What are some reasons many get trapped by Dispensationalism?

[kyredneck]

He has those leanings

...well...it's not like he's a communist or sumthin like that...

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

...well...it's not like he's a communist or sumthin like that...

No, he is an idealist

 

[Van]

1] you posts were off topic...Calvinism was not the topic

2] replacement theology is not the topic here.

3]... it is because I study the Bible I am no longer trapped

Fiction times three, your team's insults were off topic, you claimed replacement theology is what allowed you to become untrapped, and no one ever finds replacement theology in scripture, believers become children of the promise, see Galatians 3.
You failed to explain even "traditional dispensationalism" but did post the CT talking points. Me thinks thou protest too much...

Iconoclast says he was trapped in false doctrine for years. Sometimes people move from one bogus view to another such as Replacement Theology.

 

[George Antonios]

It is apostasy. It's the Pharisees teaching on the kingdom instead of Jesus' Amillennial teaching on the kingdom.

The Lord only switched to discoursing on the spiritual aspect of the kingdom to mess up the Pharisees who, like the Jews generally, correctly awaited a Messianic political kingdom but rejected the repentance necessary to obtain it.
Your line of argument argues that the spiritual form of the kingdom denies the physical form-
it doesn't; it complements it.
God created both the spiritual and the physical world and he will yet rule both via both spirit and flesh.

 

[MB]

The Lord only switched to discoursing on the spiritual aspect of the kingdom to mess up the Pharisees who, like the Jews generally, correctly awaited a Messianic political kingdom but rejected the repentance necessary to obtain it.
Your line of argument argues that the spiritual form of the kingdom denies the physical form-
it doesn't; it complements it.
God created both the spiritual and the physical world and he will yet rule both via both spirit and flesh.

AMEN

 

[Iconoclast]

Van

So Iconoclast says he was trapped in false doctrine for years

No, my doctrine was good, but my calendar on eschatology was the wrong one.

Sometimes people move from one bogus view to another such as Replacement Theology.

And yet, I do not believe in replacement theology, but rather a solid biblical one.
Evidently, you cannot distinguish the difference, but instead, insert your Twaddleology into the discussion.
Can you show where I used the term ...replacement theology?

The answer is to actually study the bible, rather than listen mostly to other people.

No the answer is to study and consider what others teach.

 

[kyredneck]

Van

Good post Icon. You should edit it and put the /QUOTE in the right place so it can be read normally.

 

[Iconoclast]

MB,

I believe the reason you see it as incorrect is that you do not consider what all of scripture is saying.

You are free to believe what you want, but I do not think you can demonstrate your theories.

You tend to form opinions about it before you've studied all of it.Of course you will say I'm wrong.

I say you are wrong because you have no idea what I do or do not study,do you???

 

[Iconoclast]

"George Antonios,
Hello George,

The Lord only switched to discoursing on the spiritual aspect of the kingdom to mess up the Pharisees who, like the Jews generally, correctly awaited a Messianic political kingdom but rejected the repentance necessary to obtain it.

I think you make a good statement here in that from John the Baptist on, repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand was the message, but I would add Jesus was looking for fruit,Mt21.

Your line of argument argues that the spiritual form of the kingdom denies the physical form-

Amill might be charged with that to an extent.
Postmillial teaching is that the Kingdom grows and changes the cultures it spreads to, here and now.

God created both the spiritual and the physical world and he will yet rule both via both spirit and flesh.it doesn't; it complements it.

hab2 yes, 14 For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.

 

[Iconoclast]

To me, dispensationalism is the progression of God's revelation of Himself to man, and how He wants to be worshipped. There's no reasonable denial thare's been several periods of different ways God wants to be worshipped. There was the time up to the flood, the time from Noah to the Exodus of Israel from Egypt, the time from that exodus until Jesus came,(commonly known as the Old Covenant time) and the time from when Jesus instituted the New Covenant til now.

Those who believe the false doctrine of preterism call almost everyone who rejects their doctrine a "Dispy", which, of course, isn't true. (But whaddya expect from people who believe something as obviously-false as preterism?)

But again, there's no reasonable denying the dispensations I mentioned above.

You recognize 4 time periods?
different ways to be worshipped?

 

[Iconoclast]

Fiction times three, your team's insults were off topic, you claimed replacement theology is what allowed you to become untrapped, and no one ever finds replacement theology in scripture, believers become children of the promise, see Galatians 3.
You failed to explain even "traditional dispensationalism" but did post the CT talking points. Me thinks thou protest too much...

Iconoclast says he was trapped in false doctrine for years. Sometimes people move from one bogus view to another such as Replacement Theology.

where do you see this post? I do not believe in replacement theology

 

[Iconoclast]

in the video jm asks where do the amill and postmill guys get their teaching?
\from 7:25-16:25 he agrees the Kingdom is taken from Israel, but then he does not follow through.
He then suggests it is only temporary.
He fails to understand Christian Israel at the 20 minute mark.

He then puts off prophecies that are fulfilled to the Church, to a yet future time.
At the 23 minute mark he sticks with his literal view speaking of earthly Jerusalem.
He then fawns over earthly Israel.
He sticks with it at 25 minutes Jews as the center of everything.
He then ridicules the vAmill view, going to the replacement theology card.

 

[Iconoclast]

"robycop3,

Those who believe the false doctrine of preterism call almost everyone who rejects their doctrine a "Dispy", which, of course, isn't true. (But whaddya expect from people who believe something as obviously-false as preterism?)

What do you mean by the term preterism?

 

[robycop3]

You recognize 4 time periods?
different ways to be worshipped?

They're very-apparent. In very early times, the righteous brought Him offerings, with no designated place to present them, & God communicated directly with them. That was the first one.

After the flood, we see specific offerings, such as sheep, with God occasionally designating places to present them, plus, they were burned on an altar, & God communicated through dreams more-often than directly. Also, He told Abraham & family that Shiloh would come.

After the Israelis left Egypt, God gave His laws to them thru Moses, & that was the way He commanded them to worship Him. This later became known as the Old Covenant, &, same as the earlier sacrifices, it all pointed to Jesus. That was the 3rd one.

The 4th one is the present one, presented by Jesus as the New Covenant.

There'll be a 5th one after Jesus returns.

 

[Iconoclast]

"robycop3

Thanks for your response.It looks like you stream-lined things a bit, so I have to ask some follow-up questions as you suggested things are obvious.
Is it possible you are assuming that the reader will know what you know?
What I mean is some items are not apparent, or missing.


1]Where is the creation of man?
2]What was his condition at creation?
3]Did anything happen to man?
4]if something happened to Adam what condition did it leave him in?
5]Did God offer a Divine solution?
6]What was that?
7] why was any offerings required?

They're very-apparent. In very early times, the righteous brought Him offerings, with no designated place to present them, & God communicated directly with them. That was the first one.

Why was Cains offering rejected?

After the flood, we see specific offerings, such as sheep, with God occasionally designating places to present them, plus, they were burned on an altar, & God communicated through dreams more-often than directly. Also, He told Abraham & family that Shiloh would come.

Were any form of promise from God to man given?

After the Israelis left Egypt, God gave His laws to them thru Moses, & that was the way He commanded them to worship Him. This later became known as the Old Covenant, &, same as the earlier sacrifices, it all pointed to Jesus. That was the 3rd one.

Why did it point to Jesus?

The 4th one is the present one, presented by Jesus as the New Covenant.

what is different with this one?

There'll be a 5th one after Jesus returns.

What happens next,? How do we get there?


Take your time if you can ,and offer some clarification on some of these ideas that seem to be crucial to the discussion.Make as if you are witnessing to a person without any bible knowledge,?Thanks.

 

[thomas15]

No, my doctrine was good, but my calendar on eschatology was the wrong one.

...........

It still is.

 

[robycop3]

"robycop3

Thanks for your response.It looks like you stream-lined things a bit, so I have to ask some follow-up questions as you suggested things are obvious.
Is it possible you are assuming that the reader will know what you know?
What I mean is some items are not apparent, or missing.


1]Where is the creation of man?

At the very beginning of the 1st disp, obviously.

2]What was his condition at creation?

Perfect, as God doesn't create anything defective.

3]Did anything happen to man?

Yes.

4]if something happened to Adam what condition did it leave him in?

Fallen, and mortal, exiled from Eden

5]Did God offer a Divine solution?

If He did, Scripture is silent about what it was.

6]What was that?

Not known, til Cain & Abel presented offerings to God.

7] why was any offerings required?

sacrifices, for the forgiveness of sins[/COLOR]

Why was Cains offering rejected?

Two possible reasons I can think of-First, it was not the best of what he had raised, & maybe he didn't even raise it himself. The other is that God required a BLOOD sacrifice, as that was what Jesus made later.[/COLOR]

Were any form of promise from God to man given?

Yes-aside from those made specifically made to Abe, Ike, & Jakeand his sons, He promised that Shiloh(Messiah, ruler, savior) would come.

Why did it point to Jesus?

Animal sacrifices were killed, their blood was poured onto the ground, & the various feasts were forerunners of things Jesus accomplished later.

what is different with this one?

Sins are forgiven directly by Jesus; no further living sacrifices are required, as Jesus fulfilled that requirement once for all.(John 3:16,John 10:9, Romans 10:9, Acts 16:31, Romans 10:13)

What happens next,? How do we get there?

When Jesus returns, we will worship Him to His face; we will have immortal bodies, and, after the millenium, the wicked will be judged & sent to hell, God will re-make the face of the earth, & the New Jerusalem will come to earth. That'll be the state of things forever. These things are discussed in the last chapters of the Revelation.

Take your time if you can ,and offer some clarification on some of these ideas that seem to be crucial to the discussion.Make as if you are witnessing to a person without any bible knowledge,?Thanks.

 

[Yeshua1]

First, holding to a position out of ignorance is not unique to Dispensationalism. Every "ism" has this problem. Often we believe what we are taught because it is all we know.

amen, just ask those who hold to infant baptism where was stated to do such in the NT!

 

[Yeshua1]

Dispensationalism as a system seeks to give an answer to what is contained in the bible as each of the other eschatological systems do.

Some Like John MacArthur and John Of Japan can give a biblical reason for their belief.

Others have been exposed to this system and trapped in it. What do I mean by trapped?

They have no real reason or cannot articulate a reasonable scriptural position.

They will argue until they are blue in the face, or tweet out ideas, but cannot actually defend their belief, whatever it is.

Has anyone else noticed this?

What reasons have you seen that keep them trapped in a system they cannot defend?

Let's find possible reasons for this.

Think a lot depends on if they just took their Scofield notes as inspired, and if they were raised up in a church that taught that heavily!

 

[Iconoclast]

It still is.

Glad you agree.Dispensationalism was the wrong calendar then,and as you say...it still is