[...] Then there is what Paul calls “the mystery of the faith,” which, while it includes all the above, includes also the pattern of resurrection of death, of deliverance out of affliction and weakness. We see it in Joseph, David, Daniel, all the prophets, and ultimately and perfectly in Christ as the suffering Servant of servants. I call it the Jacob’s trouble principle, whereby Christ is always revealed at the end of strength (see Deut 32:36; Dan 12:7). This is how it is that “the just shall live by faith” This is particularly the issue in tracing the character and necessity of Israel’s king as coming first in the form of the suffering Servant. This is the pattern seen so clearly in both Joseph and David, and in Zechariah’s prophecy that sees the Messiah as a priest upon His throne (Zech 6L13). It is the tremendous mystery of the incarnation of the seed of the woman in the poor and afflicted. This should be to some real measure evident in every believer, since it is the mystery of “Christ in you” (Col 1:27), just as it was no less the mystery of “the Spirit of Christ which was in them” (1Pet 1:11). [...]

[...] So what does the cross say? Certainly it declares the unfathomable extent of God’s incomprehensible love for sinners, but let’s consider what is less considered. The cross also says that anything and everything of man is insufficient, yea, utterly rejected. It removes all hope of human righteousness and guards paradise by a drawn sword. It is the ultimate renouncement of all that is ‘in’ man or ‘of’ man. The cross is not only the statement of who God is, but of what man is. This is particularly shown in Paul, since Jesus was not crucified by scoundrels, but by the most earnest and devout in Israel, who performed history’s greatest evil in total, albeit zealous and well meaning, ignorance (compare Lk 23:34; Acts 3:17; 26:9; Ro 10:2; 1Cor 2:8; 1Tim 1:13).

Election says much of the same thing. It too denies all natural claim on divine justice through works, to the end that no flesh might glory. It too puts to death any presumption of divine obligation. It too removes the ground of carnal confidence and shuts all persons up to he necessity of undeserved mercy through a faith that is itself a divine gift (Jn 6:29; Eph 2:8; Phil 1:29). This is not mere belief, since the devils believe and tremble. The “faith of God’s elect” is not something that is self generated. It is quickened from above; it is a sign of spiritual resurrection in one that was dead. It comes to those who have despaired of their own ability. The truth of divine election (i.e., the right of God to choose as He will choose without respect of persons) weakens the flesh of its deep presumption of any natural claim on God and this prepares the way for mercy. [...]

[...] Athens believes that reason alone is sufficient to arrive at a conviction of the existence of God as the “unmoved mover,” or cause of all things. And indeed reason is sufficient for this much. But it can proceed no further. This is the limitation that Paul is alluding to Ro 1:18-21 where he shows that there is sufficient evidence in creation to leave humanity without excuse concerning the existence, and also something of God’s divine nature. But this is only enough evidence to make man accountable to his conscience; it is not sufficient to save him. This must come down from above by grace and mercy in the form of divine revelation, as revealed secret (apocalyptic). Paul calls the gospel itself a revealed mystery (Ro 16:25; Eph 6:19). Only such ‘special’ revelation can recreate the heart in saving regeneration (the indispensable ‘without which not’ of all spiritual life). This is the classic distinction between so-called ‘general’ or ‘natural’ revelation and ‘special’ revelation that can only be mediated by the Holy Spirit (the creative ‘breath’ of God). [...]

… the same could be considered of a heavenly number chosen to fill the vacated places of rule once occupied by the angels that left their first estate. If these rebel powers became the usurping principalities of this present age’s darkness, then it is not unreasonable to consider that after they have been stripped down from the places of their usurping rule, these heavenly places might be once more occupied by the “spirits of just men made perfect” in the age to come? I believe that is the thought behind the theory. …

…The choice then, as you rightly suggest, is between fullness in the sense of time, or fullness in the sense of maturity. Either would make sense, as both are true. But I agree with you that it seems more likely that Paul is referring to the same event that Jesus has in mind in Lk 21:24 where the language is remarkably similar. Paul believed with Jesus that the age ends with the day of the Lord, which accomplishes at once the end of Gentile dominion and the restoration of captive Israel (the grafting in again of the ‘natural branches’). Moreover, seeing the term ‘fulness of the Gentiles’ as a time that ends with the coming of the Deliverer out of Zion at the day of the Lord makes better sense of Paul’s much disputed phrase, “And so (‘at this time’, or ‘in this way’?) ‘ALL’ shall be saved” (Ro 11:26).

The idea of the course was to recover the context of the apocalyptic gospel of the first century as a call to flee to Christ from the wrath to come, and thus make personal appropriation of the messianic salvation in expectation of the imminence of Jersualem’s destruction, which represented the imminent tribulation to first century Jewish expectation. Well, we are there again. We have come full circle. We stand and witness once more under the shadow of an imminent world disaster over Jerusalem. Thus the same issues that confronted first century Israel are back in the forefront.