BY ED KEAZIRIAN
In reading the scriptures one is struck by the intensity and sense of urgency in the prophetic and apostolic messages. One reason for this is that the authors were often writing to address a crisis of one sort or another among the people of God. The prophets delivered God’s word to Israel whenever the nation was threatened, whether from the outside by the hostility of another nation or from the inside by disobedience, apostasy, or conflict among the people. Similarly, the apostles wrote to churches or individuals in the midst of conflict, threats of persecution, false teaching, or apostasy. So the stakes were always high.
In addition to that, authors were also conscious and concerned that time was short. Threats were imminent and serious, requiring an immediate and decisive response by the community. That was and is the nature of speaking for God in the “in-between” times—the time between the beginning and ending of a crisis.
Among the many voices in the trajectory from the prophets in Israel to the apostles in the early church, two stand out for their awareness of the times and their commitment to speak for God amid the turmoil of the “in-between” times. This article will discuss the two-age framework that represents the biblical conception of time, the major events that define an “in-between” time, and the parallels between Jeremiah and Paul as they both spoke for God in the “in-between” times. Finally, the article will conclude with principles that may be drawn from Jeremiah and Paul and applied to our lives, as we too are called and commissioned to speak for God in the “in-between” times.
This Age and the Age to Come
In the Jewish thought-world of the first century, all of time was viewed as comprising two ages: this age and the age to come. This two-age framework is mentioned routinely throughout the Bible, although not always in those terms. This conception of time appears in the Old Testament representing the thought-world of the Ancient Near East in general and of Israel in particular.
The Old Testament Perspective
Within that perspective this age meant this present world—the created universe (the heavens, the earth, and the seas and all they contain). It referred to the material world of time and space as they knew it, but it also embraced all the human systems of organization that belonged to this age: governments, nations, economic systems, as well as the injustice, exploitation, oppression, and conflicts that arose to characterize this age. The Psalms abound with laments, pleading with God for justice, peace, and deliverance from the suffering and conflict that threaten to overwhelm and destroy the people of God. In contrast to Israel’s understanding of this age, the age to come represented that time when God would decisively intervene to overthrow the present world order and establish an eternal kingdom characterized by righteousness, justice, and peace. In Israel’s religious and political history David was the typological Messianic king whose coming would mark the end of this age and inaugurate the age to come.
Who Speaks for God
The ones who spoke for God throughout Israel’s history were the prophets. As the derivation of the word itself suggests, a prophet is one who “speaks before.” This idea of speaking before has two nuances, both of which help to elucidate the prophet’s role. Speaking before might imply a locational idea, as in standing before God or standing before the people to speak. This visualization of the prophet, standing as it were, in front of the Lord, representing God to the people and delivering words from God to the people, portrays the primary role of the prophet. The prophet was selected and appointed by God to bring messages from God to the people of God.
The second nuance of speaking before implies a temporal idea. The prophets often spoke of events before—sometimes long before—they ever took place. This was—and perhaps still is—the more popular notion of a prophet, as one who foretells the future. Then as now, anyone who can lift the curtain on the future and accurately predict what will happen will inevitably occupy a position of power and influence within the community. This was especially true of prophets in Israel’s history putting them in the precarious political position of advising kings.
On the one hand, the prophet was bound to speak truthfully God’s word to the people. Typically, the word of God was a message of encouragement and comfort, reminding the people both of the faithfulness of their God and of their obligation to worship and serve their God exclusively. In bleak or threatening times, then, the prophet turned the minds and hearts of the people back to God for sustenance and hope in the midst of national crisis. This was the message that the kings wanted to hear, especially when faced with the prospects of war. Before going to war every king wanted the assurance of God’s favor and the promise of victory over the enemy.
On the other hand, however, perhaps more often than not, the prophet’s message was a word of rebuke and warning to the king and people alike for their failure to honor and worship their God. Instead of serving God exclusively as required by their covenant, Israel repeatedly rejected the one true God in favor of foreign gods that were really not gods at all. In response to Israel’s persistent apostacy—often depicted in prophetic metaphor as repeated infidelities of an adulterous wife, the prophet assumed the role of prosecuting attorney in God’s lawsuit against the nation. The prophet presented the indictment, listing incontrovertible evidence of repeated covenant violations, projected a guilty verdict, and then announced the impending judgment of God against the nation—typically in terms of military defeat, banishment from their homes, destruction of their land, and even the ultimate punishment of death.
This was definitely not the message that kings wanted to hear from their prophets. Therefore, except for the rare instance when a king heeded the prophet’s warning, led the people in repentance, and thus avoided the dire consequences of God’s judgment, prophets were viewed and treated accordingly as religious and political enemies of the king. Consequently, prophets typically suffered hardship and abuse of all kinds for their loyalty to God and faithful proclamation of God’s word. Their circumstances were only aggravated by the plethora of false prophets—flatterers of the king—who opted for the political expediency of telling the king precisely what he wanted to hear whether it was the truth or not.
Amid the difficult, often life-threatening, circumstances endured by the prophets, their comfort and hope lay in the realization that the authority and protection of God were bestowed upon them at their calling and commissioning by God. As the gravity and solemnity of this calling to speak for God dawned upon them, a sense of fear and inadequacy likewise arose within them. This common reaction, seen in Moses, Gideon, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and others, at their prophetic call reflects God’s tendency to choose—humanly speaking—the least likely candidates to speak for God. The humility of the prophet speaking for God stood in dramatic contrast to the arrogance of the king intent upon defying God, thus making the sovereign power of God and the exclusive claims of God so much the more compelling.
The New Testament Perspective
Just as the Hebrew scriptures present a two-age conception of time reflecting the Jewish thought-world in which those scriptures were written, so too the Greek scriptures preserve, and even refine, the idea that all of time consists in this age and the age to come. In describing the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, the New Testament identifies him as the promised Messianic king whose coming would signal the end of this age, the establishment of God’s eternal kingdom, and the inauguration of the age to come. Indeed the Greek title Christ and the Hebrew title Messiah mean essentially the same thing, both denoting “the anointed one” in their respective languages. However, these references to the Messiah, the turning of the ages, and the kingdom of God are not the formulation of the New Testament authors, but rather come from Jesus himself.
Throughout his ministry Jesus preached and taught in the prophetic tradition of ancient Israel. His scriptures were Israel’s scriptures, he quoted extensively from the Law and the Prophets, and he recognized the divine authority that stood behind them. After his resurrection Jesus discussed the events surrounding his death and resurrection with two disciples as the three of them walked together to Emmaus. “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27, ESV). As they listened to Jesus, those ancient prophecies came alive for them. Their “hearts burned within them” as they listened and realized that those ancient truths had been fulfilled in Jesus.
This continuity between Jesus and the ancient prophets was evident to other disciples as well, as they viewed him not only as a prophet himself speaking in Israel’s prophetic tradition, but as speaking and acting with an authority that other prophets lacked. Furthermore, they recognized that he was the fulfillment of ancient promises regarding their long-standing messianic expectations: a new prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15–18), God’s anointed king (Psalm 2), the son of David who would reign forever (2 Sam 7:12–13, 16), and the suffering servant whose death would atone for sin and make many righteous (Isa 53:4–12).
Who Speaks for God
This turning of the ages represented the culmination of God’s plan for human history and thus merited a new and definitive voice speaking for God. The author of Hebrews identifies that voice as Jesus himself. “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world” (Heb 1:1–2, ESV).
Although this prophetic tradition may have reached its quintessence in Jesus, it did not end with Jesus. Before his crucifixion and again thereafter, Jesus commissioned his disciples to speak for him. They were to carry on his prophetic ministry of healing, announcing the arrival of the kingdom of God, and warning people about the final judgment awaiting those who reject God. He gave them his authority such that those who welcomed them welcomed him and those who rejected them rejected him. Jesus also endowed them with his Spirit—the Spirit of truth—to teach them, to remind them, and to guide them in all truth, revealing the things that Jesus had left unsaid and declaring to them the things that were yet to come. Thus the apostles were called and commissioned to speak for Christ, with the power of the Holy Spirit upon them, the presence of Christ with them, and the authority of God behind them. Like the ancient prophets these apostles of the new age were initially filled with doubt, uncertainty, apprehension and fear. It was not until the Holy Spirit filled them (Acts 2:1–4) that they began to speak with the boldness, power and persuasion that would turn the world upside down.
The In-Between Times
Some have likened the prophetic view of future events in scripture to the phenomenon that hikers encounter when looking at a series of mountains peaks extending from the near foreground toward the distant horizon. As the eyes scan from the nearer peaks to the more distant peaks, one’s depth perception decreases and so the eyes are less able to judge the distance between subsequent peaks the further away they are. While one can generally perceive the distance from one peak to the next in the foreground, the more distant peaks seem to be superimposed on each other so that it becomes impossible perceive any distance between them at all. This flattening of depth perception serves as a good illustration of how the turn of the ages is viewed from the perspective of the ancient prophets compared to that of the apostles.
Among the ancient prophets the most common expression denoting the culmination of God’s purposes for this age and the commencement of the age to come was “the day of the Lord.” It was also referred to as “that day,” or simply “the day.” Those three expressions at face value seem to imply a fairly abrupt transition from one age to the next, as though the change took place from one day to the next. However, from the perspective of the apostles, and of Jesus himself, the transition actually involved an overlapping of the ages as framed by the two comings of Christ.
The first coming featured the incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. These events signified the inauguration of a new age (the age to come) and the arrival of the kingdom of God. The death and resurrection of Christ also represented God’s judgment against sin and death. Therefore, Christ’s first coming, while not signifying the end of this age, certainly marked the beginning of the end.
As his earthly ministry drew to a close, Jesus prepared to return to the presence of the Father. Before leaving, he promised to send a Helper, the Holy Spirit. Moreover, he also promised that he himself would return to the earth. That second coming, or Parousia (“appearing”), will feature the gathering of believers, the general resurrection, the final battle, the enthronement of Jesus Christ, and the final condemnation and eternal punishment of Satan, his angels, and all those whose names are not written in the Book of Life. With the appearance of the new heaven and the new earth (Rev 21:1–4), the first age (this age) will finally come to an end as the first heaven, first earth, and the seas will all have ceased to exist.
Therefore, what appeared to the ancient prophets—from their distant perspective—as one event, the day of the Lord, is actually an overlapping of the ages with many events occurring over a long period of time. Some of what the ancient prophets foretold as future events have already taken place. For example, Joel foresees an outpouring of the Holy Spirit related to the coming day of the Lord, an event that Joel believes is imminent (Joel 2:1–2, 11, 28–32). In his sermon at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit filled and empowered the apostles, Peter quoted Joel’s prophecy and proclaimed that it had been fulfilled that day. All of that occurred in conjunction with the first coming of Christ.
At the same time, the battles and cosmic calamities that Joel also associated with the day of the Lord (Joel 2:9–15) have not yet occurred. Similarly, the vision of the Ancient of Days and the enthronement of the one like a son of man (Dan 7:9–14) have yet to occur. Both of these would seem to be associated with the second coming of Christ and the end of this age. Therefore, the whole series of events that occur during the overlapping ages, as viewed from the vantage point of the apostles, were compressed into one event by the ancient prophets who saw them from too great a distance to discern the spacing between them.
This overlap of the ages, as framed by the two comings of Christ, defines the “in-between time,” that is, the time between the beginning of the age to come and the end of this age. New Testament authors also refer to this in-between time as the last days. Therefore, from the perspective of the New Testament, the Church is a feature of the last days.
A Closer Look at Jeremiah and Paul
Although they were separated in time by nearly seven centuries, Paul had a great affinity for Jeremiah and probably looked to him as a model for his own ministry. While it is to be expected that their stories would overlap at points because of their role and identity as prophets, the similarities are too numerous and precise simply to be coincidence.
The accounts of their call and commission are strikingly similar. Both were identified and set apart to be prophets while still in the womb. Although they were Jewish, both were appointed to preach to the Gentiles (literally, “the nations”). Both experienced a theophanic encounter at their calling. Jeremiah heard the voice of God and was touched by God on his lips, while Paul saw a bright light (a vision of the resurrected Christ) and also heard a voice. Both had a verbal conversation with God during the encounter and both expressed great reluctance and apprehension in response to their calling. Jeremiah resisted the call on the basis of his youth and his inability to speak (admittedly a major liability for one whose ministry consists of speaking for God to the people). Although Paul did not resist the calling and was willing to comply, the fact that he had been struck blind by the vision of Christ caused him to question what he should do.
As an aside it is important to note that Paul did not express directly to Christ any reluctance or apprehension about his calling. However, in each of the three reports of his encounter with the risen Christ (Acts 9:1–9; 22:1–11; 26:9–18), Paul did mention his former hostility toward the church and the violence he had inflicted upon it. Several times in his ministry Paul recalls that as something that should have disqualified him for service to Christ. However, each time he mentions it, the gravity of his sin becomes an occasion to showcase the grace of God. With each downward step in his status from least of the apostles (1 Cor 15:9) to the least of the saints (Eph 3:8) to the foremost of sinners (1 Tim 1:15), Paul magnifies the grace of God all the more. Although Paul did not raise his persecution of the church in his conversation with the risen Christ, that was nevertheless an issue. The Lord took the initiative in mentioning it to Paul and in doing so essentially dismissed it as a disqualifier. That was a grievous sin, but the grace of God was sufficient to forgive it.
This is an essential vignette in understanding that no prophet is worthy in his own right to speak for God. In the presence of God’s holiness and glory every prophet is aware of his wretched unworthiness and must be forgiven himself and made worthy by the one who calls and commissions the prophet to speak for God. Every prophet’s testimony must be that of Paul. “I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy . . . and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. (1 Tim 1:12–14).
The comparison of Jeremiah and Paul presents further clues of his influence on Paul. Both were sent to the Gentiles, but both also began by preaching to the Jews. Both considered the failure to honor and worship God as the beginning of their indictment against the people of God. Both recognized that the people were fulfilling rituals without changed hearts. Paul quotes Jeremiah four times in addressing idolatry, the need for circumcised hearts rather than bodies, the need for the new covenant, and the absolute, irresistible urge to proclaim the message that God wants the prophet to deliver.
Both Jeremiah and Paul suffered much hardship and abuse because of their calling and their unwillingness to compromise the message. Both have left accounts of the suffering they endured and both remained single because of the hardships associated with their respective callings as prophet and apostle.
Finally, both were called and commissioned to speak for God in the “in-between” time, but the nature of the “in-between” time differed. Historically Jeremiah was active in calling the people of God to repentance for 20 years before the threat against them from Babylon even became evident. He began preaching about 625 BC During that 20 years Babylon was slowly working its way north and west, forming alliances with the Chaldeans and Medes, retaking the territories that had been lost to Assyria, and finally defeating Egypt. By 603 BC Babylon effectively controlled all the territory encircling Jerusalem. The threat was evident and the final destruction of Jerusalem became inevitable.
Having been ignored for those 20 years by the kings and people of Judah, in 603 BC Jeremiah turned his attention to the Gentile nations surrounding Jerusalem and Judah. He called them to repentance as well for they were all under the judgment of God, even as Judah was for all its apostacy, and God was going to use Babylon as his servant to execute his judgment upon Judah and the nations. Jerusalem was finally destroyed by Babylon and the final group of exiles taken in 586 BC.
Thus the “in-between” time for Jeremiah was measured from the time when the judgment that had been foretold actually began, that is, when the armies of Babylon actually arrived at the gates of Jerusalem and began their siege. The “in-between” time ended when Jerusalem was finally destroyed. Those are clearly evident dates from history as Jeremiah was preaching to a nation as the nation’s fate hung in the balance.
For Paul the “in-between” time related not to the fate of a nation, but to the consummation of God’s plan for the whole creation. Paul begins his letter to the Romans with the statement, “the wrath of God is being revealed . . .” (Rom 1:18), but not against just one nation. Rather, it is being revealed against all the godlessness and wickedness of humanity. This revelation took place in Christ at his first coming. God’s wrath was revealed at the cross and for Paul that marked the beginning of his “in-between” time. In the last chapter of his letter to the Romans, Paul makes this statement, “The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet” (Rom 16:20). The enemy to be destroyed here is not a foreign king or marauding empire. Rather it is the ruler of this world, the ruler of the demons, that is about to be destroyed. Here again, this is not the end of a nation, but rather the end of this age. This will occur at the final battle and is associated with the second coming of Christ. In contrast to the clear dating of Jeremiah’s “in-between” time, the end of Paul’s “in-between” time is known only to God.
Conclusion
In all of these parallels between Jeremiah and Paul we see a trajectory of the prophetic role across scripture. In the center of that trajectory is Jesus Christ, the quintessential prophet who not only speaks for God but is himself God. Several insights from this study ought to shape our understanding not only of the prophetic role in scripture, but our own place in that trajectory as well.
Just as Jesus commissioned his apostles to continue proclaiming the gospel to the nations, so too he gave that same commission to the whole church. That means that every believer stands in that trajectory from Moses through Jeremiah, Jesus, Paul, all the centuries of church history and into the 21st century. Jesus said, “As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations.”
Aside from the death of Christ there is no greater demonstration of the love, mercy, grace, and compassion of God than the prophets in the “in-between” times. The God who is not willing that any should perish, but that all come to the knowledge of the truth, sends his prophets to call sinners to repentance even in the midst of the unfolding judgment. Even in the years while Babylon was sacking the Jerusalem, God’s prophets were pleading with the people to repent. The church has been commissioned to speak for God in the ultimate “in-between” time. We do not know how much longer this time will last, so we must make the most of the time that we have.
The call and commission to speak for God is not easy, and to be faithful in it could cost you everything. But in that hardship and suffering we are assured of God’s presence, his protection, and his provision. We take comfort in that and find our satisfaction in knowing that we have been faithful and obedient to his call and commission.