"To the Jew First" is According to Prophecy not Mystery

      Many of the Mid Acts Dispensational position are critical of the Acts 2 Dispensational position, because Acts 2 Dispensationalists mix prophecy (i.e. the events on the Day of Pentecost) with the Mystery Program.  I have no problem with this accusation, because it is true that Acts 2 Dispensationalists mix prophecy with mystery.  My problem is I see the Mid Acts position also mixing prophecy and mystery.  For example, the practice by Paul of "to the Jew first," in the book of Acts is according to prophecy and not the mystery, yet the Mid Acts proponents insist the mystery starts at either Acts 9 or Acts 13 at the latest.  It is evident is studying the Old Testament prophets that Israel was to get saved first, and then they were to be a witness to the Gentiles.  

For example, Isaiah 60:1-3 states:

[1] Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee.
[2] For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.
[3] And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.

When the Mid Acts proponents are confronted with this, many will say that this practice of "to the Jew first" was just transitory during the early part of the book of Acts.  My question would be, What if an Acts 2 Dispensationalist argues that the things happening on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 were transitory during the early part of the book of Acts? Would the Mid Acts proponent accept this explanation?  My guess, based on studying Mid Acts Dispensationalism, is they would not accept this explanation from an Acts 2 Dispensationalist.

For the Mid Acts Dispensationalist, he has another problem in that "to the Jew first" was not just during the early part of the book of Acts.  It was all the way to Acts 28!  Right before Paul got to Rome he writes,  "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek" (Romans 1:16).

     In conclusion, I would argue that the Mid Acts Dispensationalist, in order to be consistent has two or at most 3 options.  First, he has the option of allowing the Acts 2 Dispensationalists to use the same explanation as the Mid Acts Dispensationalist, "Acts is a transitional book" for an excuse to mix prophecy and mystery.  A second option proposed by a few Mid Acts people would be to argue that during Acts both the prophecy program and mystery program ran concurrently all the way to the end of Acts when Israel is set aside in judicial blindness in Acts 28:25-31.  Some refer to option 2 as the "overlap position."  If the Mid Acts Dispensationalists rejects both options one and two,  then he must concede that the details of the mystery are not revealed until after Acts 28.