Eschatology

[OldRegular]

Jesus is not now reigning. You do err not knowing the Scriptures.

So which is it; you don't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ or you don't believe God is Sovereign?

 

[Revmitchell]

So which is it; you don't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ or you don't believe God is Sovereign?

I don't agree with him but your response is childish. Why dont you try to respond with some understanding of where he is coming from rather than asking a "gotchya" question.

Grow up.

 

[DHK]

Yes DHK my mind is made up and it cannot be corrupted by you because the Dispensationalism of you, Darby, and Scofield among others is a false doctrine, a manmade doctrine in every way as bad as some Roman Catholic Doctrines because it makes the Church for which Jesus Christ died an afterthought in God's program for Israel. I thank God that when God saved me in 1965, though I am surrounded by dispensationalists, a dear friend and brother in Christ, an Elder in the Presbyterian Church suggested a Thompson Chain Reference Bible to me. Otherwise I might have fallen prey to the error taught in the SRB as so many others in the Baptist Churches have.

Considering that half the board or more may be dispensational in their doctrine, I would refrain from labeling false doctrine & manmade doctrine with the inference that the rest of us are false teachers. Disagreement is fine. Please keep the rhetoric to a minimum.
IMO, the accusations concerning Darby and Scofield are wrong in the light of dispensationalism.

You conveniently did not mention which of the Early Church Fathers believed what Ryrie calls the sine qua non of Dispensational error which is:

Yes, I left out those that believed in transubstantiation and purgatory as well. The purpose of the quote was to give historical truth, not error.

Thus we have the Classic Dispensational teaching that the Church for which Jesus Christ died is a parenthesis, an intercalation, an afterthought in Gods program for Israel.

A very terse and unwise comment. Whoever said that has no reverence for God, and is speaking as an unsaved individual. There is nothing done in the providence of God that is "an afterthought." No dispensationalist would agree with the above assessment. It is just a foolish random rambling said from one who is not using his brain.

Nowhere in Scripture do we read that Jesus Christ suffered and died to cover the sins of the nation Israel.

John 3:16; John 2:1,2; John 1:29
It was John the Baptist pointing to Jesus, in front of Jews, toward Jesus saying:
"Behold the Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world."
There was no one present but Jews.

When the Jewish leaders conspired with the Romans to crucify Jesus Christ, and the mass roared approval, the use of the Jews in God's purpose to save His people was complete. God exacted punishment of the Jews in 70 AD by the destruction of the temple so that the useless sacrifice of animals, now an abomination before God, was brought to a halt!

That is simply history.
Your sin is a crime against God, and you are just as guilty as those Jews in putting Christ on the cross. Just because you live in a different century doesn't make you any less innocent. You are just as guilty as them. He died for your crimes as well as those.
Or do you think yourself better than they?

Luke 13:2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?
3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

I have mentioned before and will again that I thank God for those progressive dispensationalists who have abandoned the Classic Dispensational error of the parenthesis Church.

The "Church" did not replace Israel. That is called "Replacement Theology," is believed by the RCC, some Protestants and cults, and is a known heresy.
Paul delineated that Israel, Gentiles, and the Church all live today side by side.
Obviously with Hamas trying to wipeout Israel, we are fully aware that Israel still exists. In "this dispensation" they must come to Christ in the same way that Gentiles do--just as the 3,000 Jews did on the Day of Pentecost, and all the Jews from that day onward.
Many of the churches of that first century were composed of Jewish converts.

 

[DHK]

So which is it; you don't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ or you don't believe God is Sovereign?

Jesus Christ always was, is, and always will be God, deity.
Christ was born of a virgin. He was in that womb for nine months. He wasn't sovereign then. He wasn't ruling then. He wasn't king then.
He wasn't king while on earth.
He wasn't king while on the cross. He hung in shame, humiliated as a common criminal, and yet still deity.
He died, was buried, rose again, and 40 days later ascended up into heaven.
He sits at the right hand of the throne of God, NOT reigning but interceding for us, the believers on earth.
His reign will begin when he comes again and sets up his Kingdom on earth, a Kingdom which he offered to the Jews but they rejected.

John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

 

[OldRegular]

I don't agree with him but your response is childish. Why dont you try to respond with some understanding of where he is coming from rather than asking a "gotchya" question.

Grow up.

Thanks for the kind remarks but the only way I can tell where he is coming from is by what he says!

 

[OldRegular]

Jesus Christ always was, is, and always will be God, deity.
Christ was born of a virgin. He was in that womb for nine months. He wasn't sovereign then. He wasn't ruling then. He wasn't king then.
He wasn't king while on earth.
He wasn't king while on the cross. He hung in shame, humiliated as a common criminal, and yet still deity.
He died, was buried, rose again, and 40 days later ascended up into heaven.
He sits at the right hand of the throne of God, NOT reigning but interceding for us, the believers on earth.
His reign will begin when he comes again and sets up his Kingdom on earth, a Kingdom which he offered to the Jews but they rejected.

John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

To put it so you can understands GOD REIGNS!

 

[OldRegular]

Thus we have the Classic Dispensational teaching that the Church for which Jesus Christ died is a parenthesis, an intercalation, an afterthought in Gods program for Israel.

A very terse and unwise comment. Whoever said that has no reverence for God, and is speaking as an unsaved individual. There is nothing done in the providence of God that is "an afterthought." No dispensationalist would agree with the above assessment. It is just a foolish random rambling said from one who is not using his brain.

Charles C Ryrie writing in his book Dispensationalism regarding the Progressive Dispensational movement states on page 134.

By abandoning tbe concept of the church as an intercalation or parenthesis.

Classic dispensationalism used the words parenthesis or intercalation to describe the distinctiveness of the church in relation to God's program for Israel. An intercalation is an insertion of a period of time in a calendar and a parenthesis in one sense is defined as an interlude or interval (which in turn is defined as an intervening or interruptive period). So either or both words can be appropriately used to define the church age if one sees it as a distinct interlude in God's program for Israel (as clearly taught in Daniel's prophecy of the seventy weeks in 9:24--27).

Progressive/modified/revisionist dispensationalism wishes to discard the word parentesis, implying that it means that the church is something lesser in God's plan, an afterthought. Of course, the dictionary definition does not support this meaning. Instead, the church is submerged into the broader kingdom concept and called a "functional outpost of God's kingdom" and a "sneak preview" of the future kingdom."

You are being very harsh there DHK{and I must say assuming the purview of God}, calling one of the primer theologians of Classic Dispensationalism unsaved. Ryrie has written some books and has a Study Bible out. Can you say as much DHK?

Of course I understand who you really meant by that statement but you just could not identify who it was.

 

[OldRegular]

Your sin is a crime against God, and you are just as guilty as those Jews in putting Christ on the cross. Just because you live in a different century doesn't make you any less innocent. You are just as guilty as them. He died for your crimes as well as those.
Or do you think yourself better than they?

I notice you excluded yourself {DHK} from the above accusation.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Thus we have the Classic Dispensational teaching that the Church for which Jesus Christ died is a parenthesis, an intercalation, an afterthought in Gods program for Israel

.

Originally Posted by DHK
A very terse and unwise comment. Whoever said that has no reverence for God, and is speaking as an unsaved individual. There is nothing done in the providence of God that is "an afterthought." No dispensationalist would agree with the above assessment. It is just a foolish random rambling said from one who is not using his brain.

Couple more for your grist mill DHK!

"But for the Church intercalation -- which was wholly unforeseen and is wholly unrelated to any divine purpose which precedes it or which follows it. In fact, the new, hitherto unrevealed purpose of God in the outcalling of a heavenly people from Jews and Gentiles is so divergent with respect to the divine purpose toward Israel, which purpose preceded it and will yet follow it, that the term parenthetical, commonly employed to describe the new age-purpose, is inaccurate. A parenthetical portion sustains some direct or indirect relation to that which goes before or that which follows; but the present age-purpose is not thus related and therefore is more properly termed an intercalation" [emphasis added] (Chafer, Systematic Theology, 4:41; 5:348-349).

Charles Ryrie says the same thing: "Classic dispensationalists used the words 'parenthesis' or 'intercalation' to describe the distinctiveness of the church in relation to God's program for Israel. An intercalation is an insertion of a period of time in a calendar, and a parenthesis in one sense is defined as an interlude or interval (which in turn is defined as an intervening or interruptive period). So either or both words can be appropriately used to define the church age if one sees it as a distinct interlude in God's program for Israel (as clearly taught in Daniel's prophecy of the seventy weeks in 9:24-27)" (Ryrie, Dispensationalism [Chicago: Moody Press 1995] p.134).

http://twonewcovenants.com/covenant/covenant1.html

 

[OldRegular]

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Thus we have the Classic Dispensational teaching that the Church for which Jesus Christ died is a parenthesis, an intercalation, an afterthought in Gods program for Israel

.

Originally Posted by DHK
A very terse and unwise comment. Whoever said that has no reverence for God, and is speaking as an unsaved individual. There is nothing done in the providence of God that is "an afterthought." No dispensationalist would agree with the above assessment. It is just a foolish random rambling said from one who is not using his brain.

And then there is this one by Harry A. Ironside former pastor of the Moody Memorial Church in Chicago. The quote is from the preface to his book, The Great Parenthesis. At least he thinks the Parenthesis is great!

The contents of the present volume are really an enlargement of lectures on Bible prophecy that have been given at various conferences during the past few years. It was never convenient to have these stenographically reported at the time of their delivery, and so the substance of the addresses has been very carefully gone over and is now presented for the consideration of those who are interested in the revelation which the Spirit of God has given concerning things to come.It is the author's fervent conviction that the failure to understand what is revealed in Scripture concerning the Great Parenthesis between Messiah's rejection, with the consequent setting aside of Israel nationally, and the regathering of God's earthly people and recognition by the Lord in the last days, is the fundamental cause for many conflicting and unscriptural prophetic teachings. Once this parenthetical period is understood and the present work of God during this age is apprehended, the whole prophetic program unfolds with amazing clearness.

http://www.biblesupport.com/e-sword-downloads/file/7931-ironside-harry-a-the-great-parenthesis/

 

[convicted1]

Oh brother.....I've NOW seen it all on here. Christ is not reigning now. That's a good'un DHK....


All from 1 Cor. 15:25:

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.(KJV)

25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.(NIV)

25 for it behoveth him to reign till he may have put all the enemies under his feet --(YLT...slowly becoming my favorite translation)

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet.(ASV)

25 For [Christ] must be King and reign until He has put all [His] enemies under His feet.(AMP)

25 It is necessary for him to rule until he puts all enemies under his feet.(CEB)

25 For he has to rule until he puts all his enemies under his feet.(Complete Jewish Bible)

25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.(ESV)

25 For He must reign until He puts all His enemies under His feet.(HCSB)

25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.(NASB)

25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.(RSV Catholic Version)

25 But it behooveth him to reign, till he put all his enemies under his feet.(Wycliffe)

25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.(WEB)


Not one of these 13 versions agrees with your grotesquely heretical statement.


You need to bow before Him and repent of this vile, wicked, and slanderous to our King, post.

 

[kyredneck]

Originally Posted by DHK
Jesus is not now reigning. You do err not knowing the Scriptures.

Wrong.

And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Mt 28:18

I wouldn't be accusing anyone of 'not knowing' if I were you. I'd say this is willful rejection of truth on your part.

 

[Iconoclast]

DHK
I do not mind when anyone posts a link.....but you should not be critical of me for posting them when you do it also.

You claim I error not knowing the scriptures. ...and yet you like those described in Luke 19 are the one saying we will not have this man to reign over us.

He reigns as Lord right now. HOW would these citizens make this rebellious statement if He did not reign.

Looks more and more like it is You who err.....very often.....even accuse people of saying what they did not say.....over and over....then when caught in this Web of lies
you just dismiss it and close the thread.....we read it from thread to thread.

 

[OldRegular]

Icon

It is not strange that some would assume anything from the Moody Handbook is inerrant. Many who use the Scofield Reference Book take his notes as the Inerrant Word. They fail to realize, deliberately or otherwise, where Scripture stops and commentary begins.

 

[OldRegular]

Jesus Christ always was, is, and always will be God, deity.

You got that Correct and as God He will always be Sovereign. In the Incarnation God the Son did not leave His deity behind or lay it aside.

Christ was born of a virgin. He was in that womb for nine months. He wasn't sovereign then. He wasn't ruling then. He wasn't king then.
He wasn't king while on earth.
He wasn't king while on the cross. He hung in shame, humiliated as a common criminal, and yet still deity.
He died, was buried, rose again, and 40 days later ascended up into heaven.
He sits at the right hand of the throne of God, NOT reigning but interceding for us, the believers on earth.
His reign will begin when he comes again and sets up his Kingdom on earth, a Kingdom which he offered to the Jews but they rejected.

If Jesus Christ is not reigning now who is?

John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

And when the Jews conspired with Rome to crucify Jesus Christ they finished the transgression spoken of in Daniel 9:24. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

Having finished that which they were chosen to do the Jews/Israelites have the same status before God as all sinners, even Hamas!

 

[DHK]

To put it so you can understands GOD REIGNS!

No, even in the "Lord's Prayer" He taught His disciples "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done..." The kingdom there is still future. The prayer is for the kingdom to come.
In Acts, after the resurrection, the disciples asked Jesus when he would set up his kingdom. He rebuked them. The time of the kingdom was not for theirs to know. They had more important things to do--like carrying out the Great Commission which He reiterated in 1:8.

The Kingdom is not here, and Christ is not reigning.
Satan is the god of this world and he is the one reigning over it. Scripture is very clear about that. Sin runs unabated. There is no peace in this, what you say is the kingdom of Christ, therefore Christ must be a failure according to these results.
The Christ I serve never fails. His kingdom will not fail. He will rule with a rod of iron. There will be no injustices.

 

[DHK]

You got that Correct and as God He will always be Sovereign. In the Incarnation God the Son did not leave His deity behind or lay it aside.

I already answered that question in my post if you read it carefully. He never gave up his deity. He never laid it aside. Even in the womb he still had his deity. He is God.
However, even God did not reign as king from the womb did He?

If Jesus Christ is not reigning now who is?

Satan! God is allowing Satan to rule this world.
He allowed Satan to afflict Job and in a sense do to Job whatever he wanted. There is a parallel there. He has allowed Satan to be the god of this world, the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now works in the children of disobedience. Satan rules here; not Christ.

And when the Jews conspired with Rome to crucify Jesus Christ they finished the transgression spoken of in Daniel 9:24. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

And your point?

Having finished that which they were chosen to do the Jews/Israelites have the same status before God as all sinners, even Hamas!

That has nothing to do with the reign of Christ.
All sinners must come to Christ the same way. Period.
The war in the middle east is evidence that there is no peace; that Christ is not reigning; that Christ has not come for his chosen--Israel.

 

[DHK]

Icon

It is not strange that some would assume anything from the Moody Handbook is inerrant. Many who use the Scofield Reference Book take his notes as the Inerrant Word. They fail to realize, deliberately or otherwise, where Scripture stops and commentary begins.

Did I say he is inerrant? No.
Have you proved any of the quotes false? No.
Stop with the false accusations. If there is anything false give evidence.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Icon

It is not strange that some would assume anything from the Moody Handbook is inerrant. Many who use the Scofield Reference Book take his notes as the Inerrant Word. They fail to realize, deliberately or otherwise, where Scripture stops and commentary begins.

Did I say he is inerrant? No.
Have you proved any of the quotes false? No.
Stop with the false accusations. If there is anything false give evidence.

DHK, The comment was addressed to Icon! Did I mention your name? NO.

My Mother always said; "A guilty conscience needs no accuser!" Is your conscience bothering you?

 

[DHK]

Wrong.

And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Mt 28:18

I wouldn't be accusing anyone of 'not knowing' if I were you. I'd say this is willful rejection of truth on your part.

The verse is meaningless without context.

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Jesus was speaking to his disciples (perhaps 11 men).

Let's put that in perspective as we make an application to today's world.
Some say that Christianity is near to one billion people, (like the Muslims are).
However more than 90% of that number are Catholics that don't know the Lord. Then include the liberal and apostate Protestants who deny the Lord. Then include all those within evangelicalism who simply are not saved. Perhaps you will be left with one percent of the population of the world that are actually born again.

Now Jesus said "all power is given unto me..."
Go ye therefore and teach all nations... (to his disciples, and to us in application)
vs. 20 "And lo I am with you...)
His power is only available to those believers who appropriate it--available to those 1%, just to those few and to them who actually appropriate it through prayer and submission to his will. He was speaking to those who will actually take the Great Commission into the world and need the power of Christ to do it.

He did not say that he was reigning.