Featured The Church Not a Mystery

Yes I agree. This is what happens when anyone chooses a doctrine from one part of scripture and denies the whole.

 

Where do you get this stuff! :BangHead: Who has EVER said that the church is an interruption to God's plan?

 

You have said this well.

 

Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, in the place where it was said unto them, (Who are the them here? Judah, Israel, both the Gentiles.) Ye not my people, it shall be said unto them,(Who are the them here? Judah, Israel, both the Gentiles) the sons of the living God.

Deut. 32:26 I said, I would scatter them into corners, I would make the remembrance of them to cease from among men:
Has the remembrance of the house of Judah, the Jews, ever in history ceased from among men? ----- Ever?

Where did God scatter these people to whom He had given a bill of divorce?
Hosea 8:8 Israel is swallowed up: now shall they be among the Gentiles as a vessel wherein no pleasure.

Acts 15:14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

Who is scattered among the Gentiles and had the same Father's as Paul, a son of Benjamin which was to remain with the house of David. 1 Kings 11:32 (But he shall have one tribe for my servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel: )

Romans 9:24,26 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
And it shall come to pass, in the place where it was said unto them, Ye not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God. Who is Paul is saying these, them and they are being called from among the Gentiles.

Romans 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

Who is the remnant? From whence do they come?


Where does the word Gentiles come from?

 

It is you who rejects the word of God.

 

Seems like a reasonable thing to do since Our Savior makes a direct link to Daniel 9:27 in the Olivet discourse Matt 24:15, speaking about the time of the end.

 

So true my friend. Jesus encourage the reader of Daniel’s references here to the abomination of desolation, in particularly the ones dealing with a future abomination of desolation , to understand their true meaning.

 

You are not understanding my position. I know nothing about this man. I have never met him spoken to him on the phone or through email. I have never read anything he has written. I have simply taken the word of God and through careful examination come up with the understanding I have and I do that with all my understanding and I am always willing to change it when someone can point out error without denying truth of equal value. If you noticed in other posts I do not read the works of others. I am certainly in favor of setting under preaching as commanded but I do not seek men's opinions.
The church was a mystery. Only willful disregard for what the bible teaches can anyone deny that. No person in Adam ever saw the coming of the church. As for dispensationalism, who knows what that holds as one holds one thing and another something else. That is why I am not in favor of titles. I hold based on scripture that the church age is a time period used by God while He has set the Jew on the sidelines. There is coming an time when the church will be removed, then a 7 year tribulation period and the setting up of the millennium rule of Christ.
I will be the first to tell you that there is some problems with this view, but in studying all the views I see it as the moist viable. That does not make it heretic any more then those who hold something different is heretic as their is evidence for some of most the views. So I am trying to say that I do not pick the view I hold because of what someone has told me. I hold it because the bible seems to point to it although like I said there are some problems. To point one out I am a little uncomfortable with the pretrib rapture view, although I do hold that view, because it leaves no believers on earth and that has never happened, but I am told an angle will fly though the heavens and spread the gospel so perhaps that is the answer. None the less unless you can show me clearly that the scripture does not mean what it says then I cannot change my view.

 

• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Rom 16:25] Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,[/FONT]
  
• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Eph 3:3-5] How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote before in few words, whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.[/FONT]
  
• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Eph 3:8-10] Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,[/FONT]

MYSTERY!

 

The "mystery" that God revealed to Paul was that "Jew and Gentile are equal" in the fulfillment of prophecy. As Peter said "of which salvation the prophets searched diligently..." According to dispensationalism (as defined by the classics and hypers), the "mystery" implies utter absence from all prophecy: Israel is "the subject of prophecy;" the church is "the subject of the mystery."

As for "the unsearchable riches" meaning something that is totally unrevealed until the church, read carefully:

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?

Paul is clearly referencing statements in the book of Job:

Job 5:9 Which doeth great things and unsearchable; marvellous things without number:

Job 9:10 Which doeth great things past finding out; yea, and wonders without number.

The "unsearchable riches" and "unsearchable judgments" have to do with the depth and number of God's ways, NOT that these riches and judgments are entirely hidden through time until they were reveal to Paul.

 

I don't disagree with you entirely, but the gentiles is what makes up most the the church, not the Jew. So the church is the mystery, and it includes all involved with it including the entrance of the gentile. After the church is removed He will again work, with, on, and through the Jew. The church was such a mystery that the mystery remains today when seen by the practicing Jew. No Jew ever read any of their scriptures and saw the time of the church in fact even now after 2000 years of seeing the church it is still a mystery to the Jew and will remain so until it is removed and they are brought back in.

 

So, Jew and Gentile have never been, are not, and never will be truly equal. Got it.

 

wow, when all else fails missrepresent.

 

OK OR, I take you up on your challange. From this thread on the "parenthesis church" we get this comment which also appears in this thread post #65:

First, as a preliminary comment, this whole tirade about the parenthesis church idea is really just a big distraction. I say this because what is being sold by this individual is the idea that dispies teach that the rejection of Jesus by the Jews came as such a surprise that the Savior decided on the church concept because he had nowhere else to go. This is of course absurd and all of the disney characters know it or should know it.

But then we go to the cut and paste apparently derived from Clouse (The Meaning of the Millennium; Four Views IVP Academic 1977). Anyone reading the above cut and paste would think that Herman Hoyt is advocating the idea that the church is a "mystery parenthesis" and an interruption to the plan, that the church is a reaction on the fly to his rejection by the Jews.

In fact not once does Hoyt even come close to making this claim. In his response to Hoyt, George Eldon Ladd states (pg 93) "There is nothing distinctively dispensational about Hoyt's definition of the kingdom, even though it is quoted from McClain".

I would like to know where the cut and paste from OR came from. It is certainly not derived from a reading of the cited book. Clearly from a reading of the source it can be said that ORs comments are fiction designed to make a point that is not true. In fact, the whole rest of the quote above by OR is nonsense. This whole thing proves that the poster OR is not one to be taken seriously.

 

The original dispensationalists never claimed that God was surprised that Israel rejected Christ, it is just that the dispensational story makes things look that way. Darby himself affirmed Total Depravity, and Scofield's scheme held to the idea of the natural man always failing in every dispensation.