Timtofly
Well-Known Member
You keep forgetting that they were OT bred and raised in the first century. The two ages were death and Abraham's bosom. The Age to come was life and Paradise. The Cross was the point of the age to come.Christ and the New Testament writers only recognize two overriding ages in their teaching – “this world/age” and “the world/age to come.” One is current, corrupt and temporal and the other is impending, perfect and eternal. One refers to mortal life on earth in the here-and-now, and the other refers to our eternal state. These terms are commonly used in the New Testament when contrasting the toil and trouble of our day with the glory and rest of the hereafter. These two common phrases are found in different places in the New Testament, along with several other similar expressions, referring to time and eternity. Basically, there is now and there is then – there is no in-between. The pivotal event that divides these two diverse ages is the glorious climactic return of Jesus Christ.
While they were looking for an immediate Second Coming, we have the knowledge that it has not happened yet, 1992 years later. You are pointing out an OT mindset. Even Paul claimed ages to come: Ephesians 2:6-7
"And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus."
Sitting in heavenly places was not a future reality to Paul. That was the then and now. Sitting in heavenly places was not the ages to come. The ages to come were separate from that point. The ages to come was other greatness that would be experienced.
Sitting in heavenly places is the here and now, not some future expectation. You only see the symbolism. Paul was talking about a literal point, already in place. "Ages" is not a singular future age. It is plural future ages.
Creation has several ages. You can't limit God by your belief system. You are not even agreeing with the apostle Paul.