Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Chapter Four Is Up!

Chapter Four of
Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election
is up:

Elect "In Christ"

http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/Elect.htm

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of the article.​

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Concerning Jeremiah 31, using that as an example if dispensational error, it is grounded (it seems to me) in the tenacious belief of dispensationalists to separate Israel from the Church. "The Jewish nation is never to enter the church." -Darby

the 'basic promise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity." -Ryrie

I believe that because of the belief of a distinct Israel from the Church, Jeremiah gets applied, and the New Covenant there, to the future restoration of Israel. It is very obvious to me that the New Covenant here is the New Covenant in the blood of Christ which includes all of God's people, both Jew and Gentile, as explained by Hebrews.

Jeremiah 31 is undeniably made to Israel, yet it is the Church fulfilling it. I found this quote from Ryrie:

"If the church does not have a new covenant, then she is fulfilling Israel's promises, for it has been clearly shown that the Old Testament teaching on the new covenant is that it is for Israel. If the church is fulfilling Israel's promises as contained in the new covenant or anywhere else in the Scriptures, then [dispensational] premillennialism is condemned. One might well ask why there are not two aspects to the one new covenant. This is the position held by many premillennialists, but we agree that the amillennialist has every right to say of this view that it is a practical admission that the new covenant is fulfilled in and to the church."

Well, enough on that. Dispensationalism in its core teachings does not match the teaching of the Apostles and THEIR interpretation and application of the promises of God made to Israel.

-five

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Concerning Jeremiah 31, using that as an example if dispensational error, it is grounded (it seems to me) in the tenacious belief of dispensationalists to separate Israel from the Church. "The Jewish nation is never to enter the church." -Darby

the 'basic promise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity." -Ryrie

I believe that because of the belief of a distinct Israel from the Church, Jeremiah gets applied, and the New Covenant there, to the future restoration of Israel. It is very obvious to me that the New Covenant here is the New Covenant in the blood of Christ which includes all of God's people, both Jew and Gentile, as explained by Hebrews.

Jeremiah 31 is undeniably made to Israel, yet it is the Church fulfilling it. I found this quote from Ryrie:

"If the church does not have a new covenant, then she is fulfilling Israel's promises, for it has been clearly shown that the Old Testament teaching on the new covenant is that it is for Israel. If the church is fulfilling Israel's promises as contained in the new covenant or anywhere else in the Scriptures, then [dispensational] premillennialism is condemned. One might well ask why there are not two aspects to the one new covenant. This is the position held by many premillennialists, but we agree that the amillennialist has every right to say of this view that it is a practical admission that the new covenant is fulfilled in and to the church."

Well, enough on that. Dispensationalism in its core teachings does not match the teaching of the Apostles and THEIR interpretation and application of the promises of God made to Israel.

-five

Many classical dispensationalist do not believe that the Church is yet in the New Covenant. However, that is not true of all of us. I for instance believe that the Church is the new Priesthood of Israel. The 12 Apostles will be the new Patriarchs of Israel. Christ is forming this new priesthood today (in the Church Age). However, technically (actually in time), the Church will not be the new priesthood of Israel until the restoration of the nation of Israel at the beginning of the Kingdom Age.

Christ said regarding the Lord's Supper, "this is the New Covenant in my blood." Therefore, if the Lord's Supper is an ordinance of the Church Age (and it undoubtably is), then the Church must be at least particially fulfilling the New Covenant since the Lord's Supper is an aspect of the New Covenant of which the Church participates.

The problem here is often a failure to differentiate between the Mosaic Covenant and the Abrahamic Covenant. The Mosaic Covenant is the Covenant that has passed away, not the Abrahamic Covenant. The New Covenant is another fold in the Abrahamic Covenant of which the Church is a partial fulfillment. I will deal more extensively with this in later chapters.

Have you read the four chapters and introduction that is up as of now?
http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/DispensationalismIndex.htm

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I have not read any of the chapters. Probably won't. But your right in that there are variations of dispensationalism. There may be some true aspects of it. As I have listened to folks try to explain dispensationalism vs. what I have heard regarding covenant theology (and subsequently amilllenialsim) the later seems much closer to the Scriptures.

 

[skypair]

Amy...

So OT saints will live again as humans in your MK?

Yes, they do so that God can fulfill His "land" promises to Abrahamic promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He also promised David an everlasting kingdom on earth and Ezek says he will be a "David my prince." Ezek 37:25. And then -- back to the original issue -- how is God going to put in the truest sense of the prophecy a heart of flesh into those who have already died unless they DO live on earth again?

The Church was created by the New Covenant, therefore the branches could not bring the NC to the Church because if they were the Church they already had the NC..

It's a bit more involved than that, Amy. The root and trunk of the tree are Israel. Some of the branches that remain are Israel who were kept by taking on a new belief instead of being cut out in unbelief.

Wild branches are Gentiles grafted into the root and stock of Israel (same heritage). But almost none were part of the root and stock. And the fruit of tree now has changed.

We'll talk more after I play golf. :1_grouphug:

skypair

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Chapter Five of
Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election
is up:


Election and God's Sovereign Eternal Purpose

​

http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/Sovereign.htm

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of the article.

The Dispensational Chart is also available in PDF.
Link:
http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pictures/Dispensational%20Chart.pdf
​

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Chapter Six Is Posted - 7,470 Words

Chapter Six of
Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election
is up:

[FONT=&quot]Sovereignty: What Does It Mean?[/FONT]

​

http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/DispensationalismIndex.htm

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of the article.

The Dispensational Chart is also available in PDF.
Link:
http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pictures/Dispensational%20Chart.pdf

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Chapter Seven is Posted

Chapter Seven is up

[FONT=&quot]

​

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

The next chapter of
​

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

​

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

[FONT=&quot] Refutation of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Covenant Theology[/FONT]​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

[FONT=&quot]is posted (5,231 words)
[/FONT]​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

[FONT=&quot]
Chapter Seven
[/FONT] Election as Defined by the Hermeneutic​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

Principle of First Mention​

[/FONT]
[FONT=Castellar,serif]

http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/DispensationalismIndex.htm

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of the article.
​

[/FONT]

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Chapter Eight is Posted (5,881 words)

[FONT=&quot]

The next chapter of
​

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

​

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

[FONT=&quot] Refutation of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Covenant Theology[/FONT]​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

[FONT=&quot]is posted (5,881 words)
[/FONT]​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

[FONT=&quot]
Chapter Eight
[/FONT] "Now . . . in Christ Jesus"
​

[/FONT]
[FONT=Castellar,serif]

http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/DispensationalismIndex.htm
​

[/FONT] [FONT=Castellar,serif]

​

[/FONT]

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of the article.​

 

[Lou Martuneac]

The Bible is a Dispensational Book

I never subscribed to either one system of theology, but many would say I am "covenant" I do reject dispensationalism (as I understand it) in the main because of its teaching of two peoples of God: the Church and Israel. I do not see this concept in Scripture... There is no need for any interpretation of Jeremiah in this passage as Hebrews applies the very verses to the Church and the New Covenant spoken of there to the Covenant in Christ...This alone is enough for me to know dispensationalism has missed the mark of truth, although many godly men hold to it.

RB/All:

Those who deny Dispensationalism read the same Bible you and I have, and it professes at least two dispensations. In the front of many Bibles it says, “HOLY BIBLE.” Then it will tell me that the books of the Bible are divided into Old & New Testaments. OLD TESTAMENT: Genesis through Malachi. NEW TESTAMENT: Matthew through Revelation

For those who say, “There is no such thing as a dispensation,” the Bible clearly speaks of the dispensations.

Four times the Apostle Paul speaks of the dispensations: 1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10; 3:2, 5; Col. 1:25.

Those who say there no dispensations hold within their hands a Bible that professes itself to be dispensational.


LM

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Chapter Nine is Posted (7,349 words)

The next chapter of

Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election

Refutation of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Covenant Theology

is posted (7,349 words)

Chapter Nine
The Big "If"
http://www.disciplemakerministries....nalismIndex.htm

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of the article.​

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election​

Refutation of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Covenant Theology​

Chapter Nine​

The Big “if”

(7,349 Words)

​

and

​

Chapter Ten​

[FONT=&quot]The First Creation in Labor Pangs for the New Creation[/FONT]
(6,003 Words)


[FONT=&quot]are posted[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/DispensationalismIndex.htm[/FONT]

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of each article.​

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

It’s the Ordo Regenerare, not the Ordo Salutis

Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election

Refutation of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Covenant Theology

Chapter Eleven
It’s the Ordo Regenerare, not the Ordo Salutis
(10,206 Words)

is posted

http://www.disciplemakerministries....nalismIndex.htm

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of each chapter.​

 

[J.D.]

RB/All:

Those who deny Dispensationalism read the same Bible you and I have, and it professes at least two dispensations. In the front of many Bibles it says, “HOLY BIBLE.” Then it will tell me that the books of the Bible are divided into Old & New Testaments. OLD TESTAMENT: Genesis through Malachi. NEW TESTAMENT: Matthew through Revelation

For those who say, “There is no such thing as a dispensation,” the Bible clearly speaks of the dispensations.

Four times the Apostle Paul speaks of the dispensations: 1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10; 3:2, 5; Col. 1:25.

Those who say there no dispensations hold within their hands a Bible that professes itself to be dispensational.


LM

Did someone say "there [are] no dispensatins"?

 

[ituttut]

I have been busy with work, family, et. And I grew weary of the debates. Hopefully I can stay out of them generally speaking.

Concerning the dispensationalism I am not intimately familiar with all its details and nuances, nor with Covenant Theology. Our pastor preached a series on the covenants and I have several works on it.

I probably mentioned it before, but I never subscribed to either one system of theology, but many would say I am "covenant" I do reject dispensationalism (as I understand it) in the main because of its teaching of two peoples of God: the Church and Israel. I do not see this concept in Scripture.

Most do not. Can you say you are of Israel? Are you of any Tribe that came out of Jacob (Israel)? Even should you be of "covenant blood made directly with God", I don't know how today you can be under covenant theology, thought, or biblical reference, unless wishing to come as a proselyte. A year after Pentecost the "Covenant people" Israel were cut-off as evidenced in scripture. Amazes me so very many have no idea what is revealed in, and will not accept, Acts 9.

I have seen this concept twist and mangle verses like Jeremiah 31 which I was appalled when I learned many dispensationalists apply to Israel and think it has nothing to do with the Church. How folks can do this only makes sense when I understand our human tendency to hold to a prior belief even in the face of revealed Scripture. There is no need for any interpretation of Jeremiah in this passage as Hebrews applies the very verses to the Church and the New Covenant spoken of there to the Covenant in Christ.

You make an argument that most make who do not understand the "Body of Christ". To whom is the book of Hebrews written? Even if you changed it to the book of Gentiles, it would still reveal to whom it was written. Chapter 11 tells us HOW ALL FROM THE BEGINNING WERE JUSTFIED IN THE EYES OF GOD. None, not one were justified (as they lived) as we are today.

This alone is enough for me to know dispensationalism has missed the mark of truth, although many godly men hold to it.

The difference is the gospel of the "Kingdom that was (and to many today) at hand", and the gospel of the "Body of Christ" to be raptured. We are on one foundation of Jesus Christ, or we are on the other. One will come before the other. I chose the first in order to escape the "tribulation" period.

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election

Refutation of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Covenant Theology

Chapter Eleven

It’s the Ordo Regenerare, not the Ordo Salutis

Romans 8:26-30

(10,206 Words)

and

Chapter Twelve
Settled In Eternity According to Foreknowledge

Romans 8:31-39
(6,428 words)

are posted

http://www.disciplemakerministries.o...alismIndex.htm

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of each article.​

 

[Rippon]

I read chapter 12. It's the same old Arminianism though you pretend to be against it. You have not refuted Calvinism.God is really the Sovereign of all in my understanding of the Bible. He doesn't just know everything about everything and everyone and has sufficient back-up plans to meet with contingencies. He causes, He determines, He decrees. He choose a people for Himself in eternity past. People do not "choose to believe" as you put it. He appoints the ones of His choosing to believe.Acts 13:48 for instance knocks your suppositions out of the water.But, of course, you think that the people who the Bible says were ordained to believe merely were 'disposed' to believe. That's a horrible wrenching of God's Word on your part.
You've invested a lot of time and energy with your essays. Occasionally you have intersected with biblical truths. However, you still propound the same old Arminianism of the past. Yes, Arminianism, even if you hold to OSAS.

 

[ituttut]

Dispensationalism and the Doctrine of Election​

Refutation of Calvinism, Arminianism, and Covenant Theology​

Chapter Eleven​

It’s the Ordo Regenerare, not the Ordo Salutis​

Romans 8:26-30​

(10,206 Words)​

and​

Chapter Twelve
Settled In Eternity According to Foreknowledge​

Romans 8:31-39
(6,428 words)​

are posted​

http://www.disciplemakerministries.o...alismIndex.htm​

Comments can be made by clicking the link at end of each article.​

Expect you may be trying to answer me?? Am I of Calvin or of the Arminianism persuasion? NO! Of the covenant bringing me under the Law? NO! Then what am I? I am of the "Body of Christ", that was unknown until after Damascus Road.

Can you tell me what God had hidden until He revealed it to Paul?

 

[Jarthur001]

I read chapter 12. It's the same old Arminianism though you pretend to be against it. You have not refuted Calvinism.God is really the Sovereign of all in my understanding of the Bible. He doesn't just know everything about everything and everyone and has sufficient back-up plans to meet with contingencies. He causes, He determines, He decrees. He choose a people for Himself in eternity past. People do not "choose to believe" as you put it. He appoints the ones of His choosing to believe.Acts 13:48 for instance knocks your suppositions out of the water.But, of course, you think that the people who the Bible says were ordained to believe merely were 'disposed' to believe. That's a horrible wrenching of God's Word on your part.
You've invested a lot of time and energy with your essays. Occasionally you have intersected with biblical truths. However, you still propound the same old Arminianism of the past. Yes, Arminianism, even if you hold to OSAS.

You are right Rippon. I read his stuff before. Just plain Arminianism 101

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

I read chapter 12. It's the same old Arminianism though you pretend to be against it. You have not refuted Calvinism.God is really the Sovereign of all in my understanding of the Bible. He doesn't just know everything about everything and everyone and has sufficient back-up plans to meet with contingencies. He causes, He determines, He decrees. He choose a people for Himself in eternity past. People do not "choose to believe" as you put it. He appoints the ones of His choosing to believe.Acts 13:48 for instance knocks your suppositions out of the water.But, of course, you think that the people who the Bible says were ordained to believe merely were 'disposed' to believe. That's a horrible wrenching of God's Word on your part.
You've invested a lot of time and energy with your essays. Occasionally you have intersected with biblical truths. However, you still propound the same old Arminianism of the past. Yes, Arminianism, even if you hold to OSAS.

You obviously have not read the articles. Both Calvinism and Arminianism believe people are elected to be saved. I have clearly shown that election is vocational, not salvational. Secondly, election is not monothetic in application. If you read the articles, you would know that. In its primary use in the Word of God, election is corporate and not individual. These articles do not come any where near to either Calvinism or Arminianism. There is an alternative.

I don't mind you criticizing the articles, but don't do so if you are going to read them superficially.

Chapter 6 is on God's sovereignty.
Sovereignty:What Does it Mean?
http://www.disciplemakerministries.org/Pages/Dispensationalism/Sovereignty.htm