Was Hebrews written to believers or unbelievers?

[JD731]

Here is something that serious Bible students needs to understand. Jesus Christ said at his first coming to the earth in the form of a man, in the genealogy of Abraham according to the flesh, the following words.

Luke 24:44
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

All three divisions he gave are the divisions of the Old Testament.
They speak of this one man from his conception in the womb until his death and his bodily resurrection from the dead and then what happend and what will happen after that.

No one can doubt that all OT prophesies concerning the first coming of Jesus Christ to the earth was fulfilled exactly and as literally as they were given. This makes me wonder why anyone would think the second coming of Jesus Christ to the earth would not be fulfilled with that same exactness and just as literally.

BUT MOST DO NOT!

The epistle to the Hebrews will never be understood by people who do not believe what the scriptures teach us about Jesus Christ because none of the Jewish Christian epistles are written for the purpose of explaining the doctrines of the church of Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul has that charge and he deals with the church during this present age in the form of revealed "mysteries." There are no mysteries in the Jewish Christian epistles. The words do not even appear in them. These epistles are confirmation of promises made to this nation and to this people, Israel, in the covenants and promises God made with them and to them. As an example from the first epistle of Peter to the scattered strangers.

1 Peter 2:9
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

Can anyone imagine the apostle Paul describing the church of Jesus Christ as a "nation?" He described the church several different ways, but never as a nation. The church is not a nation.

Did you know that Paul used the word "nation" three times in his 13 epistles and each time it was in reference to the nation Israel as one alienated from the church. Did you know Paul did not use the word "priest" or "priesthood" at all in his 13 letters of instruction and description of the church of Jesus Christ. This makes the doctrine of the "priesthood of the believer" a false doctrine and unsupported by the scriptures of truth.

Rom 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
17 I have therefore whereof I may glory through Jesus Christ in those things which pertain to God.
18 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed,

1 Peter 2:12
Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.

Think about that verse awhile.

The point is that the Jewish Christian epistles apply to this nation and these people during the church age but they transcend the church age and will be of great comfort and instruction to the tribulation saints of Israel. There will be two prophets sent from God that will be preaching from these epistles during those trying days as well as other preachers. The first epistle of Peter constantly reminds his audience of the "Revelation" of Jesus Christ, which is his coming in glory to deliver this nation.

The scriptures must be understood in a literal and a logical and a reasonable and in a dispensation way or they will not be understood at all. God is going somewhere with history and he explains it to those who have ears to hear and eyes to see.

1 Peter 1:13
Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;

The Bible is a wonderful book, but it is not just about us today.

 

[George Antonios]

Here is something that serious Bible students needs to understand. Jesus Christ said at his first coming to the earth in the form of a man, in the genealogy of Abraham according to the flesh, the following words.

Luke 24:44
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

All three divisions he gave are the divisions of the Old Testament.
They speak of this one man from his conception in the womb until his death and his bodily resurrection from the dead and then what happend and what will happen after that.

No one can doubt that all OT prophesies concerning the first coming of Jesus Christ to the earth was fulfilled exactly and as literally as they were given. This makes me wonder why anyone would think the second coming of Jesus Christ to the earth would not be fulfilled with that same exactness and just as literally.

BUT MOST DO NOT!

The epistle to the Hebrews will never be understood by people who do not believe what the scriptures teach us about Jesus Christ because none of the Jewish Christian epistles are written for the purpose of explaining the doctrines of the church of Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul has that charge and he deals with the church during this present age in the form of revealed "mysteries." There are no mysteries in the Jewish Christian epistles. The words do not even appear in them. These epistles are confirmation of promises made to this nation and to this people, Israel, in the covenants and promises God made with them and to them. As an example from the first epistle of Peter to the scattered strangers.

1 Peter 2:9
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

Can anyone imagine the apostle Paul describing the church of Jesus Christ as a "nation?" He described the church several different ways, but never as a nation. The church is not a nation.

Did you know that Paul used the word "nation" three times in his 13 epistles and each time it was in reference to the nation Israel as one alienated from the church. Did you know Paul did not use the word "priest" or "priesthood" at all in his 13 letters of instruction and description of the church of Jesus Christ. This makes the doctrine of the "priesthood of the believer" a false doctrine and unsupported by the scriptures of truth.

Rom 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
17 I have therefore whereof I may glory through Jesus Christ in those things which pertain to God.
18 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed,

1 Peter 2:12
Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.

Think about that verse awhile.

The point is that the Jewish Christian epistles apply to this nation and these people during the church age but they transcend the church age and will be of great comfort and instruction to the tribulation saints of Israel. There will be two prophets sent from God that will be preaching from these epistles during those trying days as well as other preachers. The first epistle of Peter constantly reminds his audience of the "Revelation" of Jesus Christ, which is his coming in glory to deliver this nation.

The scriptures must be understood in a literal and a logical and a reasonable and in a dispensation way or they will not be understood at all. God is going somewhere with history and he explains it to those who have ears to hear and eyes to see.

1 Peter 1:13
Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;

The Bible is a wonderful book, but it is not just about us today.

Some of the points are hyper-dispensationalist and refutable if we maintain context (ex: in context, the church is called a nation in Romans 10. The chapter has no reference back to a little flock in Luke). The hyper-disp brethren have drawn solid lines where God has drawn dotted ones.
Nevertheless, generally speaking, the dispensational methodology for understanding the scriptures makes sense of almost everything while adhering to the literal sense of the scriptures, as you said.

No one can doubt that all OT prophesies concerning the first coming of Jesus Christ to the earth was fulfilled exactly and as literally as they were given. This makes me wonder why anyone would think the second coming of Jesus Christ to the earth would not be fulfilled with that same exactness and just as literally.

Indeed. While the premillennial OT Jew was blind to the spiritual aspect of the kingdom, the amillennial NT Gentile is blind to its physical aspect. This accounts for the respective concomitant blindness of the premillennial OT Jew regarding the 1st coming of Christ, and the blindness of the amillennial Gentile regarding his 2nd coming.

 

[George Antonios]

Hey look @Revmitchell, @JD731 is another one of those you never heard of.

 

[JD731]

Some of the points are hyper-dispensationalist and refutable if we maintain context (ex: in context,

Wrong, unless you have a private definition for hyper dispensation. I know the meaning and I am not one.

the church is called a nation in Romans 10. The chapter has no reference back to a little flock in Luke). The hyper-disp brethren have drawn solid lines where God has drawn dotted ones.

Wrong again. It is not the church that is call a nation in Romans 10. It is the same nation that Peter references in his epistle.

Rom 10:1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

Unsaved Israel is not the church. Look at these verses you are referencing.

Rom 10:16 But they (Israel) have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.
19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.
20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. (this line is speaking about gentiles)
21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

Who are the "no people and the foolish nation." It is the same people Peter is writing to, the ten tribes who were purged out of their own land and called by God "not my people."
They are the same people who are referenced and call gentiles in Rom 9.

Ro 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
25 As he saith also in Osee, (Hosea) I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
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:
28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

To become children of the living God requires a new birth, which could not take place until the Spirit was sent down from heaven by God the Father. Those who received him by believing in the person and work of Jesus Christ for their sakes were born of the Father and became his children. This is the fulfillment of the promise to the ten tribes of Israel thirty or so years before he even drove them out of their land for their sins.

Hosea 1:3 So he went and took Gomer the daughter of Diblaim; which conceived, and bare him a son.
4 And the Lord said unto him, Call his name Jezreel; for yet a little while, and I will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu, and will cause to cease the kingdom of the house of Israel.
5 And it shall come to pass at that day, that I will break the bow of Israel, in the valley of Jezreel.
6 And she conceived again, and bare a daughter. And God said unto him, Call her name Loruhamah: for I will no more have mercy upon the house of Israel; but I will utterly take them away.
7 But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the Lord their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen.
8 Now when she had weaned Loruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son.
9 Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God.
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, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.
11 Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.

This is the context where God is saying he will have mercy on whom he pleases. He obviously still looks on them as a nation, though scattered out of their own land and being strangers in the lands of the gentiles. Romans 7 through 11 is about the children of Abraham becoming the children of God through the new birth.

The chapter has no reference back to a little flock in Luke

???????????????

 

[George Antonios]

The chapter has no reference back to a little flock in Luke

???????????????

Well, you made the point by not proving from within Romans 10, or even the epistle of Romans, that the nation is not the church.

All the "wrong" 's you wrote are needlessly contentious if you ask me. But's fine brother. From experience, that untempered zeal tells me you have only recently discovered hyper-dispensationalism.

God bless you my friend.

 

[JD731]

Well, you made the point by not proving from within Romans 10, or even the epistle of Romans, that the nation is not the church.

All the "wrong" 's you wrote are needlessly contentious if you ask me. But's fine brother. From experience, that untempered zeal tells me you have only recently discovered hyper-dispensationalism.

God bless you my friend.

Wrong is not necessarily contentious. If the church is ever called a nation then I would readily admit it and call it that myself.I would even try to quote some verses where the scriptures wants us to believe that.

Is your definition of hyper dispensationalism a failure of dispensationalists to recognize the church of Jesus Christ as being a nation?


If you are offended by my use of the word "wrong," i apologize. That was not my intent. I am glad there are students of scripture among us who are concerned about right division and I am aware that we are all at different levels of understanding. Praise God for his wonderful book (and for saved folk like you everywhere), The Bible, the source of our light in this dark world.

 

[37818]

. . . a failure of dispensationalists to recognize the church of Jesus Christ as being a nation?

1 Peter 2:9, ". . . But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: . . ." ". . . the praises . . . " that being His virtue.

 

[JD731]

1 Peter 2:9, ". . . But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: . . ." ". . . the praises . . . " that being His virtue.

What is your definition of "generation," and in this context, what do you think they are chosen for? It has been many generations since they were dispossessed of their land in 722 BC, and it has been many generations since that generation until now.

 

[George Antonios]

Wrong is not necessarily contentious. If the church is ever called a nation then I would readily admit it and call it that myself.I would even try to quote some verses where the scriptures wants us to believe that.

Is your definition of hyper dispensationalism a failure of dispensationalists to recognize the church of Jesus Christ as being a nation?


If you are offended by my use of the word "wrong," i apologize. That was not my intent. I am glad there are students of scripture among us who are concerned about right division and I am aware that we are all at different levels of understanding. Praise God for his wonderful book (and for saved folk like you everywhere), The Bible, the source of our light in this dark world.

No, no worries. God bless you brother.

 

[George Antonios]

1 Peter 2:9, ". . . But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: . . ." ". . . the praises . . . " that being His virtue.

I'm not telling you to agree with @JD731, I don't fully agree myself, but I'm not sure you guys are getting his "view".

His view (correct me @JD731 if I'm misrepresenting you) is that, during the 1st century AD, which was a transitional phase, there were two simultaneous-yet-different gospels and concomitant ecclesiologies in operation:

1) Peter preaching the gospel of the kingdom (involving works and loss of salvation) to a body of NT Jewish believers who are not the body of Christ but a sample of millennial NT Israel (by NT he means the millennial kingdom, not the church-age)

2) Paul preaching the gospel of the grace of God (no works, no loss of salvation) to Jews but mostly Gentiles who, believing Paul's gospel, then form the body of Christ.

He is telling you that Peter's epistles are directed to group 1, not group 2.

 

[AustinC]

I'm not telling you to agree with @JD731, I don't fully agree myself, but I'm not sure you guys are getting his "view".

His view (correct me @JD731 if I'm misrepresenting you) is that, during the 1st century AD, there were two simultaneous-yet-different gospels and concomitant ecclesiologies in operation:

1) Peter preaching the gospel of the kingdom (involving works and loss of salvation) to a body of NT Jewish believers who are not the body of Christ but a sample of millennial NT Israel (by NT he means the millennial kingdom, not the church-age)

2) Paul preaching the gospel of the grace of God (no works, no loss of salvation) to Jews but mostly Gentiles who, believing Paul's gospel, then form the body of Christ.

He is telling you that Peter's epistles are directed to group 1, not group 2.

If, that's what JD is saying, then he's utterly wrong.
Peter and Paul preach the same gospel. Their theology is the same in their epistles.

 

[George Antonios]

If, that's what JD is saying, then he's utterly wrong.
Peter and Paul preach the same gospel. Their theology is the same in their epistles.

Again, it's more helpful to lay out your case.

 

[AustinC]

Again, it's more helpful to lay out your case.

No, it's more helpful to know if JD is actually making that claim.

However, read 1st and 2nd Peter, then go through the letters of Paul and see where they compare or contrast. In doing so, you can make your argument for or against.

 

[37818]

What is your definition of "generation," and in this context, what do you think they are chosen for? It has been many generations since they were dispossessed of their land in 722 BC, and it has been many generations since that generation until now.

So who do you think Peter was writing to? Not the reader of this letter?

 

[37818]

He is telling you that Peter's epistles are directed to group 1, not group 2.

By his answer, it seems he is wrong. Peter and Paul preached the same gospel of grace. In all the dispensations salvation has always been grace through faith.

 

[JD731]

So who do you think Peter was writing to? Not the reader of this letter?

Answering my questions will help you because it will make you think and reason and ask questions of the text. The things God writes through men like Peter are designed to make sense. The Book says we are to live of every word of God. Therefore the words cannot be ignored and they cannot be glossed over.

To answer your question, I will quote Peter himself.

1 Pet 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

2 Peter 3:1
This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:

He is writing to the strangers. A stranger is someone who is not at home but is in a place that is not their own.

Here is an example of how God wants us to understand the word:

Genesis 15:13
And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;

Here is how we are to approach the scriptures;

2 Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

All scripture is profitable to me but all scripture is not addressed to me. Some of it is. That is what I should obey.

 

[AustinC]

Answering my questions will help you because it will make you think and reason and ask questions of the text. The things God writes through men like Peter are designed to make sense. The Book says we are to live of every word of God. Therefore the words cannot be ignored and they cannot be glossed over.

To answer your question, I will quote Peter himself.

1 Pet 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

2 Peter 3:1
This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:

He is writing to the strangers. A stranger is someone who is not at home but is in a place that is not their own.

Here is an example of how God wants us to understand the word:

Genesis 15:13
And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;

Here is how we are to approach the scriptures;

2 Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

All scripture is profitable to me but all scripture is not addressed to me. Some of it is. That is what I should obey.

He is writing to exiles. Both Peter and Paul echo Jeremiah in telling all Christians that their Kingdom is not of this world. We are all exiles in this world until Jesus returns and reclaims earth from the corruption of our enemy, the Devil.

 

[percho]

1 peter

παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς

Dative genitive if that means anything.

Another thought; παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς --- from when?

Who was James written to? τῇ διασπορᾷ -- How many houses? From when?
1:18 βουληθεὶς ἀπεκύησεν ἡμᾶς ( τῇ διασπορᾷ ?) λόγῳ ἀληθείας εἰς τὸ εἶναι ἡμᾶς ἀπαρχήν ( ? the same first fruit of Rev 14:1-4 ?) τινα τῶν αὐτοῦ κτισμάτων

One more thought. 1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

What darkness and what light?

because we have not the wrestling with blood and flesh, but with the principalities, with the authorities, with the world-rulers of the darkness of this age, with the spiritual things of the evil in the heavenly places; Eph 6:12

This age?
2 Cor 4:4 in whom the god of this age ( ? same age ?) did blind the minds of the unbelieving, that there doth not shine forth to them the enlightening of the good news of the glory of the Christ, who is the image of God;

Same, age. for how long? Since 2 Cor 2:6 ??? because it is God who said, Out of darkness light is to shine, who did shine in our hearts, for the enlightening of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Was Jesus foreordained to die before God said, out of darkness light to shine? ---------- WHY? the god of this age?

What age/

JD731 very, very good post BTW.

 

[JD731]

I'm not telling you to agree with @JD731, I don't fully agree myself, but I'm not sure you guys are getting his "view".

His view (correct me @JD731 if I'm misrepresenting you) is that, during the 1st century AD, which was a transitional phase, there were two simultaneous-yet-different gospels and concomitant ecclesiologies in operation:

1) Peter preaching the gospel of the kingdom (involving works and loss of salvation) to a body of NT Jewish believers who are not the body of Christ but a sample of millennial NT Israel (by NT he means the millennial kingdom, not the church-age)

2) Paul preaching the gospel of the grace of God (no works, no loss of salvation) to Jews but mostly Gentiles who, believing Paul's gospel, then form the body of Christ.

He is telling you that Peter's epistles are directed to group 1, not group 2.

Actually, no. I am not dealing with how men are saved from the penalty of their sins, which is the second death in the lake of fire. I am dealing with dispensational divisions and how God is bringing to pass his will for mankind in spite of unbelief and opposition from man and Satan. God has presented himself as absolutely holy and has demanded that man be as holy as he is in order to have fellowship with him and to be accepted of him. God is the judge of all men, even the man Christ Jesus. God has determined that Jesus Christ is the only man who has achieved this perfection and therefore he has accepted his sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, Jews and gentiles, and whatever other divisions there are in world history, and has promised that he will impute the perfect righteousness of his son to the account of anyone who from the heart will repent of their sins and trust the promise of God through Jesus his perfect Son, whose blood washes their sins away.

That perfect righteousness is in the form of a member of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit, who indwelt the body of Jesus Christ from his conception, and still does, and always will. It was he, living in the body of Jesus Christ, who empowered him to perfection in the flesh. Jesus Christ is the only man who possessed the Spirit of God from his physical birth, and all other men must be "born again" in order for this transaction to take place. God, the judge, must "justify" the man who makes an appeal for this pardon of his death sentence through Jesus Christ as his substitute who died for him, because he is not only the judge, judging the heart, but he is also the administrator of the gift of the Spirit of Christ, who is eternal life, and the agency of the new birth as a son of God in all who believe.

God has not changed ever in the principle of his justification. It has always been by faith in what he has promised. Faith is defined as the confidence of man in the faithfulness of God to keep and deliver on his promise, and that confidence is manifest in obedience to the will and desire of God, no questions asked. This is the manner in which others can see the heart felt conviction that God is real and that his holiness is of greatest importance in the family of God.

While the nation of Israel, formed through the seed of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, were the special people of God whom he himself raised up to teach the other nations about himself by his interaction with them, they were not children of God because of it. They were children of Abraham and they made great boast about that. They were children of the flesh. They were given his laws and those laws, if kept perfectly, would have proven that they were righteous. But they had just the opposite effect, they proved them unrighteous and in need of a savior. That was the purpose of God. Through them he brought this savior into the world and displayed him in public to the world as he paid the penalty for the sins of the whole world, including the children of Abraham, in his own body on the cross.

This is the only gospel that saves men from the penalty of their sins, which is the second death in the lake of fire. It does not matter who you are or where you live or who your earthly parents are. This is the only way to God and the only way to be born again and to be reconciled to God, the judge of all men. One must believe with confidence from the heart that Jesus Christ died for all men and that God will receive all men who come in his name, JUST BECAUSE HE SAID HE WOULD! He will not save anyone who will not come to him by faith.

I wanted to get this straight so there will be no doubt of what I believe about salvation. But whatever I believe, it does not negate a single promise that God has made to different peoples and nations. He has made many promises to Israel concerning the land and their status as an eternal nation with 12 tribes. Obviously he has not kept those promises in this last two thousand years while he is forming the church of Jesus Christ, which includes both converts of Israel, Jews, and converts from all the other nations of the world, Gentiles. This does not mean he will not keep his national promises to them, or even that he cannot keep them, it just means that he will keep them when he has completed his formation of the church, which is his body and his bride in the same way that Eve was taken from the body of Adam and formed into his bride and the two, when married, became one flesh, according to God.

In case no one has ever read about it, there is a marriage of the Lamb prophesied by the men of God who wrote his word under his inspiration, coming sometime out there in the future. That will not happen in this age. There is much water to flow under the bridge in this world before that is fulfilled.

The scriptures do make wonderful sense but they are written from God's point of view. One must learn to think like he thinks in order to understand the deep things of God, and he must have the Spirit of God to teach him.

 

[Van]

Not true.
The author does say one thing that is accurate, however. "...when have two dispensational theologians ever agreed on everything?"
Dispensationalists butcher Daniel 9, Daniel 10, Daniel 11, and Daniel 12. They ignore the OT teachings that never teach a pre-trib rapture.They shove their cultural ideas into the text of scripture and attempt to take a square peg and fit it into a round hole. Having been raised in Dispensationalism it took decades for me to sift through the Bible and see how awful the exegesis is within dispensationalism. The idea that a Greek word, translated into Latin and thus translated to English as dispensation, which therefore makes the wacky interpretations of dispensationalists somehow accurate is as misleading as any conspiracy theory you can pick.
George, feel free to follow a wacky concoction of man since it doesn't change God's gracious salvation, but don't think for an instant that the Apostles taught such nonsense.

Yes, as AustinC says, there is more than one view of dispensationalism. But then he goes on to rail against one view, Traditional Dispensationalism.and ignores Progressive Dispensationalism.