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

[SovereignGrace]

That was one of the options, but the main one was said to be that the Church right now is under the New Covenant in the sense of sharing spiritual blessings that Israel will have in the future when Jesus returns and they accept Him as their messiah...

Best seems to be that the Church realises the New Covenant right here and now in partial, with the full manifestation being when israel receives yeshua as their Messiah!

The way I understand this, when Jesus returns, the Jews fate has been sealed. I don't think anyone will be saved after He returns.

What do you Brothers and Sisters say?

 

[Iconoclast]

That seems to be either Old Scofield studt bible notes though, or else Hyper Dispy, that deny that we are under any NT scriptures except for paul!

Have you ever used a Scofield bible?
Do you know what his notes contained?
Have you read these posted links at all?
Where do you agree or disagree?

 

[percho]

And this is where I part company with classic dispensationalism. It seems to imply there is more than one way of salvation. The OT saints were saved one way and the NT saints are saved another way. There is only one way. Christ. And all of us, the Children of God, are one Kingdom, one Family, one People called by His Name.

I want to begin by saying, I am sure all of you are better read and more educated than I in these matters. I yield to that and therefore have to depend on you to convince me when I am wrong.

I believe that for any man who was ever saved or ever will be saved, it will be by the grace of God through the faith.

From Blue Letter Bible TR : Gal:3:23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως
MGNT : 23 πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως

Once again I know, no Greek? However does that not show that relative to, the faith, there is dispensation?

Were not those before Jesus of Nazareth gave his life a ransom for many, died and was raised from the dead by God the Father Gal 1:1 Saved by this faith to come? Have not all who have been saved since then, saved by the faith that did come? Will not any who are saved from this moment in time into the future be saved by that very same faith?

Please tell me the difference if the faith of the following,

The God of Jews only is He, and not also of nations? yes, also of nations; since one is God who shall declare righteous the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through the faith. YLT Rom 3:29,30

What is the distinction of, by faith and through the faith? Something divides those two yet they accomplish the same thing. No?

BTW I believe Saving Faith is what God the Father would do and has done through the Son of God born of woman not our attitude toward hearing of the Faith.

God calls the elect unto belief.

One more edit to say I do not believe God is calling all that will be saved at this present time. I believe he is calling a people for his name to rule with Christ and they are the only ones of Faith. Abraham may have had a neighbor 200 miles down the road who God did not call at that time but can be raised from the dead and then call him.

God is taking out of the Jews and out of the nations.
Paul and the others with him on the way to Damascus were in unbelief. Paul was called out of unbelief, the others were blinded until the fullness of the nations be come in.

 

[HankD]

OK, this is taking a bad turn and I don't want to continue.
I told everyone I had to go to a Dr appointment.
I'm back.

K asked what dispensation came before the law.
I don't call it a dispensation I call it a covenant, the noahide covenant.

I will supply the scripture behind the Noahide Covenant:

Genesis 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
7 And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.
8 And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying,
9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;
10 And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth.
11 And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.
12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:
13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.
14 And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud:
15 And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh.
16 And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.
17 And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth.

This covenant never saved anyone just like the mosaic covenant with the blood of bulls and goats could not.

I don't think I will continue in this "debate".

HankD

 

[Iconoclast]

I would rather read further from scripture provided from you that describes this other way for Gentiles to worship Jehovah, which you seem unable to produce.

I do not want to branch off into this wrong belief, however I was speaking with a rabbi about the gospel and he offered this section of scripture trying to prove this noahide idea;

18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

vs 20 was his proof text????

Anytime any one portion of scripture gets isolated from the complete revelation this kind of error can happen. I was glad that rabbi knew about acts 15,lol

 

[HankD]

OK, changed my mind. Yes the Noah-ide Covenant was a Jewish thing just as the "dispensation" of the law Jewish because it occurred long before the cross.

Examining Acts 15 it seems that the apostolic council was attempting to revert to it to keep the Judaizers from polluting the gospel of grace through faith.

Acts 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
...
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
12 Then all the multitude kept silence...
...
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
...
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

My apologies to all for being so sensitive but a visit to the doctor (both before and after) seems to do that to me nowadays.



HankD

 

[Yeshua1]

Have you ever used a Scofield bible?
Do you know what his notes contained?
Have you read these posted links at all?
Where do you agree or disagree?

Disagree with the Old Scofield where it appeared that he taught that OT believers were saved by keeping the Law....

 

[Yeshua1]

The way I understand this, when Jesus returns, the Jews fate has been sealed. I don't think anyone will be saved after He returns.

What do you Brothers and Sisters say?

When Jesus returns, at that time a fountain of blessing will be open in Jerusalem, and they will see Him and mourn over him, and will repent and have a change of hearts and receive Him as their Messiah, Israel reborn, and the whole earth now blessed by them reconciling back to God!

 

[Iconoclast]

The Church, starting at pentacost, has been ubder the New Covenant, as that One was made by the shed blood/death of Christ upon the Cross, and one must be born again in order to get saved, and all who are saved are under the New Covenant!

One cannot be saved and not under that One...

When you can....get to a keyboard instead of your phone.
then try and expand on what opinion you are offering,if possible- for example;

This is a very through survey of the different options held by Dispy regarding the relationship between the Church and New Covenant
http://www.dbts.edu/journals/2003/compton.pdf

show which part you agreed with and why.....many ideas were offered in James L link...

We also would state that both Jews and gentiles come to God thru that Covenant, by receiving Yeshua as messiah...

who is "we"?

 

[Iconoclast]

Disagree with the Old Scofield where it appeared that he taught that OT believers were saved by keeping the Law....

If I disagree that Joseph Smith wrote the book of Mormon. I am not a "latter day saint"

You disagree with Scofield? Just once? you never answered the questions I asked you.
Have you ever used a Scofield bible?
Do you know what his notes contained?
Have you read these posted links at all?
Where do you agree or disagree?

You sound as if you are just faking it......as if you have never read anything you comment on.

 

[Iconoclast]

When Jesus returns, at that time a fountain of blessing will be open in Jerusalem, and they will see Him and mourn over him, and will repent and have a change of hearts and receive Him as their Messiah, Israel reborn, and the whole earth now blessed by them reconciling back to God!

Many say that is true right now.......Why do you think it is not true now?
Has a fountain of blessing been opened in Jerusalem .....at the cross?

 

[Iconoclast]

Disagree with the Old Scofield where it appeared that he taught that OT believers were saved by keeping the Law....

Okay....so do I....
now what about this?
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.

If this is the heart of dispensational teaching......the question is if you do not hold to it....are you a dispensationalist?
If a person does not hold to the 5pts....can they be a Calvinist?

 

[Iconoclast]

So far based on previous posting.....only Rmac has posted a consistent dispensational position. Beamup and DHK get honorable mention as they tried to be consistent with what they hold to. But they have not posted here.

 

[HankD]

"Dispensationalism" is in flux and has been going back several centuries with a multitude of authors.

Calvinism is in the same boat. I have even seen disputes between 5 point calvinists (supra vs infra).
Calvinism has one human origin, dispensationalism - several authoritative voices so there is going to be a wide panorama of views.

The Trinitarian doctrine took several centuries to distill into the council of Nicaea formulation.

Why say all this? Because "dispensationalism" has not reached the end product of its development and it is very easy to find contradictions and disagreements among the teachers and students thereof.

I guess my question is "Dispensational error pt 2 ... or is it truth" going to devolve into another attack upon those of us who are honestly seeking the truth with ridicule and contempt or a civil examination of the strengths and weaknesses of "dispensationalism" (according to its authorship)?

Iconoclast had done a good job of separating the views by authorship.

Certainly there are many more out there in BB land who hold a view or a hybridized view of "dispensationalism" but for fear of being torn apart verbally and challenged with "gotchas" (not exclusive to "dispensationalism") they will not contribute.

Personally, I don't like the word "dispensationalism" even though it is a biblical word.
I don't have much choice though but to accept the label.

I believe that the plan of God varies by "economy" and should be the world view viewed through the appropriates covenant.
One needs to be careful in how one explains that (as Dr Tom has pointed out) as the conclusion might be drawn that one is a "Covenant Theology" adherent of ages past.

Hopefully we can learn from each other without the insult and innuendo - if so I am willing to participate.
Being human I don't want to yield to my flesh and later have to regret insulting the brethren by exchanging railing for railing (not of staircases) , insult for insult, innuendo for innuendo as I have done in the past.

I really do want to learn but without all the testosterone.

Thanks
HankD

 

[TCassidy]

Calvinism has one human origin

Human/God. The Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[HankD]

Human/God. The Lord Jesus Christ.

Hmm did an electronic scan for "calvin" in the KJV and came up with

CALVIN:The following word or form could not be found in the current search version

HankD

 

[TCassidy]

Hmm did an electronic scan for "calvin" in the KJV and came up with

Try "Salvation."

As John Calvin lived about 1500 years after the bible was completed it is not entirely surprising his name is not there.

Or try "regeneration." Especially in Titus 3:5.

 

[HankD]

As John Calvin lived about 1500 years after the bible was completed it is not entirely surprising his name is not there.

Oh!

Or try "regeneration." Especially in Titus 3:5.

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Well yes that's better than quoting the Institutes alone.
BTW A scan of John Calvin :Institutes of the Christian Religion finds Titus 3:5 cited in Chapter 15 - of Baptism.

2. In this sense is to be understood the statement of Paul, that “Christ loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word” (Eph. 5:25, 26); and again, “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost” (Titus 3:5). Peter also says that “baptism also doth now save us” (1 Peter 3:21). For he did not mean to intimate that our ablution and salvation are perfected by water, or that water possesses in itself the virtue of purifying, regenerating, and renewing; nor does he mean that it is the cause of salvation, but only that the knowledge and certainty of such gifts are perceived in this sacrament. This the words themselves evidently show. For Paul connects together the word of life and baptism of water, as if he had said, by the gospel the message of our ablution and sanctification is announced; by baptism this message is sealed.

Give credit where credit is Due?

HankD

 

[TCassidy]

Give credit where credit is Due?

Of course. And Calvin was making it plain that baptism did not save, or even is the cause of salvation, but that baptism points to what actually saves, the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

Of course, when he speaks of baptism he is talking about infant sprinkling. He takes, essentially, the same position most Presbyterians take today. It does not bestow grace, but points to that which is by grace.

But then, I am not beholden to Calvin or his writings. My faith in Christ as my Redeemer is based on what I read in the bible, not what I read in Calvin's Institutes.

Besides, I am not a Calvinist. I am a Particular Baptist.

 

[SovereignGrace]

When Jesus returns, at that time a fountain of blessing will be open in Jerusalem, and they will see Him and mourn over him, and will repent and have a change of hearts and receive Him as their Messiah, Israel reborn, and the whole earth now blessed by them reconciling back to God!

When Jesus was pierced in the side and blood and water came forth, Zechariah 13:1 and Zechariah 14:6 were fulfilled, imo.