Retstoring The Kingdom

If Israel had accepted Jesus as their Messiah and the Kingdom age (the Millennium) would have begun in 30 AD, it sounds like Jesus’ death on the cross would not have been necessary. How then would the sins of mankind have been atoned for “for without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins”?

Q. I just finished reading your first installment on the study of Ezekiel. in it you said,

“Although God had known from the beginning of time that Israel would reject the Messiah’s offer of the Kingdom, it was a bona fide offer just the same, and had they accepted it Ezekiel 36 would have been fulfilled, beginning in 30 AD. But they didn’t and the door was opened to the Gentiles, in part to make them envious.”

So, if Israel had accepted Jesus as their Messiah and the Kingdom age (the Millennium) would have begun in 30 AD, it sounds like Jesus’ death on the cross would not have been necessary. How then would the sins of mankind have been atoned for? “for without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins”

I would appreciate your take on how that would have worked.

A. It’s important to remember that God had known all along that they would reject Him. According to Scripture, Jesus would still have had to die for the sins of the people. But if they had accepted Him in that role the Resurrection would have immediately brought the Kingdom Age.

One of the questions His disciples asked Him after the resurrection was, “Are you going to restore the Kingdom now?” (Acts 1:6) So they expected Him to do this. But after He came out of the grave he never again set foot in the Temple or had any contact with the religious leaders. A few years after the Ascension the door was opened to the Gentiles and has remained so to this day.