Dispensational error pt2......or...is it truth?

[Iconoclast]

One of the questions that has developed from the other thread was the questions raised about :Who was the New Covenant made with?

Are gentiles in the New Covenant?

Is the Nt. church in the new covenant?

here were the quotes;

The New Covenant and Christians?
Christians are not party to a covenant of any form—new or old. The very concept of covenants is exclusively associated with God's dealings with His earthly people Israel.

Christians are not party to the new covenant. The new covenant is not made with the church.

Do you believe this?
Is this mainstream dispensational teaching?

 

[JamesL]

Try this link. It's a good article from a Baptist seminary. PDF

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...nh4fCZA27XPLbvqHw&sig2=PQ8XFkLg891CeuqApDYdrw

 

[Iconoclast]

Try this link. It's a good article from a Baptist seminary. PDF

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...nh4fCZA27XPLbvqHw&sig2=PQ8XFkLg891CeuqApDYdrw

Good link James L.......
Thanks for posting it.

 

[Yeshua1]

One of the questions that has developed from the other thread was the questions raised about :Who was the New Covenant made with?

Are gentiles in the New Covenant?

Is the Nt. church in the new covenant?

here were the quotes;




Do you believe this?
Is this mainstream dispensational teaching?

The New Covenant was made between God and those to get saved, by and thru cross of Jesus Christ, both Jews and Gentiles were to get saved by Him now...

The Church is where the New Covenant is realised here on edarth, as only those in Christ, in that Church bride, are under it!

 

[Iconoclast]

The New Covenant was made between God and those to get saved, by and thru cross of Jesus Christ, both Jews and Gentiles were to get saved by Him now...

The Church is where the New Covenant is realised here on edarth, as only those in Christ, in that Church bride, are under it!

Your response does not agree with the dispensational teaching.
Are you okay with that ?

 

[Yeshua1]

Your response does not agree with the dispensational teaching.
Are you okay with that ?

Where does it disagree?

 

[Iconoclast]

Where does it disagree?

Here are the quotes from the article; these were in post number 1-
http://biblecentre.org/content.php?mode=7&item=1029

The New Covenant and Christians?
1]Christians are not party to a covenant of any form—new or old.

2]The very concept of covenants is exclusively associated with Gods earthly people Israel

3]Christians are not party to the new covenant. The new covenant is not made with the church.

 

[Iconoclast]

Where does it disagree?

What, then, is the sine qua non of dispensationalism? The answer is threefold.

1 A dispensationalist keeps Israel and the church distinct . This is stated in different ways by both friends and foes of dispensationalism. Fuller says that "the basic premise of Dispensationalism is two purposes God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity"[39] A. C. Gaebelein stated it in terms of the difference between the Jews, the Gentiles, and the church of God.[40] Chafer summarized it as follows:

The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity ... Over against this, the partial dispensationalist, though dimly observing a few obvious distinctions, bases his interpretation on the supposition that God is doing but one thing, namely the general separation of the good from the bad, and, in spite of all the confusion this limited theory creates, contends that the earthly people merge into the heavenly people; that the earthly program must be given a spiritual interpretation or disregarded altogether.[41]
[41] Chafer, Dispensationalism, 107.

 

[Yeshua1]

What, then, is the sine qua non of dispensationalism? The answer is threefold.

1 A dispensationalist keeps Israel and the church distinct . This is stated in different ways by both friends and foes of dispensationalism. Fuller says that "the basic premise of Dispensationalism is two purposes God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity"[39] A. C. Gaebelein stated it in terms of the difference between the Jews, the Gentiles, and the church of God.[40] Chafer summarized it as follows:

The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity ... Over against this, the partial dispensationalist, though dimly observing a few obvious distinctions, bases his interpretation on the supposition that God is doing but one thing, namely the general separation of the good from the bad, and, in spite of all the confusion this limited theory creates, contends that the earthly people merge into the heavenly people; that the earthly program must be given a spiritual interpretation or disregarded altogether.[41]
[41] Chafer, Dispensationalism, 107.

Israel and the Church are two separate aspects of the program of God, yet in the New Jerusalem, both of them will be included there for all eternity in new heavens!

 

[Iconoclast]

Israel and the Church are two separate aspects of the program of God, yet in the New Jerusalem, both of them will be included there for all eternity in new heavens!

That might be true....but you are avoiding the issue raised in the O.P.
You are avoiding the 3 questions.
The thread is not about the eternal state.

answer post 7 please.

 

[Yeshua1]

That might be true....but you are avoiding the issue raised in the O.P.
You are avoiding the 3 questions.
The thread is not about the eternal state.

answer post 7 please.

I thought that I did!

Natioanl Israel will still have a plan for it from God, to be fulfilled at the Second Coming, while the Church will have both saved jews/gentiles in it....

 

[TCassidy]

The Old Testament people of God, Spiritual Israel, are now united with, and one with, in the Kingdom of God, the New Testament people of God, Christians, who, together, are now the recipients of the Covenant Promises made to Spiritual Israel.

National Israel will again come to God's attention for the purpose of bringing them (along with a large number of Gentiles) to the Messiah, before the consummation of the age.

So, my answer is, the New Covenant is made with the same people the Old Covenant was made with, the People of God.

 

[Iconoclast]

Y1,

I thought that I did!

you thought you answered the 3 questions....lets look and see-
question 1-

1]Christians are not party to a covenant of any form—new or old.

Are Christians in any covenant? This dispensationalist says NO.
The first question does not speak about national Israel, does it?
yet you answer;

[National Israel} will still have a plan for it from God,
to be fulfilled at the Second Coming,
It is not speaking about the second coming
while the Church will have both saved jews/gentiles in it...
the dispensational writer says Christians are not in any covenant....

2]The very concept of covenants is exclusively associated with Gods earthly people Israel

Do you believe only national Israel has a covenant that results in salvation?

3]Christians are not party to the new covenant. The new covenant is not made with the church.
Do you believe that Christians are NOT IN THE NEW COVENANT?

THOSE ARE THE THREE QUESTIONS......3 QUESTIONS....3 ANSWERS.....

 

[SovereignGrace]

One of the questions that has developed from the other thread was the questions raised about :Who was the New Covenant made with?

Are gentiles in the New Covenant?

Is the Nt. church in the new covenant?

here were the quotes;




Do you believe this?
Is this mainstream dispensational teaching?

The church is where the New Covenant was fulfilled, as both believing Jews and Gentiles are one, Christ being the Head.

What was a circumcision of the flesh(foreskin) is now a circumcision of the heart. Romans 2 and Galatians 4 speak to this.

 

[Iconoclast]

The Old Testament people of God, Spiritual Israel, are now united with, and one with, in the Kingdom of God, the New Testament people of God, Christians, who, together, are now the recipients of the Covenant Promises made to Spiritual Israel.

National Israel will again come to God's attention for the purpose of bringing them (along with a large number of Gentiles) to the Messiah, before the consummation of the age.

So, my answer is, the New Covenant is made with the same people the Old Covenant was made with, the People of God.

VERY SNEAKY....Looks like you have cheated TC by reading your bible

 

[Iconoclast]

The church is where the New Covenant was fulfilled, as both believing Jews and Gentiles are one, Christ being the Head.

What was a circumcision of the flesh(foreskin) is now a circumcision of the heart. Romans 2 and Galatians 4 speak to this.

Like in this footnote from James L's post;
11E.g., Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1999), pp. 89–90. Mathison states: “The new covenant was inaugurated by Jesus Christ at His first coming and is being fulfilled in and through the church during this present age…. The institution of the new covenant does not await the start of the Millennium or the eternal state. Since the new covenant is the means by which God will finally and completely fulfill all previous covenant promises, and since the new covenant is specifically the covenant of the present age, these promises must be fulfilled in the present age” (p. 90).

 

[Iconoclast]

Also...here is a significant adjustment;
Both Ryrie and Walvoord have adjusted their views in subsequent writings. For example, in commenting on the new covenant in a later article, Walvoord states, “A solution to the problem then is that there is one covenant with application to Israel and to the church and to anyone saved by the death of Christ. In Scripture the application of the New covenant is explicitly to the church in the present age and to Israel as a nation in the future as far as millennial blessings are concerned” (“Does the Church Fulfill Israel’s Program?” BSac 137 [July–September 1980]: 219–20). However, in a more recent discussion Walvoord appears to return to his former position. Commenting on the references to the new covenant in the New Testament, Walvoord argues: “In the New Testament, in which the new covenant is related to the church, it is the grace of God as it applies to the church. While none of the major features of the covenant for Israel are repeated, nevertheless the church has a new covenant in contrast to her former estate in Adam, just as Israel has a new covenant in contrast to her former position under the Mosaic covenant…. There is no evidence that the church is ever regarded as fulfilling the many details of the new covenant in the Old Testament relating to Israel” (“The New Covenant,” in Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands: Biblical and Leadership Studies in Honor of Donald K. Campbell, ed. Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994], pp. 198–99).

 

[SovereignGrace]

Dispensationialism fractures God's word and ppl into two ppl, when there is only one ppl in the body of Christ, both Jews and Gentiles.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Also...here is a significant adjustment;
Both Ryrie and Walvoord have adjusted their views in subsequent writings. For example, in commenting on the new covenant in a later article, Walvoord states, “A solution to the problem then is that there is one covenant with application to Israel and to the church and to anyone saved by the death of Christ. In Scripture the application of the New covenant is explicitly to the church in the present age and to Israel as a nation in the future as far as millennial blessings are concerned” (“Does the Church Fulfill Israel’s Program?” BSac 137 [July–September 1980]: 219–20). However, in a more recent discussion Walvoord appears to return to his former position. Commenting on the references to the new covenant in the New Testament, Walvoord argues: “In the New Testament, in which the new covenant is related to the church, it is the grace of God as it applies to the church. While none of the major features of the covenant for Israel are repeated, nevertheless the church has a new covenant in contrast to her former estate in Adam, just as Israel has a new covenant in contrast to her former position under the Mosaic covenant…. There is no evidence that the church is ever regarded as fulfilling the many details of the new covenant in the Old Testament relating to Israel” (“The New Covenant,” in Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands: Biblical and Leadership Studies in Honor of Donald K. Campbell, ed. Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994], pp. 198–99).

Walvoord and Ryrie have polluted many minds with this heresy...

 

[HankD]

Redeemed Israel and the Matthew 16:18 church are two distinct entities of the one Kingdom of God/heaven on earth.
Today it is composed of all men everywhere (Jew and Gentile) being saved with those being saved added to the church.

Acts 2
46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Acts 17:30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent



HankD