THE CENTER-POINT AND THE TWO AGES

PMW 2025-071 by Oscar Cullmann

Gentry note: As I research my book on the Two-Age view of redemptive history, I have found an older work by Oscar Cullmann quite insightful and valuable. It was originally published in 1950, then as a third edition in 1962. The post below is from pages 81–84 of his book, Christ and Time.

Cullmann (pp. 81–84)We have seen that the Biblical time line divides into three sections: time before the Creation; time from the Creation to the Parousia; time after the Parousia. Even in Judaism we find interwoven with this threefold division, which is never discarded, the twofold division into this age and the coming one — a division that goes back to Parsiism. In this Jewish two-fold division everything is viewed from the point of view of the future. The decisive mid-point of the two-part time line here as the future coming of the Messiah, the coming appears of the Messianic time of salvation, with all its miracles. At that point we find in Judaism the great dividing point that separates the entire course of events into the two halves. This accordingly means that for Judaism the mid-point of the line which signifies salvation lies in the future.The chronologically new thing which Christ brought for the faith of Primitive Christianity consists in the fact that for the believing Christian the mid-point, since Easter, no longer lies in the future. This recognition is of immense importance, and all further considerations concerning the lapse of time lose their fundamental significance for the Primitive Church in view of the completely revolutionary assertion, which is shared by the entire Primitive Christian Church, that the mid-point of the process has already been reached. Olivet Discourse Made Easy (by Ken Gentry)Verse-by-verse analysis of Christ’s teaching on Jerusalem’s destruction in Matt 24. Shows the great tribulation is past, having occurred in AD 70, and is distinct from the Second Advent at the end of history. Provides exegetical reasons for a transition from AD 70 to the Second Advent at Matthew 24:36.See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.comWe must constantly keep in view this difference between Judaism and Primitive Christianity, because it is decisive for our understanding of the Christian division of time. The mid-point of time is no longer the future coming of the Messiah, but rather the historical life and work ofJesus Christ, already concluded in the past. We now see that the new feature in the Christian conception of time, as compared with Jewish conception, is to be sought in the division of time. The conception of time as such is not different, for in both cases we have to do with the linear concept of time, in which the divine redemptive history takes place upon a progressing line. Common to both is also the threefold division mentioned at the opening of the chapter. Furthermore, in both cases that threefold division is cut across by a twofold division into this and the coming age.The radical, momentous contrast has to do with this twofold division. It alone is decisive, because the first section of the threefold division, that one before Creation, actually never is the object of Biblical revelation and thought, and appears only marginally in the New Testament. In Judaism, there is only the one mid-point, which lies in the future and coincides with the dividing point between the present and the coming age. This division is not abandoned in the thought of primitive Christianity; it is rather intersected by a new one. For here the mid-point between the present and the coming age comes to lie on a definite point which lies at a more or less short distance (depending on the individual author) before the old dividing point. And yet this old dividing point is still valid. [1] Hence the entire attitude of the Primitive Christian writings toward the problem that concerns us in this book is radically different from that of Judaism. The entire New Testament, including the Synoptic Gospels, holds the view that the past, mid-point of time no longer lies in the future but in the past, or in the present for Jesus and the apostles. This is true not only in the sense that all New Testament writings were written after Easter this also, to be sure, should be noticed, for even the Synoptic Gospels were written in the light of the Easter event, which had already occurred; it also holds true, as we have already seen, for Jesus himself. For him too, his coming signifies that the mid-point of the process has already been reached in his lifetime. Therefore he sees Satan already fallen from heaven, he already expels demons “by the finger of God,” he heals the sick, he checks the power of death, he forgives sins and explains that the Kingdom of God has already come, although he holds fast on the other hand to the future character of this Kingdom.It is for this reason that the proof which W. G. Kümmel has provided in his above-mentioned work, Promise and Fulfilment (Eng. trs, 1957), is so very important; he shows how even for Jesus the preaching that the Kingdom of God is present stands with all emphasis alongside the preaching that the Kingdom of God is still to come.How both things are possible at the same time, and whence the indicated tension comes, I believe must be explained by the fact that precisely in Christ time is divided anew, inasmuch as it has received a new center: and hence a new twofold division is imposed upon the old, but still valid division. This signifies, as we have seen, that the center no longer coincides, as it does in Judaism with the beginning of the last section which lies in the future; it falls rather in the middle of the section that lies between the Creation and the Parousia, while according to the still valid old division the final section only begins at a later time.[image error]For more information and to order click here." data-image-caption="" data-medium-file="https://postmillennialworldview.com/w..." data-large-file="https://postmillennialworldview.com/w..." class="wp-image-211" style="aspect-ratio: 0.6733308030566387;width: 102px;height: auto" src="https://postmillennialworldview.com/w..." alt="" />Perilous Times: A Study in Eschatological Evil (by Ken Gentry)Technical studies on Daniel’s Seventy Weeks, the great tribulation, Paul’s Man of Sin, and John’s Revelation.See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.comThe expectation thus continues to exist just as in Judaism. What the Jews expected of the future is still expected of the future; but the future event is no longer the center of the redemptive history; rather, that center lies now in a historical event. The center has been reached but the end is still to come. I may illustrate this idea by an example: The decisive battle in a war may already have occurred in a relatively early stage of the war, and yet the war still continues. Although the decisive effect of that battle is perhaps not recognized by all, it nevertheless already means victory. But the war must still be carried on for an undefined time, until “Victory Day.” Precisely this is the situation of which the New Testament is conscious, as a result of the recognition of the new division of time; the revelation consists precisely in the fact of the proclamation that that event on the cross, together with the resurrection which followed, was the already concluded decisive battle. In this faith-given knowledge, which likewise has as a result a harvesting of the fruits of that battle, consists that participation of faith in God’s Lordship over time of which we spoke in the preceding chapter.