Again:
Concerning your first statement:
It is the blood of Christ that redeems us. It has always been the blood of Christ that redeems people.
When the Lord provided the first sacrifice for Adam and Eve, blood was shed.
How much did Adam and Eve understand about the atoning sacrifice of Christ at that time? (I have asked these questions before).
When Abel offered sacrifices to the Lord (and Cain rebelled) how much of the atoning sacrifice of Christ did they understand?
When Noah sacrificed unto the Lord how much of the atoning sacrifice of Christ did he understand?
Salvation has always been by faith. Abraham was justified by faith.
Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
Rom 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
We are justified by faith.
Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
Salvation hasn't changed. We are saved by faith.
One can only be saved by faith if it is faith in the revelation they have received at that time. Adam through Israel put their faith in Jehovah, not the revealed Christ, the second person of the trinity that shed his blood on the cross, as we did. They did not have that revelation.
Salvation is by faith.
Your second statement:
You and DC have morphed this thread into there is a distinction between Israel and the Church aka the central tenant of Dispensationalism.
--False, and a red herring.
The red herring is dispensationalism which has nothing to do with this.
You brought up the Church; you brought up the redeemed in the OT. You brought up the fact the DC said there is a difference. If there is a difference it must be proven why and how. Your statement implies there is a difference between the Church and the OT saints. Don't say you didn't bring it up. No one but you and Icon said anything about dispensationalism. We had to defend against it. You (and Icon) derailed the thread.
--You can call this the central tenet of dispensationalism; you are entitled to your opinion. That is not what I believe. Of course many of you who have come out of hyper-dispensational churches have some pretty weird doctrines that you attribute to dispensationalism as I am finding out. You attribute a political movement "Zionism" to dispensationalism, which is ludicrous. Never heard of such a thing. But this is what I find out from my opponents of "what I am supposed to believe." Hilarious!
You guys want to tell me what I believe, and yet don't have a clue. Amazing!
Anyone can do a Google search.....some of us have lived through some of these teachings which are still offered......revmac knows the accepted view and stands like a man and defends his pov.
If you profess some novelty that is not the classic teaching.....then start a new thread where you can reveal your new insights.....you can show exactly what is the same and what is different....
Once you do that we will then let you know where we agree and do not agree.
That also will remove this shifting all around the world on each item.
Last edited by a moderator: