Pastor Qualifications.

[pilgrim2009]

No, I tend to stay away from second class stuff. I have actually read the academic works in opposition to dispensationalism. They are well-researched and well-written. They are unconvincing. I don't follow Scofield or Lindsey.

Again, I don't really care if you are a dispensationalist or not. But it is wrong to pretend that dispensationalism has no biblical support. It does.

Ok Pastor show me this support you so believe there is from the bible.

God bless in Jesus.

Steven.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Ok Pastor show me this support you so believe there is from the bible.

Just read it without your presuppositions. I have defended it here often, and there are many others more capable of me. The bottom line of dispensationalism is that God said what he meant and he expects us to believe it. He didn't say one things when he meant another. Everything else flows from there. It is first and foremost a hermeneutical discussion.

 

[pilgrim2009]

I see you do a lot of reading of man's ideas. But what is the better thing to do? Read, memorize and meditate on Scripture. When you know the truth so well, the lies will scream FALSE. But when you start looking to man for truth, well then, things get all messed up.

I do read and mediate and memorize Scripture.You are right about when anyone looks to man for truth the lies will scream truth.What do you think John N Darby,C.I.Scofield,Clarence Larkin,Tim Lahaye,Charles Ryrie,Lewis Sperry Chaffer,Hal Lindsey is?There systems is what this country and its theology is based on today.


Dont you think those that walked with the Apostles who were taught by them outside of the Bible passing on to the first 100 years end-time theology would be closer than what it is today?

Did not the Bible warn in the latter days false doctrine would prevail?

Whats the most public taught doctrine on Christian TV Today regarding the end-times?

The Bible teaches that mis-leading teaching would prevail over all other.

I turn on the TV there it is on every channel.The Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine along with the re-built Temple and Millennial Madness.I turn on my radio there it is again.I go to my local baptist bookstore thats all they sell.I open my mail box and its full of dispensational teaching.But what does history teach me?Its no-where to be found and its the latter days and it prevails and the Bible jas been chopped into so-called dispensations even through the New Tesatament.

Les Feldick says only Pauls epistles apply to the Christian and all others to the Jews.My Bible tells me there is neither Jew nor Gentile in Gods sight and that He is not a respector of persons.Les Feldick says there are two Kingdoms one for the Jew one for the Church.Why did for 1800 years the Church miss the two kingdom theory?

Les Feldick says repentance is not for the Christian nor is Johns baptism.My Bible teaches me that all Scripture is given by Inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof,for correction for instruction in righteousness etc.

Les Feldick says we are not under law where the 10 commandments are concerned.The 10 commandments tell me not to kill and Jesus says dont even be angry with my brother.The 10 commandments say do not commit Adultery and Jesus says if I think about it I am guilty.Grace is stronger and goes further than the Law so Les dont tell me different.

Les Feldick says works have nothing to do with salvation.My Bible says if you have not works you have a dead faith and no faith means I am lost.

I hear the end time teachers say there must be a 3rd Temple.My bible says there has already been three.I hear someone say the land was given to Abraham unconditionally.My Bible has a bunch of IF`s tied to the promises of the land.I hear someone say the promises of land never came to pass but my bible says all came to pass regarding the land {Josh 21:43-45}

I hear someone say it applies to all Abrahams decendants.My Bible says I am a decendant of Abraham and really the promise was not of seeds as of many but of one which is Christ.I hear Christ will Judge the lost and the saved 1007 years apart.My Bible says everyone will be Judged on the last day at the same time when the sheep will be seperated from the goats etc.

So much confusion it is pitiful with no biblical support.

God in Jesus bless.

Steven.

 

[Pastor Larry]

So much confusion it is pitiful with no biblical support.

This aptly describes your post. You are very confused. I don't really have time or interest in having the discussion, but let me make a couple of points.

Dispensationalism is far from the most popular doctrine today. But even if it were, ti wouldn't matter. Truth is not up for a vote. The question is not how many believe it, but do the Scriptures teach it. On that score, dispensationalism is easily defensible.

Let me deal with one paragraph (the only one that mentions Scripture).

I hear the end time teachers say there must be a 3rd Temple.My bible says there has already been three.

there will be a future temple as prophesied by Ezekiel and Haggai, as well as others. Whether that's the third or fourth depends on how you count. The Bible actually treats it all as one temple (cf. Hag 2).

I hear someone say the land was given to Abraham unconditionally.My Bible has a bunch of IF`s tied to the promises of the land.

The "ifs" are tied to residence, not inheritance. Deut 30 among a host of other passages promises restoration after exile.

I hear someone say the promises of land never came to pass but my bible says all came to pass regarding the land {Josh 21:43-45}

The promises of land are repeated much later than Joshua, almost one thousand years later. So they couldn't have been fulfilled by Joshua. Furthermoer, you would have a hard time showing that Joshua fulfills the land promises.

You also mention the 10 commandments. We are not under law. Jesus said that plainly. That doesn't mean murder is okay. Murder is condemend outside the Law.

These are key distinctions that are easy to miss, but many people do.

In the end, as I say, when the exegesis of the text is actually done (as opposed to what you did above), dispensationalism stands just fine.

 

[pilgrim2009]

This aptly describes your post. You are very confused. I don't really have time or interest in having the discussion, but let me make a couple of points.

Dispensationalism is far from the most popular doctrine today. But even if it were, ti wouldn't matter. Truth is not up for a vote. The question is not how many believe it, but do the Scriptures teach it. On that score, dispensationalism is easily defensible.

Let me deal with one paragraph (the only one that mentions Scripture).

there will be a future temple as prophesied by Ezekiel and Haggai, as well as others. Whether that's the third or fourth depends on how you count. The Bible actually treats it all as one temple (cf. Hag 2).

The "ifs" are tied to residence, not inheritance. Deut 30 among a host of other passages promises restoration after exile.

The promises of land are repeated much later than Joshua, almost one thousand years later. So they couldn't have been fulfilled by Joshua. Furthermoer, you would have a hard time showing that Joshua fulfills the land promises.

You also mention the 10 commandments. We are not under law. Jesus said that plainly. That doesn't mean murder is okay. Murder is condemend outside the Law.

These are key distinctions that are easy to miss, but many people do.

In the end, as I say, when the exegesis of the text is actually done (as opposed to what you did above), dispensationalism stands just fine.

Pastor the whole end time teaching is based upon this re-built temple.



If an earthly temple is rebuilt, it will not be because of any prophecy in the Bible. It is simply not there. Give me one verse in the New Testament that plainly says so. It is obvious that a teaching like this is opposed to the letter AND SPIRIT of the New Testament.

Consider these few verses:

1. Notice under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, James makes it plain the prophecy in the OT that seems to refer to a rebuilt temple, refers to the church:

* (Acts 15:14-16 KJV) Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. {15} And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, {16} After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up...

2. Peter tells us what he thinks the temple walls symbolize--us, the church:

*(1 Pet 2:5 KJV) Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

3. Paul also tells us that WE are the temple, he puts NO importance or prophetic significance on the earthly temple:


*(Eph 2:19-22 KJV) Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; {20} And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; {21} In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: {22} In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.


4. Jesus, in the Olivet discourse, where He gives the signs of the end, certainly mentions the DESTRUCTION of the Temple, but NOT ONE WORD about its being rebuilt. Did Jesus fail to tell us this, supposedly, most important sign?

5. Jude joins with Paul, Peter, James and Jesus by telling us we should BUILD up ourselves....


*(Jude 1:20-21 KJV) But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, {21} Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.


6. The apostle John joins the chorus, when he sees the New Jerusalem coming down out of Heaven to earth...and notice, it is PEOPLE not a building, the TABERNACLE of God being with men is that Jesus is with His redeemed PEOPLE, (not a building.) And notice John says it is a VOICE OUT OF HEAVEN saying this. That's a pretty good source when interpreting the Bible is at stake...*(Rev 21:2-3 KJV) And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. {3} And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

7. A REBUILT TEMPLE?Probably but not biblically.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Pastor the whole end time teaching is based upon this re-built temple.

No, it's not.

If an earthly temple is rebuilt, it will not be because of any prophecy in the Bible. It is simply not there. Give me one verse in the New Testament that plainly says so.

You first say the Bible and then the NT. That's strange to me. I think all Scripture is inspired, not just the NT.

It is obvious that a teaching like this is opposed to the letter AND SPIRIT of the New Testament.

No, that's not obvious.

1. Notice under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, James makes it plain the prophecy in the OT that seems to refer to a rebuilt temple, refers to the church:

* (Acts 15:14-16 KJV) Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. {15} And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, {16} After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up...

No, he says that the present age of the church "agrees" with the prophets. When you read the prophets and the NT, you see that they agree perfectly ... that there would be an age of Gentile salvation, followed by a restoration of the booth of David. Again, just read the text.

2. Peter tells us what he thinks the temple walls symbolize--us, the church:

*(1 Pet 2:5 KJV) Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

The church is a temple of God, but that's not the OT prophecy.

3. Paul also tells us that WE are the temple, he puts NO importance or prophetic significance on the earthly temple:


*(Eph 2:19-22 KJV) Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; {20} And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; {21} In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: {22} In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Yes, the church. But that's not the OT temple. Paul didn't emphasize because he was writing to the church. Paul doesn't contradict the OT however.

4. Jesus, in the Olivet discourse, where He gives the signs of the end, certainly mentions the DESTRUCTION of the Temple, but NOT ONE WORD about its being rebuilt. Did Jesus fail to tell us this, supposedly, most important sign?

Nope, he told us about it in the OT.

5. Jude joins with Paul, Peter, James and Jesus by telling us we should BUILD up ourselves....


*(Jude 1:20-21 KJV) But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, {21} Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

Yep, has nothing to do with the temple.

6. The apostle John joins the chorus, when he sees the New Jerusalem coming down out of Heaven to earth...and notice, it is PEOPLE not a building, the TABERNACLE of God being with men is that Jesus is with His redeemed PEOPLE, (not a building.) And notice John says it is a VOICE OUT OF HEAVEN saying this. That's a pretty good source when interpreting the Bible is at stake...*(Rev 21:2-3 KJV) And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. {3} And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

Yes, in heaven. That's not what the OT is talking about however.

You are confusing issues by failing to actually exegete the Scripture. You are placing God in a position of contradicting himself. I don't think that is a proper method to go about study of the Word. Start with who is being written to and what is being talked about.

Having been through all this multiple times, and having read the published defeneses, which are far more coherent than these internet defenses, trust me when I say the issue is hermeneutical and then exegetical. We don't agree on how to handle Scripture and so we disagree on the outcome of exegesis.

You haven't even addressed one relevant issue here. Your basic approach is "The OT doesn't mean anything." I disagree.

 

[annsni]

I do read and mediate and memorize Scripture.You are right about when anyone looks to man for truth the lies will scream truth.What do you think John N Darby,C.I.Scofield,Clarence Larkin,Tim Lahaye,Charles Ryrie,Lewis Sperry Chaffer,Hal Lindsey is?There systems is what this country and its theology is based on today.


Dont you think those that walked with the Apostles who were taught by them outside of the Bible passing on to the first 100 years end-time theology would be closer than what it is today?

Did not the Bible warn in the latter days false doctrine would prevail?

Whats the most public taught doctrine on Christian TV Today regarding the end-times?

The Bible teaches that mis-leading teaching would prevail over all other.

I turn on the TV there it is on every channel.The Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine along with the re-built Temple and Millennial Madness.I turn on my radio there it is again.I go to my local baptist bookstore thats all they sell.I open my mail box and its full of dispensational teaching.But what does history teach me?Its no-where to be found and its the latter days and it prevails and the Bible jas been chopped into so-called dispensations even through the New Tesatament.

Les Feldick says only Pauls epistles apply to the Christian and all others to the Jews.My Bible tells me there is neither Jew nor Gentile in Gods sight and that He is not a respector of persons.Les Feldick says there are two Kingdoms one for the Jew one for the Church.Why did for 1800 years the Church miss the two kingdom theory?

Les Feldick says repentance is not for the Christian nor is Johns baptism.My Bible teaches me that all Scripture is given by Inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof,for correction for instruction in righteousness etc.

Les Feldick says we are not under law where the 10 commandments are concerned.The 10 commandments tell me not to kill and Jesus says dont even be angry with my brother.The 10 commandments say do not commit Adultery and Jesus says if I think about it I am guilty.Grace is stronger and goes further than the Law so Les dont tell me different.

Les Feldick says works have nothing to do with salvation.My Bible says if you have not works you have a dead faith and no faith means I am lost.

I hear the end time teachers say there must be a 3rd Temple.My bible says there has already been three.I hear someone say the land was given to Abraham unconditionally.My Bible has a bunch of IF`s tied to the promises of the land.I hear someone say the promises of land never came to pass but my bible says all came to pass regarding the land {Josh 21:43-45}

I hear someone say it applies to all Abrahams decendants.My Bible says I am a decendant of Abraham and really the promise was not of seeds as of many but of one which is Christ.I hear Christ will Judge the lost and the saved 1007 years apart.My Bible says everyone will be Judged on the last day at the same time when the sheep will be seperated from the goats etc.

So much confusion it is pitiful with no biblical support.

God in Jesus bless.

Steven.

Then preach the Word. Don't preach men's word.

 

[pilgrim2009]

No, it's not.


You first say the Bible and then the NT. That's strange to me. I think all Scripture is inspired, not just the NT.

No, that's not obvious.

No, he says that the present age of the church "agrees" with the prophets. When you read the prophets and the NT, you see that they agree perfectly ... that there would be an age of Gentile salvation, followed by a restoration of the booth of David. Again, just read the text.

The church is a temple of God, but that's not the OT prophecy.

Yes, the church. But that's not the OT temple. Paul didn't emphasize because he was writing to the church. Paul doesn't contradict the OT however.


Nope, he told us about it in the OT.

Yep, has nothing to do with the temple.


Yes, in heaven. That's not what the OT is talking about however.

You are confusing issues by failing to actually exegete the Scripture. You are placing God in a position of contradicting himself. I don't think that is a proper method to go about study of the Word. Start with who is being written to and what is being talked about.

Having been through all this multiple times, and having read the published defeneses, which are far more coherent than these internet defenses, trust me when I say the issue is hermeneutical and then exegetical. We don't agree on how to handle Scripture and so we disagree on the outcome of exegesis.

You haven't even addressed one relevant issue here. Your basic approach is "The OT doesn't mean anything." I disagree.

Yes the OT means everything.I hear many sayin the disp camp the Church was not seen in the OT but is a sorta plan B.Nothing could be further from the truth.Much that the disp camp says applies to Israel is actually told in the OT applied to the Church in the NT.

In Jesus.

Steven.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Yes the OT means everything.

So when God says to the post-exilic temple rebuilders that "The latter glory of this house [the temple] will be greater than the former glory," (2:9) it means that there will be a later temple that will surpass the glory of Solomon's temple in its silver and gold (v. 8) and in the fact that all nations bring silver and gold to furnish the temple (v. 7)? If so, then why do you say there is no biblical prophecy of a rebuilt temple? If not, then why doesn't the OT mean what it says?

I hear many sayin the disp camp the Church was not seen in the OT but is a sorta plan B.

Paul said that the church was a mystery in the OT (Eph 3). That doesn't make it a plan B, but it was a mystery unrevealed.

Much that the disp camp says applies to Israel is actually told in the OT applied to the Church in the NT.

First, this contradicts your above claim. If the OT means what it says, then the OT promises made to a particular people have to be fulfilled in the way that they were made to the people to whom they were made. You can't switch and say God promised it to Israel but fulfills is to someone else.

Second, I don't know of much, if anything that fits the claim you make. I have seen many people try to make this point, but when we actually look at the OT text and the NT text, virtually all those claims have fallen apart. So perhaps you have some new ones that have not previously been brought up, but so far, it hasn't worked.

 

[pilgrim2009]

So when God says to the post-exilic temple rebuilders that "The latter glory of this house [the temple] will be greater than the former glory," (2:9) it means that there will be a later temple that will surpass the glory of Solomon's temple in its silver and gold (v. 8) and in the fact that all nations bring silver and gold to furnish the temple (v. 7)? If so, then why do you say there is no biblical prophecy of a rebuilt temple? If not, then why doesn't the OT mean what it says?

Paul said that the church was a mystery in the OT (Eph 3). That doesn't make it a plan B, but it was a mystery unrevealed.

First, this contradicts your above claim. If the OT means what it says, then the OT promises made to a particular people have to be fulfilled in the way that they were made to the people to whom they were made. You can't switch and say God promised it to Israel but fulfills is to someone else.

Second, I don't know of much, if anything that fits the claim you make. I have seen many people try to make this point, but when we actually look at the OT text and the NT text, virtually all those claims have fallen apart. So perhaps you have some new ones that have not previously been brought up, but so far, it hasn't worked.

If there were seperate plans for Israel and the Church how do you explain these verses?

If the church is fulfilling Israel's promises as contained in the new covenant or anywhere in the Scriptures, then [dispensational] premillennialism is condemned.

Promise to Israel -

"Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, Which cannot be measured or numbered. And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not My people,' There it shall be said to them, 'You are sons of the living God.' -Hosea 1:10

Fulfillment in the church -

What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? As He says also in Hosea: "I will call them My people, who were not My people, And her beloved, who was not beloved." "And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not My people,' There they shall be called sons of the living God." -Romans :22-26

Promise to Israel -

Then I will sow her for Myself in the earth, And I will have mercy on her who had not obtained mercy; Then I will say to those who were not My people, 'You are My people!' And they shall say, 'You are my God!'" -Hosea 2:23

Fulfillment in the church -

But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy. -1 Peter 2:9-10

Promise to Israel -

"On that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of old; -Amos 9:11


Fulfillment in the church -

"Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. "And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: 'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; So that the rest of mankind may seek the LORD, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the LORD who does all these things.' "Known to God from eternity are all His works. -Acts 15:14-18

In the same manner there are many Old Testament passages referring to Israel that are in the New Testament applied directly to the church.

Spoken to Israel -


"And it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions. And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days. "And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth: Blood and fire and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD. And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant whom the LORD calls. -Joel 2:28-32


Applied to the church -

When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place..."But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy. I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD. And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved.' -Acts 2:1,16-21


Spoken to Israel -

'And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel." -Exodus 19:6


Applied to the church -

But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; -1 Peter 2:9

Spoken to Israel -

"My tabernacle also shall be with them; indeed I will be their God, and they shall be My people. -Ezekiel 37:27


Applied to the church -

And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people." -2 Cor 6:16


Spoken to Israel -

"Speak to all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say to them: 'You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy. -Lev 19:2
Applied to the church -

but as He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, because it is written, "Be holy, for I am holy." -1 Peter 1:15-16

Spoken to Israel -


"Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- -Jer 31:31


Applied to the church -

Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you. -Luke 22:20

Seems simple enough to me.

God bless you.

In Jesus.

Steven.

 

[Pastor Larry]

If there were seperate plans for Israel and the Church how do you explain these verses?

Wow … It’s like you are vomiting up a concordance here

There are several issues here:
1. Do you really think that no dispensationalist has ever thought of these verses? That we are somehow stunned by them?
2. Are there any legitimate explanations of these verses from the dispensationalist perspective? Of course there are.

I don’t have time now to go verse by verse. I would encourage you to study, not merely to repeat what others have said. When you look at these passages for what they mean, you will easily see that they don’t demand your interpretation, and in fact, your interpretation depends on starting with your presupposition. Since I don’t start with your presupposition, I have no problem reading these verses as they were originally intended. I don’t have to find some secret hidden meaning in them. The apostles never contradicted the OT, and if you study these passages you will see that.

You say it seems easy enough, and it is. But you are missing it.

 

[Robert Snow]

Let me just say goodbye to the pilgrim before he is banned.



Goodbye, pilgrim!

(if it makes you feel any better, imagine it was said with a John Wayne inflection)

Wow! A person joins asks some interesting questions, doesn't insult anyone, yet he is destined to being banned? Why?

 

[Jamal5000]

Question 1: I'm assuming DR standards for "Doctor" or "Doctor of Religion." Sure, most of the pastors that I have known have never earned such degrees let alone a bachelor's degree.

Question 2: No way. A pastor must take care of his family if he is to be a pastor of a church flock.

Question 3: Possibly. It depends on the person. Some of the best pastors that I have known in my life have served some time and learned many lessons and illustrations to share with others.

Question 4: Again, it depends on the individual. I (and the congregation) would need to wait for the discernment of the Spirit.

Good Questions,
J5K

 

[OldRegular]

I know brother.It was hard for me to accept to.I read William Cox`s ex-dispensationalist Analyzing Scofield and what the bible really says has been a real blessing to me.I am no longer confused and dont have to jump from one book and verse of the bible to understand it.Thank God for men with real concern about Gods people to expose these men and lead them into the way everlasting.Amen

Steven.

I have William Cox's book also. Very informative. John Newport in his book The Lion and the Lamb gives some info similar to Cox.

 

[OldRegular]

Dispensationalism is not the faith of 1800 years of Christianity.Just read some of the old reformers commentaries you will see.This doctrine was built during the same time as others were building Adventism-Campbellites-Christian Science etc.

God bless.

Steven.

The 19th century saw the development of a number of cults including Jehovah's Witness', Mormons, Christian Science, and Seventh Day Adventism, among others.

In fairness I must say that the theology of Seventh Day Adventism is moving toward orthodoxy.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Thank God for men with real concern about Gods people to expose these men and lead them into the way everlasting

So is it your contention that I and other dispensationalists have no real concern about God's people?

You see, that is the very type of argument that should be avoided. To insinuate that because someone concludes differently than you do about a matter they dont' care about God's people is wrong.

I could say, "I am glad that men like Charles Ryrie and Chafer, and Showers actually believed the Bible and thought it should be taught to God's people everywhere." But I won't say that because it isn't a good argument. Your's isn't either.

 

[Mexdeaf]

In fairness I must say that the theology of Seventh Day Adventism is moving toward orthodoxy.

How so??????

 

[OldRegular]

Then preach the Word. Don't preach men's word.

There are some of us who believe that dispensationalism is based on the word of Darby/Scofield not the Bible! It is a historical fact that classic dispensationalism started with Darby and was popularized in this country by the Scofield Bible.

Fortunately hyper dispensationalism is limited and progressive dispensationalism is making inroads into classic dispensationalism. Even progressive dispensationalism has its problems but it is a move in the right direction.

Now a word for pilgrim2009: Sadly brother you are spinning your wheels! Been there, done that!

 

[Pastor Larry]

There are some of us who believe that dispensationalism is based on the word of Darby/Scofield not the Bible!

But that doesn't mean your belief is true. You must separate fact from belief. I can believe that you are an 80 year old crippled woman who lives in Zambia, but that won't make it right.

Again, the question is, "What does the Bible teach?" On that grounds, dispensationalism acquits itself very well.

It is a historical fact that classic dispensationalism started with Darby and was popularized in this country by the Scofield Bible.

No, that's not a historical fact. It is true that Darby was instrumental in systematizing it, but the principles of dispensationalism existed long before that.

Again, the issue is hermeneutical. You and your side are willing to do things with the words of Scripture that I cannot in good conscience do. But to pretend that dispensationalism has no basis at all in Scripture is simply wrong. Dispensationalism may be wrong in parts, or in the whole, but there are sound scriptural arguments for it.

BTW, you say you been there/done that in spinning your wheels. If you recall those conversations, the key came down to the way in which we handle the words of Scripture. We disagreed on that, and you were unwilling to defend your position anymore against some of the serious flaws it had. That is certainly fine, and we both have better things to do. But you can't pretend like you actually gave a valid defense of some of the severe exegetical and hermeneutical problems that were brought up.

 

[DHK]

There are some of us who believe that dispensationalism is based on the word of Darby/Scofield not the Bible! It is a historical fact that classic dispensationalism started with Darby and was popularized in this country by the Scofield Bible.

1 Corinthians 9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.

Ephesians 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

Ephesians 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

Hmmm. I didn't know that Paul used the Scofield Bible. Do you know which edition it was?