Search results

It's not just this topic, it's everything. It's a head-on battle with the Reformed with any and everything. It just puts me in an unnecessary spiritual stress and I don't need that in my condition. I've just had enough of it, I'm out of here.

You can loathe Dispensationalism all you want, ok with me. But I will tell you upfront you do not understand the details that prove it's worth.

And Job also sacrificed animals to God, shedding the blood of the animals that represented Christ for his sons and daughters in case they had sinned. Before the Law the man of the household was considered the priest of the family. He offered up sacrifices to bless the family. But the...

Surly you can understand that the blood of the animals meant nothing in and of themselves. It's what that animal blood represented to the OT saints, which was the Blood of the coming Redeemer for the Atonement of sins.

Let me throw in this thought before I leave you alone, lol. The OT saints were saved the same way we are through the Blood of Christ. Rom. 3:24-25 "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith...

Ok, if that's what you choose to believe. I'll not bother you anymore.

SG, the OT folks were under the Law and commanded to obey God, period! They didn't have the understanding of the Blood of Christ that we have. Their obedience to God in the sacrifice by faith in the Blood of the coming Redeener was their salvation.

But you don't have to believe me, SG. You can go on believing what you believe.

The only way that the OT people could know Christ was represented through faith in the Blood of the sacrifice that represented the Atonement for their souls.

Later on God told the prophets to tell the Jews He was sick and tired of their sacrifices and take them away from before Him. Why would He do that? There was salvation in the faith of Blood of the sacrifice that represented the Blood of Christ shed for the sins of man. But the Jews by this time...

I know very little of the gentleman and can't say whether he does or doesn't. I can say that if he did get there it was by reading Revelation the same way he read the Gospels and Acts, in a literal format. Until he came to the parables of Christ. He said for example, "you are the salt of the...

You had me fooled. I thought maybe you had missed out on the recent long winded encounter with it.

Well, I was mistaken in thinking you didn't have a foundational understanding of dispensationalism. I can understand, somewhat, of why you disagree, but it is what it is.

We had a long discussion on this not long ago, and I believe your summary pretty much describes the conclusion.

I'm with you on that one!

It's like CT, there was a point in time when you didn't understand it, it was confusing. Over time the focus became clearer, usually years. It's the same with the dispensation view, and it's completely different.

The reason I don't care much for getting into the dispensation view with another who doesn't understand it is that it covers the entire Scripture and if you approach it from here and there instead of the beginning, it will be just as you have said, illogical. Especially if you have a foundation...

Most of the KJVO folks I know, and that's a lot of them, are middle ground with it. But there are the fanatics that will disassociate over it. I think it's more about the person when it comes to the fanatics.

That's pretty good right there!

Salty knows very well I've stated my military service in the 82nd. And he was accusing me of a liar in his smart remarks. But ask me if I care what Salty has to say!