Lol. there's that absence of consensus again.
-
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!
Dispensational error pt2......or...is it truth?
- Thread starter Iconoclast
- Start date
- Status
Lol. there's that absence of consensus again.
Oh, come now. "Damage control"? Ridiculous! There is no need for damage control among dispensationalists because there is no damage. It's not even an issue.
What the New Covenant is, is such a minor point in dispensationalism that Ryrie doesn't even address it, and I never have thought to teach it in two years teaching the class. Vlach doesn't touch it in his short but scholarly work, Dispensationalism, nor does Barndollar in The Validity of Dispensationalism. And there is no chapter on it in the excellent and recent work of essays ed. by Bingham and Kreider, Dispensationalism and the History of Redemption (2015). Finally you find a chapter in There Really Is a Difference, by Renald Showers (1990), but hey, that is a comparison of dispensationalism and covenant theology, so he would have a chapter when most ignore the discussion--because it's just not that relevant!
In short, you are making a big mountain out of a small molehill.
Last edited:
Brother JoJ, where do you find disagreement with my two posts? Thanks in advance my Brother.
BTW, you are no longer in Japan, so you need a username change? John of Michigan? Or is it Wisconsin? 
Admins??
Lullz...
Admins??
Lullz...
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
Many people, like brother kyr, hold to a straw man version of LS and then attack those with that straw man caricature.
FTR, I too believe there are many godly DT persons. But it is kind of an oxymoron for one to be godly if there need be no transformation accordingly to some of their teachings.
Also, as kyr has come on the attack, there is no need for that. It is apparent that many on here post threads to show the errors of theological systems, this one included. My point was to show that the errors of some DT is not really connected to eschatology and covenants only.
Ah, but my heart is still there.BTW, you are no longer in Japan, so you need a username change? John of Michigan? Or is it Wisconsin?
Admins??
Lullz...
And I still do correspond with my friends there, still have two Japanese Bible school students (just got their latest final exam), and am still working on the final draft of the new translation of the NT of which I am the lead translator.
If it's a heresy, you just called many of us heretics, including me. Do you really want to go there?
The fact that Jews and Gentiles are one in the body of Christ is true.
That dispensationalism fractures God's word is false. It is a theology and a philosophy of history based on a literal hermeneutic. By any literal hermeneutic, God still has a plan for His people Israel, as many prophecies attest.
Have to go, folks. My wife should be here in a few minutes to pick me up. Catch ya'll Monday. (Don't have Internet at home.)
Here's the thing, as I understand DT, it has God with two plans, with two separate ppl, one plan for Jews, one plan for Gentiles. Where I take exception with Walvoord & Ryrie(or maybe Shafer or Chafer...can't remember which...here), is they referred to us Gentiles as a 'blip' on God's radar in His dealings with the nation of Israel.
I agree that God is not done with that nation. However, as Bro. Voddie Baucham preached a sermon on Romans 11:25-36, USA is has the largest population of Jews in the world. So He can deal with Israel here and bring a multitude of Jews in and fulfill that plan. BTW, I am no longer staunchly amil, I am leaning towards Chiliasm, just not in any eschatological camp yet.
Last edited:
Have fun w/o us. It's impossible to do that, but try to have fun.Have to go, folks. My wife should be here in a few minutes to pick me up. Catch ya'll Monday. (Don't have Internet at home.)
*****Thumbs up*****
But not all of Israel is Israel, remember that. All those who make up the true Israel, the true ppl of God, have undergone a circumcision of the heart, not the foreskin. Jews saved today have been circumcised in their hearts as well as we have been. For whatever reason, God chose to turn from them to us as Jesus said in John 10 about having other sheep not of the sheepfold. So, both Jewish and Gentile sheep are in one fold, Jesus being the Shepherd. Even when He turns to the Jews, they will be saved the same way and will be added to the fold.
I think Ezekiel 37 comes into play here. I see this prophecy being all believers of all time, as it shows how God raises the dead to life. As it says, 'this is the whole house of Israel.' So I see Israel here as being the Jews and Gentiles being one body, Christ being her Head.
To the English majors...is this sentence gramatically correct? This doesn't seem plausible.
I just don't think no sentence can be worded that way. 'Don't have internet at home.' I said 'no sentence' intentionally. Being funny here...
That prophecy will have its fulfillment when Jesus returns, and all living Jews saved on that day, as israel spiritual reborn again...
Not a heresy, but some who classify orthodoxy strictly by Confessions and Creeds might hold it to be!
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!
Hello JOJ ,Oh, come now. "Damage control"? Ridiculous! There is no need for damage control among dispensationalists because there is no damage. It's not even an issue.
What the New Covenant is, is such a minor point in dispensationalism that Ryrie doesn't even address it, and I never have thought to teach it in two years teaching the class. Vlach doesn't touch it in his short but scholarly work, Dispensationalism, nor does Barndollar in The Validity of Dispensationalism. And there is no chapter on it in the excellent and recent work of essays ed. by Bingham and Kreider, Dispensationalism and the History of Redemption (2015). Finally you find a chapter in There Really Is a Difference, by Renald Showers (1990), but hey, that is a comparison of dispensationalism and covenant theology, so he would have a chapter when most ignore the discussion--because it's just not that relevant!
In short, you are making a big mountain out of a small molehill.
It might be as you say.
I have not kept up with the latest writing and modifications of this system. I have been in churches where they denied that Christians are in the New Covenant.
That is why I asked those questions that I found in these articles.
Thanks for mentioning those articles. I will search for them online and see what they offer.
Thanks you TC......I was not making it clear enough.
Starting with verse 24...
“‘My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees. They will live in the land I gave to my servant Jacob, the land where your ancestors lived. They and their children and their children’s children will live there forever, and David my servant will be their prince forever. I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant. I will establish them and increase their numbers, and I will put my sanctuary among them forever. My dwelling place will be with them; I will be their God, and they will be my people. Then the nations will know that I the Lord make Israel holy, when my sanctuary is among them forever."[vss 24-28]
It appears to me this was fulfilled in the days of David when he was king. He(God) said His sanctuary would be with them forever and David would be their king forever, so why the word 'forever' was used when David died and the sanctuary, along with the temple was destroyed, is beyond my pay grade.
I had not read that chapter in quite a while and that passage seemed to stick out as I read it this last time. But it does seem these dry bones living again serve to show us two things...how God brings to life the dead w/o their approval and how He would restore Israel during the kingdom of David's reign.
- Status