ascended Lord and King. It was a work that was clearly foretold in the prophets but not experienced until the exaltation, or glorification, of Christ.

The giving of the Spirit was the heart of the promise of the gospel in the OT Scriptures, and it is the crowning experience of the gospel under the New Covenant. This is why the Apostles not only emphasized the ascension of Christ to the Father’s right hand in their preaching, but they also emphasized it as the fulfillment of the promises made in all of the prophets. Joel’s prophecy and the covenant made with David are both clear examples.

Peter’s whole sermon hinged on the personal advent of the Holy Spirit being the following things: (1) The fulfillment of the prophecy in Joel, (2) the fulfillment of the covenant made with David, and (3) the fulfillment of the OT concept of the kingdom promised in all of the prophets.

Spurgeon has a great sermon, taken from the words “and I will put my Spirit within you” in Ezekiel 36:27 entitled “The Covenant Promise of the Spirit.” He emphasizes the newness of the Spirit’s ministry in this age:

Clearly this is a word of grace, for the law saith nothing of this kind. Turn to the law of Moses, and see if there be any word spoken therein concerning the putting of the Spirit within men to cause them to walk in God’s statutes. (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Vol. 37, p. 217).

When we put together several verses of Scripture, they show us exactly what this new ministry of the Spirit is, and why it could not begin until the ascension of Christ and the establishing of the New Covenant:

Therefore being at the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he [Jesus] hath shed forth this, which you now see and hear (Acts 2:33).

…but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence (Acts 1:4b, 5).

The baptism of the Spirit is the New Covenant experience of Christ in you and you in Christ, and this experience is only possible because Pentecost has taken place. And remember, Pentecost could not take place before the ascension of Christ to glory. The experiential reality of being personally united to Christ in his “death, burial, resurrection, and ascension” could not possibly precede Christ’s own ascension to His newly earned throne. The giving of the Spirit is the result and absolute proof of his ascension and Lordship.

Old Covenant believers could never have had a realization of “[being seated] together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:6 NIV). The book of Ephesians had not yet been written simply because the historical events described in Hebrews 9:11–28 upon which the Ephesian experience is based had not yet occurred. Covenant Theology would have us believe that an Israelite could sit in his tent and read John Murray’s great book Redemption Accomplished and Applied, even though the actual redemption had not yet been accomplished at Calvary.^[4]

3. It is the baptizing work of the Holy Spirit that created the Body of Christ or ‘New Man’ of Ephesians. Pentecost united, on an equal footing, believing Jews and believing Gentiles by creating the totally new entity (the Body of Christ) described by Paul:

[His purpose was to create] in himself of twain one new man, so making peace, And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross,…for through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father (Eph. 2:15b, 16, 18).

Covenant Theology cannot make this text refer to the church as a new and distinct entity that never previously existed. Its view of Pentecost only allows for a greater effusion of what is already the experience of Old Covenant believers. However, it is obvious that neither the Jew nor the Gentile could have had the ‘access’ spoken of in this text as long as the veil, the covenant, and the old priesthood were in effect. John Owen has a great sermon on Ephesians 2:18 entitled “The Beauty of Gospel Worship” in which he sets forth this very truth. He contrasts worship under the Old Covenant with gospel worship under the New Covenant. Owen first shows how worship under the gospel age gives us access unto God himself, and then says the following:

We have in this spiritual worship of the gospel access unto God as a Father. I showed, in the opening of the words, that God is distinctly proposed here as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in him our God and Father. Hence are we said to come “to the throne of grace,” Hebrews 4:16; that is, unto God as he is gloriously exalted in the dispensation of grace, in kindness, love, mercy,-in a word, as a Father. God on the throne of grace, and God as a Father, is all one consideration; for, as a Father, he is all love, grace, and mercy to his children in Christ. When God came of old to institute his worship in giving of the law, he did it with the dreadful and terrible representation of his majesty, that the people chose not to come near, but went and “stood afar off, and said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die,” Exodus 20:18, 19. And by this dreadful representation of the majesty of God, as the object of that worship, were they kept in fear and bondage all their days. BUT NOW are the saints encouraged to make their approach unto God AS A FATHER; the glory whereof the apostle excellently expresseth, Rom. viii. 14, 15. That fear and bondage wherein men were kept under the law is now removed, and in the place thereof a spirit of children, with reverent boldness going to their father, is given unto us. This, I say, adds to the glory, beauty, and excellency of gospel worship. There is not the meanest believer but, with his most broken prayers and supplications, hath an immediate access unto God, and that as a Father; nor the most despised church of saints on the earth but it comes with its worship into the glorious presence of God himself.^[5]

Owen is correct in stressing that this new access to God as Father is a new and distinct reality under the New Covenant that was not possible under the Old Covenant.^[6] It is the baptism by the Spirit of every believer into the Body of Christ that gives New Covenant believers, for the first time, the status of ‘adopted sons’ (Rom. 8:14; Gal. 4:4–7) and destroys forever all of the distinctions and categories established and enforced by the Old Covenant (Gal. 3:26–29). It is the new status of sonship that gives the new boldness to approach the throne and know that he who sits there is our elder Brother. An Old Covenant believer could never even imagine such a thing. It is impossible to have the ‘in Christ’ experience where every believer, Jew or Gentile, is united to Christ in his death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and to each other, as equal brothers and sisters, and at the same time, be ‘under the law’ with the distinctions of Jew/Gentile, male/female and bond/free that the Old Covenant mandated.

The Old Covenant proved one’s guilt and forbade one to draw near without a perfect righteousness or an acceptable sacrifice. The New Covenant declares a believer to be both righteous and acceptable in God’s sight, and it bids him come boldly without fear into the very Most Holy place that was totally closed off to all but Aaron under the Old Covenant.

The law as a legal covenant ended when the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom (Matt. 27:50, 51),^[7] and the law as a pedagogue over the conscience was dismissed on the day of Pentecost when the ‘promise of the Father’ took up his abode in every believer as the personal Vicar of the ascended Lord. The giving of the Spirit is the proof of the accepted work of Christ in the heavenly tabernacle, and the ‘given Spirit’ indwelling the believer is the indelible assurance of our eternal acceptance by the Father. This is the truth that Peter was delivering in his message in Acts (Gal. 3:24–29):

Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear (Acts 2:33).

Acts 2: 37–41—The Effect of the Sermon. The unbelieving Jews were convicted of their sin and cried out in fear, “What shall we do?” Peter repeated the gospel message and again reinforced it with the prophecy of Joel. Peter exhorted them to repent and be baptized and assured them that they would be saved and would receive the Holy Spirit just as Joel had prophesied:

…the promise [of salvation and the giving of the Holy Spirit promised to whosoever believes as prophesied by Joel] is unto [1] you, and [2] to your children, and [3] to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call (Acts 2:39).

Again it will be helpful to put Joel’s words and Peter’s interpretation and application side by side. Notice that the “whosoever” in Joel becomes “you, your children, and all that are afar off” in Peter’s interpretation.

Joel 2:32	Acts 2:38–40
And it shall come to pass,	…the promise is unto
that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD	you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, (v. 39).
shall be delivered:…	…shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (v. 38) ….words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves…(v. 40).
…and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.	…even as many as the Lord our God shall call (v. 39).

It is not in the scope of this book to probe into the subject of infant baptism. However, I must mention that it amazes me that Paedobaptists would use Acts 2:39 as a proof text for baptizing babies; and they not only do use it, but it is one of their key texts for proving infant baptism. (For a short discussion of this text as it applies to infant baptism, see Appendix 4).

Let us continue our discussion of Christ the unique Seed.

5. The unique Seed pictured—Christ is the subject of all Scripture. Every type and shadow in the OT Scriptures teaches us something about our Savior. Every single passage of Scripture leads to Christ in some way.

And he said unto them… that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding that they might understand the scriptures, (Luke 24:44, 45).

The OT Scriptures are not just a book of laws nor do they merely contain the history of the nation of Israel. They are all pictures of Christ the promised Messiah (Hebrews 10:5–9).

6. The unique Seed presented—Christ is the “Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). He is the fulfillment of the gospel promise that God gave to Abraham, David, and all of the fathers and prophets. Luke’s words cannot mean anything else.

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; The oath which he sware to our father Abraham, That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life. And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us, To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace (Luke 1:68–79).

The Seed is here presented and his kingdom of grace is proclaimed. It would be difficult indeed to get the Dispensational view of a ‘postponed earthly kingdom’ into Luke’s words. This passage of Scripture shows that the pious Jew living prior to Christ’s coming was looking forward to a spiritual kingdom. The kingdom described in these verses is the very kingdom that Christ both offered and established. It is the same kingdom that was the subject and hope of all of the Old Testament prophets. It is the “kingdom of his dear Son” into which we have already been translated (Col. 1:13) and of which we are willing subjects that “serve him without fear” (Luke 1:74).

7. The unique Seed positioned—He is Lord and King. Compare Acts 2:29, 30 and Rev. l:5. We have already discussed the ascension of Christ under “The Seed Pledged.”

8. The unique Seed proclaimed—He is both the sum and substance of the gospel of sovereign grace (Acts 2:36; 3:24–26; 7:2–53; 13:32–41). Again, we have covered this briefly under “The Seed Pledged.” The preaching of the gospel is nothing less than telling the story that (1) the promised Seed of Abraham has finally come; (2) God has fulfilled, in Christ, all of the promises made to Abraham and his Seed; and (3) now those same promises are being fulfilled in all those that are united to that true Seed, Christ, by a living faith.

Let us look again at the outline of “Christ the Unique Seed.” I repeat, Christ himself is the key, and keystone, of all Scripture, and seeing his one plan and purpose of saving his one elect people is the only way to establish and maintain genuine unity in the whole of the Bible. Christ, the Seed, or Messiah, was:

Purposed

He is God’s eternal Lamb (Rev. 13:8)

Predicted

He is the Seed of woman (Gen. 3:15)

Promised

He is the Seed of Abraham (Gen. 12:3)

Pledged

He is the Son of David (2 Sam. 7:12)

Pictured

He is the subject of all Scripture (Luke 24:44, 45)

Presented

He is the fulfillment of the promise (Luke 1:68–79)

Positioned

He is the exalted Lord and King (Acts 2:29–30)

Proclaimed

He himself is the gospel (Acts 2:36)

We now come to Abraham’s special natural seed, the nation of Israel, and its relationship to the church today and in the future. This is the heart of the issue.

---