Dispensationalists

Oh.

I've never seen it explained that clear before

 

Pa;ul33: //Eph. 1:10 God is going to gather together all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him.

//Using classic dispensational lingo, that means the heavenly people (church) and the earthly people (Israel)are joined together in Christ!//

I request again a common request that the version be listed
along with the scripture and it's address. Quite frankly, i can't find
this in my Bibles. Until i verfy that some Bible says this,
i must assume is it NOT SCRIPTURE.

I note the phrase "going to" which means in the future.
That is the future from when Paul worte Ephesians.
Did this happen already? IMHO it did not so will happen
at some future time.

Because the Bible verse (if indeed it is a Bible verse)
then the Bible says "going to" yet you claim that the
dispensational view says "age joined together" - past tense.
Maybe you confuse a-mill and pre-mill?

 

Ed, it's your verse, paraphrased. I didn't know I had to quote it exactly.

But it doesn't change the point I'm making.

Eph. 1:10 interpreted according to classic dispensationalism proves that both the things in heaven (heavenly people and plan) and the things on earth (earthly people and plan) are brought together in Christ in this dispensation.

But that's not what classic dispensationalism teaches. It teaches that earthly and heavenly peoples and plans are distinct and separate for all eternity, let alone for this dispensation.

 

AH, then you aught to have said:

Eph. 1:10 (Paul33):
God is going to gather together all things in Christ,
both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him.

I note you ignore what i said about that.

 

Ed, Below is your verse.

Eph 1:10 (KJV1611):
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:

It doesn't happen in a future dispensation, it happens in the dispensation of the fulness of times, which all classic dispensationalists believe to be the church age. So you are wrong.

What happens? He might gather together in one all things in Christ. Chapter two tells us what has been gathered together in Christ - Israel and those who were far off - meaning believing Jews and Gentiles.

So the very verse you site to prove classic dispensationalism refutes your brand of dispensationalism.

 

Paul33: "So the very verse you site to prove classic dispensationalism refutes your brand of dispensationalism."

I've cited no verse to prove "classic dispensationalism"
I don't even know what "classic dispensationalsim" is.
Nobody can refute my "brand of dispensationalism" because i've specified no
"brand of dispenstationalism.

What i've done is quote some scriptures
that contain the word 'dispensation'.
You can't beat scriputures.

Oh, i've also tried unsuccessfuly to get
Brother Paul33 to list the version of the
scriptures he quotes with each scripture.
I hope the readers will understand that
God requires me as part of my ministry to
check every scripture no matter which version.
Feel free to consider balking posters for
what they are, just don't mention they are
being 'nasty' in your posts

 

Does anybody agree with my soerology?

 

Whomever: "It doesn't happen in a future dispensation, it happens in the dispensation of the fulness of times, which all classic dispensationalists believe to be the church age. So you are wrong."

We are not discussing "all classic dispensationalists".
I am not defending them. You are tilting with windmills, ah, er
with strawmen

 

Which part of this does folks disagree with?
All I'm doing is quoting scriptures
and making a few comments about what they mean
to me.

 

John 5:28, 29
28. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29. And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

The hour is [singular] coming. The passage does not say the hours are [plural] coming.

In the [the hour, singular from above] which all [that means all] that are in the graves shall hear his voice and come forth. That means all shall come forth at the same time not 1000 years apart or 1007 years apart.

Actually believing that there will be a pretrib rapture and millenial reign of Christ, makes one a follower of Darby/Scofield in the same way that being a cat makes one a cat!

 

Ed, I listed your version of the text.
You then accuse me of not listing the version of the Scripture that I used.
Can anyone take you seriously?
Finally, you say that I'm balking, when I clearly identified the version of Scripture that I'm using. Yours!

You come across as arrogant, snide, scarcastic, and idiotic. Before you run to the moderators, please note that I did not say your are arrogant, snide, sarcastic or an idiot. I said you come across that way. You may be the nicest, gentlemanly person in the universe. You just don't come across that way.

 

John 5:28, 29 (somebody never gives the version of the Bible):
28. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29. And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Person who doesn't give the version of the Bible:
"The hour is [singular] coming. The passage does
not say the hours are [plural] coming."

When you understand God's economy you will understand
the meaninglessness of this sentence.
day = the appropriate time
hour = the appropriate time
1,000 years = the appropriate time
for a physical Jesus to phys;ically reign on a physical Earth
1 day = 1 hour
24 hours = 1 hour ---- tee hee
1 day = 7 years
1 day = 1000 years


Paul33: "Ed, I listed your version of the text.
You then accuse me of not listing the version of the Scripture that I used."

My bad, it is somebody else that can't keep up with which
Bible they are using.

 

I didn't see anybody respond to:

I've cited no verse to prove "classic dispensationalism"
I don't even know what "classic dispensationalsim" is.
Nobody can refute my "brand of dispensationalism" because i've specified no
"brand of dispenstationalism.

What i've done is quote some scriptures
that contain the word 'dispensation'.
You can't beat scriputures.

 

Ed Edwards

You well know that this is the 1769 edition of the KJV. If you don't you should be ashamed since that is what I use unless otherwise noted. You can't answer any question posed to you so you nit pick about versions. Sad!

 

In judicial proceedings this is called
a hostile witness. It is only reasonable
to expect to put the version on each

To rail at doing this simple task is sign
of some type of personality i don't want
to deal with.

As for me not jumping through your hoops
on schedule, consider this.
When i go to work i get over $37.00 per hour.
Why should i work for the Lord for less?
I've spent some 27 hours this week doing
research on a certain party who yanked my
chain. You owe God $37 times 27 = $999
(which is 666 upsidedown )

 

Ed,

Your logical of 'hour' does not prove what Jesus Christ actual saying. Christ does not saying 'hour' is 7 years or 1,000 years like as stretch into length time. Christ tells us, when the time to come arrive, it's TIME for all graves of the world to br risen, some go everlasting punishment, some go everlasting life. John 5:25-27 suport Dan. 12:2-3; and Matt. 25:46.

Early Christians understood of John 5:25-27; and 6:39,40,44, & 54 talk about the general resurrection at Christ's coming on the last day of the age. Because, pretrib doctrine was not yet existed in their time. They believed only one coming at the end of the age. None of them were taught on split comings or series of resurrections. They believed in one coming of Christ at the end of tge age. That was classical Church doctrine on Eschatology.

Till in 19th Century, Darby developed pretrib doctrine. Then, many Christians were builting up on their own logicals of John 5:27-29; 6:39,40,44, & 54 in their own interpreting, they seem not willing to listen or accept what Christ actual saying. In other word, many Christians depart from the sound doctrines of the Bible, and give heed flase teaching in their own itching ears. Because most Christians do not read or study Bible at home. They only listening to their pastors. They think pastor is always right and preaching the truth. But, many are already misleading or deceived.

We must sticky on the Bible only, instead what we listening to any man teaching in philosophy - Colossians 2:8.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

DeafPosttrib: "Till in 19th Century, Darby developed pretrib doctrine."

Can you get together with your fellow posters and attack me
from one direction here? I've heard that Darby developed
dispensationalism (though i'm getting it from the Bible).
I've had it argued at me that Darby invented pretrib rapture
(though i teach it from the Bible). I've hear that Darby
developed the rapture - but i preach it from the Written
Word of God, the Holy Bible. I've had it told to me that
John Nelson Darby developed pre-millinnialism (which i also
teach, but i teach it from the Bible.

 

OldRegular and DeafTrib,
You claim that until Darby pre-trib was unknown, but are still unable to prove. I have not seen the evidence yet.

And yet in the same light almost every historical source available tells us that Augustine is the Father of Amillennialism. The church before Augustine held to "Historic Millennialism." If anyone was closer to the view of the early church fathers it would be the pre-tribbers who don't deny the millennial kingdom, as you do. Augustine, the champion of the Catholic Church, the father of many heresies, the founder of the allegorical method of interpretation of the Scriptures, and of amillennialism, is your founder.

In as much as you refer to those on the board as Darbyites or followers of the teachings of Darby, you are followers of a well known heretic--Augustine, and thereby shall be known as Augustinians. Please keep your name calling and inferences to yourself.
DHK

 

Next week, I will make a post, that I already been researching Church history of Eschatology doctrine. There are so much overwhelming evidences that I seen the doctrine of Eschatology during Church history have been changing so dramatically within 200 years span. Later I will telling you the details why, the Eschatology doctrine during Church history have been changing so dramatically next week.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!