• 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!

Dispensationalism

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by UZThD:
Originally posted by ituttut:


But:

Romans 3:28 "justified 'pistei."
Hebrews 11:17 "offered Isaac pistei"

Same dative singular of pistos. Why should one be thought to mean BY faith and another THROUGH faith?

Bill
I like to inform and be informed.

In verse 30, "Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith"
===
re Rom 3:30

IMO, the use of the two prepositions is either but a rhetorical device with no intended difference (eg see, Cranfield, Murray, EF Harrison ) or the apostle uses ek to indicate source and dia agency (eg, see Robertson, Lenski). In either case, none of these exegetes find there what you do. But we both will believe what we will.
Thanks for your reply friend.

I’ll not go through all of the above, for Cranfield is enough. “There is not one of us who is saved yet. We are trusting God for our salvation” as he writes of I Peter 1-13.

Peter is of the Jewish Pentecostal church, and received the Holy Ghost by “repenting and being baptized for the remission of sins”, just as He was told, and also preached. This gospel is fine for Peter for this is the gospel of John the Baptist to the Jew. Those of that gospel, just as Cranfield believes must endure until the end, for he says as much above. But I believe the foundational gospel based on Christ Jesus from heaven that tells me I am saved immediately by the One baptism done without hands, that spiritual baptism performed by the Holy Spirit.

I notice you proclaimed, Quote” I don't wish to argue anymore dispensationalism with friend It.

But:
”Unquote.

Yet this is the very heart of the dispensational gospel that Christ Jesus gave to Paul.

So we do disagree for I do not believe as the Catholic church that we must be water baptized to be saved, for it is not a saving baptism, but a “holding” baptism until we die, i.e. if we endure until the end.

When Paul preached and wrote He had to use the word “Through” when Christ told Him. This is part of what was hidden from the beginning. This is peculiar to Paul (until others grasp this gospel), just as is the gospel of God Reconciling the world unto Himself. And just as that terrible so terrible word which so many hate, it being “dispensations”. Through faith is nowhere found in connection with salvation until after Damascus Road.

If I come preaching to you “Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision byfaith”, I would hope you would ask me what I am talking about, for it is the same faith. If Christ really did reveal to Paul a secret, was it to tell Paul the Gentile will be saved just as the Jew? This is not what His Word teaches, for Peter informs us that the Jew can now be saved as we (me) Gentiles (Acts 15:11).

Changing Through in both of these scriptures to By simply makes a nonsensical thought.

I can’t fault you for your belief, for the masses believe this, but I am not of the masses. We can only believe what He reveals to us.

If you have time, how do you interpret Romans 5:1-2 from the Literal Bible with Strong’s numbers?

|1344| having been made right
|3767| Then
|1537| by
|4102| faith,
|1515| peace
|2192| we have
|4314| with
|3588| -
|2316| God
|1223| through
|3588| the
|2962| Lord
|2257| of us,
|2424| Jesus
|5547| Christ,
2.
|1223| through
|3739| whom
|2532| also
|3588| the
|4318| access
|2192| we have had
|4102| by faith
|1519| into
|5485| gracious love
|5026| this
|1722| in
|3739| which
|2476| we stand,
|2532| and
|2744| boast
|1909| on
|1680| the hope
|3588| of the
|1391| glory
|3588| of
|2316| God.

Christian faith, ituttut
 

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Paul33:
I for one will be pleased when we can put dispensational teaching to rest.
Have i got a bargin for you

at the pretribulation rapture/resurrection by Jesus
at the end of the Dispensation of Grace, we will
quit teaching God's Economy (AKA: 'dispensation'
doctrine) as found in the Bible.

Too bad you will have to go Home with Jesus
with us ;)
</font>[/QUOTE]One with Christian love,
Christian faith, ituttut
 

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by Paul33:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ituttut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Paul33:
Dispensationalism is on its death bed, this is why LaHaye opened his pre-trib research center at LU. It was in reaction to the growing ground swell of post-trib teaching in evangelical and former dispensational circles!

I for one will be pleased when we can put dispensational teaching to rest.
No problem. You can do it right now.

There are many that wish to dismiss Paul. If you really mean this, then never refer to him again, other than giving reference to him standing looking at, bringing on and allowing the stoning of Steven. Try it please, and see what you understand. You will understand the “law and the prophets”, and the gospel of John the Baptist. Remember, never ever quote PAUL again. Your wish will come true, being rid of Christ Jesus in heaven forever.
</font>[/QUOTE]I have made it a general rule never to respond to you, but I've got to tell you, your last post was so absurd that I couldn't resist telling you.
</font>[/QUOTE]God love you for your truthfulness. We can't hold back the truth. You say what is in your heart, and I do also.
Christian faith, ituttut
 

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by OldRegular:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ituttut:
I don’t believe you quite understand what you are saying. In your first paragraph you deny we are in the Body of Christ. Now here you are saying the Church is the Bride of Jesus Christ?
I understand now why you are hyper-dispensational. You can't understand more than one thought at a time. I wrote:
Your posts above are essentially nonsense. From what little is understandable you appear to assert that the Body of Jesus Christ is the Church and that the Bride of Jesus Christ is Israel. If that it is your contention it is totally false.
Please show me where I said that the Church was not the Body of Jesus Christ.
</font>[/QUOTE]Here it is in black and white:

Quote – “Your posts above are essentially nonsense. Form what little is understandable you appear to assert that the Body of Jesus Christ is the Church and that the Bride of Jesus Christ is Israel. If that it is your contention it is totally false.” Unquote.

Quote – “In 2 Corinthians11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. Paul is obviously talking about the Church as the Bride of Jesus Christ. In Ephesians 5 Paul talks about the Church as the Bride of Jesus Christ.” Unquote.

You call false “the Body of Jesus Christ is the Church”, and then you follow-up with “Paul is obviously talking about the Church as the Bride of Jesus Christ.” You at first say Jesus Christ is not One with the Church, then you say Paul is after all saying the Church is One with Christ.

Is not Jesus Christ the head of the Church, and we are in that Church?

Christian faith, ituttut
 

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by OldRegular:
ituttut

The Apostle Paul is the one who said that anyone who taught that there was more than one Gospel was a heretic, at least he said let them be accursed.
Do you believe this gospel today? ”These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matthew 10:5-7.

Do you believe this gospel today? ”And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Mark 16:15-18. Then Peter preached the same gospel in Acts 2:37-39.

Do you believe this gospel today? ”But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here. 29. Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, 30. And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31. And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”……………………”And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: 7. That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. 8. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9. Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Acts 16:28-31, and Ephesians 2:6-9.

Which One gospel is Paul talking about for today? Christian faith, ituttut
 

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by OldRegular:
ituttut

I was going to quit responding yo your posts. However On reading the last two I noted that you had either grossly misrepresented some of my statements or lied about them. I may respond to all your lies and misrepresentations of my earlier posts, I may not. However I will say three things:

1. I quit responding to posts by dispensationalists because it was useless and they took great delight in questioning the salvation of any one who was not a dispensationalist.

But haven’t you noticed it is you and those that avoid the Word of Jesus Christ from heaven given to us through His Apostle Paul, that starts the “name calling” when they can find no answer to refute Paul’s dispensational gospel?

2. There is only one people of God, those who have been redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ. The Southern Baptist Faith and Message adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention in Atlanta, Georgia on June 14, 2000 writes of the Church in Section VI as follows: “The New Testament speaks also of the Church as the Body of Christ which includes all the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.”

Old friend, being a Baptist, I believe much as they, or some in the church. On this topic however I ask, does the Old Testament speak of the Church of the Body of Christ? We are not all saved in the same manner, and all are not of that nation that God made for Himself. “For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God, and the Lord hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.” Deuteronomy 14:2. I only put forth what God says. Who today can lay claim to this?

3. Hyper-dispensationalism is gross error at best and heretical at worst and that is in essential agreement with those who call themselves dispensationalists. An example of the heretical teaching promulgated by you on this thread is that there is more than one Gospel. Those are not my words they are Paul's.
Those are hoarse words from one in the Body of Christ and where I also reside. I believe the One gospel of Paul as shown in my previous post. Surely that is the one you also chose. If you did, then it is the dispensational gospel that Christ gave to Paul for we today. Christian faith, ituttut
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by ituttut:
I believe the One gospel of Paul as shown in my previous post. Surely that is the one you also chose. If you did, then it is the dispensational gospel that Christ gave to Paul for we today. Christian faith, ituttut
I believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the one and only Gospel. The Apostle Paul was not ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as he notes in the following Scripture:

Romans 1:16

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Please note that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is for both the Jew and the Gentile.

There is no such thing as the gospel of Paul. Those who trust in Paul for salvation will be sadly disappointed!
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
The origin of some of Itututts radical views might be explained if we understand their origins, hyper- or ultra-dispensationalism.

THE ORIGIN OF ULTRADISPENSATIONALISM [from Dispensationalist Charles Ryrie’s book Dispensationalism, page 198]

Ultradispensationalism had its origin in the ministry and writings of Ethelbert W Bullinger (1837-1913). He received his education at Kings College, London, and was an ordained Anglican clergyman. He was the author of seventy-seven works, including the Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the Greek New Testament and the Companion Bible. He was a scholar of repute, editor for nineteen years of a monthly magazine called Things to Come, and an accomplished musician.

His theology was a mixture. He held the heretical doctrine of the extinction of the soul between death and resurrection.silent on the final state of the lost, and many of his followers were and are annihilationists. In his sevenfold dispensational scheme Bullinger had two dispensations between Pentecost and the end of the church age. He placed the Gospels and the book of Acts under the Law and commenced the dispensation of the Church with the ministry of Paul after Acts 28:28. The prison epistles, therefore Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians—set forth the fullness of the revelation of the mystery of this church age. He also denied that water baptism and the Lords Supper are for this age.

His dispensational teaching has been the fount of all the ultra-dispensational teachings from his day to the present. However, many ultradispensationalists do not teach soul sleep and annihilation. But almost all hold to the doctrine that the church did not begin at Pentecost but did begin with Paul (although I came across one group that believes the Body of Christ began at Pentecost even though the group does not practice water baptism or the Lords Supper).
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by ituttut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by OldRegular:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ituttut:
I don’t believe you quite understand what you are saying. In your first paragraph you deny we are in the Body of Christ. Now here you are saying the Church is the Bride of Jesus Christ?
I understand now why you are hyper-dispensational. You can't understand more than one thought at a time. I wrote:
Your posts above are essentially nonsense. From what little is understandable you appear to assert that the Body of Jesus Christ is the Church and that the Bride of Jesus Christ is Israel. If that it is your contention it is totally false.
Please show me where I said that the Church was not the Body of Jesus Christ.
</font>[/QUOTE]Here it is in black and white:

Quote – “Your posts above are essentially nonsense. Form what little is understandable you appear to assert that the Body of Jesus Christ is the Church and that the Bride of Jesus Christ is Israel. If that it is your contention it is totally false.” Unquote.

Quote – “In 2 Corinthians11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. Paul is obviously talking about the Church as the Bride of Jesus Christ. In Ephesians 5 Paul talks about the Church as the Bride of Jesus Christ.” Unquote.

You call false “the Body of Jesus Christ is the Church”, and then you follow-up with “Paul is obviously talking about the Church as the Bride of Jesus Christ.” You at first say Jesus Christ is not One with the Church, then you say Paul is after all saying the Church is One with Christ.

Is not Jesus Christ the head of the Church, and we are in that Church?

Christian faith, ituttut
</font>[/QUOTE]Again ituttut you show your inability to understand what you read. You accuse me of stating that the Church was not the Body of Jesus Christ yet you still cannot show where I stated such. In fact in my post of uly 21, 2005 11:18 PM I quoted the Baptist Faith and Message: “The New Testament speaks also of the Church as the Body of Christ which includes all the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.”

You also invent out of whole cloth the statement you attribute to me
You at first say Jesus Christ is not One with the Church, then you say Paul is after all saying the Church is One with Christ.
Again ituttut you show your inability to understand what you read. In fact your thought process appears to be irrational.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by ituttut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by OldRegular:
ituttut

The Apostle Paul is the one who said that anyone who taught that there was more than one Gospel was a heretic, at least he said let them be accursed.
Do you believe this gospel today? ”These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matthew 10:5-7.

Do you believe this gospel today? ”And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Mark 16:15-18. Then Peter preached the same gospel in Acts 2:37-39.

Do you believe this gospel today? ”But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here. 29. Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, 30. And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31. And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”……………………”And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: 7. That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. 8. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9. Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Acts 16:28-31, and Ephesians 2:6-9.

Which One gospel is Paul talking about for today? Christian faith, ituttut
</font>[/QUOTE]I repeat, there is only one Gospel, there has always been only one Gospel, There will always be only one Gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul said it most clearly in Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

In fact Paul tells us that this same Gospel was preached to Abraham:

Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.[/b]
 

UZThD

New Member
Originally posted by ituttut:
Originally posted by UZThD:
[qb]
Originally posted by ituttut:


But:

Romans 3:28 "justified 'pistei."
Hebrews 11:17 "offered Isaac pistei"

Same dative singular of pistos. Why should one be thought to mean BY faith and another THROUGH faith?

Bill
I like to inform and be informed.

In verse 30, "Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith"
===
re Rom 3:30

IMO, the use of the two prepositions is either but a rhetorical device with no intended difference (eg see, Cranfield, Murray, EF Harrison ) or the apostle uses ek to indicate source and dia agency (eg, see Robertson, Lenski). In either case, none of these exegetes find there what you do. But we both will believe what we will.
Thanks for your reply friend.

I’ll not go through all of the above, for Cranfield is enough.

Changing Through in both of these scriptures to By simply makes a nonsensical thought.

I can’t fault you for your belief, for the masses believe this, but I am not of the masses. We can only believe what He reveals to us.


===
===


Hi IT:

Well, I think we may also may believe what we THINK He reveals to us. At least I will admit to doing that at times.

My concern in posting now is not dispensationalism ! My only concern is the determination of the difference in Pauline usage between prepositions. And while those 5 exegetes I referenced opined on that difference or lack of it, they did not exemplify for me in Paul's writings the cause for their convictions. So, I read some texts on my own in the Greek. I believe Paul NOT commentators or establishers of belief systems even if they are not of the masses.

It seems to me that if we wish to see what Paul in Rom 3:30 sigifies, if anything, by using both dia and ek, we should look at how he elsewhere uses those same prepositions with that same noun!

In all of these verses the object of the preposition is pisteos (long o--"faith"). However , the preposition is sometimes dia and at other times ek. As you know, in Rom 3:30 Paul uses both prepositions each of which has as its object pisteos --although in one usage the noun is articulated and in the other it is not! What that may signify may be of interest! Perhaps you'll be kind enough to share with me your view as to why one pisteos is articulated but other is not?

While I looked at other texts besides Pauline, I'll limit the sample to Paul. So in the Greek (as neither do I put my entire trust in translators! I never could understand why anyone who wishes to grasp Pauline thought and who, like me, deems Paul so important, would be content to attempt that in English instead of the language in which Paul actually wrote--don't you agree??) ) So, I looked at:

Gal 3:8 ; 3:11 ; 3:24; 3:26 Eph 3:17 ;Phil 3:9; Rom 1:17 ; 3:22 ;3:25; 4:16 ; 9:32; and, 2 Cor 5:7 .

Again, understand that in some of these the Greek is ek pisteos and in others the Greek is dia pisteos. SAME noun! Yet at first glance, the two prepositions appear to be used by Paul in these texts interchangeably with NO difference at all in the meaning!

Would you please, therefore, as you have time, look at the Greek in those texts and tell me if you agree that Paul in them uses the two prepositions with the same meaning?

Thanks,

Bill G.

[ July 22, 2005, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: UZThD ]
 

Paul33

New Member
Originally posted by ituttut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Paul33:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ituttut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Paul33:
Dispensationalism is on its death bed, this is why LaHaye opened his pre-trib research center at LU. It was in reaction to the growing ground swell of post-trib teaching in evangelical and former dispensational circles!

I for one will be pleased when we can put dispensational teaching to rest.
No problem. You can do it right now.

There are many that wish to dismiss Paul. If you really mean this, then never refer to him again, other than giving reference to him standing looking at, bringing on and allowing the stoning of Steven. Try it please, and see what you understand. You will understand the “law and the prophets”, and the gospel of John the Baptist. Remember, never ever quote PAUL again. Your wish will come true, being rid of Christ Jesus in heaven forever.
</font>[/QUOTE]I have made it a general rule never to respond to you, but I've got to tell you, your last post was so absurd that I couldn't resist telling you.
</font>[/QUOTE]God love you for your truthfulness. We can't hold back the truth. You say what is in your heart, and I do also.
Christian faith, ituttut
</font>[/QUOTE]That last comment has earned alot of respect from me for you. We won't agree, but thanks for taking my statement like a man. I hope I can be as manly as you.
 

UZThD

New Member
Originally posted by exscentric:
What is the first name on the author "Cranfield"

Thanks.
===

C.E.B. Cranfield, Romans (2 vols) in The International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T and T Clark, rewritten, 1975).
 

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by OldRegular:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ituttut:
I believe the One gospel of Paul as shown in my previous post. Surely that is the one you also chose. If you did, then it is the dispensational gospel that Christ gave to Paul for we today. Christian faith, ituttut
I believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the one and only Gospel. The Apostle Paul was not ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as he notes in the following Scripture:

Romans 1:16

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Please note that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is for both the Jew and the Gentile.

There is no such thing as the gospel of Paul. Those who trust in Paul for salvation will be sadly disappointed!
</font>[/QUOTE]I’ve been telling you in almost every post that Christ Jesus in heaven gave Paul his gospel, and that gospel is to both Jew and Gentile. But I cannot understand why you will not believe the gospel of Paul, for Paul’s gospel is not the gospel of Peter, and it is not gospel of John the Baptist, but the gospel of Christ Jesus from heaven. Do you believe Romans 2:16, ”In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” I believe Christ from heaven, so I determine I must understand the gospel of Paul.

We are to no longer look for an earthly gospel. Paul’s gospel is a heavenly gospel. Jesus Christ is dead to this earth, and is alive in heaven, and that is where we are to know Him. Here is a personal word for all that Christ in heaven gave to Paul to include in Paul’s gospel. This secret is now out for Christ proclaimed it to Paul in II Corinthians 5:-16-18, ”Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. 17. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 18. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation.” If this doesn’t scare you to death, then you had better reread it. For years I rejected this for nobody I knew really believed this, and said , “Oh, that is just Paul talking”. Then one day I said, “Oh, that is My Lord and Savior in heaven talking to me”. We are of the Spirit of God, and it all boils down to the Holy Spirit talking to us. Won’t you please listen to Him as He speaks to you today?

It tells us the Old has passed away, the Old being the Law and the Prophets; as well as the preaching of John the Baptist of “the kingdom is at hand”. Those have come and gone, and they are Old. What is New? The Body of Christ of which the Christian is in. Christ Jesus is the head, and we are in that Church, both Gentile and Jew, for Christ tells us so. How? Acts 9:15, ”But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.” Christian faith, ituttut Galatians 1:11-12
 

ituttut

New Member
Originally posted by OldRegular:
The origin of some of Itututts radical views might be explained if we understand their origins, hyper- or ultra-dispensationalism.

THE ORIGIN OF ULTRADISPENSATIONALISM [from Dispensationalist Charles Ryrie’s book Dispensationalism, page 198]

Ultradispensationalism had its origin in the ministry and writings of Ethelbert W Bullinger (1837-1913). He received his education at Kings College, London, and was an ordained Anglican clergyman. He was the author of seventy-seven works, including the Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the Greek New Testament and the Companion Bible. He was a scholar of repute, editor for nineteen years of a monthly magazine called Things to Come, and an accomplished musician.

The origin of my views is the Bible. Perhaps that is why my views seems foreign to you. Who says I follow the gospel of Bullinger? I know whom it is that I follow, and it is Christ Jesus from heaven. I have never read one book of Bullinger. I have no knowledge other than fleeting glances in asinine posts such as I am now reading. And I doubt what you are putting forth is all truth, for you seem to believe everybody that believes exactly like you, or that hates any that claim to believe the dispensations of God.

Why in the world would anyone wish to try and cram all of this in their minds, for we should be gaining knowledge of Christ Jesus, and not that of some man. For Pete’s sake, this is what that man believed, and you sound as if you have judged him and sent him to hell. That is not what we Christians are to do. We are to teach the Word of God that He gives to us. I’m sure some have probably judged you to hell, and me also. It doesn’t make a hill of beans. We can condemn safely, I believe, those that do not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for their salvation, but hating those in His Body? No, we cannot do that, but we can discuss giving guidance and information unknown, and available for understanding should the Spirit decide one is ready to grow.

His theology was a mixture. He held the heretical doctrine of the extinction of the soul between death and resurrection.silent on the final state of the lost, and many of his followers were and are annihilationists. In his sevenfold dispensational scheme Bullinger had two dispensations between Pentecost and the end of the church age. He placed the Gospels and the book of Acts under the Law and commenced the dispensation of the Church with the ministry of Paul after Acts 28:28. The prison epistles, therefore Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians—set forth the fullness of the revelation of the mystery of this church age. He also denied that water baptism and the Lords Supper are for this age.

His dispensational teaching has been the fount of all the ultra-dispensational teachings from his day to the present. However, many ultradispensationalists do not teach soul sleep and annihilation. But almost all hold to the doctrine that the church did not begin at Pentecost but did begin with Paul (although I came across one group that believes the Body of Christ began at Pentecost even though the group does not practice water baptism or the Lords Supper).
Friend, Old Regular, please go back to where the “dispensational” gospel began, and that is with Paul. I believe some of what this man says, and some of what you say, but neither of you believe as I, so of what sin do you charge me with? You will find Paul is Super Ultra Dispensational and He warns us. Colossians 1:25-28, ”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: 27. To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: 28. Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ
Jesus:”
Christian faith, ituttut Galatians 1:11-12
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by ituttut:
Friend, Old Regular, please go back to where the “dispensational” gospel began, and that is with Paul. I believe some of what this man says, and some of what you say, but neither of you believe as I, so of what sin do you charge me with? You will find Paul is Super Ultra Dispensational and He warns us. Colossians 1:25-28, ”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: 27. To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: 28. Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ
Jesus:”
Christian faith, ituttut Galatians 1:11-12
Poor ituttut, there is no such thing as a dispensational gospel; there is only the Gospel of Jesus Christ which the Apostle Paul calls:
the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
The Apostle Paul also states in Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
 

Ed Edwards

<img src=/Ed.gif>
1Co 9:17 For if I doe this thing willingly, I haue a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the Gospel is committed vnto me.

Eph 3:2 If ye haue heard of the dispensation of the grace of God, which is giuen me to youward:

Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulnesse of times, he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heauen, and which are on earth, euen in him:

1Co 9:17 For if I doe this thing willingly, I haue a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the Gospel is committed vnto me.

All of these are:

----------------
G3622
οἰκονομία
oikonomia
oy-kon-om-ee'-ah
From G3623; administration (of a household or estate); specifically a (religious) “economy”: - dispensation, stewardship.
----------------

oikonomia is the word from which we get
our word ECONOMY.

In God's economy (where the temporal
can be seen as eternal): the lame walk,
the poor are rich, the first are last,
the last are first,
the blind see, and the stupid are Einstin


Dispensation(s) are just part of the
Gospel of Jesus, the Christ, as defined in
God's Holy Bible.
wavey.gif
 
Top