The Church Not a Mystery

[freeatlast]

Not even the Apostles who heard Jesus speak about it before Pentecost. It is simply amazing that on a Baptist forum comprised of Baptist who claim Biblical authority in matters of faith that we are even having this discussion but we are!

And yet some speak with such certainty about things that are not even taught by the Bible such as covenant theology. They discount details of prophecy which they think are not important and yet insist that theirs is the correct interpretation of that same prophecy!

Yes I agree. This is what happens when anyone chooses a doctrine from one part of scripture and denies the whole.

 

[OldRegular]

Yeah, but what real (classical or hyper) dispensationalism means by "mystery" is not that the church was prophesied yet unclear, but rather that its existence was entirely outside the realm of prophecy (which was entirely about geopolitical Israel). Basically, the 70 weeks given to Daniel were "supposed" to be consecutive, followed by the millennial reign, followed by the new heavens and earth. The church is an "interruption" in that prophecy and a "parenthesis" inserted between the 69th and 70th week. Accordingly, absolutely nothing in prophecy could even hint at the church.

Modern dispensationalism has softened these brash assertions by Darby and company.

Very well said! The movement away from Darby, Scofield, Chafer, and others, by the progressive dispensationalists is a welcome move, not necessarily because of any change in their doctrine of eschatology but because of their understanding that the Church for which Jesus Christ died is not an "interruption" in God's plan for Israel.

I would remind those who are hung up on Israel that:

Adam and Eve were Gentiles,
Abel was a Gentile,
Seth was a Gentile,
Noah was a Gentile,
Abraham was a Gentile;
Isaac was a Gentile;
Hagar, Rahab, and Ruth were Gentiles;
Job was a Gentile;
the people of Nineveh were Gentiles.

And then there was Melchisedec, the priest of the Most High God and king of Salem [later Jerusalem] to whom Abraham paid tithes. We are not told much about Melchisedec other than that his priesthood was a type of that of Jesus Christ. That speaks very highly of the man!

So we see that even in the Old Testament God had a people among the Gentiles. How many we are not told. That is His prerogative and we should not make light of it!

 

[freeatlast]

the Church for which Jesus Christ died is not an "interruption" in God's plan for Israel.

Where do you get this stuff! :BangHead: Who has EVER said that the church is an interruption to God's plan?

 

[OldRegular]

Yes I agree. This is what happens when anyone chooses a doctrine from one part of scripture and denies the whole.

And classic dispensationalism is exceedingly good at this. They take an obscure passage of Scripture, Daniel 9:27, and base their eschatology on it; denying the teachings of the New Testament.

And then there is their "afterthought Church" for which Jesus Christ died. Why you and they ignore the teaching of Scripture regarding the Church is beyond comprehension except you have become mindless slaves to Popes Darby and Scofield and are hung up on Israel.

 

[OldRegular]

Where do you get this stuff! :BangHead: Who has EVER said that the church is an interruption to God's plan?

If you are going to "parrot" dispensational error you should at least understand what you are parroting. I suggest you read the following:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=80260

Dispensational doctrine makes the Church for which Jesus Christ died, a parenthesis, an intercalation, an interruption in God’s program for Israel.

Much of Dispensational doctrine is the invention of John Nelson Darby of Plymouth England in the early 19th Century, a century when many “Christian” Cults were started: Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, and Christian Science are the most notable.

Dispensationalism denies that the Church is included in prophecy. Rather, the claim is made that Jesus Christ came to establish the Messianic kingdom for the Jews, that they rejected Him, and that He established the Church instead [Herman Hoyt, a dispensationalist, in The Millennium, Four Viewpoints, by Clouse, pages 84-88]. The Church is often referred to as the ‘mystery parenthesis’ form of the Kingdom; mystery in that there is no prophecy in the Old Testament regarding the Church and parenthesis in that God found it necessary to interrupt His program for the Jews because their leaders rejected Jesus Christ as the Messiah and He was unable to establish the Messianic kingdom.

In the letter of the Apostle Paul to the Church at Ephesus God reveals to us His program for the Church of Jesus Christ.

11. Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12. That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13. But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15. Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16. And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17. And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18. For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20. And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21. In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22. In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Sadly dispensationalism rebuilds that wall between Jew and Gentile that Jesus Christ broke down through His own Blood. Dispensationalism teaches that an intrinsic and enduring distinction exists between Jews and the Church. The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved, which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity [Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism ]. Charles C. Ryrie in his book Dispensationalism writes about the above statement [page 39]: This is probably the most basic theological test of whether or not a person is a dispensationalist, and it is undoubtedly the most practical and conclusive. The one who fails to distinguish Israel and the Church consistently will inevitably not hold to dispensational distinctives; and the one who does will.

Dispensational doctrine indeed makes the Church for which Jesus Christ died, a parenthesis, an intercalation, an interruption in God’s program for Israel.

 

[thomas15]

Yes I agree. This is what happens when anyone chooses a doctrine from one part of scripture and denies the whole.

You have said this well.

 

[percho]

The passage in Hosea speaks against futurist doctrine. Verse 7 eliminates the doctrine of a future battle of Armageddon. Verse 10 is an undeniable description of the Church with an innumerable number of souls from every nation. The "it shall come to pass" prophecy was fulfilled when Paul was sent to the Gentiles. We are proof of the fulfillment of this passage. Then verse 11 reveals Christ as the sole head of the Church. If verse 11 is referring to the genetic Israel & Judah, it is contradiction to verse 6. Israel & Judah are OT types.

A question, if verse 11 is referring to the genetic descendants of Israel & Judah, then where is the nation of Judah today?

But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen. Now when she had weaned Loruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son. Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel. (Hosea 1:7-11)

Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, in the place where it was said unto them, (Who are the them here? Judah, Israel, both the Gentiles.) Ye not my people, it shall be said unto them,(Who are the them here? Judah, Israel, both the Gentiles) the sons of the living God.

Deut. 32:26 I said, I would scatter them into corners, I would make the remembrance of them to cease from among men:
Has the remembrance of the house of Judah, the Jews, ever in history ceased from among men? ----- Ever?

Where did God scatter these people to whom He had given a bill of divorce?
Hosea 8:8 Israel is swallowed up: now shall they be among the Gentiles as a vessel wherein no pleasure.

Acts 15:14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

Who is scattered among the Gentiles and had the same Father's as Paul, a son of Benjamin which was to remain with the house of David. 1 Kings 11:32 (But he shall have one tribe for my servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel: )

Romans 9:24,26 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
And it shall come to pass, in the place where it was said unto them, Ye not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God. Who is Paul is saying these, them and they are being called from among the Gentiles.

Romans 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

Who is the remnant? From whence do they come?


Where does the word Gentiles come from?

 

[freeatlast]

And classic dispensationalism is exceedingly good at this. They take an obscure passage of Scripture, Daniel 9:27, and base their eschatology on it; denying the teachings of the New Testament.

And then there is their "afterthought Church" for which Jesus Christ died. Why you and they ignore the teaching of Scripture regarding the Church is beyond comprehension except you have become mindless slaves to Popes Darby and Scofield and are hung up on Israel.

It is you who rejects the word of God.

 

[thomas15]

And classic dispensationalism is exceedingly good at this. They take an obscure passage of Scripture, Daniel 9:27, and base their eschatology on it; denying the teachings of the New Testament.

Seems like a reasonable thing to do since Our Savior makes a direct link to Daniel 9:27 in the Olivet discourse Matt 24:15, speaking about the time of the end.

 

[Bob Alkire]

Seems like a reasonable thing to do since Our Savior makes a direct link to Daniel 9:27 in the Olivet discourse Matt 24:15, speaking about the time of the end.

So true my friend. Jesus encourage the reader of Daniel’s references here to the abomination of desolation, in particularly the ones dealing with a future abomination of desolation , to understand their true meaning.

 

[freeatlast]

If you are going to "parrot" dispensational error you should at least understand what you are parroting. I suggest you read the following:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=80260

You are not understanding my position. I know nothing about this man. I have never met him spoken to him on the phone or through email. I have never read anything he has written. I have simply taken the word of God and through careful examination come up with the understanding I have and I do that with all my understanding and I am always willing to change it when someone can point out error without denying truth of equal value. If you noticed in other posts I do not read the works of others. I am certainly in favor of setting under preaching as commanded but I do not seek men's opinions.
The church was a mystery. Only willful disregard for what the bible teaches can anyone deny that. No person in Adam ever saw the coming of the church. As for dispensationalism, who knows what that holds as one holds one thing and another something else. That is why I am not in favor of titles. I hold based on scripture that the church age is a time period used by God while He has set the Jew on the sidelines. There is coming an time when the church will be removed, then a 7 year tribulation period and the setting up of the millennium rule of Christ.
I will be the first to tell you that there is some problems with this view, but in studying all the views I see it as the moist viable. That does not make it heretic any more then those who hold something different is heretic as their is evidence for some of most the views. So I am trying to say that I do not pick the view I hold because of what someone has told me. I hold it because the bible seems to point to it although like I said there are some problems. To point one out I am a little uncomfortable with the pretrib rapture view, although I do hold that view, because it leaves no believers on earth and that has never happened, but I am told an angle will fly though the heavens and spread the gospel so perhaps that is the answer. None the less unless you can show me clearly that the scripture does not mean what it says then I cannot change my view.

 

[OldRegular]

I am curious! Dispensationalists freely post spew vitriol to defend their position. Those who defend the OP are routinely accused of making God a liar! So far only one passage of Scripture has been used to refute the OP. So where is the Scripture?

 

[freeatlast]

I am curious! Dispensationalists freely post spew vitriol to defend their position. Those who defend the OP are routinely accused of making God a liar! So far only one passage of Scripture has been used to refute the OP. So where is the Scripture?

• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Rom 16:25] Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,[/FONT]
  
• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Eph 3:3-5] How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote before in few words, whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.[/FONT]
  
• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Eph 3:8-10] Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,[/FONT]

MYSTERY!

 

[AresMan]

• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Rom 16:25] Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,[/FONT]
  
• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Eph 3:3-5] How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote before in few words, whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.[/FONT]
  
• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][Eph 3:8-10] Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,[/FONT]

MYSTERY!

The "mystery" that God revealed to Paul was that "Jew and Gentile are equal" in the fulfillment of prophecy. As Peter said "of which salvation the prophets searched diligently..." According to dispensationalism (as defined by the classics and hypers), the "mystery" implies utter absence from all prophecy: Israel is "the subject of prophecy;" the church is "the subject of the mystery."

As for "the unsearchable riches" meaning something that is totally unrevealed until the church, read carefully:

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?

Paul is clearly referencing statements in the book of Job:

Job 5:9 Which doeth great things and unsearchable; marvellous things without number:

Job 9:10 Which doeth great things past finding out; yea, and wonders without number.

The "unsearchable riches" and "unsearchable judgments" have to do with the depth and number of God's ways, NOT that these riches and judgments are entirely hidden through time until they were reveal to Paul.

 

[freeatlast]

The "mystery" that God revealed to Paul was that "Jew and Gentile are equal" in the fulfillment of prophecy. As Peter said "of which salvation the prophets searched diligently..." According to dispensationalism (as defined by the classics and hypers), the "mystery" implies utter absence from all prophecy: Israel is "the subject of prophecy;" the church is "the subject of the mystery."

As for "the unsearchable riches" meaning something that is totally unrevealed until the church, read carefully:

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?

Paul is clearly referencing statements in the book of Job:

Job 5:9 Which doeth great things and unsearchable; marvellous things without number:

Job 9:10 Which doeth great things past finding out; yea, and wonders without number.

The "unsearchable riches" and "unsearchable judgments" have to do with the depth and number of God's ways, NOT that these riches and judgments are entirely hidden through time until they were reveal to Paul.

I don't disagree with you entirely, but the gentiles is what makes up most the the church, not the Jew. So the church is the mystery, and it includes all involved with it including the entrance of the gentile. After the church is removed He will again work, with, on, and through the Jew. The church was such a mystery that the mystery remains today when seen by the practicing Jew. No Jew ever read any of their scriptures and saw the time of the church in fact even now after 2000 years of seeing the church it is still a mystery to the Jew and will remain so until it is removed and they are brought back in.

 

[AresMan]

I don't disagree with you entirely, but the gentiles is what makes up most the the church, not the Jew. So the church is the mystery, and it includes all involved with it including the entrance of the gentile. After the church is removed He will again work, with, on, and through the Jew. The church was such a mystery that the mystery remains today when seen by the practicing Jew. No Jew ever read any of their scriptures and saw the time of the church in fact even now after 2000 years of seeing the church it is still a mystery to the Jew and will remain so until it is removed and they are brought back in.

So, Jew and Gentile have never been, are not, and never will be truly equal. Got it.

 

[freeatlast]

So, Jew and Gentile have never been, are not, and never will be truly equal. Got it.

wow, when all else fails missrepresent.

 

[OldRegular]

I don't disagree with you entirely, but the gentiles is what makes up most the the church, not the Jew. So the church is the mystery, and it includes all involved with it including the entrance of the gentile. After the church is removed He will again work, with, on, and through the Jew. The church was such a mystery that the mystery remains today when seen by the practicing Jew. No Jew ever read any of their scriptures and saw the time of the church in fact even now after 2000 years of seeing the church it is still a mystery to the Jew and will remain so until it is removed and they are brought back in.

So the death of Jesus Christ was of no effect to the Jew? Then there is no hope for them, other than the elect, because there will be no reestablishing of the law, the blood sacrifices, or anything resembling the Jewish practices of the Mosaic Covenant! That wall that Jesus Christ died to tear down will not be erected again.:applause:

I will show you a Mystery, a great Mystery. Why, Why, would those for whom Jesus Christ died belittle His work, His death, by their obsession with Israel and the return of that which saved no one? Now that is a Mystery!:BangHead::BangHead::tonofbricks:

 

[thomas15]

If you are going to "parrot" dispensational error you should at least understand what you are parroting. I suggest you read the following:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=80260

OK OR, I take you up on your challange. From this thread on the "parenthesis church" we get this comment which also appears in this thread post #65:

Dispensational doctrine makes the Church for which Jesus Christ died, a parenthesis, an intercalation, an interruption in God’s program for Israel.

Much of Dispensational doctrine is the invention of John Nelson Darby of Plymouth England in the early 19th Century, a century when many “Christian” Cults were started: Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, and Christian Science are the most notable.

Dispensationalism denies that the Church is included in prophecy. Rather, the claim is made that Jesus Christ came to establish the Messianic kingdom for the Jews, that they rejected Him, and that He established the Church instead [Herman Hoyt, a dispensationalist, in The Millennium, Four Viewpoints, by Clouse, pages 84-88]. The Church is often referred to as the ‘mystery parenthesis’ form of the Kingdom; mystery in that there is no prophecy in the Old Testament regarding the Church and parenthesis in that God found it necessary to interrupt His program for the Jews because their leaders rejected Jesus Christ as the Messiah and He was unable to establish the Messianic kingdom.

First, as a preliminary comment, this whole tirade about the parenthesis church idea is really just a big distraction. I say this because what is being sold by this individual is the idea that dispies teach that the rejection of Jesus by the Jews came as such a surprise that the Savior decided on the church concept because he had nowhere else to go. This is of course absurd and all of the disney characters know it or should know it.

But then we go to the cut and paste apparently derived from Clouse (The Meaning of the Millennium; Four Views IVP Academic 1977). Anyone reading the above cut and paste would think that Herman Hoyt is advocating the idea that the church is a "mystery parenthesis" and an interruption to the plan, that the church is a reaction on the fly to his rejection by the Jews.

In fact not once does Hoyt even come close to making this claim. In his response to Hoyt, George Eldon Ladd states (pg 93) "There is nothing distinctively dispensational about Hoyt's definition of the kingdom, even though it is quoted from McClain".

I would like to know where the cut and paste from OR came from. It is certainly not derived from a reading of the cited book. Clearly from a reading of the source it can be said that ORs comments are fiction designed to make a point that is not true. In fact, the whole rest of the quote above by OR is nonsense. This whole thing proves that the poster OR is not one to be taken seriously.

 

[AresMan]

OK OR, I take you up on your challange. From this thread on the "parenthesis church" we get this comment which also appears in this thread post #65:



First, as a preliminary comment, this whole tirade about the parenthesis church idea is really just a big distraction. I say this because what is being sold by this individual is the idea that dispies teach that the rejection of Jesus by the Jews came as such a surprise that the Savior decided on the church concept because he had nowhere else to go. This is of course absurd and all of the disney characters know it or should know it.

But then we go to the cut and paste apparently derived from Clouse (The Meaning of the Millennium; Four Views IVP Academic 1977). Anyone reading the above cut and paste would think that Herman Hoyt is advocating the idea that the church is a "mystery parenthesis" and an interruption to the plan, that the church is a reaction on the fly to his rejection by the Jews.

In fact not once does Hoyt even come close to making this claim. In his response to Hoyt, George Eldon Ladd states (pg 93) "There is nothing distinctively dispensational about Hoyt's definition of the kingdom, even though it is quoted from McClain".

I would like to know where the cut and paste from OR came from. It is certainly not derived from a reading of the cited book. Clearly from a reading of the source it can be said that ORs comments are fiction designed to make a point that is not true. In fact, the whole rest of the quote above by OR is nonsense. This whole thing proves that the poster OR is not one to be taken seriously.

The original dispensationalists never claimed that God was surprised that Israel rejected Christ, it is just that the dispensational story makes things look that way. Darby himself affirmed Total Depravity, and Scofield's scheme held to the idea of the natural man always failing in every dispensation.