[...] Before its revelation, the mystery of an anonymous suffering servant (let alone two distinct comings) would only raise such questions as those put by the Ethiopian eunuch, “Of whom does the prophet speak? Of himself or some other man?” Therefore, the church is foolish and perverse to exalt itself over Israel, imputing to the Jew a special stubbornness for not seeing what was plainer than the nose on their face. This is a self righteous presumption that understands nothing of what confronted Israel. It is the same perverse superficiality that prevails in the church’s facile comparison of itself with the stereotype of the Pharisee. When it is seen what the Pharisee actually represented in the context of that generation, a discerning believer would not exalt or glory over them, but cry out, “who is sufficient?!”, But that’s another subject, though not unrelated.
Since Pentecost, the mystery has been openly revealed and made universally available, albeit only in the sense of its outward form. It still takes a miracle of mercy and grace to truly apprehend it in terms of its glorious implications. In this sense, it remains, by its very nature, elusive to pride, even in its revealed form. It was hidden for a twofold purpose: 1). It is hidden so that when it is seen, we may know that it is mercy indeed, and nothing of ourselves that has made us to differ from Israel, or anyone for that matter. [...]
