Featured MacArthur on the State of Evangelical Christianity

They named it and created the method of artificially breaking up the Bible into parts rather than seeing the whole.

All the covenants point to the Redeemer.

 

So, I understand full well that all the covenants point to the Redeemer. How is dispensationalism messing me up?
You mad at the folks who put chapter numbers in The Bible?

 

I provided enough. I was once a dispensationalist. Then I read my Bible without the dispensational crib notes and realized those notes were entirely irrelevant to scripture. They were just man-made constructs that got in the way Jesus.

 

You provided nothing but rambling.
You can't offer any intelligent argument that dispensationalism is wrong?
So far all I am hearing is mile markers along the Interstate highway distract me from arriving at my destination.

 

Please share the source of the "dispensational crib notes" so I know what to look for. I don't want anything to get in the way of my understanding Jesus, having His mind and becoming more like Him.

 

Meh...
I didn't expect you to leave something you've been taught by men rather than by God.

 

Lewis Sperry Chafer, systematic theology - 7 volume set. I have it in my closet so I can look at it and weep over my past.

 

Abandon the term "Trinity" then.

 

Why don't you start with a correct or best translation first?

 

Sure. Let's stick with scripture. It is enough.

 

Not sure what post you are speaking about. I start with Chafer's theology, but you can tack on the Scofield reference Bible as well as the Ryrie reference Bible. All these rely upon a flawed perspective of the Bible through a dispensationalist lense.

Personally, I prefer a Bible that has no extras. I like only Book and chapter with verse numbers removed. It's quite hard to find such a Bible. The best option would be to have a pdf with only the book and chapter breaks. Then have annotation tools for the believer to observe and mark according to their own observations.

There is far too many "helps" available, which ultimately hinder the believer in the pursuit of God.

 

I fear that even the best English translations, such as the KJV, NKJV, WEB, NASB, CSB. ESV, NIV, LEB, and NET all present flawed interpretations of some of God's actual message. But the flaws are not in the same passages, so study of several seems required.

For example, does paying the ransom automatically result in "rescue, freedom, or redemption?" A person can still present another gospel while reading a vague but accurate section of scripture, because they look at scripture through an agenda or doctrine driven lense.

 

Consider the standard translation of genitives, using "of." The "love of God" might mean God's love for someone or someone's love for God. Context must be used to understand the vague translation. A major doctrinal divide arises from John 6:29 and the "work of God" with some saying it means God's work for someone, and others saying it means someone's work for God.

Another example, faith of Christ might mean someone's faith in Christ, or Christ's faith or faithfulness.

How can evangelists present Christ's gospel, when it is not well understood?

 

Always will have the wheats and tares right inside the Church, just getting overrun now with weeds it seems!
Shows what happens once the full authority and inspiration of the scriptures are watered down, or denied altogether!

 

Evangelism is the age of COVID.

Rioters tightly packed ok, but attending church not ok.

Finding fault with the views of others, but unwilling to consider their own flawed views.

Looking forward to when vaccine neutralizes the impact of COVID, while berating those who helped bring about the vaccine rapidly.

If you ask "Just what behaviors constitute the "spirit of unity?" you get a blank stare.

 

Compared to what documents?

 

The alleged misstranslations.

 

Difficult if they all are flawed. But perhaps you think several are without error.

 

I honestly think there being a better translation for the repective Greek terms what is best should be stated first.