The Days Are Coming When There Will Be A New Covenant With Israel & Judah

[RLBosley]

Congrats on leaving the fog, I did too some 30+ years ago. And yes, I'm certain the OP would fall within the 'hyper' category.

I just left it within the last 2 years. Quite the change. It wasn't without cost or difficulty. I was asked to leave the church my family was attending and labelled a heretic (along with a friend who had come to the same conclusions) by another church I attended in the past. But God is good and I am secure in his New Covenant grace.

That's unfortunate that the hyper brand seems to be prevalent here.

Amen brother!

"The new is in the old concealed, the old is in the new revealed".

When that truth is adhered to Dispensationalism fades away like as with the old covenant.

Truth! :thumbs:

Thanks RLBosley for adding some light to the heat.

Thank you sir.

One purpose of the Book of Hebrews is to show the superiority of the New Covenant over the Old Covenant. The Thompson Chain Reference Bible demonstrates this by the following summary:

• Better Revelation, Hebrews 1:1-4
  Better Hope, Hebrews 7:19
  Better Priesthood, Hebrews 7:20-28
  Better Covenant, Hebrews 8:6
  Better Promises, Hebrews 8:6
  Better Sacrifices, Hebrews 9:23
  Better Possessions, Hebrews 10:34
  Better Country, Hebrews 11:16
  Better Resurrection, Hebrews 11:35

Yes. Hebrews can simply be summed up as "Jesus is Better!"

To your list I would add:

• Better than Angels, Heb 1:5-13
• Better than Moses, Heb 3:1-6

Actually the superiority of the New Covenant, instituted by Jesus Christ, over the Mosaic Covenant is the emphasis of the whole of the New Testament Revelation. Yet in the face of this truth the dispensationalist would have us believe that the old system is to be reinstituted even to the resumption of animal sacrifice in a rebuilt temple. What Darby and Scofield sold as "dispensational truth" is in reality not only false doctrine but an exceedingly tragic doctrine.

Yes. It really is sad that such an obvious truth is missed. :tear:

 

[kyredneck]

...Hebrews can simply be summed up as "Jesus is Better!"....

Well, let's be careful not to over simplify, 'Hold fast and don't go back' is a major theme to those beleaguered persecuted Hebrew Christians:

6 but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.
14 for we are become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto the end: Heb 3
14 Having then a great high priest, who hath passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. Heb 4
23 let us hold fast the confession of our hope that it waver not; for he is faithful that promised: Heb 10

There was to be no repentance granted for those that fell away and returned back to that old whore that killed Christ, because by returning they crucified the Son of God afresh and put him to an open shame (Heb 6:4-6), but there was only a certain fearful expectation of judgment which would devour the adversaries before that generation passed away (Heb 10:37), for those that had trodden under foot the Son of God and counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing and done despite unto the Spirit of grace (Heb 10:27-29) by falling away back to the apostate Judaism they been delivered from.

THAT is a very crucial message contained within the book.

 

[RLBosley]

Well, let's be careful not to over simplify, 'Hold fast and don't go back' is a major theme to those beleaguered persecuted Hebrew Christians:

6 but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.
14 for we are become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto the end: Heb 3
14 Having then a great high priest, who hath passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. Heb 4
23 let us hold fast the confession of our hope that it waver not; for he is faithful that promised: Heb 10

There was to be no repentance granted for those that fell away and returned back to that old whore that killed Christ, because by returning they crucified the Son of God afresh and put him to an open shame (Heb 6:4-6), but there was only a certain fearful expectation of judgment which would devour the adversaries before that generation passed away (Heb 10:37), for those that had trodden under foot the Son of God and counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing and done despite unto the Spirit of grace (Heb 10:27-29) by falling away back to the apostate Judaism they been delivered from.

THAT is a very crucial message contained within the book.

Well yes of course. But they/we are to hold fast to Christ, because he is better.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Be aware that using words like HERESY or ASININE will earn suspensions quickly. We use such only in the strict sense (non-orthodox teaching like Jehovah's Witness, Mormon, Bullinger's hyper-dispensational, cults)

 

[kyredneck]

Well yes of course. But they/we are to hold fast to Christ, because he is better.

Lol, well yes, of course!

 

[RLBosley]

Be aware that using words like HERESY or ASININE will earn suspensions quickly. We use such only in the strict sense (non-orthodox teaching like Jehovah's Witness, Mormon, Bullinger's hyper-dispensational, cults)

If this is referring to my post at 10:06am, I said that I was labelled a heretic by a old church I attended. Not the other way around.

 

[RLBosley]

Lol, well yes, of course!

:laugh::thumbs:

I wish this board had a "thanks" button like another forum I visit, then I wouldn't have to make a new post just to acknowledge and thank you for your post. Ah well.

 

[kyredneck]

If this is referring to my post at 10:06am, I said that I was labelled a heretic by a old church I attended. Not the other way around.

I have to wonder if someone reported a post which stirred Dr. Bob to make the statement. It's hard for me to imagine him following this thread on his own.

 

[OldRegular]

I have to wonder if someone reported a post which stirred Dr. Bob to make the statement. It's hard for me to imagine him following this thread on his own.

I am the "dirty dog" that called some of the hyper dispensationalism evident in beameup's posts asinine or heretical.

********************************************

My post #32

Originally Posted by beameup
I believe that there is a "slight" difference between "throughout all history" and "during the last 2,000 years".

Following is your statement. I take the liberty of emphasizing your asinine claim!

Originally Posted by beameup
144,000

The "main harvest" will be brought in during the first 3 1/2 years of the Tribulation.
We, as the "first fruits" will be safely tucked away in the third-heaven following the harpazo.
The "main harvest" will reach every corner of the earth and will surpass the (approx) 2,000 year "first fruit" harvest.
The "gleanings" (harvest) will be during the Great Tribulation (last 3 1/2 years) and will be for the "poor in spirit", who will enter the Millennium.

*************************************************************

My post #34

Why don't you give us your "twist" on this scripture:

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision
was committed unto me (Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles) ,
as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Galatians 2:7

And then the Holy Spirit repeats Himself (for emphasis):
(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision (ie: "Jews"),
the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles) (ie: uncircumcision) Gal 2:8

There is only one Gospel and to claim otherwise is absolutely heretical just as the Apostle Paul stated. I have heard your heretical drivel before and that is exactly what it is, heretical drivel. Your hyper dispensationalism puts you in the same class as some of the cults! If you were the scholar you think you are you would know that Peter preached the Gospel to Gentiles before Paul. Philip did also!

***************************************************************

You do realize that Dr. Bob is dispensational, the classic type I believe not the progressive type!

 

[kyredneck]

I am the "dirty dog" that called some of the hyper dispensationalism evident in beameup's posts asinine or heretical.

Dr Bob said "words like HERESY or ASININE.... We use such only in the strict sense (...Bullinger's hyper-dispensational)..."

You may be dead on spot OR.

 

[beameup]

Be aware that using words like HERESY or ASININE will earn suspensions quickly. We use such only in the strict sense
(non-orthodox teaching like Jehovah's Witness, Mormon, Bullinger's hyper-dispensational, cults)

Replacement Theologians, like Leftist-Liberals, seldom respond to the plain meaning of facts presented that deviate
from their "theology", but resort to name-calling (like "homophobe" or "racist"). It's a tactic of the Liberals.

The Catholics abandoned the plain meaning of scripture when the Emperor oversaw the adoption of the State Church,
taking such ideas as "symbolism" and "allegorical" to explain away the plain meaning of scripture that they simply didn't understand.

Clearly, God deals with "the Chruch" (composed of Jew & Gentile) seperately from the NATION of Israel,
and verses that clearly show this are simply "dismissed" or "reinterpreted". It's interesting to note this "shift",
among Baptists, back to 4th Century Catholic "Replacement Theology".

By my posting of clear scripture, I'm met with slanderous remarks. For example:
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression,
and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in
everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Daniel 9:24

A "missing piece" of the puzzle is understanding God's utilization of an (approx.) 40 year "transition period" (overlap)
between the baptism of Jesus and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70AD. Another "piece of the puzzle" is the understanding
and incorporating the concept that "a thousand years is but a day" with the Lord. "The Twelve" continued practicing
Judiasm, understanding that the Crucifixion was, for the nation of Israel, a fulfillment of Yom Kippur (Atonement).

Zech 12:8-14

 

[RLBosley]

Nevermind.

 

[kyredneck]

Lol, ah RL, it's probably just as well this way....

If I were you I probably wouldn't sleep over eight hours tonight worrying about it.

 

[RLBosley]

Lol, ah RL, it's probably just as well this way....

If I were you I probably wouldn't sleep over eight hours tonight worrying about it.

:laugh:

I'll try to avoid it.

 

[OldRegular]

Dr Bob said "words like HERESY or ASININE.... We use such only in the strict sense (...Bullinger's hyper-dispensational)..."

You may be dead on spot OR.

There is no doubt that beameup is hyper-.

 

[OldRegular]

Clearly, God deals with "the Chruch" (composed of Jew & Gentile) seperately from the NATION of Israel,
and verses that clearly show this are simply "dismissed" or "reinterpreted".

Can you present a single passage of Scripture from the New Testament showing the truth of the above claim!

It's interesting to note this "shift", among Baptists, back to 4th Century Catholic "Replacement Theology".

Dispensationalism was a mystery revealed to John Nelson Darby, and possibly Margaret MacDonald, in the early 19th Century. If you examine Baptist Confessions of Faith through the 19th Century you will see that all teach a general resurrection and general judgment.

By my posting of clear scripture, I'm met with slanderous remarks. For example:
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression,
and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in
everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Daniel 9:24

A "missing piece" of the puzzle is understanding God's utilization of an (approx.) 40 year "transition period" (overlap)
between the baptism of Jesus and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70AD.[ Another "piece of the puzzle" is the understanding
and incorporating the concept that "a thousand years is but a day" with the Lord. "The Twelve" continued practicing
Judiasm, understanding that the Crucifixion was, for the nation of Israel, a fulfillment of Yom Kippur (Atonement).

Zech 12:8-14

Considering beameup's remarks about

"symbolism" and "allegorical"

by others, it is comical to see how dispensationalists symbolize and/or allegorize and stretch Daniels 70th week.

 

[DHK]

Can you present a single passage of Scripture from the New Testament showing the truth of the above claim!

Most of Romans 11; 1Cor.10:32; Rom.9:1-4; 10:1-3, etc.
There is much scripture to show that church is composed of believers who have a background both of Jews and Gentiles, and outside of that the Jews and Gentiles to this date remain separate. Thus Paul was able to say:

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
Replacement Theology, that is that the Church has replaced Israel is a heretical teaching taught for generations by the RCC. Paul prayed (in Rom. 9 and 10) for his brethren, his kinsman in the flesh, the nation of Israel. They were still a nation in Paul's time. The Christian's had not replaced them.
Then, in 70 A.D., after Paul died, the city of Jerusalem was destroyed as was their Temple, and the nation of Israel was dispersed. Not until 1948 did Israel become a nation again when the UN granted them land. But they are still a nation. You cannot deny that fact.
Salvation is through Christ. There is only one way to be saved, and that is through the blood of Christ. Jews must be saved the same way Gentiles are. All 3,000 on the Day of Pentecost were Jews, and then they became Christians. The church at Corinth however, was primarily made up of Gentile believers. Paul explains in Ephesians chapter two how both Jews and Gentiles are one in Christ. That is the mystery that he speaks of in that chapter.

Dispensationalism was a mystery revealed to John Nelson Darby, and possibly Margaret MacDonald, in the early 19th Century. If you examine Baptist Confessions of Faith through the 19th Century you will see that all teach a general resurrection and general judgment.

That is not true and simply shows your bias and hatred toward the subject.
It also shows that you use the Confession of faith for your standard of faith instead of the Bible. I am willing to guess that most here have never read it. It isn't inspired nor infallible. Neither is dispensationalism a mystery. Read your Bible and do some study. It was around long before Darby was.

Considering beameup's remarks about by others, it is comical to see how dispensationalists symbolize and/or allegorize and stretch Daniels 70th week.

I don't agree with everything that Beamup posts. But he has his right to post them without being belittled.
Study Daniel 9. Daniel 9 is speaking of 70 weeks of years. The word for "week" simply means "seven". Thus 70 "sevens." This is not allegorization; it is a literal interpretation of the Bible. The question is what do the "sevens" refer to? Seven days, seven weeks, seven months, seven years? Seven of what? That is the question. Only the context can tell us that. Unless you study the context carefully you cannot get the meaning. Thus there is no allegorization involved. They are 70 weeks of years. There remains one week left, and it is yet to be fulfilled. It is The Great Tribulation." It is described in Revelation 6-19.

 

[Yeshua1]

Best to have a balanced biblical view on this issue, for while replacement theology is wrong, so is Hyper Dispy views, that cut up the NT like Swiss Cheese, and we end up without the Gospels/Acts, basically just writings of paul!

 

[DHK]

Best to have a balanced biblical view on this issue, for while replacement theology is wrong, so is Hyper Dispy views, that cut up the NT like Swiss Cheese, and we end up without the Gospels/Acts, basically just writings of paul!

It is a simple way of looking at the Bible and how God works at different times in different ways with different peoples.
One could make a fair and just accusation against those who believe in Covenant theology. They "cut up" the Bible into several little pieces with various little covenants here and there. We need not use the approach of sarcasm (as I just did), nor accuse one another of heresy, for neither dispensationalism or covenantal theology is heresy. If you want to read a balanced approach to dispensationalism then read John MacArthur.

 

[OldRegular]

Most of Romans 11; 1Cor.10:32; Rom.9:1-4; 10:1-3, etc.
There is much scripture to show that church is composed of believers who have a background both of Jews and Gentiles, and outside of that the Jews and Gentiles to this date remain separate. Thus Paul was able to say:

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
Replacement Theology, that is that the Church has replaced Israel is a heretical teaching taught for generations by the RCC. Paul prayed (in Rom. 9 and 10) for his brethren, his kinsman in the flesh, the nation of Israel. They were still a nation in Paul's time. The Christian's had not replaced them.
Then, in 70 A.D., after Paul died, the city of Jerusalem was destroyed as was their Temple, and the nation of Israel was dispersed. Not until 1948 did Israel become a nation again when the UN granted them land. But they are still a nation. You cannot deny that fact.
Salvation is through Christ. There is only one way to be saved, and that is through the blood of Christ. Jews must be saved the same way Gentiles are. All 3,000 on the Day of Pentecost were Jews, and then they became Christians. The church at Corinth however, was primarily made up of Gentile believers. Paul explains in Ephesians chapter two how both Jews and Gentiles are one in Christ. That is the mystery that he speaks of in that chapter.

This is the passage by beameup I to which I responded:

Originally Posted by beameup

Clearly, God deals with "the Chruch" (composed of Jew & Gentile) seperately from the NATION of Israel,
and verses that clearly show this are simply "dismissed" or "reinterpreted".

I disagree that the above Scripture you reference show God deals with the nation of Israel as a separate entity. You say, and I do agree:

Salvation is through Christ. There is only one way to be saved, and that is through the blood of Christ. Jews must be saved the same way Gentiles are.

Jews are saved the same way Gentiles are, period!

That is not true and simply shows your bias and hatred toward the subject.
It also shows that you use the Confession of faith for your standard of faith instead of the Bible. I am willing to guess that most here have never read it. It isn't inspired nor infallible. Neither is dispensationalism a mystery. Read your Bible and do some study. It was around long before Darby was.

You say so but that is not correct. Darby, or someone in his circle, was the granddaddy of the pre-trib rapture. It is true that there were some earlier writers who spoke of dispensations but Scripture does not. Scripture speaks of Covenants and God deals with people through Covenants. The word dispensation does not appear in the OT and only 4 times in the NT.

It is the height of arrogance, a failing dispensationalists have, to imply that those Old Baptists who wrote the Confessions were ignorant of Scripture. I suspect they could put both you and me to shame. Furthermore, I use Scripture as my standard of Faith, not a Confession, not John Nelson Darby, not Margaret MacDonald's vision, not Scofield, not Ryrie, not Walvoord, not Chafer, and most certainly not Bullinger.

Classic dispensationalism is, in my opinion, the invention of John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth [England} Brethern in the early 19th Century. It is most encouraging to see that some dispensationalists are rejecting the dispensational doctrine of the "parenthesis" Church and are taking a position more like the Covenant or historical premillennialists.

I don't agree with everything that Beamup posts. But he has his right to post them without being belittled.

I suppose he even has the right tp post heresy and that is what his argument that there is a Gospel other than the Gospel Jesus Christ preached and taught constitutes; Heresy! I will simply say further that those who disagree with dispensationalism are routinely and brutally belittled by some, especially if you mention their doctrine of a "parenthesis" Church.

Study Daniel 9. Daniel 9 is speaking of 70 weeks of years. The word for "week" simply means "seven". Thus 70 "sevens." This is not allegorization; it is a literal interpretation of the Bible. The question is what do the "sevens" refer to? Seven days, seven weeks, seven months, seven years? Seven of what? That is the question. Only the context can tell us that. Unless you study the context carefully you cannot get the meaning. Thus there is no allegorization involved. They are 70 weeks of years. There remains one week left, and it is yet to be fulfilled. It is The Great Tribulation." It is described in Revelation 6-19.

How can you argue that 70 weeks means 490 years and still claim a literal interpretation?

To take the 69 sevens and apply a consistent interpretation that they represent 483 years and then insert an unlimited amount of time between the 69th and 70th week is surely not literal interpretation. It is eigesis of the worst sort!.

Furthermore, the Scripture states that The Messiah, Jesus Christ, was murdered AFTER 69 weeks, not at the exact end of 69 weeks. In fact looking at verse 27 it appears He was murdered at the middle of the 70th week. It is a fact that verse 27 is a very difficult passage to interpret and insisting on a strictly literal translation is not possible. I have my belief on what verse 27 means but I am sure it does not agree with your interpretation.

Daniel 9:24-27
24. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.