Salvation by Grace During the Kingdom Offer
Question: People were getting saved under grace in Acts 13:38 and 39. And same in Acts 16:31. People were getting saved under grace outside of the law of Moses in Acts 13:38 and 39 and Acts 16:31 before Acts 28:31. So the question then is what if the kingdom would have come?
The texts you cite do present salvation by grace apart from the law during the Acts period.
In Acts 13:38–39, Paul proclaims:
“Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins. By him, all that believe are justified from all things, from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.”
Here “all that believe” are said to be justified from what the law could not justify. That is genuinely grace apart from the Mosaic system.
In Acts 16:31, the Philippian jailer is told:
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.”
Nothing of law-keeping is added. These are real instances of people being saved under a Pauline, grace-based message before Acts 28:31, where we are told that Paul was:
“Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus with all confidence, no man forbidding him.”
So, during Acts there is both (1) a message of grace to individuals, and (2) a continuing proclamation of the kingdom to Israel. The question you raise is: if the kingdom offer had been accepted and the kingdom had come, what then?
The Reality of a Genuine Kingdom Offer
If the kingdom was genuinely being preached, the offer had to be real, not merely rhetorical. A central condition is given in Matthew 23:39, where Jesus says to Israel:
Future Subscription: In the future a subscription may be required to read the full answer. But for now it is free!
“Ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”
The “ye” is corporate—Israel as a nation. The coming of the kingdom is contingent on a national acknowledgment of Jesus as the One who comes in the name of the Lord.
During Acts, then, two things run in parallel:
1. A bona fide kingdom offer to Israel as a nation. 2. A bona fide grace offer to individuals—Jew and Gentile—through Paul’s gospel.
Theoretically, Israel could have met the kingdom condition during that overlap period.
What If Israel Had Accepted the Kingdom Then?
Because we are dealing with a contingency that did not occur, we cannot verify the scenario in history, but we can reason from the structure of Scripture.
Today, we typically say that the rapture must precede the renewed direct dealing with Israel in the tribulation and the kingdom, because in this present dispensation there is “neither Jew nor Greek” in terms of standing before God. If God is to deal again with Israel as a nation under covenant, the body of Christ must be removed.
However, in the Acts period, the situation was different. The kingdom offer was still active, and Paul was simultaneously preaching grace. In that setting, it is at least conceptually possible that:
- Israel might have met the condition of Matthew 23:39 during Acts. - The Lord, having bound Himself by that word (“Ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say”), would have responded by coming in kingdom glory. - The rapture, as a prophetic event tied to the postponement of the kingdom and the continuation of the present dispensation, would in that case have been a contingency that did not need to occur.
In such a scenario, believers like the Philippian jailer—saved by grace apart from the law—would not thereby become members of Israel. They would stand as saved individuals from the nations, related to the King and His people but not identical with the covenant nation. Scripture does not spell out their exact role in that hypothetical arrangement, but nothing requires that their salvation would be annulled.
The Rapture as Contingent in the Acts Context
If, as argued, all prophecy operates with contingencies tied to human response, then in the Acts context the rapture itself could be viewed as contingent: it would occur if the kingdom offer was finally rejected and God shifted fully into the present, Israel-independent administration of grace.
Had Israel accepted the kingdom during that overlap, the Lord, bound by His word, could have come in response to “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord” without first removing the body of Christ via the rapture.
From our present vantage point, after Israel’s continued unbelief, the rapture has become a necessary step before the future tribulation and kingdom, because now God is not dealing with Israel as a nation at all. There is presently no kingdom offer on the table. When He resumes dealings with Israel, the church must first be removed.
Could Such a Scenario Occur Now?
Today Israel does not possess the unified, covenantal, priestly structure in which a national, Sanhedrin-acknowledged “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord” is realistically in view. More importantly, God is not now extending a kingdom offer. The present administration is one in which He deals with Jew and Gentile alike on the same terms of grace, with no active, national kingdom proposal.
Because of that, the earlier kind of overlap between kingdom offer and grace proclamation no longer exists. At this stage, the rapture is not a mere option among prophetic contingencies; it is bound up with the transition from the present administration to the resumption of Israel’s prophetic program.
Summary of the “What If”
In the Acts period, your question is well formed. There was:
- A genuine kingdom offer to Israel. - Genuine salvation by grace to individuals, apart from the law.
If Israel had, at that time, met the conditions of Matthew 23:39, it is exegetically reasonable to say the Lord could have come in kingdom power without a prior rapture, and the saved by grace (such as the Philippian jailer) would have had their place under His rule as saved members of the nations.
Because that did not occur, the kingdom was postponed, the Acts overlap came to an end, and in our current setting there is no preaching of the kingdom as a present offer. We may teach about the kingdom, but we cannot announce it as available. In this context, the rapture stands as the necessary next step in God’s prophetic dealings before the kingdom is finally established.
questiontransition