-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Covenant Theology or Dispensationalist?
- Thread starter Rich_UK
- Start date
quote;
Dispensationalism makes a distinction that the bible does not.
Hmm.
1Cor. 9:16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!
17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
Eph. 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph. 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
Col. 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
Better read a little more scripture before making a statement like that.
Dispensationalism makes a distinction that the bible does not.
Hmm.
1Cor. 9:16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!
17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
Eph. 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph. 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
Col. 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
Better read a little more scripture before making a statement like that.
quote;
Obviously, I think the bible teaches that the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are the same, synomous terms referencing the same thing.
Think is the key word in that sentence.
If you read the verses I posted you will see that they have things in common but some things do not apply to both.
For instance none of the people in God's kingdom could be cast into hell.
Obviously, I think the bible teaches that the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are the same, synomous terms referencing the same thing.
Think is the key word in that sentence.
If you read the verses I posted you will see that they have things in common but some things do not apply to both.
For instance none of the people in God's kingdom could be cast into hell.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
I am not denying Scripture—I am denying that there is a distinction in the Scriptures between the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God. Matthew favored the expression Kingdom of Heaven; Luke favored the expression Kingdom of God, as did Mark and Paul. Matthew, and only Matthew, used the expression Kingdom of heaven 32 times, and the expression Kingdom of God only five times.
Suggestion, read and study:
The Theocratic Kingdom by George N. H. Peters, a three-volume (2,175 pages of small print) work on this subject.
Jesus and the Kingdom of God by G.R. Beasley-Murray
The Kingdom of God by John Bright
The Kingdom of God by Alexander Balmain Bruce
Jesus and the Kingdom by George Eldon Ladd
Well rather than read all of those tonight how about if you just tell me how someone gets cast out of heaven as the verse says.
The reason for the word change is because they are different.
The "kingdom" all throughout the Old Test. is the same kingdom mentioned in Matt. and is very not the same as Kingdom of God.
Look if your serious about it let's discuss it.If you just want to repeat yourself I'm not interested.
The reason for the word change is because they are different.
The "kingdom" all throughout the Old Test. is the same kingdom mentioned in Matt. and is very not the same as Kingdom of God.
Look if your serious about it let's discuss it.If you just want to repeat yourself I'm not interested.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
I hope that you are not an advocate of the heresy known as Millennial Exclusion Theology perpetrated by Joey Faust and his band of thieves
. Or perhaps you are an advocate Zane Hodges’ anti-intellectual, modernist theory that there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth in a suburb of heaven . Matt. 13:33-43 explains exactly what is going on.
33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.
36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear,
Pay close attn. to verse 40 angels come to gather out of his kingdom all things that offend.
Now I'm sure you know that in the eternal home of the saved there will be nothing that offends.
Really this is such a basic teaching. I am not sure how you can read this and say that it is the same as the kingdom of God.
33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.
36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear,
Pay close attn. to verse 40 angels come to gather out of his kingdom all things that offend.
Now I'm sure you know that in the eternal home of the saved there will be nothing that offends.
Really this is such a basic teaching. I am not sure how you can read this and say that it is the same as the kingdom of God.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
If you are not approaching this subject from the point of view of Joey Faust or Zane Hodges, I have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about. I believe in the historical interpretation of the passages that you are citing. I don't even have a clue as to how you are interpreting them.
Craig said; I don't even have a clue
Are you trying to impress someone by dropping names? It does not impress me.
I am taking the bible point of view where it says that the children of the kingdom of heaven are cast into hell.
I printed the verses for you to read.
Now please explain them in light of your statement that both kingdoms are the same.
It seems you are doing everything in your power to avoid explaining it.
Forget your books and authors for 60 seconds and explain the verses please.
Are you trying to impress someone by dropping names? It does not impress me.
I am taking the bible point of view where it says that the children of the kingdom of heaven are cast into hell.
I printed the verses for you to read.
Now please explain them in light of your statement that both kingdoms are the same.
It seems you are doing everything in your power to avoid explaining it.
Forget your books and authors for 60 seconds and explain the verses please.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
After you have carefully and prayerfully read the works that I cited above, if you still have some questions, I will be glad to answer them.
Exactly as I thought you cannot explain the most basic of verses but instead just list books and authors.
Have you ever studied on your own?
Really I am suprised that you cannot explain these verses the way you jumped in with guns blazing.
Is that a smoke screen for not being able to answer?
I understand the verses perfectly.
My only question is can you explain your statement that both kingdoms are the same in light of what the BIBLE says.
Apparently not.
Have you ever studied on your own?
Really I am suprised that you cannot explain these verses the way you jumped in with guns blazing.
Is that a smoke screen for not being able to answer?
I understand the verses perfectly.
My only question is can you explain your statement that both kingdoms are the same in light of what the BIBLE says.
Apparently not.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
Because someone doesn't agree with you they must be spiritually immature? Not very sporting
Matthew 13:40 - weeds sown by the Devil are gathered
Matthew 13:41 - tells us how the weeds will be gathered
Matthew 13:42 - tells us where the weeds will go
Matthew 13:43 - the righteous shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father after the weeds have been gathered
So to follow your thinking there is now a kingdom of heaven, a kingdom of God and now a kingdom of their Father. The words are different aren't they?
go2church said;Because someone doesn't agree with you they must be spiritually immature?
To disagree is human however to disagree without
grounds of proof shows lack of understanding.
All that craig did was disagree but offered no scriptual reasoning.
To answer your question above the time frame is verse 39 "end of the world"
The kingdom of heaven will be instituted after the trib.
Ez. 20:33-42 explain it very well.
Matt. 24 also
go2church said So to follow your thinking there is now a kingdom of heaven, a kingdom of God and now a kingdom of their Father. The words are different aren't they?
"now a kingdom of heaven" No
Kingdom of God and Father are one in the same.
After all;
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
To disagree is human however to disagree without
grounds of proof shows lack of understanding.
All that craig did was disagree but offered no scriptual reasoning.
To answer your question above the time frame is verse 39 "end of the world"
The kingdom of heaven will be instituted after the trib.
Ez. 20:33-42 explain it very well.
Matt. 24 also
go2church said So to follow your thinking there is now a kingdom of heaven, a kingdom of God and now a kingdom of their Father. The words are different aren't they?
"now a kingdom of heaven" No
Kingdom of God and Father are one in the same.
After all;
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Why are these references to a seperate kingdom of God and kingdom of heaven only found in Matthew?
Because Matthew is Old Tesatment
What about the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 5-7?
Good moral/ ethical teaching but don't apply to the current church age, you have to rightly divide the word of God.
So Jesus was an Old Testament prophet?
Blah-blah-blah
Well, we have managed to chase that around pretty good. Since I don't buy the entire dispensational scheme (which is what it truly is) it is safe to say we aren't ever going to find much common ground on this one.
Because Matthew is Old Tesatment
What about the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 5-7?
Good moral/ ethical teaching but don't apply to the current church age, you have to rightly divide the word of God.
So Jesus was an Old Testament prophet?
Blah-blah-blah
Well, we have managed to chase that around pretty good. Since I don't buy the entire dispensational scheme (which is what it truly is) it is safe to say we aren't ever going to find much common ground on this one.
Stratiotes
New Member
I believe that both Covenant Theology and Dispensational Theology are man-made theological schemes that distort the true teachings of the Bible through the application of deductive rather than inductive logic. Deductive logic:
Covenant Theology is the correct theology; therefore this verse must be interpreted thus:
Or
Dispensational Theology is the correct theology; therefore this verse must be interpreted thus: </font>[/QUOTE]This is something we struggle with on a lot of issues. While trying to find the "systematic" links in scripture to understand the big picture we sometimes force scripture to fit our system. We don't like it when we think we've figured out a system of understanding (sortof like putting God in a box) and then find something that challenges it. But, that does not mean we are wrong to try and understand the big picture. It only means we should be willing to daily question if our system explains all that we think it does. All of us have a system for understanding the big picture - we have to because God is a lot bigger than anything we can hold in our minds otherwise.
But, not wanting to be accused of chickening out on the question
, I think I would hold more to the convenant view. I think the argument about the Presbyterians holding it as a test of orthodoxy is a good point but that is not something inherent in convenantal view. And it is an interesting historical note that while one nonconformist might have been jailed, others seemed to have incredible influence even at high levels (the John Bunyan/John Owen oddity). I don't think God has had two separate people...to take that view to its logical conclusion would lead us to have to throw out the OT because we would never be totally sure what was for us and what was for the "other" people of God. Just does not make sense on that alone. I also don't see how one could say that God has not yet fulfilled his promises to the physical sons of Abraham as an excuse to separate them in light of scriptures that imply that all the promises were fulfilled or that imply that the *real* and *eternal* promises were not earthly but something that earth only mimics.
Deuteronomy 1:10, Joshua 21:43-45, Joshua 23:1,14, Galations 3:8, Hebrews 11:8-10 (The promise was not ultimately fulfilled in an earthly kingdom but in one prepared by God for all *true* children of Abraham John 14:2, 3)