-
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!
In that dispensation
- Thread starter ituttut
- Start date
Bluefalcon
Member
The law of God that was in his heart.
In the first two chapters of Romans Paul discusses the general condemnation which men fall under. Men are responsible and are held accountable to the "light" that has been revealed to them
"For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law..." Romans 2:12
"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith..." Ro 3:28
Also see Gal. 3:17ff
Rob
"For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law..." Romans 2:12
"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith..." Ro 3:28
Also see Gal. 3:17ff
Rob
Bluefalcon
Member
Romans
2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another
2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another
Marcia
Active Member
God gave Cain a warning:
Rom. 2 says that we all have a law written on our hearts (maybe this is the conscience?) to determine right from wrong (Rom. 2.15).
It's interesting to note that in light of God's later punishment for murder (a life for a life in Gen. 9), this was not imposed on Cain. Cain was given refuge in the land of Nod, marked for protection (funny how the "mark of Cain" has been twisted in so many ways), and God said that anyone who killed Cain would be given vengenace "sevenfold" (Gen. 4.15).
Amen!Originally posted by Bluefalcon:
Romans
2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another
I would give each of you above an “A”. It is interesting that each of you went to what confirms your belief. You each brought Paul into the equation for the answer. A good number of years ago I began noticing, on just about any subject discussed, the Christian cannot successfully defend our position as Christians unless we go to Paul’s letters written to and for the Gentile, which today includes all nations and tribes on earth.
I’m going to take the opportunity here to give a reply I gave on another heavily attended “board” (a Calvinist Board that takes all comers), to the question posed in Genesis 4:8, of “What law did Cain break when he killed Abel?”
Quote - This is a good place to show the “principle” of Law of God, and the “dispensation” of Law of God. In Genesis 4:8 we do not see or know of a law prohibiting, or taking the life of someone, spilling their blood, but even in our tarnished nature we would know this was not right. Man now knows “right from wrong”, but as yet man had not shown his true colors, or his tendency to not walk in the light.
The Law is eternal, and there is a dispensation just ahead that will begin to correct all men, so that ignorance can in no way exonerate him, or let him off-the hook. Only eight souls were saved in that antediluvian dispensation, and one man was responsible, he being Noah. God ended that dispensation, and starts all over with these eight souls. God gave men the chance without a law, for righteous men need no law, so in this new “dispensation” there will be a law to cover the shedding of man’s blood.
In Genesis 9:6 at the beginning of the new “dispensation” of God we see God puts a Law into effect, that ”Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” If any one is interested this is where those in authority have the right to demand the “Death Penalty”. Nation’s before God’s nation Israel had this authority, even before the Law of Moses was given. Man in his great wisdom today and over the years have thumbed their nose at God, telling Him He is wrong requiring the guilty to be put to death. This Law has never been rescinded, and neither has ”be fruitful and multiply”. For the tender hearted Christians for those that commit such crimes, I would imagine will see many of their works are for naught, as they believe another on this subject.
Cain rebelled, for he thought he could please God by doing it “His way”, with the pretty “fruit salad” sacrifice. Cain had been told a “blood sacrifice” was to be brought. Since man knew “right from wrong”, it is then the “principal” of the thing that he did. Pride, jealousy, hate all come when rebelling against God.
It is interesting to note here that from the first “blood sacrifice” performed by God, then required of Adam, and all after him all the way through the Pentecostal church, today, and only today a "blood sacrifice" by man is not required. I would say another “dispensation” can clearly be seen here as glaringly as the dispensation above.
Just as the “principal” of the Law is eternal, so is the “principle of grace eternal. However this "dispensation" of Grace is not. Unquote
It is my belief that once we began to understand the gospel of Paul that Christ from heaven revealed to him is when we began to understand the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of the Word of God. Christian faith, ituttut
I’m going to take the opportunity here to give a reply I gave on another heavily attended “board” (a Calvinist Board that takes all comers), to the question posed in Genesis 4:8, of “What law did Cain break when he killed Abel?”
Quote - This is a good place to show the “principle” of Law of God, and the “dispensation” of Law of God. In Genesis 4:8 we do not see or know of a law prohibiting, or taking the life of someone, spilling their blood, but even in our tarnished nature we would know this was not right. Man now knows “right from wrong”, but as yet man had not shown his true colors, or his tendency to not walk in the light.
The Law is eternal, and there is a dispensation just ahead that will begin to correct all men, so that ignorance can in no way exonerate him, or let him off-the hook. Only eight souls were saved in that antediluvian dispensation, and one man was responsible, he being Noah. God ended that dispensation, and starts all over with these eight souls. God gave men the chance without a law, for righteous men need no law, so in this new “dispensation” there will be a law to cover the shedding of man’s blood.
In Genesis 9:6 at the beginning of the new “dispensation” of God we see God puts a Law into effect, that ”Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” If any one is interested this is where those in authority have the right to demand the “Death Penalty”. Nation’s before God’s nation Israel had this authority, even before the Law of Moses was given. Man in his great wisdom today and over the years have thumbed their nose at God, telling Him He is wrong requiring the guilty to be put to death. This Law has never been rescinded, and neither has ”be fruitful and multiply”. For the tender hearted Christians for those that commit such crimes, I would imagine will see many of their works are for naught, as they believe another on this subject.
Cain rebelled, for he thought he could please God by doing it “His way”, with the pretty “fruit salad” sacrifice. Cain had been told a “blood sacrifice” was to be brought. Since man knew “right from wrong”, it is then the “principal” of the thing that he did. Pride, jealousy, hate all come when rebelling against God.
It is interesting to note here that from the first “blood sacrifice” performed by God, then required of Adam, and all after him all the way through the Pentecostal church, today, and only today a "blood sacrifice" by man is not required. I would say another “dispensation” can clearly be seen here as glaringly as the dispensation above.
Just as the “principal” of the Law is eternal, so is the “principle of grace eternal. However this "dispensation" of Grace is not. Unquote
It is my belief that once we began to understand the gospel of Paul that Christ from heaven revealed to him is when we began to understand the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of the Word of God. Christian faith, ituttut
Marcia
Active Member
Thanks for "A" ittutt, but I need to ask a question re your post.
Heb. 11.4 says that "by faith Abel offered a better sacrifice" which seems to imply that Abel offered his in faith and Caine did not. This is emphasized by verse 6 which says that without faith it is impossible to please God.
Where in the Bible does it say Cain was told to bring a blood sacrifice?
Heb. 11.4 says that "by faith Abel offered a better sacrifice" which seems to imply that Abel offered his in faith and Caine did not. This is emphasized by verse 6 which says that without faith it is impossible to please God.
Continued
God? Not at all. But in the dispensations they lived in, it was a requirement within the faith. And why was it required? You tell it, and see it in verse 6. Faith must have an object, and in this case it is by faith in God that required within the faith to offer a blood sacrifice. Anything else, such as fruits, vegetables, nuts or whatever is not of faith, but of “unbelief”, of rebellion, of self.
Cain’s sacrifice established his faith in himself, and what he deemed right in his eyes. He thought what pleased him would surely please God.
Abel established His faith in God, and this, as you point out, “pleased God”. We see the same thing in those that God made a nation of for himself. To please God in the covenant they made with Him, they had feasts, laws and ordinances such as water baptism for the remission of sins, after they repented of their sins. Why only them, and no one else? It was required by God of His people, because they transgressed the “two way covenant”. They came by faith in God, and the “covenant”.
We see this formula, or pattern used by God from the beginning for all men everywhere through Pentecost, but only His nation had extra requirements. Man from the beginning had to do a work, and present a “blood sacrifice”. What if Noah had not done the work? No Ark would have meant no more mankind. Noah knew why he needed two “clean” animals, and that is the first thing he did, was to shed blood as He sacrificed to God. It is Abraham By faith, Moses By faith, David By faith and all the others By faith did they sacrifice and do the work of keeping the Sabbath, feasts, and the other 600 and some odd religion rites.
Were all those in past dispensations saved By works? No, but By faith they did what God required and so they worked and presented Blood sacrifices.
This is why I am a dispensationalist. If I endeavor to associate myself with any in the past, would that be Christian? Is the Christian to Work for their salvation? Do we think Jesus’ Work not sufficient? God forbid.
Is the Christian to repent of sins that were taken care of at the Cross, where we died with Him, and all our sins were washed away? This is our confession of our sins when we turn (repent) to Him, and by one Spirit we are baptized, and that without hands.
He did the Work for all. He shed His Blood for all. By the Holy Spirit we enter into the Body of Christ Church. What a “secret” God had, even from the beginning, a dispensation just for Christians that are saved by His Grace, through faith in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Only Begotten Son of God for His faithfulness has an inheritance coming. We are it, for God does so love the world. He loves those that built on The Rock by Peter’s gospel, and those that build on That Same rock through Paul’s gospel. Christian faith, ituttut
Were all before us saved because they brought a “blood sacrifice” as demanded by
God? Not at all. But in the dispensations they lived in, it was a requirement within the faith. And why was it required? You tell it, and see it in verse 6. Faith must have an object, and in this case it is by faith in God that required within the faith to offer a blood sacrifice. Anything else, such as fruits, vegetables, nuts or whatever is not of faith, but of “unbelief”, of rebellion, of self.
Cain’s sacrifice established his faith in himself, and what he deemed right in his eyes. He thought what pleased him would surely please God.
Abel established His faith in God, and this, as you point out, “pleased God”. We see the same thing in those that God made a nation of for himself. To please God in the covenant they made with Him, they had feasts, laws and ordinances such as water baptism for the remission of sins, after they repented of their sins. Why only them, and no one else? It was required by God of His people, because they transgressed the “two way covenant”. They came by faith in God, and the “covenant”.
We see this formula, or pattern used by God from the beginning for all men everywhere through Pentecost, but only His nation had extra requirements. Man from the beginning had to do a work, and present a “blood sacrifice”. What if Noah had not done the work? No Ark would have meant no more mankind. Noah knew why he needed two “clean” animals, and that is the first thing he did, was to shed blood as He sacrificed to God. It is Abraham By faith, Moses By faith, David By faith and all the others By faith did they sacrifice and do the work of keeping the Sabbath, feasts, and the other 600 and some odd religion rites.
Were all those in past dispensations saved By works? No, but By faith they did what God required and so they worked and presented Blood sacrifices.
This is why I am a dispensationalist. If I endeavor to associate myself with any in the past, would that be Christian? Is the Christian to Work for their salvation? Do we think Jesus’ Work not sufficient? God forbid.
Is the Christian to repent of sins that were taken care of at the Cross, where we died with Him, and all our sins were washed away? This is our confession of our sins when we turn (repent) to Him, and by one Spirit we are baptized, and that without hands.
He did the Work for all. He shed His Blood for all. By the Holy Spirit we enter into the Body of Christ Church. What a “secret” God had, even from the beginning, a dispensation just for Christians that are saved by His Grace, through faith in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Only Begotten Son of God for His faithfulness has an inheritance coming. We are it, for God does so love the world. He loves those that built on The Rock by Peter’s gospel, and those that build on That Same rock through Paul’s gospel. Christian faith, ituttut
God told Adam and Eve that they would die. Their sin revealed their nakedness. They tried to cover it up their own way. It was not sufficient. God gave them skins for a covering. The animals died in their place, immediately. The later died because they had sinned...
OK. Here is the question. It is not a trick. Where did the skins come from? HINT: not veggie tales...
OK. I know there is no explicit statement that God explained the whole animal sacrifice at this point. But, cannot it not be reasonably inferred? (John 21:25)
Where did Cain get his wife? We answer that one by inference, don't we?
ITUTTUT,
IN ALL AGES SALVATION WAS ALWAYS BY FAITH AND ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS INVOLVED A BLOOD SACRIFICE. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins....
OK. Here is the question. It is not a trick. Where did the skins come from? HINT: not veggie tales...
OK. I know there is no explicit statement that God explained the whole animal sacrifice at this point. But, cannot it not be reasonably inferred? (John 21:25)
Where did Cain get his wife? We answer that one by inference, don't we?
ITUTTUT,
IN ALL AGES SALVATION WAS ALWAYS BY FAITH AND ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS INVOLVED A BLOOD SACRIFICE. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins....
Happy you agree. However something was added to the equation. Not until after Christ shed His Blood, and only after Damascus Road was our Savior God's Grace made available to all, Through His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, thus being born our definition. We are called Christian. This was hidden in God since the beginning. Fact, and not inference. Christian faith, ituttut.
Here is the summary position statement regarding dispensationalism that our church has published...
Thought I had posted it here? May have meant to but forgot, or may have put it on another thread. I 'ave no ideee whar it went... Here it is...
No matter how many dispensations are preferred, it is clear that God has dealt differently with mankind at various points in the history of the earth. Adam was told to eat only fruits, nuts, and vegetables. After the flood, Noah was told to eat meat (“every living thing that moveth” - Gen 9:3). Under the Mosaic Law, certain kinds of animals were defined as unclean and the Jews were forbidden to eat them. The Jews were told to approach God with an animal sacrifice. Believers today approach God on the basis of the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. All of these distinctions clearly indicate that God’s manner of dealing with mankind, and mankind’s responsibilities toward God have undergone some significant transitions throughout history. Dispensationalism is basically a recognition of the fact that God’s requirements and man’s responsibilities have changed through the ages. Conservative dispensationalists would argue that salvation has been by grace through faith in all ages and that the shedding of blood has always been required for salvation. While faith has always been required, the content of the faith has varied at different points throughout Scripture. The Old Testament saints did not understand the substitutionary death of the Lord Jesus Christ and to suggest that they were saved on the basis of their faith in His coming death is to clearly go beyond the written Word of God. Even the eleven disciples failed to understand the significance of the crucifixion till some time afterward. It has been suggested that anyone who trusts in the death of the Lord Jesus rather than an animal sacrifice and who fails to observe Old Testament distinctions between clean and unclean animals is, in reality, a dispensationalist.
Thought I had posted it here? May have meant to but forgot, or may have put it on another thread. I 'ave no ideee whar it went... Here it is...
No matter how many dispensations are preferred, it is clear that God has dealt differently with mankind at various points in the history of the earth. Adam was told to eat only fruits, nuts, and vegetables. After the flood, Noah was told to eat meat (“every living thing that moveth” - Gen 9:3). Under the Mosaic Law, certain kinds of animals were defined as unclean and the Jews were forbidden to eat them. The Jews were told to approach God with an animal sacrifice. Believers today approach God on the basis of the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. All of these distinctions clearly indicate that God’s manner of dealing with mankind, and mankind’s responsibilities toward God have undergone some significant transitions throughout history. Dispensationalism is basically a recognition of the fact that God’s requirements and man’s responsibilities have changed through the ages. Conservative dispensationalists would argue that salvation has been by grace through faith in all ages and that the shedding of blood has always been required for salvation. While faith has always been required, the content of the faith has varied at different points throughout Scripture. The Old Testament saints did not understand the substitutionary death of the Lord Jesus Christ and to suggest that they were saved on the basis of their faith in His coming death is to clearly go beyond the written Word of God. Even the eleven disciples failed to understand the significance of the crucifixion till some time afterward. It has been suggested that anyone who trusts in the death of the Lord Jesus rather than an animal sacrifice and who fails to observe Old Testament distinctions between clean and unclean animals is, in reality, a dispensationalist.